DeletedUser
Guest
leading is for losers
DeletedUser
Guest
Considering both worlds are extremely new, the only way they would take that much time is if you used your time inefficiently.
DeletedUser
Guest
Who said she was bad?!?! Shes not bad to have in a tribe, but she is a headache for leaders, and she knows it. She messes around and occasionally causes issues.
DeletedUser
Guest
This is true - it is also the same for every sort of guide. You learn sniping more through practice than through reading something explaining how to do it - sniping guides tell you how to do it, but you have to get the hang of it through practice to be able to be happy using it on a regular basis.
This is meant more for very new leaders so that they have something they can look at which has some advise in it for them, than a set of rules to go through. I tried to avoid absolutes as much as I could for this reason
You know I have to disagree with you. I learned new methods, but my ability to hit a correct MS which is about +/-.1 seconds has not changed since the first time I tried to snipe something till now.
DeletedUser
Guest
Contextual error fixed (amazed nobody picked up on it for one and a half years considering the 5000+ views).
Thanks LiveLifeHard for highlighting the mistake
/returns to hiding
Thanks LiveLifeHard for highlighting the mistake
/returns to hiding
DeletedUser
Guest
Anyone reading this, in my opinion, is getting advice from one of the best leaders of tribalwars (Personal Opinion). Take Googly's advice, he's a good leader, and is better than most leaders I've played under.
DeletedUser
Guest
Then you have never played under me
Quote this, You have to do everything yourself!, or at least supervise all the assignments...
Key to success 101
Quote this, You have to do everything yourself!, or at least supervise all the assignments...
Key to success 101
DeletedUser
Guest
Most people burn out doing that, and when they quit no one can take up the mantle. I've found that the best leadership structure is a small council of 3-5 people that consistently keeps open with their members (even when there's spies), agrees 99% of the time even if they sometimes lose a vote (meaning very little ego or power-hunger), and leads by example. Duke figures exist, but don't override council...they're more like the US Congress in a sense that can override the duke, but the duke would usually agree with council anyways.
It's a hard combo to get, but the tribes that win are typically these (if they're on a world) from my experience.
It's a hard combo to get, but the tribes that win are typically these (if they're on a world) from my experience.
DeletedUser
Guest
Well then you have observed very well. I start the tribes with 3 leaders, one of them usually wouldn't care about leading so I have more 1:1's with my other leader. The management team would consist of about 10 to 15 players (I usually led 100-150 player tribes) At first we give the expression that we are 3 equal leaders to our members and outside, but since other 2 leaders would be my friends from past, they know and accept my skills both as a leader and as a player, so they trust my judgement and let me think about every high matter. Of course I have long 1:1's with one of my leaders to settle important diplomatic matters. and council with the other and ask for his help if necessary. Diplomatic matters are never told to anyone outside leader team before they are decided or highly anticipated. As for the management team, I select the most active, helpful and smart players to my management team. I declare and ask for their opinions for less important diplomatic matters, and about war tactics. It's hard to keep track of all areas military condition, So I have a military leader at every family tribe. And war matters are talked about and decided together with them. I usually don't have spy problems because I always start with premade council, and I only recruit the players I know personally or I played more then once with to my management team. Only leaders are recruiting members at first couple weeks of the world, after that small recruit is given to management team. But I keep doing the big recruits that others can't such as recruiting a big portion of members from a dying tribe by using their inside relations and my personal relations with their leaders. Btw if you are reading until now you should know that I'm only telling you about my big world- big tribe leading tactics. Now, let's talk about qualifications for leader team and management. Every member of leader team should be highly experienced in game, playing and leading. They should be active and they should give importance to world and tribe in highly manner. As for the management team experience is not highly expected. A player only played 2-3 months can be a member of management team if he is active, helpful, and fast learner, plus if he loves the game.And I need to add, always choose your management team during the game play about 15 days later from the start. I don't want to make it so long but I might write a leader's handbook later this year. So finally keys to success, the qualifications and quality's you should have to lead your tribe to victory. Be warned I have at least 50 specialty's but I'm gonna write about few. Determination, Self-confidence, pro-level experience, foreseeing, analyzing, synthesizing , activity, hard-working, great judge of character, smart(genius), fast, give importance to everything(I'm gonna explain the butterfly effect), playing the game even when you're dreaming(that's not necessary or wise
, although it had great outcomes for me, Usually when I'm playing this game while dreaming, things go wrong and bad things happen ,in my dream, So I take lessons from them and take precautions against them.) , critical thinking, fast-learning, selfless, giving, good math skills, good geometry skills(these are important for war strategies), rational , planner, ability to understand how things work(this is connected with butterfly effect), and dedication. Final, butterfly effect: Every new idea is generated by analyzing other ideas and synthesizing the new one(according to most philosophers). Actions are consequences of ideas, so every thing happens , happens because of ideas. Smaller ideas causing bigger and bigger ideas, and goes like this. You should be able to use this to your own advantage and also avoid being the victim of it. It will take long time to explain it so im gonna stop here and wish you enjoy reading it.
