Points v Troops

[DeletedUser]

Troops win wars, not points.




So an old TW cliche, that still gets used far too much on TW. (keep seeing it on tribe profiles ingame:icon_confused

I was wondering what all your thoughts on it are ?

My own thoughts are that it is stupid for this to be actually true(in most cases)

For if I have higher points than a player near me then I must assume he has lower building levels than me, thus I can produce troops faster and more of them (bigger rax/stab/farm- and in this world most importantly higher mines).

And if that said smaller player is always concentrating on troops he will in turn have less than me from his lower mine levels and lower farm level, and not be able to produce them quicker than I, more so again in this world from limited hauls, if we started the world at the same time yet I went straight for mine levels and only had the Quest troops to farm with for the first few weeks (which indecently I did).


Thus in a war a higher ranked tribe with say double the points and villages over I dunno....3-4 other tribes are going to have more troops than those smaller tribes combined(the ones who are 'troop whores' - Thus leading to a war win. 1v3-4


I have brought this up before in another world, but as the settings are much different hear was interested to hear thoughts on it...how important are troops early on in this world?

 

[Maggie Wallis]

It no different on any world with any settings, troops alone don't win wars... points alone don't win wars...

The right balance between points and troops win wars...

That's why point whores and troops whores don't win... maths nerds with the right balance of both win...

 

[DeletedUser]

to be honest, points win the game (village points as well as opponents defeated points), however, only troops will effectively win the battle(s) and, in the best case, the war (or some cunning diplomacy).

As well as another common saying goes 'points don't fight', I can't believe that and every time some goofy muppet with ASCII bunnies on his ingame profile adds this to his tribe application I can't deny myself chuckling (and, of course, this application directly goes to the trash).

As you correctly said:

if I have higher points than a player near me then I must assume he has lower building levels than me

so you see points do fight in a psychological way. An average player won't think about attacking someone who either has a pretty amount of points and is ranked quite highly on the world ranking list or someone who's got a huge pile of ODA (well, in the majority of cases).

I totally agree on your statements.

 

[DeletedUser]

maths nerds

AP and Zard sprung to mind when I read that lol

Also, you said a good balance, could you elaborate more?

What is a good balance, how do you know you've got one ?

 

[Maggie Wallis]

AP and Zard sprung to mind when I read that lol

Also, you said a good balance, could you elaborate more?

What is a good balance, how do you know you've got one ?

Hey I'm not a maths nerd so you will have to ask others for the mathematical equation to use...

Not that I think it is that easy...

Though I can make it sound easy: the right balance is the exact amount of D troops needed to defend your points with the exact amount of O troops needed to keep your points increasing faster than your neighbours...

 

[DeletedUser]

Rule of thumb: whore everything.

 

[DeletedUser9748]

I believe that points win on the psychological level of any war. A smaller tribe with less villages is most of the times afraid to hit a bigger tribe, nevermind the players it has or how experienced they are. Only with the help of allies they can make the decision and act against them.

But what needs to be considered are the settings. It's the most important in any world. Here, as we all know, if you make more troops than buildings in the beginning, eventually you will be left behind. In other worlds, if you are super active you can concentrate on troops for fast farming and clear semi-active players who minewhore without any descent amount of troops. You can't find a formula for all these, it all comes out as the world progresses.

But if we have to come to a general agreement, I would say that troops win wars cause with troops you take villages and smash players to the grounds. Points only help you to get there ^^

 

[DeletedUser]

surely,someone with more points but a lower barracks will produce troops slower than a player smaller than them but twice the barracks level, points dont all ways put other players off attacking early on, late game they will more likely be put off attacking some one larger, but you can be a smaller tribe and if you hit the right members in a bigger tribe, you can lower morale low enough for the tribe to fall from the inside especially when it is a council that is wiped out ,

 

[DeletedUser]

Points are the objective of the game, troops are there to stabilise and grow your points.

 

[DeletedUser]

Simply put, you can't have one or the other. There has to be a balance, how you find that precipice is up to each player.

 

[DeletedUser]

^ Exactly.

 

[DeletedUser6695]

surely,someone with more points but a lower barracks will produce troops slower than a player smaller than them but twice the barracks level, points dont all ways put other players off attacking early on, late game they will more likely be put off attacking some one larger, but you can be a smaller tribe and if you hit the right members in a bigger tribe, you can lower morale low enough for the tribe to fall from the inside especially when it is a council that is wiped out ,

If at the one village stage someone with less points than you has double your rax level you can assume they are dumb.

 

[DeletedUser10444]

Of course you need both but in this world, at least in the early stages, I'd say the numbers don't mean much. For example in my tribe I have the most points but I know I don't have the most troops. For this reason I'll get told off by the leaders but I know I've done the smart thing, I have enough troops to make it too expensive to clear me but got a nice fast growth. Others in my tribe that started about the same time as myself I think have roughly the same amount of troops as I do, but they are behind on points because they concentrated on troops early, slowing their growth. I mine-whored for a while so now I can grow much faster than them and soon enough I'll have more troops and can reach how many I'm "supposed to have".

 

[DeletedUser]

.......

Of course you need both but in this world, at least in the early stages, I'd say the numbers don't mean much. For example in my tribe I have the most points but I know I don't have the most troops. For this reason I'll get told off by the leaders but I know I've done the smart thing.

oh quick send in the cats.

no i agree with what u said.

 

[DeletedUser]

This world is a weird one when it comes to this discussion. Obviously, mathematically and common sense says mines mines mines for start up. But that's besides the point I'm about to make. Troops = Points. If not, you're doing it wrong. Points are obviously scary to players. It's usually a sign of growth and prowess. And really, for the most part, the people who grow the most are farming the most. What do you farm with? Troops.

 

[DeletedUser8153]

In early game,

No. of points is in little way proportional to No. of troops.
(as a general trend, more points tends to mean more troops, but that is as far as it goes.)

And should not be used as a guideline as to the amount of each you should have.

 

[DeletedUser]

More points in the 1st couple is ok, but later it just makes you more of a prize target.
after that it makes you a point whore

if you want to play for points go to Worlds 8 & 9