Just wondering!?

[DeletedUser]

bud, you're hilarious

honestly, I'd enjoy fighting against you

I think it all goes for the server settings you've chosen and the area you're settling in. If you need def, either ask for tribal support or rustle up a secret personal alliance who keeps recruiting def for you.

Do you know the settings?!

And again my point still stands. Rank 3 account, #1 ODA 3 O villages. So what are you all doing with these O villages, as 2 of my three nukes are full. So what the heck are you doing with them, you're either not building them right, not using them right, or not farming with them right.

 

[Nauzhror]

bud, you're hilarious

honestly, I'd enjoy fighting against you

I think it all goes for the server settings you've chosen and the area you're settling in. If you need def, either ask for tribal support or rustle up a secret personal alliance who keeps recruiting def for you. HCav Defs here and there for occasional snipes and sporadic stacks. The more offensive villas you have, the more active an account needs to be/the vulnerable you are.

Your signature says all that needs to be said. Your ODD is ridiculously low. You have not been properly tested in that account, at all. You're high ranked not because you're any good, but because the rest of the world is too afraid to hit you.

 

[DeletedUser]

Your signature says all that needs to be said. Your ODD is ridiculously low. You have not been properly tested in that account, at all. You're high ranked not because you're any good, but because the rest of the world is too afraid to hit you.

I was given luvnhugs this year in May with about 7,5 million points I received less than 500 incs so far, 95% of them bloody fakes. I'm mostly doing offensive stuff since I took it over. So yes, Nauzhror, I did not have had the pleasure of being tested there at all.
I'm actually known for defensive battles, at least I love to sit accounts which suffer heavy incoming fire.

some other accounts I worked on in past
w48.de (~75% offensive)
w54.de (80% offensive, 360° front)
w57.de (~90% offensive, quite safe area)


all of them display relatively low amounts of ODD. A ratio of 3:1 offensive to defensive has been proven countless times, when being active and watchful. Teamwork with a handful reliable tribe mates or a personal alliance is the key to success here. At least that's my secret of success.

I've never heard of a defensive player winning a war (I now base my statement on a player who rather loves to turtle than retaliate and fight back to demoralize the attacking enemy). Defensive players might win the majority of battles, however, in the end the offensive player wins the trophy.

Wait, are you saying having defence is bad and you should rely on others to defend you?

If that is the case you realise you ruined your own argument in your last sentence

no, I did not want to say that defensive units are bad at all. I just mean it the other way round- placing defensive villages wisely is of more use as building loads of def's that never get used properly. As a nuke has finished recruiting, I'll launch it onto any target I either want to be cleared or catted or whatever. If it gets wrecked, I'll wait till it has finished recruitment again and I'll launch it another time.

As for my quote goes, just read it through a second time:

The more offensive villas you have, the more active an account needs to be/the vulnerable you are.​

between the letters: The more offensive villas you have, the more pressure you are able to impose on your chosen enemy. Means: your enemy most likely stops attacking due to your constant offensive resistance and keeping him busy! The fewest players are able to defend and attack at a time. On the other hand, the more offensive villas you have installed, the vulnerable you are in case you're not on the account and to predictable.

 

[DeletedUser]

Defensive players might win the majority of battles, however, in the end the offensive player wins the trophy.

Really? Towards late-game, defence is more favoured against offence. The only time you can beat a decent player outright is via a gangbang where there is a war of attrition with vastly superior firepower against the target's defences.

 

[DeletedUser]

...

My statement still stands, what are you doing with your offense.:icon_neutral: You're not farming right, or you would be ranked higher than me, your not killing things or you would have more ODA than me. So what are you doing with it. I am seriously confused.

Also it is tribalwars, it is a team sport not an individual sport.

some other accounts I worked on in past
w48.de (~75% offensive)
w54.de (80% offensive, 360° front)
w57.de (~90% offensive, quite safe area)

Also every one of these accounts has never been ranked what I would consider good, so really, what is your story, do you just entirely suck at attacking and need massive amounts of O to compensate? And none of them have a good ODD either so none of them were attacked.

To me it seems like you a subpar player who lucks out and builds all O because you do not know how to play.

 

[DeletedUser]

I was given luvnhugs this year in May with about 7,5 million points

That account was created and built out of scratch by my oldest friend in the game, darth earth. You dishonor his legacy by playing it.

 

[DeletedUser]

I like to go about 1:2 O, but I'm relatively new and haven't been able to prove this much.

