How important is activity for success?

[DeletedUser1511]

Rather than having the same old boring coplaying vs non coplaying flame fest.
I want your opnions on how important activtity is for success. And by success i do not mean being ranked 40....

Seriously it is an interesting discussion. As i can bring up examples of plenty of players( well not plenty, i do not even know plenty of players), but numoerous players who have done well despite not spamming or abusing activity.
Activity include co-sitting or whatever the hell people get up to these days.

I mean what ever happened to good old skill and common sense


I seem to have misplet the title. Can a mod correct for me?

 

[DeletedUser]

by success i do not mean being ranked 40....

What do you mean? Rank 1 only?

numoerous players who have done well despite not spamming or abusing activity.

What the heck is abusing activity?

I would have thought that it is near impossible without logging on (or having someone play for you) almost everyday.

Activity is (sadly) by far the most important factor in determining success. And I would consider rank 40 reasonably successful.

I seem to have misplet the title.

Brilliant!

 

[DeletedUser]

If your not active everyday your growth is going to be servilely stunted and you'll be out grown very, very quickly and won't be able to compete, end off really.

 

[DeletedUser]

My opinion is that activity is essential.

 

[DeletedUser8687]

Activity is directly proportional to success and talented active neighbours is inversely proportional. That means take your activity x by your skill (FARMING INCLUDED)divide that by the amount of active and talented players in your area and that = the amount of success you have.

In my mind XD

A= Activity
S= Skill
Ar = Area
Su= Success

A*S
_____ = Su
Ar

 

[DeletedUser]

Activity is (sadly) by far the most important factor in determining success. And I would consider rank 40 reasonably successful.

This world I'd agree but that is only due to the mass competition in farming in my area. I've played worlds where I hit top 5, even rank 1 while playing completely solo, no coplayer(s) and no account sitting what so ever admittedly I tend to start those worlds 2 - 5 days later. In my experience the most important factor is exactly that experience as with experience comes knowledge. If you're smart and you observe and analyse your surroundings you are generally going to do well. Though if you are under attack obviously you may need to be more active during that time (Dodge, backtime, prepare for any more incomings)

 

[DeletedUser1511]

What do you mean? Rank 1 only?

What the heck is abusing activity?

I would have thought that it is near impossible without logging on (or having someone play for you) almost everyday.

Activity is (sadly) by far the most important factor in determining success. And I would consider rank 40 reasonably successful.



Brilliant!

When people run accounts 24/7 that is abusing activity. That is not to say there is anything wrong with their actions.
However i would disagree on activity being the most important factor.
I for one have outgrown dozens if not hundreds of coplayed accounts, with activity that did not match their own.
Surely if they were more active they should have done better ?:icon_wink:

But, this thread isnt about my attempts to brag. The question i put forward for those who claim activity is the most important.
Why is it then that good players can outgrow accounts played 24/7 with similar areas?

 

[DeletedUser]

Why is it then that good players can outgrow accounts played 24/7 with similar areas?

Cos they don't know what there doing?

 

[DeletedUser1511]

Cos they don't know what there doing?

In which case activity is not the most important factor. You sure don't know how to raise a good arguement. Assuming you answered having read the question, in which case you answered because you think activity is the most important factor :icon_wink:

 

[DeletedUser]

Why is it then that good players can outgrow accounts played 24/7 with similar areas?

Can they if, for example, they only play for half-an-hour each day? I would guess that is about the average accross all players (purely a guess though). There are lots of week-end only players, too. They have very little chance of beating even the half-hour per day player, let alone the 8 hour/day or 24/7 players.

 

[DeletedUser8687]

See above for my formula for success.... As an after thought, Its important to spread your activity out through the day. Much better to be on 5-6 times for an hour rather than a 6 hour slot.

Just sayin

 

[DeletedUser1511]

Can they if, for example, they only play for half-an-hour each day? I would guess that is about the average accross all players (purely a guess though). There are lots of week-end only players, too. They have very little chance of beating even the half-hour per day player, let alone the 8 hour/day or 24/7 players.

That was not my question.
And if you can only play half an hour each day, and i assume you mean that during the entire 24 hour day they can only physically access tribal wars on 1 30 minute slot. Then they should not be playing this game, or they should play speed....
You are constructing another arguement seperate from mine.

 

[DeletedUser]

if you can only play half an hour each day... they should not be playing this game

Lol. I know, timewasters. How dare they?

...or they should play speed....

How would that help them? Instead of falling behind by 100 points between each log-on, they'll find the game has ended before they've even got an academy. Speed wouldn't help at all.

That was not my question.... You are constructing another arguement seperate from mine.

Mmmm, because I disagree with you. A bad "player" playing 24/7 may be beatable by a good player playing 8/7, but never by an excellent player playing 1/1.

