Troops Win Wars, Not Points?

[DeletedUser]

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.


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.



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.

Actualy I took a player on w8, nobled him out as he asked and said he was quitting from being attacked by others. I took him on as a co-player and taught him what I know. I certainly don't make myself out to be the best player though nor a pre-made hero :s whatever that is supposed to mean. So unless you have any real proof about me or who I am, don't make judgements you can't back up.

So what your saying is to teach a player, you tell him that Troops win wars and not points and write it on your tribal profile ? :icon_rolleyes: Does not work, seen it many times over alot of uk worlds and those tribes failed.


From what I gather in your ridicoulas post, it seems you think telling a new player that sentance helps him more thn you teaching him wht farming is and how to do it efficently?

 

[Nauzhror]

It's a fact that the one with the largest numbers of troops has the best chance of winning a war.

No it's not.

You and I could be given accounts to play in the same area, yours would start with twice as many troops. I'd put money on mine still winning.

Timing skills and strategy matter far more than troopcount.

 

[DeletedUser]

Points are not a thing to me.
Sorry but I don't care about the rat race.
To be the top dog in points.
It's just a lie. A mask.

Then again, you have to view everything as a mask. Low points are high points. More OD then others. Less OD then others.

All you have to do is be bold enough to see if you can remove that mask. To see if it's really just a mirage. The only players who know who the better player is..is the one who faced the said player or players around. Rather it be on the receiving end or the one on the attack.

Those with low points, could be a deadly trap to those with higher points.
Those with higher points could be a front to scare off the enemy.
Those with low points could just suck.
Those with high points might have something worth talking about.

I say...beware of the one in the middle. Not the highest nor the smallest.
As well as never over or underestimate those around you.

Fight the other as if they know what they are doing. No matter what. Always expect for the worst.
For if you think life is just a walk in the park rather it be low or high points. You might find yourself gone.

My opion guys
-T

 

[DeletedUser455]

Buildings: Village Headquarters (Level 10)
Barracks (Level 6)
Stable (Level 1)
Smithy (Level 5)
Rally point (Level 1)
Market (Level 1)
Timber camp (Level 13)
Clay pit (Level 10)
Iron mine (Level 6)
Farm (Level 5)
Warehouse (Level 7)
Hiding place (Level 1)
Wall (Level 6)

top70 player... discuss!

ps: also top10 oda o.o

 

[DeletedUser3371]

A week ago we all started with 75 points. Did you spend you start up fund of rezzies on buildings-points? No, neither did I. Balance is great.
For anybody who manages to find these forums for the first time the saying is usually already obsolete.

The guy you added as a co .... he was further along than listening to that 'sound bite' as a lesson. He has already seem the figures of what troops counts had won/lost his first battle and probably what his first mistakes were.

When you get a new guy who joins up and want to attack his neighbour with his shiny and new 100 axe you remind him that the other guy(just as much a newbie) has 300 more points than him and so in all likelyhood has 100 swords to go with his 200 axes.
If you keep reminding him, Troops win wars, not points! from when he starts up until he gets his first battle report the chances are he'll win that battle. After he has seen that first report it should be a case of lesson learned .... move on to lesson 2, 3, 4 etc.
I didn't mention a tribe profile and I like having words put in my mouth as much as you do.

I mean teaching that rather than adding that extra level of smithy over night, queuing troops all night would be more appropriate, just before you attack and turn your opponent into a farm.

'Troops win wars, not points!' I thought this was the topic? Surely if we want to discuss what is the most valuable thing you can teach somebody, such as, troops win wars v farming, we need to start another thread. Perhaps even a new guide.

My point was and still is that you have taken the saying out of context and and asked players to evaluate it in that inappropriate context. For everybody to try and evaluate the saying in a way relevant to them now can't help but come to the conclusion that it is a fairly rubbish piece of advice.
That still won't change the fact that the first time they read it they stopped to think about what it meant just as I did and as I supposed you did too.

... many times over alot of uk worlds and those tribes failed.

Been there, done that .... learned from it.

From what I gather in your ridicoulas post

Take the argument apart instead of ridiculing it. Just because you may feel I was harsh with my criticism, doesn't detract from the valid points.