 

[DeletedUser]

i normally lean towards defence, i do build offence villages only when i can defend them and my other villages

 

[DeletedUser]

will try to steer it back on course
For me it also depends on location, for example if you have 2 tribe members sitting next to you, learn what their build is, and go the opposite,so if the are both d, logic would say you go offence as you can clear your and theres 7x7 therefore wiping out threats, and they can support you when you need it, but it requires a lot of trust and activity
9/10 defence it the easier option to go for(well for me anyway), but when i do have offence villages they are normally hiding in a cluster of defence

 

[DeletedUser]

will try to steer it back on course
For me it also depends on location, for example if you have 2 tribe members sitting next to you, learn what their build is, and go the opposite,so if the are both d, logic would say you go offence as you can clear your and theres 7x7 therefore wiping out threats, and they can support you when you need it, but it requires a lot of trust and activity
9/10 defence it the easier option to go for(well for me anyway), but when i do have offence villages they are normally hiding in a cluster of defence

Yes, the tribal meathod of dispersion is good, but as you pointed out it is a lot of trust and dependance on activity. From my experience leading those are two things, which I do not count on, as well as future recruitment shifting things, I feel like self sufficient accounts are the way to go, and always require at least 50% of all villages to be defense in my tribes. I'm not saying it cant work otherwise, but I think it is more stable otherwise as a whole, and more flexible with recruitment.

 

[DeletedUser]

I know this is the Tavern but felt a need to clean up a little bit in here. Would just like to reiterate something from our forum rules:

Spoiler: Explination

Manners

Please treat each other with respect and remain polite. Do not forget that there are people of different ages and with different gaming ‘know-how’. Therefore, please stay patient if questions arise that you may consider “stupid” or “childish”.​

I understand the need for flaming, and flaming is a huge aspect for PnP and I have no problems with it. However, posters need to keep in mind that rule from the forum rules posted above. Please remember also, that whenever there is an issue involving a moderator, mail me asap.

That being said, I'd like to put my noobish 2 cents in for this discussion...

When I did play, I would usually go to a 4:1 ratio, defenseffense. Reasoning for this is because I'd noble in little clusters, and I like stacking :icon_eek:. Later on in the game, I'd do a 2:2 ratio, but have never and will never have an obscene amount of offense compared to defense. But then again everyone has different play styles, and that one works for me.

 

[DeletedUser]

1. crap
2. If a player takes over a friend's account and shows poor knowledge of the game, those who do not know that the account has been replaced will think less of my friend. Hence it is tied into this discussion
3. more crap
4. even more crap

I took that account beginning of May, that's about 5 months ago. It had about 750 villas and just under 60m OD at that time, ranked 14th with just a little front section, an amount of barely 50 potential adversarial noble targets.

That's the statistic nowadays:​

Points: 12.150.944
Rank: 7
Opponents defeated: 128.618.266 (15.)
OD Attack Rank: 3. (118,212,277 score)
OD Defense Rank: 47. (9,871,439 score)


been #4th a short time, but ran out of targets and needed to prepare for another front section, then.

That's my front these days - HERE's a map displaying today's situation, estimated 150 potential noble targets for the next two months.

I don't want to stack my front villas and wait till the enemy launches hundreds of armies like poor, pathetic and clueless players, I want to nuke the shit out of my enemies and TAKE villas, NOT DEFEND them a hundred years

once lost villages can be taken again a later moment.

And now please tell me why the heck you think I'm completely dumb at this game. can't find your point lol

 

[DeletedUser]

I took that account beginning of May, that's about 5 months ago. It had about 750 villas and just under 60m OD at that time, ranked 14th with just a little front section, an amount of barely 50 potential adversarial noble targets.

That's the statistic nowadays:​

Points: 12.150.944
Rank: 7
Opponents defeated: 128.618.266 (15.)
OD Attack Rank: 3. (118,212,277 score)
OD Defense Rank: 47. (9,871,439 score)


been #4th a short time, but ran out of targets and needed to prepare for another front section, then.

That's my front these days - HERE's a map displaying today's situation, estimated 150 potential noble targets for the next two months.

I don't want to stack my front villas and wait till the enemy launches hundreds of armies like poor, pathetic and clueless players, I want to nuke the shit out of my enemies and TAKE villas, NOT DEFEND them a hundred years

once lost villages can be taken again a later moment.

And now please tell me why the heck you think I'm completely dumb at this game. can't find your point lol

Would you mind stating what you are doing with your O in this world, as it is the topic of the thread and my continued point of confusion.

