500 Tribes Vs 2 A O D Tribes - Or Is It lol

DeletedUser1163

Guest
If you couldn't care less why waste your time posting, let alone reading a thread you don't care about?... a forum is a place for people that wish to discuss things, though possibly not by hijacking a different topic thread...

Well there's not alot else to do haha, these forums arn't exactly what i'd call lively, but i need to wait for this coffee to wear off before i can get any sleep. :icon_wink:

Carry on chaps, the topic is indifferent but the banter is entertaining.
 

Maggie Wallis

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
69
:) I'm on a one man mission to liven up these forums...

It may well end in a "Mancunia is a stupid Nub Troll" megathread but it be fun...
 

DeletedUser4753

Guest
:) I'm on a one man mission to liven up these forums...

It may well end in a "Mancunia is a stupid Nub Troll" megathread but it be fun...

Can i make the thread plox!


One man mission :eek:, im offended
/me (goes n suicides)

"ohh noes... I almost argee with D1"

(phew least he included almost,) god forbid between us 2, york's n lanc's make peace
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
Does it really matter how many we had in our council? I made a guess because I couldn't be bothered to count, Mike actually counted because he loves his stats!

Matt has already come on here and said he is running his tribe on W15 like his tribe on W11, not KnK. So I guess that answers your point about how ION are being run.

If we were classed as a good tribe, I am happy with that. However, if a tribe that has won two consecutive worlds is only 'good', I dread to think what that makes many other tribes on the UK servers! I have absolutely no doubt that there are tribes out there on other servers that are far better and have achieved far more than we have. Were proud of what we have achieved and thats what matters to us.

You mentioned W1N - they are the tribe that are in my opinion the best the UK servers have seen. Their achievement on W1 far surpasses what we achieved. Full sized world, and the boredom factor must have been massive for them for quite a long time. I have huge respect for them and always will do. However, they themselves were not averse to the odd spot of tactical diplomacy, recruiting, and merges. They merged with the one tribe large enough to threaten them (CHE). The world was pretty much over from that point. It is sometimes a necessity if your intention is to win a world. They made the right calls at the right times and were rewarded for it. As has already been said, there is so much more to winning a world than just fighting.....

On both W7 and W12, we went to war early on (barely out of startup) and were almost continuously at war until the end. On w12 in particular, we faced some very tough opponents and won. There was even a time on W12 when we weren't sure we would survive, but we did, because we fought, and fought hard. At one point, we ran three full scale tribal ops within the space of a week. If that isn't fighting I would not like to know what true fighting is! So yes, in all honesty, I could say our approach was always to fight, but if an opportunity arose we were never adverse to using it. We played to win, simple as that.

The reason we reply to your posts and your opinion, is because a good debate is always enjoyable, and you seem to possess a big stirring stick of the sort we like to use ourselves, hence our responses ;-)

Well done on your biggest achievement though, ive achieved two of those myself - expensive achievements at times!
 

DeletedUser4753

Guest
mmm, without going down the imo knk are just good and not great purely because its the feeling i get, i propose a few points for knk to consider.

if a .net pervis/mattcur tribe is considered a 10/10 a amazing tribe, purely on how the tribe functions, can knk stake a claim to be more than good?

out of knk players, are they any who can rumble with the best pound for pound start up players/mid game players/late game players.

Can anyone in knk say they can match or beat nauz/will/nick/mattcur/jchilds/dent at start up?
can anyone in knk sat they can match similar top fo thier mid game/late game players?

I would argue no, so just the spotlight on a player base can we say knk are good but not great? imo yes

As a leadership, are whoever the dukes of knk are comparable to the top leaders, erm from what i hear they are good and run a steady ship, amazing? well if i asked people out side on knk who the best leaders are, im not sure i would hear those names, so would the words stringer than just good be used? possibly not.

as team work is concerned i would say this is a knk strength, all members pulling their weight is super, but ive seen noob tribes all wanting to get involved, but again if the player level is poor a grand nub effort. not that knk are noobs, just im sure you understand the concept im trying to explain.

Style, what i mean is, some tribes, and not even world winners, have a reputation for things, a great tribe for me is one of a low diplo high agression mentality. W1n has some great players, along with some very poor ones, thier style was well used diplomacy to win the world, and some worthwhile players doing the business on tribes who they didnt manage to gangbang/overwhelm, i respect w1n, but the best tribe around? not imo. knk merged with ally on w12 did they not? late game merges imo show weakness, diplomacy is a tool in ones tool box used to gain some form of advantage, but a tribe not in need of said tool is surely to be rated higher?

I dont think knk suck, and playing with one of their members id deffo disagree with anyone who says their members are just idiots who are active and work like a good team should.

but i would call knk good, and a good tribe that has won worlds beating worse tribes.
 

DeletedUser9598

Guest
Theres a few members of KnK w7 that can certainly rumble with the players you've just mentioned, dunno if they were in LOL w12 as they changed there name
 

DeletedUser9598

Guest
Locutas of Borg immediately jumps too mind, won w7, w8 and w9 finishing rank 6,3,1, its not easy playing 1 world at a time let alone 3, the guy was a grafter tbf to him, always solo too.
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
mmm, without going down the imo knk are just good and not great purely because its the feeling i get, i propose a few points for knk to consider.

if a .net pervis/mattcur tribe is considered a 10/10 a amazing tribe, purely on how the tribe functions, can knk stake a claim to be more than good? Nope. Nor do we!

out of knk players, are they any who can rumble with the best pound for pound start up players/mid game players/late game players. Its purely subjective this bit. Late game is generally considered to be easier than startup. Our top players all know how to run a mid-late game account very well. Whether any are considered great or not, down to your own opinion. What I would say, is that we have a group of good players, with a few who I would class as very very good. Perhaps the sum is greater than the parts? Again, down to opinion.

Can anyone in knk say they can match or beat nauz/will/nick/mattcur/jchilds/dent at start up.Nope, nor do we. Had this debate with Nauz before. Our strategy at startup is based on the collective at startup, and not the individual like most do. Of course everyone has to work on their individual growth, but from the first moment on a world were looking at what is the best course of action as a tribe.
can anyone in knk sat they can match similar top fo thier mid game/late game players? Answered this above.

I would argue no, so just the spotlight on a player base can we say knk are good but not great? imo yes. I agree. Good, but not great.

As a leadership, are whoever the dukes of knk are comparable to the top leaders, erm from what i hear they are good and run a steady ship, amazing? well if i asked people out side on knk who the best leaders are, im not sure i would hear those names, so would the words stringer than just good be used? possibly not. Again, down to individual opinion. The ones who truly know how well we run a tribe are our members. To a lesser extent, our enemies will know too. I dont think of myself as a great leader, never have. I enjoyed leading, and I enjoyed seeing the enjoyment our hard work gave to a great group of people.

as team work is concerned i would say this is a knk strength, all members pulling their weight is super, but ive seen noob tribes all wanting to get involved, but again if the player level is poor a grand nub effort. not that knk are noobs, just im sure you understand the concept im trying to explain. Quite simply, we were a group of decent/good players who understood that TW is a team game, and its entirely about teamwork. Add to that a good level of organistion and efficiency, and we were successful.

Style, what i mean is, some tribes, and not even world winners, have a reputation for things, a great tribe for me is one of a low diplo high agression mentality. W1n has some great players, along with some very poor ones, thier style was well used diplomacy to win the world, and some worthwhile players doing the business on tribes who they didnt manage to gangbang/overwhelm, i respect w1n, but the best tribe around? not imo. knk merged with ally on w12 did they not? late game merges imo show weakness, diplomacy is a tool in ones tool box used to gain some form of advantage, but a tribe not in need of said tool is surely to be rated higher? I never said w1n are the best tribe around. They are, to me, the best theres been on the UK servers. I know very little about .net, but I know there must be some awesome tribes over there. Never in a million years would I put KnK on their level! We did merge with our allies on W12. What you need to understand about W12, is that the main war had been fought and won. If we had fought our allies, everyone knew which way it would have gone. We wouldve beaten them, they accepted that. They fought hard alongside us against a tough enemy, and we decided together to share in the win. If thats a weakness, sharing in a win with a tribe that also deserves it and became friends, that one sits fine with me :)

I dont think knk suck, and playing with one of their members id deffo disagree with anyone who says their members are just idiots who are active and work like a good team should. Thanks :)

but i would call knk good, and a good tribe that has won worlds beating worse tribes. I agree!

​Answers in red
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
Locutas of Borg immediately jumps too mind, won w7, w8 and w9 finishing rank 6,3,1, its not easy playing 1 world at a time let alone 3, the guy was a grafter tbf to him, always solo too.

Yeah LoB was a very good player, we had a fair few disagreements on how the game should be played though!

To me, our most talented players are/were pangela(aka sheepdip), Kiren and Seamus (Raspberry W7, Kiren was on the Fresh Prince account on W12), and reshlock/tangerine. ash/Grapevine/rich deserves a special mention too.
 

DeletedUser4753

Guest
So we agree knk are good not great based on a number of factors :p

Pang is cool and knows what he's doing :)
 

DeletedUser9598

Guest
Yeah LoB was a very good player, we had a fair few disagreements on how the game should be played though!

:lol: :lol: i know what you mean, had the pleasure of fighting with and against him on w8, was never a dull moment.

I didnt stick around on w12 too long after the merge with Addicts (worst decision ever that merge was) but the short time you guys and us (DOGS) scrapped tangerine, tungsten and sheep stood out. Cant say how good they are but they certainly seemed very capable.
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
Id say the only way we could ever be considered great is if we were to go over to .net, and won a couple of worlds over there too. As that is never going to happen, we could never be considered great.

Whatwe will say and always will say is that we are very proud of what we have achieved, and im sure most players would be pretty proud of winning two worlds in a row themselves :)
 

DeletedUser4753

Guest
Id say the only way we could ever be considered great is if we were to go over to .net, and won a couple of worlds over there too. As that is never going to happen, we could never be considered great.

