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.
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.