Skill Of UK3??

[DeletedUser1511]

Ok, so this is just turning into a royal rumble of egos.

Most of the above post's are a load of rubbish and a waste of time to read. (So if you care not to waste time don't bother reading them)

All I see is people showing there skill with their mouth and not enough stats to back themselves up.

Four words!

Get your stats out!

Lol Because PP, MattCurr, Hoang ect still have to prove they know what they are talking about :icon_rolleyes:

Yeah ....
That said i disagree and agree with MattCurr. I think if you should clear your area a lot depends on settings, the area, village place ment and where you have active farmers. But what do i know.

 

[DeletedUser]

W3 does have skill,just most of it is in Rumble.

 

[DeletedUser]

W3 does have skill,just most of it is in Rumble.

i believe your mislead :icon_wink:
Rumble has an amaizing amount of skilled players
RA has an amzaizing amount of skill players
Window has skilled players
Darts has skilled players

i personnally believe my tribe has skilled players under alias' of course :icon_wink:

 

[DeletedUser]

W3 does have skill,just most of it is in Rumble.

and RA, their avg. points are triple that of most of the other top 20 tribes, which is quite an achievement. If INTRO and RA merged, I think most people would quit, there would be no point in continuing to play, there would be no chance of survival. :icon_biggrin:

 

[DeletedUser]

It seems that you have some kind of weird idea that your previous 'achievements' gives you the right to claim that YOUR method, and YOUR method ONLY is the right one to use, while tribal wars particularly depends on your ability to adapt on your area if you aren't able to outpower them right from the start.

uhh, seriously? how narrow minded can you get?

Also, why wouldn't you be able to spend resources on other things then troops? if you have your stable and barracks busy 24/7, does that mean there is nothing left to spend your resources on? have you EVEN THOUGHT of your tech levels?
Also, when having your stable/barracks busy 24 hours a day, your farm has to be upgraded continuesly as well.
With this example i want to make it clear to you that there are more ways in where to spend your resources on.

Matt pretty much covered it, queues=HQ too, and your smithy queue (with premmy)

Now, what would you gain for letting your neighbours keeping their armies? even if your unit production is about 50% higher then that of your neighbours, their walls start making big differences when their armies become bigger and bigger.
Clearing your neighbour now and then will minimalise your losses in the end (see it this way, clearing 2 times 200 soldiers will take you less losses then clearing 1 time 400 soldiers, PERIOD)

again, what he said. And, on the last part: yes, the losses will be higher, but hwta about percentage wise? I it better to loose 20% of your troops now, or 10% in a week when your troopcount has quadrupled and the person your clearing has only doubled...

Now, i really don't care what you want to believe, or what strategy you want to use, just be aware that with many players, there are many different strategies, each and everyone of them with their advantages and disadvantages, who are you to declare one particular strategy as the winning one?

Salamanco

He never did. Predator/metal duck did on the other hand.
@itchy: I am a fail player, who can't even get into the top 100.
@other guy who said it was a flame war: sorry

 

[DeletedUser]

and RA, their avg. points are triple that of most of the other top 20 tribes, which is quite an achievement. If INTRO and RA merged, I think most people would quit, there would be no point in continuing to play, there would be no chance of survival. :icon_biggrin:

I hope that never happens, the world would become extremely boring then.

 

[DeletedUser]

i believe your mislead :icon_wink:
Rumble has an amaizing amount of skilled players
RA has an amzaizing amount of skill players
Window has skilled players
Darts has skilled players

i personnally believe my tribe has skilled players under alias' of course :icon_wink:

Re-read my post,I said they have most of the more skilled players in this world,not all.

 

[DeletedUser]

Re-read my post,I said they have most of the more skilled players in this world,not all.

i stilll think your mislead.

 

[DeletedUser]

i stilll think your mislead.

Not everyone thinks alike.

Friskie <3

 

[DeletedUser]

Not everyone thinks alike.

Friskie <3

lol
do you like friskie?

 

[DeletedUser]

Directed at the issue of guides :

Guides represent our failure as a gaming community to teach our newer members. Its always sad when new players have to turn to a piece of text to learn tricks and strategies of TW in the absence of experienced players to explain and demonstrate those to them first hand.

People who learn by following guides will never (and this is a rare case where I apply that word) be remotely as good as someone who has been trained through an "teacher - student" relationship with more experienced players.

So. Much. Truth.

Speaking as someone who has played for just over a year and has read every guide/thread worth reading I completely agree with this. I learned how to send trains from a guide. I learned about village builds and troop counts from guides. Sniping and backtiming were common sense to figure out once I found out what the idea behind them was. Bookmark farming I semi-figured out by myself. So I've got all the basic techniques down. I've been told that the way to bringing up my game to the next step is play with the best players.

This is the hard part though. Guides are readily available on the forums and many people learn the basics but players that are able and more importantly, willing to help them along with the rest is difficult. [insert generic debate about the same people always in the "good" premades] :lol:

In summary, I wouldn't go as far as pervis to say that guides are the results of failing to teach newbs ourselves. The teacher to student ratio is just way to high that guides are necessary to compensate but I do agree that someone who learns only from guides will never be as good as someone trained by a teacher.

 

[DeletedUser]

So. Much. Truth.

