Tribe Changes

Jimkurmi

Active Member
Reaction score
97
I think that Tribes themselves need a rework.

Tribe Lock isn't the answer but maybe the below can be expanded upon by this wonderful community(Sarcasm intended)

Tribes in their current state are currently not adequate for the future of the game, as such there is no consequence to joining or leaving.

You can join a world with no friends, join the nearest beginner tribe who have just started learning and enjoying themselves, get a big fish join them late in a world, that bigger fish has ambitions, not to help his small beginner rim tribe grow, but just use them as a shield to further ambitions to move on. Once grown to a satisfactory level he/she joins a bigger tribe and then potentially turns on the initial home to give the bigger tribe a better foothold in the K.

You could have an established tribe and one member disagrees with leadership so decides to leave as a power move knowing full well that their leader would have to re focus on either removing them or the genuine battles they are currently fighting, more often than not leading to a concession in their demands to keep parity and unity.

Or the worst of these bunch, you can have some lovely members within the core of your tribe who decide they would like to join the enemy and provide information to another tribe in exchange for places, attacks come in and they jump ship completely destroying morale and the enjoyment of the remaining players.

What all these have in common is that a player is free to leave and re-join Tribes on a whim making them nothing more than decoration.

In a game called Tribal Wars where Tribal being the key word here there needs to be a system added where joining and leaving a tribe isn't an instant decision.

I believe this also slightly alleviates problems of sister tribes no re-organising backlines and frontlines to support front line members, and no switching of members to provide emergency support.

Without going too much further into making this another huge post:

When you voluntarily leave a tribe there should be a cooldown of joining another lets say 7 days as an example:
No instant joining of another tribe which allows:

No organising merges to happen over night bonus
To providing information on members to get an immediate safe haven
Not to leave in a tantrum if you don't agree with your leadership
To making a tribe of 3-4 friends at the start and surveying your best option.
Many many more hypothetical situations.

If you are already in a tribe invites should be automatically blocked.
If you are on cooldown then invites are to be blocked until the cooldown is removed.
If the Leader disbands his tribe then they shall be placed on cooldown.
If you are dismissed then you are free to join another tribe immediately.

the TLDR version
A system needs to be put in place where joining a Tribe gives you a serious choice, not switching as it suits.
Tribe joining cooldown when leaving a Tribe

These are just quickfire thoughts probably many holes but thats the idea of my suggestion.
 

Womd

New Member
Reaction score
10
I like the idea of the 7 day cooldown period after leaving a tribe, it really makes leaving a tribe a bit of a tougher decision.

Could be a bit of an issue, early on. I know you're against merges, but little tribes often merge together early on. Perhaps an option for a duke of a tribe to invite another tribe to merge into them, if space is available, and vice versa (I know this is easy to abuse, kicking loads of players out and merging a tribe into another)
 

Jimkurmi

Active Member
Reaction score
97
I've merged and facilitated merges on worlds, I am not totally against them, especially in the face of an overwhelming foe to make something an even playing field.

To address your concern, Tribes need to have a consequence of joining, with something like that active there will be less tribes and more skirmishes, especially if a leader is punished for disbanding. It will lead to less need for merges because many may perish by choosing to merge with a cooldown in place, but if there is a true alliance and diplomacy a merge can still be done, just won't be instant and have a serious choice for doing so.

There will be ways to abuse and circumvent even this idea such as a leader making a tribe and dismissing members to to allow them to join, but I don't know many who lead a tribe and sacrifice themselves to do this,
 

General-Richa

New Member
Reaction score
13
There is that phrase, "don't hate the player, hate the game".

Unfortunately that saying is not appropriate for Tribal Wars... because no matter what changes are made to the game to try to make it better, some players will always find ways to manipulate other players and abuse the game mechanics for personal gain.

So in my view, it's the players that are the problem, not the game... and no matter what the devs do to help, the players will continue to be the problem, in one way or another.

I think there are lots of players like you and I, who hope for a better, fairer game with a more level playing field, but the fact is that human nature is what it is and that is what ultimately will lead people to do the things that they do... and they do it for what they class as a victory, which in truth is often a very shallow victory indeed.

Heck of a shame, I for one would support a solution if ever it could be found, so please do keep making these suggestions to try to make things better.
 

Baronesspink

New Member
Reaction score
4
Isn't there already sort of something like that in place whereby when you join a tribe you can't send or receive certain types of support/resources or have I got that wrong?
 

SWDXB

Active Member
Reaction score
84
There’s sometimes a block on sending support when you join a tribe, but players can usually receive it immediately.
 

Eriswell

Member
Reaction score
43
W54 is different again I believe, you can send support to someone in another tribe but it will bounce. But if they tribe hop into yours before it lands - it'll support the villa.
 

SWDXB

Active Member
Reaction score
84
That was the arrival setting that was voted against, did they implement that in the end anyway?
 

jaguarr

Active Member
Reaction score
46
That was the arrival setting that was voted against, did they implement that in the end anyway?
No they didn't implement it.You can only support your tribe, you can't send support to villages that you don't own.
Screenshot_1.png
 

sp33duser

Active Member
Reaction score
144
and add a tribe lock for 2 weeks or 30 days if the world has uber support so you cant just have people switching between 2 tribes often.

lowers the strength of ally/hugging if you can only cordinate attacks and not support anyone outside your tribe
 

jaguarr

Active Member
Reaction score
46
and add a tribe lock for 2 weeks or 30 days if the world has uber support so you cant just have people switching between 2 tribes often.

lowers the strength of ally/hugging if you can only cordinate attacks and not support anyone outside your tribe
They should add a support block that you won't be able to receive support for 3-7 days after you join a tribe instead of tribe lock because a lot of the times people quit.
 

sp33duser

Active Member
Reaction score
144
They should add a support block that you won't be able to receive support for 3-7 days after you join a tribe instead of tribe lock because a lot of the times people quit.
true that is much better, but if they are joining a tribe it is unlikely they are going inactive that quickly.

and i forgot to clarify the tribelock feature would be inacted after a certain period of time not immediately when a world opens like 30/45/60 day before it happens.

i think bigger tribe limits would help, but i don't think it matters too much on a server with already low users.