Don't get mad .... get even!

 

[DeletedUser]

A week ago we all started with 75 points. Did you spend you start up fund of rezzies on buildings-points? No, neither did I. Balance is great.
For anybody who manages to find these forums for the first time the saying is usually already obsolete.

Yes I did spend my start up fund on buildings:s as you have to due to building towards barrack's:icon_confused:
The guy you added as a co .... he was further along than listening to that 'sound bite' as a lesson. He has already seem the figures of what troops counts had won/lost his first battle and probably what his first mistakes were.

He didn't know what farming was :icon_confused:
Nor did he understand what to build and when. So what your saying is that I never helped him in anyway :icon_rolleyes:

When you get a new guy who joins up and want to attack his neighbour with his shiny and new 100 axe you remind him that the other guy(just as much a newbie) has 300 more points than him and so in all likelyhood has 100 swords to go with his 200 axes.
If you keep reminding him, Troops win wars, not points! from when he starts up until he gets his first battle report the chances are he'll win that battle. After he has seen that first report it should be a case of lesson learned .... move on to lesson 2, 3, 4 etc.
I didn't mention a tribe profile and I like having words put in my mouth as much as you do.

If you like words in your mouth thats fine, the whole basis of my arguement is the sentance is a cliche and get used way to often, it stems from my post in the top 10 tribes:icon_rolleyes:
Youv'e took the cliche out of context and made it into a hypothetical situation, if u keep reminding him that troops win wars then he's most likely going to concentrate as much as possible on troops, bad advice imo.

I mean teaching that rather than adding that extra level of smithy over night, queuing troops all night would be more appropriate, just before you attack and turn your opponent into a farm.

'Troops win wars, not points!' I thought this was the topic? Surely if we want to discuss what is the most valuable thing you can teach somebody, such as, troops win wars v farming, we need to start another thread. Perhaps even a new guide.

It is about teaching players though, that sentance influences how new players and some don't learn otherwise for a long time (I find most on UK are just stubborn if u try to teach them otherwise)

My point was and still is that you have taken the saying out of context and and asked players to evaluate it in that inappropriate context. For everybody to try and evaluate the saying in a way relevant to them now can't help but come to the conclusion that it is a fairly rubbish piece of advice.
That still won't change the fact that the first time they read it they stopped to think about what it meant just as I did and as I supposed you did too.

Yes i did stop to think about it, but then i as lucky enough to be taught otherwise. You havn't made that point until just now :icon_confused: how can it still be your'e point?
Nor did I ask anyone to 'evaluate it' they do that(if the did) themselves. Surely its releveance would be to TW and that would mean it has the same meaning to everyone?

Been there, done that .... learned from it.

This part i don't get, you mean youv'e been taught othewise from the 'troops win wars' or you learned that having it on a tribal profile is causing new players to become inclined to stick to it every world they play? Or what?

Take the argument apart instead of ridiculing it. Just because you may feel I was harsh with my criticism, doesn't detract from the valid points.

Don't get mad .... get even!

Not at all I don't feel you were harsh. Valid points? :lol: That you think that sentance is a valuable lesson to new players

 

[DeletedUser]

This sentence is valuable to new players as it will make them survive for longer ( Able to be attacked and attack others with troops) but as they how shall i say become a maturer Tw player they will begin to see the balance needed between points/troops to get the most points while keeping themselves protected.

learn from mistakes and remeber we all had a beginning wheather it be messy or glorious.

 

[DeletedUser]

This sentence is valuable to new players as it will make them survive for longer ( Able to be attacked and attack others with troops) but as they how shall i say become a maturer Tw player they will begin to see the balance needed between points/troops to get the most points while keeping themselves protected.

learn from mistakes and remeber we all had a beginning wheather it be messy or glorious.

:icon_confused:

So what your saying teach them stuff that might help them in the short term but in the long term it'l be un-benificial as they realise its wrong?

Why not just teach them from the begining that a good balance is needed?

 

[DeletedUser]

:icon_confused:

So what your saying teach them stuff that might help them in the short term but in the long term it'l be un-benificial as they realise its wrong?

