Member limit

CUMBERWORLD

Banned
Not disputing your points guys, but I think its a dead route bashing players for using said tactics. I don't like them but if you cant beat them you join them or quit.
If your tribe is weaker than the enemy do you merge someone or do you lose? cause those are the options people have atm. No surprise people pick merge every time.
Again I don't support the style of play but players arn't going to stop it regardless of how much complaining you do on a forum where only 1/100 players actually see.
 
hat's why now I bash the players because everytime I see a good player leave it is because of "Cheats, merging or hugging". So yeah, it pisses me off when I see people starving worlds because they're too chicken shit to have a top 3 war.
Unfortunately bashing players will have the same outcome than, asking the devs to listen... Does that mean we should just do nothing? Well by doing nothing you are certain of one thing - that nothing will happen... so yes we need to do something, but bashing player only makes more players leave, sure perhaps you would want that player to leave, but from negativity only comes more negativity...
 
Unfortunately bashing players will have the same outcome than, asking the devs to listen... Does that mean we should just do nothing? Well by doing nothing you are certain of one thing - that nothing will happen... so yes we need to do something, but bashing player only makes more players leave, sure perhaps you would want that player to leave, but from negativity only comes more negativity...
So you agree that the top 3 tribes hugging and strangling a world out is a tactic that is going to make players want to stay or want to leave? I'm jsut curious as to how you can agree with this tactic.
 
Not agreeing to the tactic @whitty . This tactic has most certainly killed the game. I just don't believe that bashing players will solve anything. Most of the worlds has been ended in this way...very few didn't have some large scale merge in them... Once everyone figured out that domination could be won simply by merging, everyone seemed to jump on board the easy express.And yes strong leadership could prevent this, but trust isn't something that is just given, with all the spying and tribe infiltrators, how can we as a community trust that one leader will keep his word and not merge? I have actually never won a world, not because I haven't been on the winning side, but if I didn't agree on the terms on how we won, I left the tribe before the winners was announced. I have been part of many a tribe that has done the hugging... but unfortunately as Cumberworld stated players will always try to take the easier route, perhaps not initially, but once someone starts loosing they will try to shift the odds in their favor by any means necessary.
 
I'll put in my two cents here. ive been around for ages like most of the players here albeit not under this name (rhaegar/mast3rofnone)however while many of you have won worlds back to back i have won only 2.En12 and en30 the gameplay that i saw and was apart of between en09-en32 has vastly changed.as has the player base to a major extent.Back in en09 there was SEVERAL tribes at 200 members.now we have 2 maybe 3 that size in recent worlds. the reason being the playerbase has declined.Inno needs to adapt to it which their not.Gutsman has said many noteable players have left. and its true however its mainly the leaders of said tribes which has caused that decline.Syphryx uruzet,Hailtotheredskins,My Bad,CeeRo,??? are just the few that i know have had players quit when they did and they all quit for similar reasons nobody was willing to truly fight anymore not in the level we were used too.and the players that quit with them were some of the best.almost none of EMR remains playing.same for B D out of the 200 winners from both tribes each only around 20 remain from 400.... because as the worlds evolved tactics changed.and they changed for the worst.its why i have stopped playing aside from having 0 time to play.Where is the fun in sitting around growing slowly while waiting for everyone else to off themselves only to swoop in or to merge with them.There isnt. eveyone now days is too focused on winning and looking good rather than warring.I could have won around 4 more worlds than I have but i left them tribes when they went so low to merge to win.one of those 4 were tribes i had been council in since before they even began on that world(migrated from winning another) such is how far the tribe had fallen.and how the worlds now play out.
world start
10 tribes form
2 weeks later
6 remain viable top 3 allied or family
10 weeks 3 tribes remain top 2 merge
13 weeks one tribe remains noble barbs to get requirements and win world.
boringgggggg
 
I feel like this could be a possible solution and would love to see it in action on a world outside the beta
"The winning tribe will win a grand total of 40 000 crowns to be divided equally among all tribe members. If need be to round the number, it will be rounded up. We hope that this will incentivize smaller and more active tribes."