Sincerely
A dictator who is loved by his citizens.
edit:ahh btw the thing you say about open knowledge to what council wants to accomplish that works only in small worlds with 20-30 member tribes. If you try to vote everything at a 150 members tribe it would only lead to caos.
DeletedUser
Guest
Small councils like that are really efficient.
Well then you have observed very well. I start the tribes with 3 leaders, one of them usually wouldn't care about leading so I have more 1:1's with my other leader. The management team would consist of about 10 to 15 players (I usually led 100-150 player tribes) At first we give the expression that we are 3 equal leaders to our members and outside, but since other 2 leaders would be my friends from past, they know and accept my skills both as a leader and as a player, so they trust my judgement and let me think about every high matter. Of course I have long 1:1's with one of my leaders to settle important diplomatic matters. and council with the other and ask for his help if necessary. Diplomatic matters are never told to anyone outside leader team before they are decided or highly anticipated. As for the management team, I select the most active, helpful and smart players to my management team. I declare and ask for their opinions for less important diplomatic matters, and about war tactics. It's hard to keep track of all areas military condition, So I have a military leader at every family tribe. And war matters are talked about and decided together with them. I usually don't have spy problems because I always start with premade council, and I only recruit the players I know personally or I played more then once with to my management team. Only leaders are recruiting members at first couple weeks of the world, after that small recruit is given to management team. But I keep doing the big recruits that others can't such as recruiting a big portion of members from a dying tribe by using their inside relations and my personal relations with their leaders. Btw if you are reading until now you should know that I'm only telling you about my big world- big tribe leading tactics. Now, let's talk about qualifications for leader team and management. Every member of leader team should be highly experienced in game, playing and leading. They should be active and they should give importance to world and tribe in highly manner. As for the management team experience is not highly expected. A player only played 2-3 months can be a member of management team if he is active, helpful, and fast learner, plus if he loves the game.And I need to add, always choose your management team during the game play about 15 days later from the start. I don't want to make it so long but I might write a leader's handbook later this year. So finally keys to success, the qualifications and quality's you should have to lead your tribe to victory. Be warned I have at least 50 specialty's but I'm gonna write about few. Determination, Self-confidence, pro-level experience, foreseeing, analyzing, synthesizing , activity, hard-working, great judge of character, smart(genius), fast, give importance to everything(I'm gonna explain the butterfly effect), playing the game even when you're dreaming(that's not necessary or wise
wish you enjoy reading it.
Sincerely
A dictator who is loved by his citizens.
edit:ahh btw the thing you say about open knowledge to what council wants to accomplish that works only in small worlds with 20-30 member tribes. If you try to vote everything at a 150 members tribe it would only lead to caos.
Ahh wall of text sorry didnt read it lol
DeletedUser
Guest
well at least i tried to keep it short
DeletedUser
Guest
Maybe you should write a guide of your own, so you can make it as long as you'd like ? I'd be interested in seeing more opinions.
