Pandas recruitment

  • Thread starter Thomas The Tank Engine
  • Start date

DeletedUser

Guest
Has anyone else realised this? They have 91 tribe changes, for a tribe with 11 members. That means 80 tribe changes which were not these players joining. Let's assume that's 40 joining and then leaving again (i.e. 2 tribe changes each). That means they have recruited 3.63 as many players as are currently in the tribe. This is ridiculous, and for a so-called elite tribe they don't half do a lot of recruiting.

Compared with evoL. They have 39 members with 125 tribe changes, hence 86 tribe changes currently not in the tribe. So yes, higher than pandas, but turnover wise much, much less. So as measured before that is a recruitment of 2.2 players per current member. More respectable, I'm sure we'll all agree.

So INNOV, regarded as mass recruiting by many I'm sure. They have 34 members, 264 changes. So 230 changes ignoring current members. Or 115 other members. 3.38 members recruited per current member. Which again makes them less than pandas.

Ultimately what does this show? Pandas are mass recruiting for rank, and have a very, very high turnover rate due to their players ultimately failing. Next let's consider what usually goes hand in hand with mass recruiting - point whoring. It's clear pandas are point whoring, just look at the top 20 players listing.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I would assume saying pandas aren't as elite as they woudl have you believe is the point he is trying to inform the general uk9 population of. He also explained this point with logical and fact based reasoning. I consider that reasoning flawed, however were it true, the rank one tribe being a mass recruiting nubbins would be important information, and something that should be shared with the masses.

You sir, are trolling.

Oh come on Zard, am just tryna get a better understanding of what he's saying here :)

I mean am just so fascinated by how he came to this conclusion, I wanna know more!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Hey there, thanks for adding your input to this thread (especially highlighting to that annoying troll why he should stop posting. Could you point out where my reasoning is flawed, I'm genuinely interested as I see no holes.

You looked at some basic numbers. However did not do anything further than assume based on those.
If you look at the full list of tribe changes, a different picture emerges.

32 of those changes come from people joining and then leaving with under 200 points, I can only assume these are inactive players who lied to join pandas. This does not show a tribe with little to no recruiting process, it shows one with members who are willing to lie to get in.

Another 12 tribe changes came from players leaving and then rejoining, which is not a recruitment issue. In the case of MUTINY, these players left because of disagreements and then later returned. This cannot be called overrecruitng. Those together bring the tribe from an 8:1 ratio to a 4:1 ratio, something much more "normal," would you agree?

@meechan:
He outlined it quite blatantly in his first post.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
You looked at some basic numbers. However did not do anything further than assume based on those.
If you look at the full list of tribe changes, a different picture emerges.

32 of those changes come from people joining and then leaving with under 200 points, I can only assume these are inactive players who lied to join pandas. This does not show a tribe with little to no recruiting process, it shows one with members who are willing to lie to get in.

Another 12 tribe changes came from players leaving and then rejoining, which is not a recruitment issue. In the case of MUTINY, these players left because of disagreements and then later returned. This cannot be called overrecruitng. Those together bring the tribe from an 8:1 ratio to a 4:1 ratio, something much more "normal," would you agree?

@meechan:
He outlined it quite blatantly in his first post.

A more normal ratio would be maybe 2:1 or maybe at max 3:1. 4:1 certainly still seems a bit over the top for a premade who many expected to not need to recruit in-game. Look at the lineup, Nauzhror, Mattcurr, JChilds, Sneggy etc etc. Should a tribe with that quality need to recruit?

If you look at a most recent in-game recruitment, he was top 5. That seems to be recruiting on points to me I'm afraid, and is a typical example of mass recruitment. All in all they don't have that elite feel to them, they cycle players too frequently. A normal ratio would apply to an in-game started tribe, in my opinion, and most certainly not a hand picked premade.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
A more normal ratio would be maybe 2:1 or maybe at max 3:1. 4:1 certainly still seems a bit over the top for a premade who many expected to not need to recruit in-game. Look at the lineup, Nauzhror, Mattcurr, JChilds, Sneggy etc etc. Should a tribe with that quality need to recruit?

