DeletedUser7920
Guest
luke bishop is a very gd player as i was in w1 and he runs the best tribe i have ever seen if he starts and sticks around for a long time he will do the same lets just hope he not like these other good players who starts a world then quits after a month or so
DeletedUser1511
Guest
Since when was it a good thing to carry on playing long past the competitive stage ?????
DeletedUser589
Guest
You have got to be kidding me? You seriously suggesting that the game isnt competitive after the first month?
Late game is just as competitive as the start up, its just a very different type of competition, as attacks require more time and planning. In start up it is a lot easier to roll someone over, but as you get later into the game every player has hundreds of villages that you need to consider when hitting them
I cant believe you even posted that comment.
Late game is just as competitive as the start up, its just a very different type of competition, as attacks require more time and planning. In start up it is a lot easier to roll someone over, but as you get later into the game every player has hundreds of villages that you need to consider when hitting them
I cant believe you even posted that comment.
DeletedUser
Guest
What he said...
DeletedUser
Guest
Just been chilling, watching the game, having a bud.
Nah, been busy with Uni, Drinking, and girls =]
DeletedUser
Guest
I'll be joining :3
not like anybody knows who i am but still ;D
not like anybody knows who i am but still ;D
DeletedUser1511
Guest
You miss understand me bro, i never said anything about the first month. I merely said why would anyone stick around when the worlds is no longer competitive. If you want to tell yourself late game is as competitive as startup then cool story bro.
Fact, there are many much inactives late game...
DeletedUser
Guest
Sorry as much as it pains me , I agree with Wardy :icon_sad:
Start up is much more competitive , generally requires more activity , not to say later game cannot be competitive in war , but unless there is 24/7 war a lot of the game is gobbling inactives and general village maintenance.
Will probably join uk6 , very inactively . :icon_sad:
<3
Nauzhror
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 106
Late game isn't nearly as competitive as startup. You're actually arguing wardy's point by stating that attacking requires more planning to successfully take a village from another player. Taking villages from skilled players is indeed difficult late game. Keeping villages from attackers on the other hand is not difficult. The defender has a gigantic advantage in late game, so much so that the best way to dominate the rankings is to play 80% D and noble almost entirely barbs and/or internals. Maybe you see things differently, but I don't consider a race to noble my tribemates as fast as I can when they quit to be a worthwhile competition.
Last edited:
DeletedUser
Guest
DeletedUser1511
Guest
You joined uk1.
I wouldnt count playing an account on the rim for a bit, taking over a top 20 account then never logging in playing. :icon_neutral:
DeletedUser589
Guest
Sorry lisa and nauz I have to disagree. During start up it is much easier to steam roll players, they have limited villages to consider when hitting them. You say your self lisa that you have to be more active in start up, in my opnion this is not competitive. One of the major parts of start up is activity assuming you have a basic skill level.
For me to take a village off a player in W1 it is much harder now then during start up. It's easier to defend late game as nauz stated and therefore I find it more of a competition to gain ground on an enemy.
Yes there are a lot of internals in some tribes but that is also true in early game, eg lisa we had to internal you during start up.
For me start up is basic skill such as sniping and farming correctly and lots of activity. Later game is strategic nobling and good attack planning. Both competitive in a different way but equal.
For me to take a village off a player in W1 it is much harder now then during start up. It's easier to defend late game as nauz stated and therefore I find it more of a competition to gain ground on an enemy.
Yes there are a lot of internals in some tribes but that is also true in early game, eg lisa we had to internal you during start up.
For me start up is basic skill such as sniping and farming correctly and lots of activity. Later game is strategic nobling and good attack planning. Both competitive in a different way but equal.
DeletedUser
Guest
We meet again Wardy.
I'll be joining with Hans and XiG. And I think I did similar to you in UK1 wardy:lol:
I'll be joining with Hans and XiG. And I think I did similar to you in UK1 wardy:lol:
DeletedUser1511
Guest
no no no, all those things are active in early gam but they hold more significance. At start up each nuke and D you have is precious. Loosing your nuke during startup - mid game, will set up back a lot more than loosing a couple of nukes late game, this means that you have to think when you attack a lot more and there is more strategy to your nobling since you need the fastest growth, while being able to defend yourself and having your D near tribe mates.
It is a fact that there are a lot more factors that play into start up.
send your nuke at someone to cotrain, you risk being backtimed. This doesnt exist later game, other than if you are really close.
Send your train at someone, then you risk you being sniped and packtimed. Assuming you are at 1 village stage you have to decide how you will get round the chance of someone sniping you.....
please i mean no offense if you want to play late game thats your choice. But dont even try and compare it to early- mid game, thats a joke.