? I'd be interested in seeing more opinions.DeletedUser
Guest
Agreed.Maybe you should write a guide of your own, so you can make it as long as you'd like
DeletedUser
Guest
Thanks very much; unsure who this is but it's very flattering
The best leadership structure I've ever been involved with (we joined as a premade on W62 .net and we won the world within a year) was as follows:
-3 dukes (one 'head duke', or figurehead if you like and 2 dukes who work in the background).
- 2 barons
- 1 council member/unofficial baron
The way it worked was as follows:
Diplomacy
The dukes would handle specific tribal relations based on timezone, free time or contacts in those tribes. We'd always be polite, helpful and courteous until the other tribe provoked/insulted us past an invisible line we did not like to be pushed past, at which point we'd change method and be a little more unhelpful (treat as we get treated so to speak).
We rarely agreed to arrangements, but stayed in touch with any tribes we felt it necessary to keep an ongoing conversation with in case political situations around the world changed. I think we had 2 NAPs both of which ended within the first 6 months, and one alliance which got made about 7-8 months into the world.
We always honoured diplomatic agreements as we were fully aware that if we acted against one it could impact negatively on our tribal relations for the rest of the world. We turned on one NAP after approximately 100 breaches (some incredibly severe such as recruiting and holding our enemies) occurred, and the other we honoured agreements to until the tribe disbanded, instead of hitting them in the back during a war that crushed them.
We rarely agreed to arrangements, but stayed in touch with any tribes we felt it necessary to keep an ongoing conversation with in case political situations around the world changed. I think we had 2 NAPs both of which ended within the first 6 months, and one alliance which got made about 7-8 months into the world.
We always honoured diplomatic agreements as we were fully aware that if we acted against one it could impact negatively on our tribal relations for the rest of the world. We turned on one NAP after approximately 100 breaches (some incredibly severe such as recruiting and holding our enemies) occurred, and the other we honoured agreements to until the tribe disbanded, instead of hitting them in the back during a war that crushed them.
Recruitment
The dukes, barons and council would all discuss recruitment possibilities if they came up, alongside people we were keeping an eye on. We'd wait for months until the prime opportunity to pick up people we had our eye on without putting them or any tribe member at risk.
Whoever knew the target to recruit would generally handle it in a group chat with at least 1 duke (barons tended to handle the majority of recruitment chats after the first few months of the world). We'd then chat about the ensuing conversation as well as all other relevant information (and get feedback from local players/players who knew them in the past) and make a decision based on that. We'd always hold off on recruiting a player until we were sure it wouldn't impact on politics with other tribes (Matko on W62 waited 2 months before he could join us so that we didn't beak an NAP border agreement for example after passing all our checks).
It was always important to us to also integrate members into our team, so a baron or duke would spend time chatting with them and when we had the time introduce them to the local players or ones who would work closest with them.
Whoever knew the target to recruit would generally handle it in a group chat with at least 1 duke (barons tended to handle the majority of recruitment chats after the first few months of the world). We'd then chat about the ensuing conversation as well as all other relevant information (and get feedback from local players/players who knew them in the past) and make a decision based on that. We'd always hold off on recruiting a player until we were sure it wouldn't impact on politics with other tribes (Matko on W62 waited 2 months before he could join us so that we didn't beak an NAP border agreement for example after passing all our checks).
It was always important to us to also integrate members into our team, so a baron or duke would spend time chatting with them and when we had the time introduce them to the local players or ones who would work closest with them.
Op Planning
We micro-managed our Ops a lot to ensure the best end results came about. Co-ordination wise our team displayed an ability to pull off devastating ops that no other tribe could even come close to repeating (150 caps within 1 minute was our best record, the next best tribe achieved approximately 50).
We'd discuss our war targets as a group, although as my best area of leadership is war tactics I'd often make the call on who we'd hit, as well as setting high standards (an 800 noble target Op on a tribe larger than us and another top 10 tribe at the same time was our largest launch).
One member (council, baron or duke) would write instructions out.
One member (council, baron or duke) would plan a group of player's targets, assigning a small cluster to each player to hit. So we'd often have 4-5 members of leadership producing sections of each Op.
One member (council, baron or duke) would organize multiple fake scripts and nuking scripts.
We'd each be responsible for mailing instructions and targets to each group of players (often 5-6 targeting each player), so only leadership ever knew full Op plans (meaning if anything happened to get leaked it wouldn't damage the full Op). It was a complicated system (very micro-managed) but very effective.
We'd discuss our war targets as a group, although as my best area of leadership is war tactics I'd often make the call on who we'd hit, as well as setting high standards (an 800 noble target Op on a tribe larger than us and another top 10 tribe at the same time was our largest launch).
One member (council, baron or duke) would write instructions out.
One member (council, baron or duke) would plan a group of player's targets, assigning a small cluster to each player to hit. So we'd often have 4-5 members of leadership producing sections of each Op.
One member (council, baron or duke) would organize multiple fake scripts and nuking scripts.
We'd each be responsible for mailing instructions and targets to each group of players (often 5-6 targeting each player), so only leadership ever knew full Op plans (meaning if anything happened to get leaked it wouldn't damage the full Op). It was a complicated system (very micro-managed) but very effective.
Internal Issues
If anything happened, dukes would handle it. I think we only had 2 issues in the entire time that Agency existed, and of those one guy ended up leaving the tribe when he realized the drama wasn't going to end nicely for him. The other guy just started behaving after one conversation with a duke.
We didn't have much change in leadership because there were always 2 active dukes and 2 active barons.
There are other leadership systems that work really well too, but that was the way that we worked on W62 .net.
DeletedUser
Guest
DeletedUser
Guest
Ah cool, didn't know you play .us mate
I am unsure as to who you are or what success you've had leading in the past so I won't comment on your self-attempted ego stroking, but I will comment on your opinion regarding 'key to success 101'.
If you are a leader who is so active that he doesn't need to delegate then granted you do have to do everything yourself. But it's very rare to find a duke who is competent enough to pull this off.
However, I'd actually recommend any person interested in leadership to not bother listening to that advise, as trust is hugely important in leadership. If you have to breathe down the necks of your barons/co-dukes/council then you are showing them you don't trust them. Which is quite possibly the most foolish thing you can do as a leader.
Then you have never played under me
Quote this, You have to do everything yourself!, or at least supervise all the assignments...
Key to success 101
I am unsure as to who you are or what success you've had leading in the past so I won't comment on your self-attempted ego stroking, but I will comment on your opinion regarding 'key to success 101'.
If you are a leader who is so active that he doesn't need to delegate then granted you do have to do everything yourself. But it's very rare to find a duke who is competent enough to pull this off.
However, I'd actually recommend any person interested in leadership to not bother listening to that advise, as trust is hugely important in leadership. If you have to breathe down the necks of your barons/co-dukes/council then you are showing them you don't trust them. Which is quite possibly the most foolish thing you can do as a leader.
DeletedUser
Guest
Sorry to double post but I wanted to keep this part separate from my previous comment.
The 'butterfly effect' is a scientific explanation of what can be heavily simplified to 'cause and effect'. In other words, each action you take will have an impact and change what happens in the world (to a small or large degree).
It is common sense to take actions only that you as a leader see will be of benefit to your tribe. To link it to a scientific theory as complicated as the 'butterfly effect' is a little illogical. You may wonder why; it's simple really (ironic huh?).
A chain of resultant actions can't be accurately predicted by anybody, whether in this game or in real life. Nobody can see every external influence that will crop up along the way, and unless you have every possible detail before making a decision (which I doubt any leader has ever been in a position to have) you don't know precisely what will occur.
I like the idea you put forward there but I don't think it has any place in a successful approach to leadership.
Trying to over-think as a leader isn't smart as it'll merely make you paranoid and thus sow seeds of concern in areas that shouldn't be concerning. And over-thinking is exactly what will happen when trying to think and analyze anything but the immediate consequence(s) of an action.
N.B.: That's not to say you can have end goals that require several actions to take; just that things will change that you cannot control or predict.
DeletedUser1180
Guest
We all are human - although some players seem to have a different idea. So even dukes that want to do it all by themselves and be in control of everything hit the wall at some point.
Smartest thing you can do is work with your council and delegate. Just knowing that the tribe can keep going if you can not be around for a few weeks helps.
I have experienced the devastating effect of the inactivity of the all knowing and controlling council due to RL issues several times. One of them being a tribe with pro's... but especially those big ego's needed someone to keep them in line.
It is impossible to control everything. And if "It is common sense to take actions only that you as a leader see will be of benefit to your tribe." than something is wrong...
Make sure the tribe knows what the goals are and why. Most players in this game aren't stupid. I rather have discussions in the tribe - as a whole or on more delicate issues with the trusted members - so it is clear why decisions are taken. (And you do not need to overanalyse all possibilities...) If you do not do this motivation will go down, inactivity will rise (and internalling is not what a good tribe wants), tribe actions will get less participation.
Do the discussion and not simply dismiss players because they are critical. If they are stupid or do not fit the tribe culture than you have a good reason for dismissal.
Leadership is never easy but if you share the burden you can make it more fun. This game is about teamwork and that goes for leadership too.
DeletedUser
Guest
I've not found this to be the case when I've led in the past; I never reveal plans until near the time but I do hint at things to keep the team vaguely aware of where we're going next. However, I tend to not discuss issues outside of the leadership team by-and-large, nor do I as a leader have discussions about what the tribe wants.
I get people to tell me what they'd like privately to help make decisions for the best of the tribe; however, I don't do public discussions or anything remotely close to a democratic procedure purely because is only necessary for groups with a lot of huge egos (which I always avoid).
Your method I can see working in some groups, but from a personal standpoint I'd disagree with that method and the logic behind it because in practice that's never happened when I've led and I have a very much secretive dictatorship style.
DeletedUser1180
Guest
You may be not so dictorial as you think you are Googly. What you call 'keep the team vaguely aware of where we're going next' can be seen as giving them direction who to attack and who not to.
I use people talking to me privately to help make the decisions too. But if a major decision has to be taken than after discussing it in council the trusted members will be informed. They may come up with critical questions. Also they may have intel council is not aware of.... Answering the issues will make it easier to sell it to all of the tribe.
It is not the huge ego's I worry about: they are loud enough. It is the 'little ones' that work hard but are hardly heard. They may let you down when you need them most if they do not feel respected.
I have been - among others - mediator on us1: give the little ones a voice when they felt treated unfair and not listened to. Keep the tribe unified.
This can work in most tribes. And I never said it is democratic.... What you do is keep everyone motivated and part of the tribe.
Maybe I should explain that I try to have a trusted members team around of players that are involved and good, council material even. I am as good as my team is.
And if the tribe is large it is good to have - just like in big companies - departments that are responsible for their own area. Tribe actions AND local actions so everyone can grow and have fun.
Leadership knows what is going on but does not do everything itself.
I use people talking to me privately to help make the decisions too. But if a major decision has to be taken than after discussing it in council the trusted members will be informed. They may come up with critical questions. Also they may have intel council is not aware of.... Answering the issues will make it easier to sell it to all of the tribe.
It is not the huge ego's I worry about: they are loud enough. It is the 'little ones' that work hard but are hardly heard. They may let you down when you need them most if they do not feel respected.
I have been - among others - mediator on us1: give the little ones a voice when they felt treated unfair and not listened to. Keep the tribe unified.
This can work in most tribes. And I never said it is democratic.... What you do is keep everyone motivated and part of the tribe.
Maybe I should explain that I try to have a trusted members team around of players that are involved and good, council material even. I am as good as my team is.
And if the tribe is large it is good to have - just like in big companies - departments that are responsible for their own area. Tribe actions AND local actions so everyone can grow and have fun.
Leadership knows what is going on but does not do everything itself.