 

[DeletedUser1511]

Lol. I know, timewasters. How dare they?


How would that help them? Instead of falling behind by 100 points between each log-on, they'll find the game has ended before they've even got an academy. Speed wouldn't help at all.


Mmmm, because I disagree with you. A bad "player" playing 24/7 may be beatable by a good player playing 8/7, but never by an excellent player playing 1/1.

No you misunderstand. When someone is said to play 24/7 that means they have a 24 hour period in which they can access their account, since i doubt anyone ( well not at least anyone sane) would sit staring at their account for 2 hours never mind 8ect.
If a player was exllent like you say they would have no problem overcoming any difficulty possed by their activity through bookmarking and organising trips. Although again i highly doubt that anyone on this game only has 1, 1 hour splot in which they have access to tw.
However even then by admitting that a bad player can be beaten by someone with half their activity. Sure that is accepting that activity is not the most important factor :icon_confused:

 

[DeletedUser]

Imo activity is clearly linked strongly to ssuccess.
But you can't forget other factors, other players in your area have a big influence. In the first few days, even a large number of banned players next to you can be a substantial set back (though can repay itself 2 weeks in).
There is no substitute for skill... you'll never do particularly well without some skill. You could have a 24/7 player that doesnt realise the benefits of micro farming. This player could be farming constantly, but with unfull hauls. A more experienced 8/7 player could then get larger total hauls in the same area - and so be more successful.

I like L3mst3r's 'formula' above. Includes what I think are the main 3 factors for success.
Also agree activity should be spread throughout the day. A player that can log in for 10 mins every 2 hours (e.g. office worker with an unobservant boss ) can be more successful, and much more efficient, than someone at school who cannot log in form 8-4 but is online constantly from 6-10.

 

[DeletedUser]

by admitting that a bad player can be beaten by someone with half their activity. Sure that is accepting that activity is not the most important factor :icon_confused:

No - I agree it is not the only factor, I don't believe that the rankings simply list the players in order of how many clicks they've made, for example. But I can't believe that a player who logs on for just half an hour once a day can possibly hope to take the #1 spot.

Farming is probably the most important activity - it is the primary source of wealth and without wealth there is little growth. Effective farming is almost entirely down to activity - I'm not saying there is no skill involved, but it is 99% mechanical with very little room for innovation/strategy (excepting, perhaps, selection of "live" targets). Similarly with things such as backtiming, sniping, etc. - if you know the theory, successful tactical play just relies on being online at the right times.

A cunning, clever player who is playing a wholistic game (planning, strategy, diplomacy, intrigue) but who only has very limitted time to play simply can not beat a less intelligent account if that account is online so much that they never miss an incoming and are competent at dealing with the mechanical aspects of the game (farming, timing troop movements, etc.)

 

[DeletedUser]

Also agree activity should be spread throughout the day. A player that can log in for 10 mins every 2 hours (e.g. office worker with an unobservant boss ) can be more successful, and much more efficient, than someone at school who cannot log in form 8-4 but is online constantly from 6-10.

Very true. Good activity is more about frequency than the duration of any one session. Much to the advantage of co-played accounts.

 

[DeletedUser1511]

No - I agree it is not the only factor, I don't believe that the rankings simply list the players in order of how many clicks they've made, for example. But I can't believe that a player who logs on for just half an hour once a day can possibly hope to take the #1 spot.

Farming is probably the most important activity - it is the primary source of wealth and without wealth there is little growth. Effective farming is almost entirely down to activity - I'm not saying there is no skill involved, but it is 99% mechanical with very little room for innovation/strategy (excepting, perhaps, selection of "live" targets). Similarly with things such as backtiming, sniping, etc. - if you know the theory, successful tactical play just relies on being online at the right times.

A cunning, clever player who is playing a wholistic game (planning, strategy, diplomacy, intrigue) but who only has very limitted time to play simply can not beat a less intelligent account if that account is online so much that they never miss an incoming and are competent at dealing with the mechanical aspects of the game (farming, timing troop movements, etc.)

You seem to miss the part to which there are many different strategies for farming each with different ranges of effectiveness.And is farming not by definition a strategy for obtaining more res :icon_confused:

 

[DeletedUser]

You seem to miss the part to which there are many different strategies for farming each with different ranges of effectiveness.And is farming not by definition a strategy for obtaining more res :icon_confused:

Because we weren't talking about farming strategy, I was giving an example of the importance of activity. But, since you mention it, I would contend that farming is primarily carried out to obtain more res. You wouldn't?

 

[DeletedUser9711]

First world I ever played I was immediately hooked and highly addicted, playing for hours on end. I didn't do well becuase I didn't have a clue how to best use that time and after 10 vills got gobbled up.

Activity is without doubt a huge factor, but don't mistake it for the only thing that matters.

CG