Classic 8 settings, start date Thursday 02nd April at 9am

[DeletedUser6695]

Who let all this .net filth onto my server ?

 

[DeletedUser]

The true reason .uk sucks is that CF is thought of highly here (or so Im led to believe) :S

 

[DeletedUser11750]

We all know matt and ray did nothing on that account. 'Twas all me :X

 

[DeletedUser6598]

The only difference between anyone who knows the mechanics of the game is activity. The ability to farm 24/7 makes a huge difference to an account that doesn't at during the night.
If .uk sucks so much it is kind of sad that you have to play with 3-4 co's every time you play. Not that I am questioning your abilities you have a good understanding of the mechanics of the game. Just you know if you bring accounts with several players to a relatively inactive server it's no surprise when you rank highly.

 

[DeletedUser11750]

The only difference between anyone who knows the mechanics of the game is activity. The ability to farm 24/7 makes a huge difference to an account that doesn't at during the night.
If .uk sucks so much it is kind of sad that you have to play with 3-4 co's every time you play. Not that I am questioning your abilities you have a good understanding of the mechanics of the game. Just you know if you bring accounts with several players to a relatively inactive server it's no surprise when you rank highly.

I hate to break it to you but there was 2 coplayers on that account and 12 hours downtime per day with both players actively playing other worlds

 

[DeletedUser13240]

Maybe all of the UK server are idiots. Maybe .net is full of awesome players. I really don't care.

If you don't mind jo, I would like to use this in my sig as it's got truth written all over it :lol:.

OT: this forum just got interesting.

 

[Nauzhror]

The only difference between anyone who knows the mechanics of the game is activity.

No, not remotely, unless you're suggesting I am the only player that knows the games mechanics anyway - and I don't think you are.

I have been rank 1 when solo without using sitters on ~15 worlds. I was certainly not more active than all the co-played accounts on any of those worlds.

 

[DeletedUser13240]

Your the only player on this server who knows anything about TW if that's what you mean :lol:.

 

[Maggie Wallis]

No, not remotely, unless you're suggesting I am the only player that knows the games mechanics anyway - and I don't think you are.

I have been rank 1 when solo without using sitters on ~15 worlds. I was certainly not more active than all the co-played accounts on any of those worlds.

I don't think he is suggesting you are the only player that knows the game mechanics.... though someone I seem to remember suggested that you know them 'virtually' better than anyone else...

Remind me who was that?...

 

[Maggie Wallis]

The true reason .uk sucks is that CF is thought of highly here (or so Im led to believe) :S

People used to think the world was flat....

 

[Nauzhror]

I don't think he is suggesting you are the only player that knows the game mechanics.... though someone I seem to remember suggested that you know them 'virtually' better than anyone else...

Remind me who was that?...

My point was that if anyone who knew the game mechanics played the same except for activity that there should be people ahead of me on any world I play solo unless I'm the only person that knows the mechanics. I wasn't claiming I was the only person to know them, just poking holes in that logic via reducto absurdum.

 

[Maggie Wallis]

Or, using your logic... there are people that know the game mechanics 'virtually' as well as you but even when you play solo, have less activity then you...

Or maybe... strange I know... there are people that know the game mechanics 'virtually' as well as you but enjoy playing the game for other goals then being rank 1...

 

[Nauzhror]

Or, using your logic... there are people that know the game mechanics 'virtually' as well as you but even when you play solo, have less activity then you...

Even then, that implies virtually no one knows the mechanics. Certainly no one that co-plays.

Or maybe... strange I know... there are people that know the game mechanics 'virtually' as well as you but enjoy playing the game for other goals then being rank 1...

K, so they're more active, have less res hauled, less troops, less points. What exactly is their goal if they're just as good as reaching their goal as I am? It's not like these other players goal is troops and mine is points. They're lacking in both areas.

 

[DeletedUser13240]

What exactly is their goal if they're just as good as reaching their goal as I am?

To have fun? Doh!

 

[DeletedUser11750]

K, so they're more active, have less res hauled, less troops, less points. What exactly is their goal if they're just as good as reaching their goal as I am? It's not like these other players goal is troops and mine is points. They're lacking in both areas.

This implies you have the ability to get past 300 points :O

 

[Maggie Wallis]

Even then, that implies virtually no one knows the mechanics. Certainly no one that co-plays.



K, so they're more active, have less res hauled, less troops, less points. What exactly is their goal if they're just as good as reaching their goal as I am? It's not like these other players goal is troops and mine is points. They're lacking in both areas.

No it doesn't... your argument implies that all co-played accounts are more active then you... all other solo accounts are more active then you... therefore the only reasons they are behind in rank, is your superior understanding of the game mechanics... who knows... being rank 1, by any method or at any stage of the game, does not equal better understanding of the game mechanics...

You define 'success' and even enjoyment of this silly game by rank... A player, could have a better understanding of the games mechanics and choose not to use it... they may choose not to define themselves by points, troops or res hauled... your reasoning suggests that no person has every played a game and enjoy the game regardless of the result...

If I play a game with my 3 year old boy... chances are I will have a better understanding of the mechanics of that game... but he wins... crazy stuff... using your reasoning, my little boy can only beat me due to his better understanding of the game mechanics... perhaps my enjoyment came from something other than winning....

Yes, an extreme example... but no less extreme then a claim that by being rank 1, you must have more knowledge then anyone else that plays the game...

I'm not arguing against your ability or your understanding of the game mechanics... I'm simply highlighting that being rank 1, does not mean your ability or understanding is better than everyone else... yes, it's better than everyone with the same or more activity that strives for the same goal... but not all players have the same goals...

 

[Nauzhror]

No it doesn't... your argument implies that all co-played accounts are more active then you... all other solo accounts are more active then you...

No. Reading comprehension is apparently not your forte at the moment. I am not claiming to be the least active. Merely far from the most active and that you'd be hardpressed to find anyone on TW who at some point I haven't outperformed with equal or lesser activity. Thus they must not know the game mechanics if pearcey's comment is accurate.

You define 'success' and even enjoyment of this silly game by rank

Err, where the hell are you pulling this from? Your ass? Enjoyment is obviously derived in different ways by different people. I'm quite damn sure I've never claimed enjoyment is obtained from high ranks and that all low ranked players are thus unhappy. However success, yes that is obviously related to the condition of ones account. If your account has less troops, less points, less villages, etc. than someone elses it is obvious that ingame they have had greater success than you have.

... A player, could have a better understanding of the games mechanics and choose not to use it...

Bullshit.


Complete and utter copout. You're claiming they do bad because the intentionally want to do bad. There's a difference between not wanting to put effort in and wanting to do bad. It's common to not put effort in, that's called being less active, but no one knows how to play at a top level, puts enough time into playing their account to do so, yet chooses not to for some reason. Suggesting they do is complete and utter idiocy, it's essentially the losers way of saying, "You're not better because you won, I just prefer losing".

they may choose not to define themselves by points, troops or res hauled... your reasoning suggests that no person has every played a game and enjoy the game regardless of the result...

You're making a strawman again. Not once have I ever suggested that someone knowledgeable is inherently active or successful. The thing is they will inherently be more successful than other players with equal or lesser activity activity. Equal or lesser activity. That is the key.

 

[DeletedUser13240]

For some strange reason (hint hint) Nauz reminds me of the late GIXXER :lol:.

 

[DeletedUser5582]

A quick summary of last night for those that like such things. Reading up on the whole earned v bought premium and the inherited or earned wealth lol is still premium/money. You spend either to get ahead and it doesn't matter where it came from really?

Am not sure that setting up shop and selling clay on another world for premium to spend on a current world is any different than a player that just pays? One is just lazier/richer/dumber than the other. Anyway am not that fussed about such little intricacies of paying to get to 1k points super fast....

A quick summary...

 

[Nauzhror]

For some strange reason (hint hint) Nauz reminds me of the late GIXXER :lol:.

Not sure I follow. GIXXER used to constantly try and claim superiority to players like matt and myself, but it's very hard to take someone seriously who has a 24 farm when you have a 30 farm when they tell you you're not up to par. The guy was a straight up pointwhore/ODwhore.

Your post seems to imply you think we're the same person, which is silly since anyone that played the worlds we were both on would clearly know better. GIXXER was a middling-sized fish in a small pond. He was occasionally one of the biggest fish when the big fish were in a different pond, but he let it go to his head and felt he was the biggest fish even when they were placed back into his pond.