Speaking as someone who has played for just over a year and has read every guide/thread worth reading I completely agree with this. I learned how to send trains from a guide. I learned about village builds and troop counts from guides. Sniping and backtiming were common sense to figure out once I found out what the idea behind them was. Bookmark farming I semi-figured out by myself. So I've got all the basic techniques down. I've been told that the way to bringing up my game to the next step is play with the best players.

This is the hard part though. Guides are readily available on the forums and many people learn the basics but players that are able and more importantly, willing to help them along with the rest is difficult. [insert generic debate about the same people always in the "good" premades] :lol:

In summary, I wouldn't go as far as pervis to say that guides are the results of failing to teach newbs ourselves. The teacher to student ratio is just way to high that guides are necessary to compensate but I do agree that someone who learns only from guides will never be as good as someone trained by a teacher.

I'm currently trying to help (I wouldn't go as far as train because I wouldn't class myself as a "solid" player, atleast not on this world) by using a combination of just going by student-trainee and PP's start-up guide. I think the most important thing is that people don't rely on guides, but use them just as what they are, guides.
If they're used as a rough template, and as long as the environment is suitable, you can't go far wrong. This is not saying that this person will get top20 because they're following the best guide ever, but it could be the key for them playing to their optimum for the skills and knowledge they have picked up so far.

 

[DeletedUser]

Tbh the best way to teach anyone is throw them into the chat of a good tribe, after loads of spam we talk about game play strategy in detail and in differing views, lets you take in what you want and use different parts from different people. I only really ever taught 2 people on an individual level, one was number one in the world after usually having a rank of 2000, the other was rank 2000 still, but it was willovain lol.

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm currently trying to help (I wouldn't go as far as train because I wouldn't class myself as a "solid" player, atleast not on this world) by using a combination of just going by student-trainee and PP's start-up guide. I think the most important thing is that people don't rely on guides, but use them just as what they are, guides.
If they're used as a rough template, and as long as the environment is suitable, you can't go far wrong. This is not saying that this person will get top20 because they're following the best guide ever, but it could be the key for them playing to their optimum for the skills and knowledge they have picked up so far.

Was going to write something exactly like that (believe it or not). 100% agree though. Pervis's one dimensional view that you must be trained and taught (keep thinking about star wars :lol to become a great player is a ridiculous narrow minded statement. But I've come to expect nothing more from his posts.

Theres absolutely nothing stopping a player becoming great even if they didn't read any guides and learned it all through hands on exp and mass trial and error. Its going to take them a long time longer but it can be done no doubt.

 

[DeletedUser]

Knowing the fundamentals of the game without being able to execute them will get you know where. Although, executing blind tactics will get you to the same place. That's why if you have an experienced player as a teacher he can teach you the fundamentals, and the when, where, and how of executing them.

Hmm, does that make sense?

 

[DeletedUser]

Was going to write something exactly like that (believe it or not). 100% agree though. Pervis's one dimensional view that you must be trained and taught (keep thinking about star wars :lol to become a great player is a ridiculous narrow minded statement.

Theres absolutely nothing stopping a player becoming great even if they didn't read any guides and learned it all through hands on exp and mass trial and error. Its going to take them a long time longer but it can be done no doubt.

Guides are good for a basis of knowledge, but honestly good and "solid" players make those guides (the good guides) they have prior knowledge of the game and can make it work for them, but for a beginner the conditions are not going to be as easy as they are for the person that wrote the guide.

But I've come to expect nothing more from his posts.

Don't turn this into a flame thread, this is a very good debate.

 

[DeletedUser]

Metal Duck / Predator's personal flames are a redundant because quite frankly after my thread regarding him, that individual doesn't have any credibility left.

However if I were to speak more on guides, I wouldn't say any one method is a surefire path to success, or that theres only one or two ways to become successful, but for sure I do know this :
Somebody who has had a mentor or a group of mentors to each him/her will never need to consult a guide for those strategies that he is shown before hand.
And that somebody is much better at said tactic/strategy/method than anyone who learned that strat from a guide.

One of the many things that guides cannot cover is probably the most important aspect of being a good player (as Purple keeps stating) : Situational awareness and adaptivity.

A guide cannot take a good look at your personal situation and advise you based on your current set of variables. A mentor can (if you don't mind the word pun) "guide" you through individual scenarios far more succinctly.

 

[DeletedUser1508]

However, just to throw this in here, being mentored is not the only way to become good. If you will take my example (I will assume that I am at least kinda halfway decent) I was never mentored in anyway, I learned by experience and a few guides.

 

[DeletedUser]

However, just to throw this in here, being mentored is not the only way to become good.

Very important point that. One I would second.

Ultimately the biggest factor in a players development is the adversity he or she faces. Baptism by fire often creates many a top tw player.

 

[DeletedUser]

One can easily reach Top10 just following guides, and even stay there.

The skill that people who follow guides lack is the ability to calmly evaluate an emergency situation. Players who were "guided" so to say, are MUCH more likely to panic when they come under attack (or are straight away ordered to take part in Ops like a Top 10 player should).

The above is especially for the first 6 months - the earlier part of the game - when they are still learning. They are the people who shout: "Guys I am under attack please send HELP now!" and people stare at them in disbelief as to how such a good high ranked player can act so noobish. Also, "guided" players are much less likely to reach their full potential in leadership.