DeletedUser
Guest
It may require different methods later game , that does not mean it is more competitive nor more strategic . Simply because it's harder to gain ground , does not make it more competitve , that is simply because people have enough defence to make it difficult but that is the same for everyone .
Earlier game there are far more players , far more variables , much greater risk of being attacked , nobled , cleared , tribe disbanding .
The activity is required as if you miss an attack early game , your game could be over , your troops cleared , your village lost , at 200 villages you can not log in for a week and come back to nothing changed except red warehouses , how is that equal in terms of competitiveness ?
Further on in the game players are quitting therefore less competition , if someone drops out of a game that is one less competitor and the only challenge half the time is who can noble the most inactives and in terms of that being the same early game thats silly Luke
<3 there's a massive difference in nobling out the odd 20-50k inactive as oppose to numerous 1million account inactives .People can enjoy playing late game and some people don't , personally I like to play one world for as long as I can but I do find it extremely boring and tedious . Although there are players who can fight well and some worlds are more competitive and interesting that others , but not more competitive than when the world began , many players leave when the world ceases to hold a challenge and the players in the background then come forward and play out the remainder of the world .
Although I'm not saying start up is better than late game , I do prefer start up , but also like to play a world long term , but each to their own in terms of preference but as for competitiveness , I cannot see how later game is more competitive , maybe a test of endurance , different tactics , but less competitors , more security , less competitive.
But I also think some people use the , 'no challenge' as an excuse to quit as they like the ranking wars of start up .
<3
Nauzhror
Well-Known Member
- Reaction score
- 106
I suppose I should rephrase.
I consider ranks to mean more during startup because that particular aspect of the game is more competitive then.
The reasons being that indeed it is hard to take villages from skilled/active opponents in late-game, but it is fairly easy to keep your own villages. Thus the best way to grow as quickly as possible is to not attack active players at all and just barb/internal munch while farming for nobles.
I'm not stating that it isn't a competition of sorts to try and take villages from an enemy player, just that as far as actual world ranking is concerned, the guy at the top is not usually the one that took the most enemy villages, but the one that avoided war and nobled the most barbs or internals.
Examples from other worlds:
W1 .net:
Code:
1 Balaur999 TRaP 33.503.055 2803 11953
2 DavidTesanovic ToRe 29.144.231 2745 10617Player: Belaur999
Total Conquers: 2,814
Barb Conquers: 2,217
Internal Conquers: 387
Tribeless Targets: 48
Remaining Conquers: 162
ODA: 39,755,176
ODD: 939,261
Clearly a player who has as outlined avoided competition yet, as far as the ranks are concerned is the top player. Also has abysmal ODD, suspect he's never been tested.
W39 .net
Code:
1 cer-berus Devils 14.307.307 1451 9860
2 raynerou1 NOB!! 8.834.922 982 8997Player: cer-berus
Total Conquers: 1,471
Barb Conquers: 366
Internal Conquers: 295
Tribeless Conquers: 280
Remaining Conquers: 530
ODA: 103,917,783
ODD: 58,097,882
Fair bit of inactive/barb nobling going on here as well, but the main difference is rank 1 ODA, rank 2 ODD, has obviously been far more tested than Belaur999.
Both though show what I'm talking about when referring to ranks not being overly competitive in late game as they'd both be rank 1 even if you removed all their conquers in the "Remaining Conquers" category, ie. they'd be rank 1 with no war caps and just barbs/tribesmates/tribeless players as conquers.
DeletedUser589
Guest
To be honest I doubt any of us are going to be able to persuade the other. I would like to state though Lisa that I am not saying either stage of a game is more competitive than the other just that they are equally competitive just that the competiion is measured in a different way. For me a task being harder means it is competitive.
Besides I think it comes down to each individual world. Some worlds have mass quitting at the earlier stages and do become more boring where as other worlds get a flurry of late joiners, therefore in my opinion it differs from world to world.
On this one I will most likely just be here for start up as I am having too much fun on W1 still.
Besides I think it comes down to each individual world. Some worlds have mass quitting at the earlier stages and do become more boring where as other worlds get a flurry of late joiners, therefore in my opinion it differs from world to world.
On this one I will most likely just be here for start up as I am having too much fun on W1 still.
DeletedUser
Guest
I was just being competitive about your views on competitiveness :icon_razz: <3
As long as people are enjoying the game that's all that matters.
<3
DeletedUser
Guest
BANGERS you owe me you drag me into a noob world and then vanished days later :icon_neutral:
