Pandas

[DeletedUser]

This is not me mouthing off or anything, I'm genuinely curious. Who are you ?
I've hitherto never reallly heard of you as a . . . player, leader, poster, farmer, diplomat, anything really - just haven't blipped my radar.

This could be - and if you turn out to be something worthwhile, it is - my own ignorance, but normally when people do well in .co.uk, someone in co.uk gives me a heads about it. Who are you ? (again not looking down on you - anymore than I do by default to everyone I don't know xD - just curious about your origins)

He's played a few worlds prior to this Pervie, as far as my memory serves, was noteworthy for his amusing posts and PnP on UK4. I don't know further though... :|

 

[DeletedUser5774]

I'm elite.

Right? :3

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm elite.

Right? :3

How to easily spot on elite player, the spelling. el1t3 or l33t. As soon as i see this i know i'm up against a formidable foe!

You therefore, i'm sorry to say are not :icon_cry:

 

[DeletedUser]

There is a reason why UK3 was one of the best startups on the UK server; two well-skilled tribes matched by each other, facing off, giving each other fibre to digest, to use the analogy.

Wait what that was the best start up on uk:icon_confused: That world was as competitive as a game of tick toe with my dog. This world is uncompetitive as well. 23 hq and I maxed a village years before anyone else:icon_confused: Really guys? Really? heck my third village is now top 15 village in the world only 14 people have a village as large as the third village I nobbled:icon_confused: Panda's arent good .uk sucks.

Co-player debate.....

For the case of solipsist only Red, and karma play it every day of the week, it is like the idea of what a co-player account should be. 4 inactive players playing one account, generally speaking red gets on for like 10 minutes a time randomly throughout the day, wardy gets on 2-3 days a week, maybe less with school now, karma has no web stability. And I play 3-4 days a week. Any one of us playing actively like we used to, would have done better than all four of us in our current states imo. The issue is coplaying to some extent. But there are many many accounts more active than my own with co-players that just dont know how to play. The issue is the existence of .uk, and .us. Back in the day if we had joined a world it would have been w57, and all the .us people if they had joined a world it would have been w57, and then you have the 3-4 good players per world instead of being separated on the same world, as well as many more upper mid level players who luck out with good areas.

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm elite.

Right? :3

Very elite.

Spoiler: NAAAAAAAAAAAAAART

I'm a top twenty player.

Dodododo.

Did we enter an alternate reality somewhere during the course of your post? :icon_confused:

Your egotistical nature will just make you look more stupid when you achieve nothing.

 

[DeletedUser]

I never said to stop playing with your friends. I suggested stop making tribes with only a few large accounts. That way (potentially) the difference in average player size will not be as large as it is in this world, and there will be more of a challenge for you individually.

Lets just think about this.
- If - every top player in TW played solo, and would not be in a tribe with another top player unless and until every tribe in the server had an equivalent number of top players thus ensuring uniform distribution of talent, then would people stop complaining ?
Or would they find something else to complain about when set of players rises above all the others and is more successful ?

Is it really coplaying or stacked tribes that people have a problem with ? Or is it the need to have a problem ?

 

[DeletedUser9006]

Lets just think about this.
- If - every top player in TW played solo, and would not be in a tribe with another top player unless and until every tribe in the server had an equivalent number of top players thus ensuring uniform distribution of talent, then would people stop complaining ?
Or would they find something else to complain about when set of players rises above all the others and is more successful ?

Is it really coplaying or stacked tribes that people have a problem with ? Or is it the need to have a problem ?

I know , we should try Battle of the Tribes !!

<3

 

[DeletedUser]

Heh, Battle of the Tribes has got to have some sort of bar at the door and the bar has to be high enough to maintain credibility. That chatroom I was in was painful to be in, like anybody who could answer the questions in an interview got added.

If that idea did materialize in Uk10 with those people then winning such a tournament would be meaningless. Almost no one there is a decent player.

 

[DeletedUser]

Heh, Battle of the Tribes has got to have some sort of bar at the door and the bar has to be high enough to maintain credibility. That chatroom I was in was painful to be in, like anybody who could answer the questions in an interview got added.

If that idea did materialize in Uk10 with those people then winning such a tournament would be meaningless. Almost no one there is a decent player.

Ughh humm to do that... You would need simz, you, Rq/shveik, and me to lead imo.

 

[DeletedUser]

No, no, no we must respect the seniority chain and get people like Ender Wiggin, Uldor, Bloodhood and Lord Hellz to lead the tribes.


Because you know those "old schoolers" moar liek LAW SCHOOL amirite? are totally better than us, fit to shine our shoes even. Some days :icon_razz:

 

[DeletedUser]

No, no, no we must respect the seniority chain and get people like Ender Wiggin, Uldor, Bloodhood and Lord Hellz to lead the tribes.


