Troops Win Wars, Not Points?

[DeletedUser]

They just don't. You want to speed up your troop production, that's why you get more point than you neighbours.

Yes they do, producing more troops faster allows me to haul more res in less time than that said neighbour. Meaning my ques will be longer in HQ/RAX/Stab...thus meaning points are what wins.

 

[DeletedUser]

No, the points of the 10k tribe dictate they will have more troops than the 5k tribe, so the smaller having double the troops of the larger would not happen.

But then all you are saying is that it is better to be bigger - where does the troops v. building thing come in to it.

Why do you think it never happens? :icon_biggrin:

Who farms without spending? Maybe I have underestimated the influence of Khmer Rouge ideology on players of this game.

 

[DeletedUser]

But then all you are saying is that it is better to be bigger - where does the troops v. building thing come in to it.

It comes into it when my buildings (which make my points larger) help me to produce more troops than those concentrating on majoritivly troops.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes they do, producing more troops faster allows me to haul more res in less time than that said neighbour. Meaning my ques will be longer in HQ/RAX/Stab...thus meaning points are what wins.

No they don't. Producing more troops allows you to haul more? More troops? Troops.

Who farms without spending? Maybe I have underestimated the influence of Khmer Rouge ideology on players of this game.

Nobody duh.

It comes into it when my buildings (which make my points larger) help me to produce more troops than those concentrating on majoritivly troops.

With the fastest way to a large amount of troops you will get more points, the cliche doesn't say that you can't upgrade your buildings.

 

[DeletedUser]

No they don't. Producing more troops allows you to haul more? More troops? Troops.

To produce more troops to haul more, you have to upgrade buildings. Thus more points So having more points allows you to farm more ( through being able to produce more troops and faster.

With the fastest way to a large amount of troops you will get more points, the cliche doesn't say that you can't upgrade your buildings.

I never said it did :icon_confused:

 

[DeletedUser]

It comes into it when my buildings (which make my points larger) help me to produce more troops than those concentrating on majoritivly troops.

It takes time to build large buildings...will you still continue to build them higher even when your neighbors get academy?

 

[DeletedUser]

It takes time to build large buildings...will you still continue to build them higher even when your neighbors get academy?

Course, as by the time they do that if thev'e been concentrating more on troops, I will all ready have an academy, and be able to up things that allow me to produce troops even faster an more of them

 

[DeletedUser1511]

Troops win wars, not points.




So an old TW cliche, that still gets used far too much on TW.

I was wondering what all your thoughts on it are, some decent discussion needed ?

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). The more farm levels I fill the more res I can haul through farming to upgrade more levels and create troops even quicker and more of than before.

And if that said smaller player is always concentrating on troops he will in turn have less than me from his lower hauls and lower farm level, and not be able to produce them quicker than I.


Thus in a war higher ranked tribe with say double the points and villages are going to have more troops than that smaller tribe- Thus leading to a war win.



Discuss?

Bro are you serious.
Tribal wars is a game that has its rankings based on points not troop count. If you need to read into it beyond that, then chances are you are a fool(not you personally, but the individual who does not)

 

[DeletedUser]

Bro are you serious.
Tribal wars is a game that has its rankings based on points not troop count. If you need to read into it beyond that, then chances are you are a fool(not you personally, but the individual who does not)

Its called creating discussion Wardy, you should try it instead of trolling :icon_wink:

 

[DeletedUser]

The point you guys are missing is that azn is talking about the exponential curve tw has.

Say two people get a haul, each has 30 spears. If one person puts all those res into troops, he'll have a twoish hour queue with 5 spears or whatever. Great.

The second puts 1 sp in the queue and puts another in, makes sure the queue is running but keeping the res to upgrade his barracks a level.

The first person has succeeded in keeping the amount of troops in his village at a linear level. The second has begun an exponential curve that requires more resources to sustain, but makes his troop output a little faster.

After a day of farming, the barracks of the second player has let him finish with a higher sp count than the first guy, who kept his growth linear. The few extra troops the first guy got will not matter in the long run, but hinder him from getting more troops faster.

Having more troops in the queue is nice but having them build faster is what's important. So in the long run, pointwhoring with consistent troop queues does the trick

 

[DeletedUser1511]

Its called creating discussion Wardy, you should try it instead of trolling :icon_wink:

It aint trolling. That is a genuine point. No one can deny that the game is based around the concept of points.
Troops are a means of obtaining points, troops however do not produce points. Heck the process of obtaining more troops involves gaining points.

How someone can say troops are more important than points in beyond me. You need only look at how many people fail during start up and maintain that they are "troop whoring".

 

[DeletedUser]

It aint trolling. That is a genuine point. No one can deny that the game is based around the concept of points.
Troops are a means of obtaining points, troops however do not produce points. Heck the process of obtaining more troops involves gaining points.

How someone can say troops are more important than points in beyond me. You need only look at how many people fail during start up and maintain that they are "troop whoring".

Bolded part is exactly my point.

 

[DeletedUser]

Bolded part is exactly my point.

Why didn't you said it like that in your first post? :icon_redface:

 

[DeletedUser]

Why didn't you said it like that in your first post? :icon_redface:

I said it that way......you obviously read wrong

I said- 'My own thoughts are that it is stupid for this to be actually true(in most cases)' on the subject of 'Troops win wars, not points.'

 

[DeletedUser]

Is it a waste of time and resources to build HQ to 30, or would that be wise to build other buildings faster afterwards considering this slow speed server?

 

[DeletedUser1511]

Bolded part is exactly my point.

Which is why my original post said. Bro are you serious. Because a discussion implies that there is an opposing arguement.

 

[DeletedUser]

Which is why my original post said. Bro are you serious. Because a discussion implies that there is an opposing arguement.

Then I read it wrong

 

[DeletedUser]

In the end those players with most troops have more or less most points. At least if you play right. There is no successfull player without troops and many points.

 

[DeletedUser3371]

Troops win wars, not points.

That exponential curve is all well and good but if you want to dissect the statement do it from the start.

When did you first see that written in a TW related sense?
When you were a noob perhaps, ... when a snipe was a bird, a re-take was another photograph or probably even before you knew that farming didn't mean you had to get all muddy.

So an old TW cliche, that still gets used far too much on TW.

No, it doesn't get used 1/2 enough! It is a cliche because it is the easiest and simplest way to teach a guy to remember not to get carried away building up his first village.

You added conditions ... all things being equal, rates you farm at, that are actually lessons No.2 and No.3 that follow after No.1 Troops win wars, not points!
If the player your telling it to doesn't know what farming is yet, it is hardly fair to being farming into the equation.

There are times when conditions are right and luck goes your way, a guy with 1/10th of an adversary's points can win the war, but higher points will almost certainly bring a considerable advantage and usually victory when all things are equal.

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

If you simply count up the times you actually use this phrase appropriately, it will be right approx. 999/1000 times!

I guess it is just a really really long time since you actually taught someone how to play. That ivory tower of pre-made heros just got a little more tarnished in my eyes. Shame on you for turning 1 on TW's most valuable lessons into carrion for Wardy to feed on.

Shoo, shoo ..... UK9 beginners help ... go back to the sound bites, please.

 

[DeletedUser]

new to the uk servers so have no idea who's who, and who knows who.. and who cares less

nice discussion topic, interesting views, good to hear basic start-up strategy discussed.. new players can read through the pros and cons and make up their own mind

agreed about achieving a balance that allows you to farm and grow (both buildings and troops)