Huglamidi war/stats thread

[SYPHAX]

what about recruiting a player that HAVE a tribe ? how you define that ? it seems to me that you call that merging too ... recruiting few players from the same tribe ?

 

[DeletedUser4507]

You didnt answered. Until you have idea what you consider recruiting and what merging this discussion cannot have positive outcome. I think I explained my idea decently when I called 9 out of 25 "relevant" players merge (I usually use semi-merge for describing any part-merge). If you need more accurate line that for me grey zone is between 1/4 and 1/5 of "relevant" players, depending on whether tribe they left survived.

 

[SYPHAX]

i didn't answer what exactly ? you just rewrote my statement "Recruiting player that has no tribe is undeniably recruiting. Complete merge of two tribes is undeniably merge of two tribes." ... you just added "that has no tribe" to it hence my questions about why you consider any tribe switching a merge ... if that's not being constructive i don't know what is it ... i also don't see the point of continue this if you don't answer that

I think I explained my idea decently when I called 9 out of 25 "relevant" players merge (I usually use semi-merge for describing any part-merge). If you need more accurate line that for me grey zone is between 1/4 and 1/5 of "relevant" players, depending on whether tribe they left survived.

now we are really getting back to square one ... do you know what "semi" means ? what semi-merge means ? did OTS semi-merge into -X- when Grhin and the other two joined -X- ?? did SIN semi-merge into -X- when cute kitten recruit few of their best players ? ... hell we can even say WOW semi-merged into -X- following your logic ...
again with the 25 nonsense ... you think only top 25 are "relevant" ... i think only top40 ... Grhin think only top10 ... nick think top 15 ... people will always disagree on what is relevant ... that's why we treat tribes as a whole eg : tribe A merged into tribe B or "semi-merged" into it ... we don't slice tribes to serve our arguments or make points ...

 

[DeletedUser4507]

"merge" is the key word here ... both -D- and SIN merged into WOW ... three tribes become one ... that's what "merge" mean

you just can't separate "join force and create one tribe" from "recruiting some members"

This question.

@SYPHAX I am not sure if I see your point. Recruiting player that has no tribe is undeniably recruiting. Complete merge of two tribes is undeniably merge of two tribes. I dont see where is your line what you still call recruiting and what you call merge.

 

[SYPHAX]

easy ... recruitment is for individual , whether they are tribless or not , you recruit each player separately... merges are tribes fusion to create one bigger tribe ... players movement on large scale+leadership changes in most cases ... it can only be as a result of an agreement between both tribes ... anything else or you are going to just ignore the rest of my post ?
i need answers for all the points i raised in my post too ...

 

[DeletedUser5131]

this guy has the iq of warm milk

 

[DeletedUser4507]

Nice, so you rewrite it, but didnt set a line I asked.
I know it is hard and most likely everybody of us will see this line between "large scale" and "individuals" somewhere else. "agreement" argument cannot be aplied unless you have internal info. "you recruit each player separately" you really want me to believe that you SEPARATELY recruit 9 players from tribe that you should have war with? It is difficut to believe that it is SEPARATELY.
I wanted to skip reaction because I dont think it leads to constructive output, but it would be rude to not answer you when you explicitely asked.

Spoiler: answering one or two words putting out of context

"do you know what "semi" means?" semi means half
"what semi-merge means?" You quote my answer to that already "I usually use semi-merge for describing any part-merge" aka. "large scale"
"did OTS semi-merge into -X- when Grhin and the other two joined -X-" YES
"did SIN semi-merge into -X- when cute kitten recruit few of their best players ?" I dont know details, so cannot say
"WOW semi-merged into -X- following your logic" 2 out of 20 players that are above 50k is less than 1/5, so NO .. based on logic I described above, it is recruitment.
"you think only top 25 are "relevant" " NO. Described one line above. I agree with you that everybody has the line somewhere else.
"we don't slice tribes to serve our arguments or make points" I dont know who is that "we", but OK no more part-merge/semi-merge using from me, still I need your full merge definition to be more exact than "larger scale".

I hope all others are having at least same fun from this as I do.

 

[SYPHAX]

what line are you asking me to set here ? a % or a ratio of members who left vs those who stayed ? i was talking about a full merge in both posts ... i rewrite it to try make it simpler for you to understand ... seems like i failed ... this whole semi-merge is your thing .... my reply with third/quarter merge was sarcastic if you missed that ...

"you recruit each player separately" you really want me to believe that you SEPARATELY recruit 9 players from tribe that you should have war with? It is difficut to believe that it is SEPARATELY.

what if i told you -X- didn't have to talk/convince most of those players ? most of players that joined + many other "top players" were the ones asking for an invite ,i heard that many other top players are still hoping for an invitation, -X- had to sort them out SEPARATELY ... will that make it easier for you to believe they were recruited separately ? you just have no idea how hot -X- is atm ...

as for your "answers" you lost me when you said OTS did semi-merged into -X- ... i'm kinda speechless tbh ...
you are turning this into my opinion vs yours which is FINE ... my only remark is next time you post something like that present it as it is ... your "opinion" not a hard fact that you build on to accuse others of lying , misleading or presenting false information ...
this was fun at first but we are turning in the same circle now ... time to move on

 

[DeletedUser4507]

both -D- and SIN merged into WOW

i was talking about a full merge in both posts

This is full merge aswell? 15 -D- members stays in -D- and call ex-members traitors and spies, 9 players actively joined -X- and rest you call full merge into WoW? Really? You are little bit contradicting yourself. Thats why I want you to draw a line or of course you can admit you were wrong . This is NOT full scale that you defined.