Whatwe will say and always will say is that we are very proud of what we have achieved, and im sure most players would be pretty proud of winning two worlds in a row themselves :)

mmm its not about winning, knk are good, why are they good? cause they won? no!

knk are good cause they do well partly due to good team work and cohesion, this is a good trait which is why i see them as good.
They over use diplo, and merge to win, which is why i dont see them as great.

If anytribe was made that used little or 0 diplo, didnt merge but crushed thier enemies, and said enemies were tough competition, i dont care what world/server that tribe plays or weather they win.

erm name of one tribe escapes me, but they played on one of the 20's on .net, they was a bunch of fighting player who did a number on varius decent tribes, i believe they hold, or atleast held the record for most villages cap'd in one second.

this tribe mass deleted, they did not even finish the world, nor see the end game phase, but as a tribe, when they play, they REALLY play.

this tribe is a great tribe, for thier combination of ability/leadership/teamwork <-- all proved on a competative world without doing things like allies/merge to win manuever's

as apposed to knk who are a good bunch of players, with alright ability as a whole, leadership which did a good job, and worked well as a team, and sadly used a lil too much diplo for me and finished a world in poor style.

We agree on knk for the most part, but i was just trying to say forget world wins, its about the journey.
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
Everyone plays for different reasons. We played for each other and for the win, so for us it was about winning. Everyone has their own definition of what makes a tribe great, so we will have to agree to disagree on that bit. Its also a pointless debate, again because its so subjective.....
 

DeletedUser5942

Guest
IMHO - working with the fellow tribemates of KnK on both won worlds is a privilege not a right. Whilst the leadership have retired (for the time being :p) the players remain. ANY tribe which counts one of these players amongst their ranks should feel grateful as they bring with them knowledge.. Knowledge passed on via campaigns to win worlds. Having said that, players are faithful to those that produce. If you don't, they don't.

In short, Pablo, Mike et al, might be very good at running a tribe, but the leaders of a tribe need to be of a quality worth following,, before tribe mates will follow.. If you fail at that - no matter what the tribe is called - you will fail.
 

DeletedUser10816

Guest
knk are good cause they do well partly due to good team work and cohesion, this is a good trait which is why i see them as good.
They over use diplo, and merge to win, which is why i dont see them as great.

If anytribe was made that used little or 0 diplo, didnt merge but crushed thier enemies, and said enemies were tough competition, i dont care what world/server that tribe plays or weather they win.

To put you correct here...

We had 1 diplo on W12, which was far less than any other tribe had on that world. How that can be called too much I don't know. (yes - I know how many diplos all the other tribes had on that world, because every other tribe other than our ally, was as leaky as a sieve imo - either that, or our spy network really excelled itself).
We warred everyone else... without exception, pretty much from the start. We don't do diplo - infact, we see it as pointless and restrictive on our tribemates growth. If you look at your own tribes diplomatic relationships - if you have more than 1 ally then you're doing something wrong...

The only thing that is useful about diplo, is talking to other tribe leaderships and pushing them in the right direction so that they make the diplomatic relationships that benefit you indirectly by cutting off their own growth or others.
Our policy on W12 was the same, if not more ruthless than W7. Maximum 1 ally, and maximum 1 tactical NAP. The fact is though, that we never found a tribe worthy of NAPing on 12. We never felt the need for it, and as we were quite happy with our ally, the relationship lasted throughout the whole game.
The world was won quickly, why drag it out when we were all just wishing it was over as once we broke the enemies back, it was like taking candy from a baby - it was boring as the enemy could never gather themselves to ever really threaten us. We broke their back, by continual ops, 2 or sometimes 3 full scale tribal ops a week - for about 3 months. After that, the heart and soul had disappeared from the enemies we were facing, and they disintegrated. This is otherwise known as the steamroller effect.

W7 - We stuck to our principals here, though probably annoyed a few people off in the process :) 1 ally at a time, and 1 tactical nap. no more, no less. The policy worked, and we warred consistently from pretty much the start right until the end. There was no large scale mergers, no mass recruiting to point whore. Did we tactically recruit when we needed fresh blood - yes, as would any tribe.
Yet again, what won the world for us here, was not diplomacy, though that set the scene for us to work in - but the constant ops run consistently once or twice a week followed up by a period of fire at will, right up until the point that we could fire at will with no need for tribal coordination.

Just for info - and as it doesn't matter any more as we're not playing... We were extremely offensive orientated. The theory being that the limited defence we did have was all what I term as rapid reaction defence. We could stack at a moments notice and the solid teamwork and generosity of the tribe meant that everyone could be far more offensive in style than in other tribes. The actual proportions varied by player of course. The best form of defence was to kill off the enemies nukes in local villages, snipe any noble attempts rather than stack, and generally keep the enemy constantly on the back foot.

Our aim was 2 win two worlds, and we won 2 worlds. People can make of it what they like, as they clearly are.

As Pablo has said before - theres no chance of us coming out of retirement, (however much I miss the various elements of the game... tactical analysis, op planning and execution, playing mind games with the enemy)... it just takes too much time. I'm a perfectionist and given the choice of spending 5 hours every evening planning, plotting, and manipulating the next move to the finest detail - or spending time with my 2 young kids and wife.... there's no contest
 
Top