Why not just teach them from the begining that a good balance is needed?

Because if there all good who will we have to noble? :icon_razz:
Hmm didnt think of it that way, good point.
But what if these players your teaching arent active enough to farm so instead spend their rezzies all on upgrading resources so
The teacher can do all the teaching and lead them in the right direction but its all down to the player in the end?

 

[DeletedUser]

Newbies need to learn the importance of building troops. Building buildings comes naturally - it's exciting to be able to build a new facility, and points are points - everyone wants to be higher in the tables. It's helpful to say "Troops win wars not points" as a way of putting emphasis on the need to be well armed as there is less obvious reward in building troops. If you don't already know the value of a few extra troops, why would you bother building them when you could have a few extra points and a shiney new workshop for the same money? Not to say that points are worthless, just that they arn't everything. It's a very helpful motto for the inexperienced - repeating this mantra could elevate a god-awful player to the dizzy heights of abject mediocrity.

 

[DeletedUser]

Because if there all good who will we have to noble? :icon_razz:
Hmm didnt think of it that way, good point.
But what if these players your teaching arent active enough to farm so instead spend their rezzies all on upgrading resources so
The teacher can do all the teaching and lead them in the right direction but its all down to the player in the end?

Ultimately yes its all down to the player, but show them how benificial it can be to not follow the said statement this thread is about, and imo they'l do better than if you just gave them that statement as advice.

If there not active enough then suggestion would be to get a co-player or sitter, If there keen to learn and show there not stubborn to what there saying, any decent player (not me as I am not decent) would be able to find someone for them to co to make up of that lack of activity and show its benifits.

Newbies need to learn the importance of building troops. Building buildings comes naturally - it's exciting to be able to build a new facility, and points are points - everyone wants to be higher in the tables. It's helpful to say "Troops win wars not points" as a way of putting emphasis on the need to be well armed as there is less obvious reward in building troops. If you don't already know the value of a few extra troops, why would you bother building them when you could have a few extra points and a shiney new workshop for the same money? Not to say that points are worthless, just that they arn't everything. It's a very helpful motto for the inexperienced - repeating this mantra could elevate a god-awful player to the dizzy heights of abject mediocrity.

I strongly disagree, that moto makes players worse, because it takes most who see it into a mind frame that those with more points have less troops than them, and encourages new players to grow villages that are not beneficial to there account.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes like you said show them, lead by example by having a healthy point count while maintaining troops.
I agree completely with helping anyone who is willing to learn all the better. And yes a statement wouldnt be worth much for beginners as everyone interpets it different but it is up to decent player ( like you ) to show them the right way. Co-playing can be brilliant for those who cannot be active enough due to Rl and yes it does have many benefits which can be seen in this world with most of the high pointers on co-played accounts.

 

[DeletedUser]

It's very complicated, it has 2 sides.

 

[DeletedUser]

It's very complicared, it has 2 sides.

Hahaha! Helpful.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hahaha! Helpful.

I know very insightful :icon_razz:
But i feel his point needs to be expanded.

 

[DeletedUser3371]

So what your saying is that I never helped him in anyway :icon_rolleyes:

Where did I say you didn't help him? Did the attacking troops out number his? He had already learned the value of a high troop count which was my sole assumption here and by extension moved past the first lesson.


If you like words in your mouth thats fine, the whole basis of my arguement is the sentance is a cliche and get used way to often, it stems from my post in the top 10 tribes:icon_rolleyes:
Youv'e took the cliche out of context and made it into a hypothetical situation, if u keep reminding him that troops win wars then he's most likely going to concentrate as much as possible on troops, bad advice imo.

So tell me about the wars you won without any!:icon_rolleyes: << oh, look they make my points way more sarcastic, too!

Honestly, I think I put it in a context that all of us can relate to and most of us remember. When did we first here the saying? What effect did it have on your game play and when did you first learn to ignore it? , are all very much relevant to both of our views.

OK, I'll toss you a bone. Why do so many start up tribes fail in the first month on every world? Lack of points or lack of troops? Of those that fail in my humble opinion the majority would be because of a lack of troops. Fortunately I have very limited experience in this area so it is basically a guess.
I would still maintain that it is usually a case of not building the troops to adequately defend/attack/counter attack and over estimating what they can do with what they have. Over confidence should never he sneered at in an adversary, but admire for the glaring flaw that it is. ( Sorry, Nauzh )


It is about teaching players though, that sentance influences how new players and some don't learn otherwise for a long time (I find most on UK are just stubborn if u try to teach them otherwise)

Surely that is the responsibility of the guide they use or the teacher who told them the '1st lesson' to make sure that balance is just as important just as sometimes rushing to academy at the cost of troops to finish off a player can be the most important thing you need to do at a different point in time. Yes, another hypothetical.
Just as you teach a kid to spell "i before e" you teach troops before points and later " except after u " you teach him when he should ignore that first rule.


You havn't made that point until just now :icon_confused: how can it still be your'e point?

Perhaps because it was the whole basis of my first post. I know it can be confusing but do try and keep up.:icon_wink:

Nor did I ask anyone to 'evaluate it' they do that(if the did) themselves. Surely its releveance would be to TW and that would mean it has the same meaning to everyone?

I imagine the answers would vary as much as the answer to what is the ideal village build or what is the best defence. Or is everybody else wrong with their build if it differs from your opinion as well?

Not at all I don't feel you were harsh. Valid points? :lol: That you think that sentance is a valuable lesson to new players

Oh, thank goodness for that! I would hate to upset you with the thought that there might be some players who need to be told to produce more troops rather than ploughing all their resources into their buildings sim -city style when they first start to play TW.

So what your saying teach them stuff that might help them in the short term but in the long term it'l be un-benificial as they realise its wrong?

Why not just teach them from the begining that a good balance is needed?

By all means run through a full start up strategy with a new player. I find that for the most part they only take small pieces on board and often miss crucial points. When you move on to the next stage it can be extremely difficult to identify where their strategy is flawed, or even that it has a flaw, if you have move forward too quickly.
Often, they then they move on taking the thought that XXXX who is acknowledged as a top player with them and confidently refuse to be corrected in points that have gaping holes or don't fit with the change of variables that compromise the system they try to use.

 

[DeletedUser]

Where did I say you didn't help him? Did the attacking troops out number his? He had already learned the value of a high troop count which was my sole assumption here and by extension moved past the first lesson.

I read your post as an insinuation that's what you were sayng. Moved past the first lesson though? :icon_confused: what lesson?

So tell me about the wars you won without any!:icon_rolleyes: << oh, look they make my points way more sarcastic, too!

Honestly, I think I put it in a context that all of us can relate to and most of us remember. When did we first here the saying? What effect did it have on your game play and when did you first learn to ignore it? , are all very much relevant to both of our views.

Hmm, maybe you never read or you skimmed my other comments in this thread?
I never said I won any wars without troops, infact I stated that having more points dictates you will have more troops. In most cases but obviously there are exceptions.

OK, I'll toss you a bone. Why do so many start up tribes fail in the first month on every world? Lack of points or lack of troops? Of those that fail in my humble opinion the majority would be because of a lack of troops. Fortunately I have very limited experience in this area so it is basically a guess.
I would still maintain that it is usually a case of not building the troops to adequately defend/attack/counter attack and over estimating what they can do with what they have. Over confidence should never he sneered at in an adversary, but admire for the glaring flaw that it is. ( Sorry, Nauzh )

No I disagree, I think its poor leadership that makes them fail. Maybe even going as far to say it's majority new players who want to try there hand at leading but don't get it right.

Surely that is the responsibility of the guide they use or the teacher who told them the '1st lesson' to make sure that balance is just as important just as sometimes rushing to academy at the cost of troops to finish off a player can be the most important thing you need to do at a different point in time. Yes, another hypothetical.
Just as you teach a kid to spell "i before e" you teach troops before points and later " except after u " you teach him when he should ignore that first rule.

Why :icon_confused: (I was always taught I before e except after c, not a dig just saying, point is I was taught the whole of it at the beginning and not the c part afterwards)
I don't see how you can be in favor of teaching new players something you'll later teach them to disregard? Why not just teach them from the beginning to have a good balance?

Perhaps because it was the whole basis of my first post. I know it can be confusing but do try and keep up.:icon_wink:

So I take it you couldn't think of how to reply properly to that, or couldn't admit I was right about it not being your point from the beginning you felt the need to take something I said earlier and incorporate it into something sarcastic, *claps hand* Well done you Pro pRo poster:icon_biggrin:

I imagine the answers would vary as much as the answer to what is the ideal village build or what is the best defence. Or is everybody else wrong with their build if it differs from your opinion as well?

Oh, thank goodness for that! I would hate to upset you with the thought that there might be some players who need to be told to produce more troops rather than ploughing all their resources into their buildings sim -city style when they first start to play TW.

hmm maybe your right, don't think there was any need to insinuate I thought people were wrong because they differ in opinion, I'd never do that always encourage people to have thier own. Again no need to put words in my mouth I can speak for myself

:icon_rolleyes: Its called a balance.......your whole heartedly sure that the statement 'Troops win wars not points' is good advice for a beginner, so if you told that to a player who did sim-city it up at thier first go, then there second go would become more apparent as they'd build more troops and have a tiny<->nonexistant HQ que each day.

IMO teaching players that statement at the beginning and then taking it back and teaching them something else is counter productive. Why do it, when you can just teach them the right way the first time.

By all means run through a full start up strategy with a new player. I find that for the most part they only take small pieces on board and often miss crucial points. When you move on to the next stage it can be extremely difficult to identify where their strategy is flawed, or even that it has a flaw, if you have move forward too quickly.
Often, they then they move on taking the thought that XXXX who is acknowledged as a top player with them and confidently refuse to be corrected in points that have gaping holes or don't fit with the change of variables that compromise the system they try to use.

I feel the best way to teach a new player is to take them on your own account, hands on experience, leaving constant notes for them on what to do. If they do something you feel is wrong or not beneficial to the account, you tell them there and then, not wait for the flaw to develop and then find it later on and try to correct it(where it coul be too late, as they have that set mind set.

 

[DeletedUser]

Seriously, points are more important than troops. You don't see a ranking for who has the most troops do you? No, it's all about who has the most points, thus HQ 30 and Market 25 are a MUST have in any village.

 

[DeletedUser]

Seriously, points are more important than troops. You don't see a ranking for who has the most troops do you? No, it's all about who has the most points, thus HQ 30 and Market 25 are a MUST have in any village.

No.

10k player with 500 troops goes to war with 3k player with 2000 troops. 10k player gets nobled. Simples.
3k player now has larger points with his two vils. Can be seen as a false positive to onlookers that points are more important.
Thus discussion.....

Don't think it will be summed up either way tho. The closer the amount of troops are to one another the more the points matter. For example

3k player with 2000 troops goes to war with 10k player with 1800 troops. By the time its got there 10k player has built more troops. 3k player gets there, gets killed. 10k player can build more troops than 3k faster in the same amount of time.

The answer is its relative to the gap, the time the attack takes to land and what points have been spent on what by both players.

 

[DeletedUser]

No.

10k player with 500 troops goes to war with 3k player with 2000 troops. 10k player gets nobled. Simples.
3k player now has larger points with his two vils. Can be seen as a false positive to onlookers that points are more important.
Thus discussion.....

Don't think it will be summed up either way tho. The closer the amount of troops are to one another the more the points matter. For example

3k player with 2000 troops goes to war with 10k player with 1800 troops. By the time its got there 10k player has built more troops. 3k player gets there, gets killed. 10k player can build more troops than 3k faster in the same amount of time.

The answer is its relative to the gap, the time the attack takes to land and what points have been spent on what by both players.

No! You do not see it how I see it. This game is based on who has the most points, if you are busy building troops 24/7 you won't have to time to increase your points thus falling massively in the ranks and you'll be outgrown in your area. Thus I think a good way to go is to build resources mines to about 15 each then get Market to trade any resources you don't need for ones you have, thus you cut out the middle man (In this case farming) As I said before, if you check the rankings we don't have a ranking for the player with the biggest farm nor the player with the most troops so we must concede that this game is about points and grow POINTS! NOT TROOPS! That way we have a high rank.