 

[SYPHAX]

because there was some inactives leftover in SIN/-D- after they moved to WOW ? by all means don't consider that as a merge ...

there is no back to begining ... you just can't separate "join force and create one tribe" from "recruiting some members" ... you are just trying to use a technicality to contradict my point ...

You forget those two quotes ... didn't i tell you this is becoming a silly argument ...
Oh look ! SIN didn't disband and still have 7 inactives members ... not a merge ...
Oh look ! -D- still existe with 15 members ,10 of them are inactives, ... NOT a merge ...
If you are looking for a contradicting ... read your first posts again then read the last ones ...

 

[DeletedUser4507]

This is insane mess when you mix different merge definitions in your posts.
So again. Based of what I call as part-merge or semi-merge mentioned before, last weeks were full of these "part-merges" finished by "part-merge" of -D- into WoW that was almost full-merge (by wiki definition, that you use)
OK. I am leaving all these part-merges they are too confusing for other players.
You are using wiki definition and you claim WoW no matter how many players they invite do all the full merges and leaving defunct tribes and -X- are just accepting "few" players that afked for if they can join. Lets have closer look what happened to -D-. From 62 players, 29 joined WoW, 15 stayed in -D-, 9 joined -X- and 9 were kicked/left and didnt join any tribe. So you want me call this 4 groups mess -D- full merge (by wiki) into WoW?
Btw, dont have those 9 players that joined -X- more village points then those 29 that joined WoW?

 

[cute kitten xoxo]

I've had a more reasonable conversation with a couch from IKEA. This really IS like talking to a literal rock.

 

[DeletedUser4507]

I've had a more reasonable conversation with a couch from IKEA. This really IS like talking to a literal rock.

You found speaking rock? :O

 

[DeletedUser2369]

so let's go back to basics ... here is how the official TW2 wiki define merge :

• Merge (tribe): When two tribes agree to join forces and create a single tribe.

Key words here are "two tribes agree" not "several players change tribes". Thats the line for me. if there is a concensus in the tribe to merge, particularly in the leadership (who effectively speak for the tribe), then its a merge.
Definition of "consensus" :
noun

1. a general agreement.

taking players that are unhappy with the leadership is not a merge.
Taking a few of the best players is not a merge.
taking all active players is a merge
Taking the leadership and the players the leadership have specified as part of the "merge" is a merge.
Having the leadership agree to having the players move is a merge.
Having a discussion in the tribe where the majority agrees to move (or stays silent or inactive) is a merge

Is that enough definition for you WR?

@GRhin I dont think my English is good enough to fully understand that sentence. Can you please write it simplier?

Cute Kitten said "you don't know how to ever be correct yourself"
You said " I think I corrected myself too many times in top10 thread"
Basic logic. If you corrected yourself, you needed to be corrected.If you needed to be corrected, you were not correct. Stating that this needed to be done alot is evidence of what Cute Kitten said, however you used it to try contradict him, which does not work.

 

[DeletedUser4507]

This definiton is masterpiece. Amazing job.

 

[DeletedUser2369]

@Walkingrock because you are so concerned about players changing between tribes, I have done a increase rankings based on accumulative data of all members currently in the tribe, rather than the change of the tribe stats. This way we see the bash and village increase of tribes, excluding villages that came with new recruits. I think this will paint a clearer picture for you of whether this is "merge wars" or not.
This is from 18th March when i did a stats update, till 25th march when i did my last stats update.

Turns out this is easy for me to do, so i might include it in my top10s from now on if players think its usefull. However right here right now its about warstats, not the top10. ANd i think this is pretty clear that -X-, who you accused of just merging, is really killing their opposition, not merge-to-win.
#truestats #notwalkingrockssocalledstats

Yea, -X- is better. "Only" 21 new members in last 2 weeks. Merge wars in process. #Stats

WalkingRock, can you go one week without making an ass of yourself? please? do it for me? ill give you a special mention in the stats....

 

[DeletedUser2616]

tfw you recruit 1 member from a tribe and it's a merge

>walkingrocklogic

 

[DeletedUser4507]

Part quote from TOP10 thread page9:

My main issue is actually you are describing static informations instead of describing development.

because you are so concerned about players changing between tribes, I have done a increase rankings based on accumulative data of all members currently in the tribe

So you finally did, what I want you to do a month ago. I am not sure who you are trying to mock, me or yourself? #notwalkingrockssocalledstats

... i think this is pretty clear that -X-, who you accused of just merging ...

Little bit inaccurate. After several -X- members call -D- and WoW merging, I said they are doing same thing. All about merging stuff, you briliantly closed already. I have never questioned -X- war ability. (I think you call that) If you can remember my prediction, I placed them on first place.

But all of this doesnt matter, because you finally did what I asked you and we see some intersting data. Even more interesting is showing bashIncrease and villageIncrease as ratios and compare it with ratio of size. If you need to name it, you can call it simplified look to tribe efficiency. I am sorry I will just write it as text, I am lazy to make a table.
Total villages right now: -X- 1321, WOW 1007, NOH/MAG 529, GUM 213, -D- 129.
Size ratio: -X- 1.00, WOW 0.76, NOH 0.40, GUM 0.16, -D- 0.10
BashIncrease ratio: -X- 1.00, WOW 0.47, NOH 0.32, GUM 0.07, -D- 0.10
VillageIncrease ratio: -X- 1.00, WOW 0.07, NOH 0.28, GUM 0.07, -D- -0,06
-X- are kings of offensive efficiency this week. Looking forward to next week.

 

[DeletedUser2369]

so no, even after being caught out, you are still not willing to stop making an ass of yourself. I wonder what it would take.

 

[cute kitten xoxo]

grhin don't bother, he is right in his mind and always will be without exception, just like his bestie janos. i gave up hope on them a very long time ago... it's literally even worse than frankster and ceero combined.