https://beta.forum.tribalwars2.com/index.php?threads/new-world.7508/
the only problem i see with that is there are certain groups of players who generally travel in packs. so if they win a world lets say and theres 40 members in the tribe... and maybe 10- 20 of them join a new world as a group that would mean they have 10,000 to 20,000 crowns to drop into a new tribe in a new world. I have no idea how many levels that would buy them but that would be a hugeeee boost.
 
the only problem i see with that is there are certain groups of players who generally travel in packs. so if they win a world lets say and theres 40 members in the tribe... and maybe 10- 20 of them join a new world as a group that would mean they have 10,000 to 20,000 crowns to drop into a new tribe in a new world. I have no idea how many levels that would buy them but that would be a hugeeee boost.
I won the previous beta with 27 members in my tribe. Everyone got +- 1400 crowns. Everyone gets those crowns, even if you quit playing after that world. Sure, you have premades who will always start a tribe together. ( ex. the Bananas ) but I don't see a way to counter that
 
This isn't really a new idea and it isn't really something that haven't been brought up before but things changes. With the decreasing player base server get more and more effected by the high member limit to tribes. Basically you can recruit every active player and win the server in no time. A 200 limit is way to high with the player base we have at the moment and it results in mass mergers ending server after server.
The idea is to reduce this number, if not for all worlds atleast for some. Either make worlds with 50 member limit or make all worlds with a limit of 50 members. It will help the game go back to what it is all about, WAR, I mean the game is after all named Tribal WARS and nothing else.
Is this sarcasm? are you for real ???????
Complains about big tribes and says it is tribal WARS and not tribal HUGS. Next thing he does in a server is merge in to a big tribe with his own tribe. Good job pretending to be a fighter!
another world bites the dust :confused:
thx
 
>whines about merging and player cap
>merges with #1 tribe

Oh man I am laffin
Yes and now the problem no longer exists I presume? Cause the player commenting on it the first time around did it himself at one point.
So if you coop abuse, well then there are no problem with players coop abusing cause you talked about it AND did it yourself, problem gone. Stupid logic...
 
It's not stupid logic. What is on the other hand is your action. It is like a nutritionist who says eating chips is bad for you, because you will get fat and all kinds of diseases. And the next thing he does is eating chips. How credible is that nutritionist then? Just as credible as you are right now. Saying big tribes are bad and then merging in to a big tribe.

If you would be a real man, you would stand up against big tribes. You and your group (VPW) could have been the guys who proved everyone wrong that you don't need a big tribe. But instead of doing that you took the easy way out. You ran like a scared puppy the moment GRD came close.
 
A player who creates a new account to hide behind to start bashing on the forum has even less credability. Now I gotta ask you, so as long as a nutritionist eats the chips that he says are bad for you the chips aren't bad for you? How can you not see the stupidity in that logic?
The double morale is clear to everyone, but the problem still exists. My or anyone posts here has nothing to do what people and players do in game, it is to point out a broken system and the actions in game only shows my point further, regardless of who is making it.
Now I am not gonna argue with you, it is like arguing with a anonymous kid. Use your true acc and at least we can see the player behind the flawless logic;)
 
Yes the chips are still bad for you when the nutritionist says they are bad. And therefore you won't see them eat the chips. Instead the figt against it. If you want to make a point, then act like it. When the system is broken you don't have to use it. You could also stay with your own tribe and fight. But instead you used the "broken" system to get a easy victory.
 

gutsman

Banned
That's just it though, when you advocate something while acting to the contrary, you damage your own credibility. You claim that it's a new account that you don't have to argue with, it could very well be a new player calling out your hypocrisy. But you do the classic move of "hurr durr, you're an anon account, that means your points are invalid"

why are you so thick that you don't get it? you say you "WANT" a war game, but you took the easy option and merged. You had the chance to change the meta and you pissed it away cos you like every other leader are more interested in winning and bragging about m-m-muh win rate.
 
"win" rate or "win by merging the top 2 and fighting an unfair battle whilst complaining about how fair it is on the forums" rate ?