 

[DeletedUser]

what you are doing with your O in this world *blahblahblah*

I throw in the towel, you troll have won *leaves room with ducked head*

 

[DeletedUser8800]

ok im on world 3 and have had many battles with rover on luvhugs account when i have sat accounts in my tribe
tell you what he is a good player and very active and a decent bloke the latter one being the most crucial from my point of view
now there is no wrong or right answer
if i was on most the time my villas would be very much offensive
if i wasnt on as much they would favour more defensive
so really why is there such arguments we all play differently and to suit our own style of activity and game play
i for one love the long onslaught and play a world for years and years
other players want a quicker world and move onto the next
so my message to you lot happy gameing enjoy it

 

[DeletedUser]

cheers Ferret *hands ale to you*
as I've mentioned some posts above- during early game stage a ratio of 50:50 OFF to DEF villages is always a good basis to operate with. Depends on the area you settled in and how folks pull together on the tribe/how reliable your allied neighbours are. Though, I'd rather go for more nukes than defs following the saying 'Offence is the best defence'.

The tougher the later game performance develops, the more nukes you actually need to put heavy pressure on your enemies to either make them hit delete button or loose the game. At least that's my way to act ingame.
On the other side, you do can recruit defensive armies in the majority of your villas, too. Speculating any member gets inactive or dismissed off the tribe from time to time, internally taking these villas to occasionally show decent growth while helping out the more offensive players on the tribe with permanent defs. But that's way less fun in my humble opinion.



@ the ferret
was that you on alex, too?

 

[DeletedUser]

I understand the need for flaming, and flaming is a huge aspect for PnP and I have no problems with it.

When I did play, I would usually go to a 4:1 ratio, defenseffense. Reasoning for this is because I'd noble in little clusters, and I like stacking :icon_eek:. Later on in the game, I'd do a 2:2 ratio, but have never and will never have an obscene amount of offense compared to defense. But then again everyone has different play styles, and that one works for me.

But Jaypee, flaming is intolerable!!!!
I kid bro, was mostly interested in reading the insight into your O ratio. I feel my own ideas align in that way depending on one of two situations:

1) Am I leading
2) Am I following

Since most of the time I'm leading, I'll deal with the smaller concept first.
Assuming I am just a player, do not formulate tribal policy and do not have specific O ratio instructions from tribal leadership - which depending on who it is I may follow (mattcurr, Allyboo, Lance, Simz) or I may ignore (everyone else).

When playing for myself, I tend to believe in a very heavy defense oriented ratio usually 5:1, or 6:1. This is primarily because:

• I usually have to take on multiple hostiles at once when I do fight
• I tend to have a lot of non-tribemate minions who I have quid pro quo relationship with (recruited in every world)
  

Now just because I favour heavy defense ratio, does not mean I lag behind in OD*A, I'm usually around the top on that rank list not necessarily through smashing defenses but more by utilizing psychological warfare, subterfuge strategy, timing wars (Okay I rarely do my own timing), etc to really get hostile villages as cheaply as possible (which is very different from internalling and barb nobling - that I look down on) and kill enemy troops with the aim (not always met) of minimizing my own offense loss.

Heavy defense is rooted in my belief that I should not lose anything I gain (except in cases of extreme strategic benefit - train crashes, etc) and quite frankly that defensive stacks composed of split troops from different villages retrain at a fraction of the speed offense retrains. I've normally found the tactic of killing enemy O with quickly replaced D troops and messing with their heads till they break to be quite successful.

Now moving on to leadership situations, personally I do not believe - while leading - in the worth of the individual player except in terms of what be brings to the tribe. However, please don't confuse this with the utterly worthless players who claim to be "team players" in spite of the fact that their accounts don't really add much to the team no matter how good their attitude is. Personally I don't think the tribe should have to sacrifice either capacity or cooperation, both are needed, neither are expendable (by the same token I've kicked and removed a lot of good players with bad attitudes).

Now that the tribe composition is covered, we need to move on to the tribe strategy. There are no personal clusters, the tribal cluster should be more or less a uniform grouping with each tribemate having multiple other tribemates as neighbours. This serves to force people to communicate and coordinate to get things done. The results are horrific if the players are incompetent, they're excellent when the players are cool headed and get along with each other well (anybody who is wrong for the tribal community isn't permitted in to start with). Along the same line of community based tribal strategy, each individuals defense is there to serve the tribal need (or at least a minimum amount of that individuals defense). As such those who cannot serve that need, cannot be in the tribe. This is what I like to call minimum defense requirements and they are set at increasing levels starting from a couple days after the end of beginner protection to the point where the tribe is now self sustaining.
In the beginning its numerical requirements but as expansion leads to multiple fully built villages, it becomes a ratio of anywhere of minimally 3:1 D:O. Like all good rules there are exceptions. Players can go higher defense ratio if they wish to but that does not spare them from the war target burden they are assigned. Players can go below that if they can prove/convince me that:

• They are capable of defending their accounts with what they have (tribal stacking is always there to bolster defense and minimize losses)
• They have more defense than the tribal median (which is normally very high)
  
  

This sort of defense centered tribal strategy is something I attribute to the 12 member W49 Haze defeating higher ranked tribes more than twice its size and thrice its members in 3 different occasions in the course of the server. Its what allowed Hp5 Scorch to survive getting hit by the other 19 of the top 20 early on as well and win that round with 100 % village ownership. In fact anywhere we have played, we have played a smart defensive game as a tribe (even if certain members were permitted to go all offense for specific purposes - very rare).

