W12 for pro's

DeletedUser3642

Guest
Nauzhror, cold-fusion and I will never agree on certain things.

One of those things is what constitutes a good player, and another thing is what is the definition of winning.

I'm happy for them to look at the short term early game where I agree it is much more intense as it relies heavily on the hours dedicated to the game and sound tactical self preservation techniques to ensure your growth and strength outgrows those around you.

I however look at the longer game where the challenges are more about the collective. I see far more value in playing tribal wars as a tribe rather than as an individual. Infact - we have kicked people for playing their own game rather than being members of the comunity we refer to as KnK. If their villages aren't going to benefit us, then they're better off owned by someone else who will use them for our benefit.
I would also say at this point, that we had for the majority of the game, a barb nobling ban, and in the latter stages, an internalling ban.

All our council members including the Pogue account would happily give up their own villages to help bring smaller players into the game more, or to provide a tactical advantage if one was to be gained in this way. None of us play for personal gain, all of us play for the tribe win.
In the same way, I would suggest 90% of KnK fully buy into the concept of 'one for all and all for one'. Support, providing offense, looking after accounts, every aspect of the game is shared pretty selflessly - nuking on behalf of other players, defending someone else right up to and including your last spear - putting your own villages at risk in the process - is all part of the KnK way.

So you can see, that whereas some players on this forum will focus purely on an individuals skill, I see it as pretty irrelivant as this is not an individuals game (in my opinion). But as others would disagree with our playing style and ethos - there is no point in me dissing anyone elses opinion.

In answer to Nauz's comment about being able to beat the Pogue account at start up - then yes, there is no denying that you are one of the great start up players and would likely outperform us as an individual in these early stages. That is how you measure success - and that is fine, it is your opinion.

However, if you were to play under our concept of whats important rather than yours, then I would suggest that you wouldnt be able to lead a tribe successfully to 100% domination, to build a comunity as strong and dedicated as ours, and would ultimately fall to our collective strength - which as we all know, and you have admitted yourself above, is key to achieving domination.

Two differences of opinion, I trust you will respect our view as I respect yours. I don't wish this to go off into another long winded and rather boring tit-for-tat of insults and childish comments :)
 

Nauzhror

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
106
Nauzhror, cold-fusion and I will never agree on certain things.

One of those things is what constitutes a good player, and another thing is what is the definition of winning.

We agree very much on what winning means.

The difference is you seek to win, I don't. I don't quit and then claim to have won. I quit because winning was never my goal in the first place.

Mikek said:
I would also say at this point, that we had for the majority of the game, a barb nobling ban, and in the latter stages, an internalling ban.

pangela seems to have still nobled quite a lot of barbs to be honest. Less than most rank 1 players noble during late-game, but still not by any means the lowest I've seen, at least on .uk that award would go to sour-krout from uk4 (technically gals11 of uk10 has fewer, but that world's much earlier on than uk4 is).

UK1: dandare: 25.11% barbs
UK2: WaterWarrior: 42.45% barbs
UK3: SuicidEd: 12.08% barbs
UK4: sour-kraut: 5.21% barbs
UK5: ibilis111: 26.53% barbs
UK6: durransr: 13.70% barbs
UK7: pangela: 16.73% barbs
UK8: Tigerstripe: 19.91% barbs
UK9: William Barnett I: 19.83% barbs
UK10: gals11: 4.84% barbs (not sure this one should be counted, due to the smaller size of this account)

So, yes, pangela's 16.73% is a bit below the combined average of UK1-9 which is 20.17%, but not by leaps and bounds.

Actually shocked overall by how low most of uk's percentages are though when compared to .net's old worlds where as an example Jirki (.net's largest account) has a barb conquer ratio of 65.39%
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser7242

Guest
pangela seems to have still nobled quite a lot of barbs to be honest. Less than most rank 1 players noble during late-game, but still not by any means the lowest I've seen, at least on .uk that award would go to sour-krout from uk4 (technically gals11 of uk10 has fewer, but that world's much earlier on than uk4 is).

UK1: dandare: 25.11% barbs
UK2: WaterWarrior: 42.45% barbs
UK3: SuicidEd: 12.08% barbs
UK4: sour-kraut: 5.21% barbs
UK5: ibilis111: 26.53% barbs
UK6: durransr: 13.70% barbs
UK7: pangela: 16.73% barbs
UK8: Tigerstripe: 19.91% barbs
UK9: William Barnett I: 19.83% barbs
UK10: gals11: 4.84% barbs (not sure this one should be counted, due to the smaller size of this account)

So, yes, pangela's 16.73% is a bit below the combined average of UK1-9 which is 20.17%, but not by leaps and bounds.

Actually shocked overall by how low most of uk's percentages are though when compared to .net's old worlds where as an example Jirki (.net's largest account) has a barb conquer ratio of 65.39%

but how many internals on the uk's?
 

Nauzhror

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
106
but how many internals on the uk's?

Probably lots, harder to spot though since I can't know who every tribe was allied with at all moments in time (could only count nobling literal tribemates, but there's often lots of gifts that are less obvious to spot).
 

DeletedUser3642

Guest
Internals are necessary, barb noblings are not.



I would disupte that. Internals are not necessary, they are a waste of a noble that could turn something red or brown, blue.

The only valid reason for taking an internal is to maintain a tactical position in certain areas of the map. If there is no tactical reason to internal the village, it is best turned into a farm.
 

DeletedUser6695

Guest
Late game all accounts will be tactically advantageous. Allowing a multi million point account to barb is suicide in late game wars as it basically opens your back door to enemies.

And as regards to farming, it isn't that essential that you would require the res from a barbed account to keep minting coins.
 

