Speed 1
No Archers
Package nobles
No Churches
No Attack gap
Flag off
Scavenge off
Lots and lots of barbs
10:1 points attack block and the worst moral ever seen
Barbs can't be nobled, as per W9
Small tribes size just makes the families 5 tribes deep rather than 2 or 3
Outside support on, spiking barbs is fun.
Yeah, there's no way this would work lol.
From what you're saying, the aim of these settings is to force the good players to attack each other earlier on in the world, rather than taking the barbs and 'inactives' first. Let me explain from my perspective this would make for a generally poor world.
On every world, there's really a maximum of four tribes who could realistically have a chance at winning the world, most of the time it's three, but let's imagine the best-case scenario and say four. The ideal end game for a lot of people here would be four tribes controlling one K each and having a large war, most likely north vs south or east vs west. At this point, there should be players with millions of points, dozens of nobles, plenty of nukes and enough vills to fake from. This is what makes ops fun and is what tribal wars is all about. I think we can agree on this point.
What you're suggesting is to bring this war significantly further forward, to the point where players are probably only on a few hundred thousand points and they have very few nobles or nukes compared to what we should have for these tribe-wide ops. Tribes will only be able to control half a k before these wars break out because of this 10:1 point block you're suggesting. On previous worlds, it's been a struggle for my co and I to find targets that fit in the 20:1 point ratio, going with 10:1 would just make it impossible. Let's say we get to 100k points, based on previous worlds, there will be very few people outside of the top four tribes which meet the 10k requirement, probably no one. This will force us to go into wars with tribes our size or larger way too early in the world.
Your proposed settings propose another problem here. If we can't take barbs or smaller payers, the possible ways for players to build a new frontline is limited to swapping with people in the tribe. With all these new barbs you're wanting on the world and players not being able to noble them, there will probably be a large number of vills which can't be nobled separating the two tribes at war. On a speed one world, imagine how slow the world will be if players have limited nukes and nobles, and they'll have to send nobles from 10+ hours away. If a player starts backline, the only chance that they will get on the frontline and actually have fun is through inactives in the tribe you're fighting against, the exact opposite of what you're suggesting. I'm not the best defender, but I can safely say if these are the settings, then it would be near impossible to lose a vill. You'd then have to wait for another two weeks or however long it would be for nukes to build up and go again. If this is what people want to play like then they're playing the wrong game in my opinion.
Anyway, that's enough spam. I personally think pretty much every one of the suggested settings goes against what most have said they want in the next world, but happy to discuss further and even go into how many more family tribes will be created because tribes can't risk letting others grow on their backline lol.