Mind you these values are something I'm quantifying (I dislike absolute numerical quantities) so that you the reader can understand what I'm talking about. In reality, I have a short chain of command and rarely apply the exact same numbers to two different people. This is through close personal connections to my tribemates, each has a role I assign to them based on situational needs.

At German dude: My post was deleted, I don't even recall what you're talking about.

 

[DeletedUser]

I throw in the towel, you troll have won *leaves room with ducked head*

It's not a hard question:icon_confused: Fairly simple, I don't know how it is trolling either, I just simply want to know what mostly O players do with their O. If you have no answer and need to devolve your argument by saying I am just trolling, than I think that speaks for itself.

If you do know what you are doing with your O, and I would assume you do, then if it was worth wild you would respond and tell me, but I suspect that is not the case as you totally avoid the question and use illogical insults in order to support your points.

 

[DeletedUser]

As a player with:
a) more offence than 99% of the world (only 2 accounts probably have more, 3 at a maximum but pretty sure 2 or even 1)
b) Still maintaining a 2:1 D:O ratio.

I would regard myself as having too much offence than I currently have use for, but at the same time my defence numbers are 3rd on the world (again pretty sure). Whilst I don't yet have need of this offence, I don't wish to run into a situation where I have too little offence (unlikely on this world). So it's not needs based but I'm attempting to save myself the time in the future when I may need it, and if it's there I can use it more freely - targeting larger villages without as much worry. At the stage where you have 1 or 2 nukes, and at a rebuild of one every 9 days minimum, that could be quite a setback. I believe your account suffered this problem Matt.

Essentially my point here is that I would rather be prepared for the worst offensively (losing a nuke every time I noble) compared to be caught wrong footed and ultimately having my growth cut because I valued D more. I know you've grown well on this world without huge loads of offence, it's more the security of the future in mind. Meanwhile I also have enough D to sustain myself against any likely attacks on this world, so I believe the balance is right here. It's a risk, and it doesn't always pay off (e.g. get nobled) or simply the offence its there doing nothing.

When building offence you have to work a couple of weeks in advance, and it's an unknown. Defense on the other hand stacks, and so does not need as much preparation for it's future use. Whilst I'm not the most O-heavy of players, and so this response doesn't justify some of the people who build their first 5 villages as offence (you aren't going to need 5 nukes in 2 weeks if you only have 1 now !?), it does explain some of the reasoning on why building more O than you may need, at that time, is worthwhile.

 

[DeletedUser]

As a player with:
a) more offence than 99% of the world (only 2 accounts probably have more, 3 at a maximum but pretty sure 2 or even 1)
b) Still maintaining a 2:1 D:O ratio.

I would regard myself as having too much offence than I currently have use for, but at the same time my defence numbers are 3rd on the world (again pretty sure). Whilst I don't yet have need of this offence, I don't wish to run into a situation where I have too little offence (unlikely on this world). So it's not needs based but I'm attempting to save myself the time in the future when I may need it, and if it's there I can use it more freely - targeting larger villages without as much worry. At the stage where you have 1 or 2 nukes, and at a rebuild of one every 9 days minimum, that could be quite a setback. I believe your account suffered this problem Matt.

Essentially my point here is that I would rather be prepared for the worst offensively (losing a nuke every time I noble) compared to be caught wrong footed and ultimately having my growth cut because I valued D more. I know you've grown well on this world without huge loads of offence, it's more the security of the future in mind. Meanwhile I also have enough D to sustain myself against any likely attacks on this world, so I believe the balance is right here. It's a risk, and it doesn't always pay off (e.g. get nobled) or simply the offence its there doing nothing.

When building offence you have to work a couple of weeks in advance, and it's an unknown. Defense on the other hand stacks, and so does not need as much preparation for it's future use. Whilst I'm not the most O-heavy of players, and so this response doesn't justify some of the people who build their first 5 villages as offence (you aren't going to need 5 nukes in 2 weeks if you only have 1 now !?), it does explain some of the reasoning on why building more O than you may need, at that time, is worthwhile.

I didnt really have that issue Tom, my offense was entirely rebuilt and climbing towards rank 1, we just fell inactive. I always have set backs on offense, but I have never had one that kept me back. I am not necessarily pushing forward my style of play, but a style of play which is more defensive than 50% which imo makes no sense, and the fact that my account is healthy and can easily grow right now in this world with the largest oda pushes forward the idea that no-one in this world needs more O than 30% of their villages..