DeletedUser5582

Guest
UK1: dandare: 25.11% barbs
UK2: WaterWarrior: 42.45% barbs
UK3: SuicidEd: 12.08% barbs
UK4: sour-kraut: 5.21% barbs
UK5: ibilis111: 26.53% barbs
UK6: durransr: 13.70% barbs
UK7: pangela: 16.73% barbs
UK8: Tigerstripe: 19.91% barbs
UK9: William Barnett I: 19.83% barbs
UK10: gals11: 4.84% barbs (not sure this one should be counted, due to the smaller size of this account)

So, yes, pangela's 16.73% is a bit below the combined average of UK1-9 which is 20.17%, but not by leaps and bounds.

Actually shocked overall by how low most of uk's percentages are though when compared to .net's old worlds where as an example Jirki (.net's largest account) has a barb conquer ratio of 65.39%

Very interesting stats there.

Should be pointed out though that on some worlds barbs only grow to 500 points so someone like SuicidEd should be judged not as a percentage of barbs taken but on the the size of those barbs? A 9k barb on UK3 will be a deleted player so whilst hard to say if an internal or an enemy player giving up a little different than say a 7k barb on a world like UK5 so a comment like

Internals are necessary, barb noblings are not.

should be taken in context. Some of the players on that Rank 1 list have huge numbers of internals so that too should be taken into acc as to how they reached their rank but as already pointed out would be impossible to get the true picture though easy enough to spot a trend (for example look at Tigerstripe's noble history on UK8).

Still by looking at the world settings and assuming that by a worlds mid term tribes aren't booting dead accs to save stats a better picture of which rank 1 player is eating red dots and which are more parasitic on their tribe's real growth can be seen.

Good stats though Nauzhror ty
 

Nauzhror

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
106
Figured I'd check internals, but as noted above, these numbers are not necessarily 100% accurate in regards to the amount of gifted villages the players got:

UK1: dandare: 37.03%
UK2: WaterWarrior: 8.21%
UK3: SuicidEd: 19.21%
UK4: sour-kraut: 67.99%
UK5: ibilis111: 27.82%
UK6: durransr: 62.24%
UK7: pangela: 5.75%
UK8: Tigerstripe: 40.73%
UK9: William Barnett I: 0% (No, not a typo, he doesn't have a single internal to his name)
UK10: gals11: 0.81%

Combined total for barb + internal:

UK1: dandare: 62.14%
UK2: WaterWarrior: 50.66%
UK3: SuicidEd: 31.29%
UK4: sour-kraut: 73.2%
UK5: ibilis111: 54.35%
UK6: durransr: 75.94%
UK7: pangela: 22.48%
UK8: Tigerstripe: 60.64%
UK9: William Barnett I: 19.83%
UK10: gals11: 5.65%

Overall pangela does have the fewest free conquers aside from uk9/10, but those two accounts are under 2 million points.
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
Wow, some of those are high!

Surprisingly enough I have the same opinion as Mike. Only internal when there is a tactical reason for doing so. Nobles become a valuable commodity late game, so I find it really hard to justify spending them on internals. Barbs I am even more averse to, so much so I refused a request from some of our guys to attempt to turn UK7 blue now we have won! It just goes against every TW bone in my body lol
 

DeletedUser5582

Guest
again nice stats there.

Bearing in mind that the older worlds will have had more players leave as the light at the end of the tunnel is very very very dim at times this making more folk leave and so more internals to do you have to say hat tip to SuicidEd for having a very low score (wonder how many 500 point barbs he has taken!) and Pangela for being under 25% which is very impressive.

I am surprised at some high percentages of barb and internal stats for some Rank 1 players there though. Be interesting to compare their contribution to tribe's real growth (i.e. red dots) and some of their smaller teammates and see who actually is driving their tribes forward.

I would temper that slightly in that some players provide a lot of defense for their tribes and I always send internals their way as helps eat dead accs and will know new support off to the front lines shortly but still some very high percentages there which was a surprise to me
 

DeletedUser6695

Guest
I figured Sour's internals would be huge seeing as he merged with Nothie recently which was something like 350 villages :D
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Sorry but how would this make TW any better than it is already, you need the element of new players and old that's the beauti of the game that's what draws us in and wanting a world for so called pro's is wrong, saying that define pro don't that mean you should be paid to play!!! I know allot of really good players over the years and non of them considered themselves as a pro.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Figured I'd check internals, but as noted above, these numbers are not necessarily 100% accurate in regards to the amount of gifted villages the players got:

UK1: dandare: 37.03%
UK2: WaterWarrior: 8.21%
UK3: SuicidEd: 19.21%
UK4: sour-kraut: 67.99%
UK5: ibilis111: 27.82%
UK6: durransr: 62.24%
UK7: pangela: 5.75%
UK8: Tigerstripe: 40.73%
UK9: William Barnett I: 0% (No, not a typo, he doesn't have a single internal to his name)
UK10: gals11: 0.81%

Combined total for barb + internal:

UK1: dandare: 62.14%
UK2: WaterWarrior: 50.66%
UK3: SuicidEd: 31.29%
UK4: sour-kraut: 73.2%
UK5: ibilis111: 54.35%
UK6: durransr: 75.94%
UK7: pangela: 22.48%
UK8: Tigerstripe: 60.64%
UK9: William Barnett I: 19.83%
UK10: gals11: 5.65%

Overall pangela does have the fewest free conquers aside from uk9/10, but those two accounts are under 2 million points.

Why does the bolded not surprise me at all?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
isax u really need to remove that bottom link in your siggy - you were never duke mate :/
 
Top