If you look at a most recent in-game recruitment, he was top 5. That seems to be recruiting on points to me I'm afraid, and is a typical example of mass recruitment. All in all they don't have that elite feel to them, they cycle players too frequently. A normal ratio would apply to an in-game started tribe, in my opinion, and most certainly not a hand picked premade.


I'm sorry, why exactly do you think Pandas was a premade? As far as I'm aware, it was not, and this is supported by the fact that nauzhror joined a few days in, and refuse to recognize in early spetember, almost 2 weeks after the world began.
Of all of their top 20 players, only 1 joined the first day, 2 in the first week. That obviously sounds like a premade.
Of their top 40 players, 3 joined in the first week. That is only a third of their top players who joined at the beginning.

And anyway, don't activity problems often hurt "elite" tribes like Pandas.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I'm sorry, why exactly do you think Pandas was a premade? As far as I'm aware, it was not, and this is supported by the fact that nauzhror joined a few days in, and refuse to recognize in early spetember, almost 2 weeks after the world began.

There was a thread. Found here. The nauzhror account was what, his third account on this world? Two joined the first day. :/

Of all of their top 20 players, only 1 joined the first day, 2 in the first week. That obviously sounds like a premade.
Of their top 40 players, 3 joined in the first week. That is only a third of their top players who joined at the beginning.

And anyway, don't activity problems often hurt "elite" tribes like Pandas.

Here you actually support my point about them recruiting in game to get ranks. :/
Activity problems? Have you seen the ranks of their members. Clearly not inactive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I'm sorry, why exactly do you think Pandas was a premade? As far as I'm aware, it was not, and this is supported by the fact that nauzhror joined a few days in, and refuse to recognize in early spetember, almost 2 weeks after the world began.
Of all of their top 20 players, only 1 joined the first day, 2 in the first week. That obviously sounds like a premade.
Of their top 40 players, 3 joined in the first week. That is only a third of their top players who joined at the beginning.

And anyway, don't activity problems often hurt "elite" tribes like Pandas.

Comments regards me are not true. I think i joined day one. Did play for 3-4 days, then found a friend who was covering me for 3 days when i am on holidays. But i did change holidays for over 10 days, when i let him now, he left account. I was nearly completely cleared at that time. But after comeback i did continue to play.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
well dang, it seems you are correct. TTTE
and LW, yeah...what now!
:p
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Comments regards me are not true. I think i joined day one. Did play for 3-4 days, then found a friend who was covering me for 3 days when i am on holidays. But i did change holidays for over 10 days, when i let him now, he left account. I was nearly completely cleared at that time. But after comeback i did continue to play.

He was talking joined pandas ;P
 

DeletedUser

Guest
/me is curious why op is using different forum alias to his usual uk10 one and writing as if he is not in panda's.
 

Nauzhror

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
106
/me is curious why op is using different forum alias to his usual uk10 one and writing as if he is not in panda's.


Damn, wondered how long till someone would remember that alias from uk3 and realize it's my co-player. :lol:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
That pandas aren't as elite as they would have people believe? :icon_rolleyes:



Who the hell believes Pandas to be elite (I do not like the word "elite") ?

Pandas are at best a group of intensive farmers and least resistance expansionists propped up by 4-5 multiplayed accounts maybe 3 of which actually have decent players in them.
Pandas aren't good, they're in a poor world. The world makes Pandas look good in comparison.

They have a tribal average of 58K and they've never done a single tribal operation. How does anybody know if these guys can hold together in a serious war ?

* Say no to troll baiting today! *

 

DeletedUser6623

Guest
nice thread. That is summit easily missed, but im glad you pointed it out :) +1

p.s- meechan fails
 

DeletedUser4697

Guest
i hate it when people purposefully come on this forum to hate other people..

this is a very interesting thread by thomas and it gets attacked.. please ignore this immature people thomas. Great Post!
 

Nauzhror

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
106
i hate it when people purposefully come on this forum to hate other people..

this is a very interesting thread by thomas and it gets attacked.. please ignore this immature people thomas. Great Post!



He's the co-player of the duke of Pandas. ie. It's a troll thread. :icon_rolleyes:
 
Top