Because you know those "old schoolers" moar liek LAW SCHOOL amirite? are totally better than us, fit to shine our shoes even. Some days :icon_razz:

faaaaark, krakkan, uldor, that uzumaki fellow

 

[DeletedUser]

No, no, no we must respect the seniority chain and get people like Ender Wiggin, Uldor, Bloodhood and Lord Hellz to lead the tribes.


Because you know those "old schoolers" moar liek LAW SCHOOL amirite? are totally better than us, fit to shine our shoes even. Some days :icon_razz:

I know I have only been in tribes that have beaten those leaders 3 times. They are old school they r best

 

[DeletedUser1508]

Lets just think about this.
- If - every top player in TW played solo, and would not be in a tribe with another top player unless and until every tribe in the server had an equivalent number of top players thus ensuring uniform distribution of talent, then would people stop complaining ?
Or would they find something else to complain about when set of players rises above all the others and is more successful ?

Is it really coplaying or stacked tribes that people have a problem with ? Or is it the need to have a problem ?

You mistook my meaning. I was making the suggestion in response to Galum claiming no competition, not about other people complaining about Pandas. If he want's competition then instead of expecting everyone else to get better, perhaps he should make it a bit harder for himself. That is all.

For the case of solipsist only Red, and karma play it every day of the week, it is like the idea of what a co-player account should be. 4 inactive players playing one account, generally speaking red gets on for like 10 minutes a time randomly throughout the day, wardy gets on 2-3 days a week, maybe less with school now, karma has no web stability. And I play 3-4 days a week. Any one of us playing actively like we used to, would have done better than all four of us in our current states imo. The issue is coplaying to some extent. But there are many many accounts more active than my own with co-players that just dont know how to play. The issue is the existence of .uk, and .us. Back in the day if we had joined a world it would have been w57, and all the .us people if they had joined a world it would have been w57, and then you have the 3-4 good players per world instead of being separated on the same world, as well as many more upper mid level players who luck out with good areas.

If that is truely the case, then my arguement is slightly void. However, the fact still remains that four inactive players will do better than one inactive player. So in my opinion, co-playing is therefore all about getting higher rankings than you otherwise would have got. Can you deny that?

However, I do recognise your point about the alternative servers. It has definitely not helped the high ranked competitive level within worlds.

Heh, Battle of the Tribes has got to have some sort of bar at the door and the bar has to be high enough to maintain credibility. That chatroom I was in was painful to be in, like anybody who could answer the questions in an interview got added.

If that idea did materialize in Uk10 with those people then winning such a tournament would be meaningless. Almost no one there is a decent player.

I do not think it will work on the uk servers... there is just not enough people to make it 'credible'.

 

[DeletedUser]

If that is truely the case, then my arguement is slightly void. However, the fact still remains that four inactive players will do better than one inactive player. So in my opinion, co-playing is therefore all about getting higher rankings than you otherwise would have got. Can you deny that?.

Okay I dont feel like getting into this argument, since I am the one who started the movement against co-playing in .net so I will drop the co-player argument.. But answer this, how would 4 inactive accounts better the competition:icon_confused: If all 4 of us were active than yeah individually we would all be top 10, and that would be 4 top ten accounts vs 1 #1 account that would increase the competitiveness of the server, but 4 inactive accounts would not increase server competition. You cant possibly think it would:icon_neutral:

 

[DeletedUser1508]

Okay I dont feel like getting into this argument, since I am the one who started the movement against co-playing in .net so I will drop the co-player argument.. But answer this, how would 4 inactive accounts better the competition:icon_confused: If all 4 of us were active than yeah individually we would all be top 10, and that would be 4 top ten accounts vs 1 #1 account that would increase the competitiveness of the server, but 4 inactive accounts would not increase server competition. You cant possibly think it would:icon_neutral:

Not server competition. Competition for yourself, individually.

 

[DeletedUser]

Not server competition. Competition for yourself, individually.

Than your stance really has nothing to do with anything. It's then not really about co-playing cause crappy people co-play as well, you are then just advocating handy capping yourself to make it more competitive.

I have always been for raising the bar not lowering it. Teach, explain educate the public, remove the stereo types that people dont think about like family tribes are bad. Or you shouldnt build mine levels when you start your villa, but saying we should handy cap ourselves does not really help anyone it just brings the competition level further down. You are advocating making worlds easier not harder.

 

[DeletedUser1508]

Than your stance really has nothing to do with anything. It's then not really about co-playing cause crappy people co-play as well, you are then just advocating handy capping yourself to make it more competitive.

I have always been for raising the bar not lowering it. Teach, explain educate the public, remove the stereo types that people dont think about like family tribes are bad. Or you shouldnt build mine levels when you start your villa, but saying we should handy cap ourselves does not really help anyone it just brings the competition level further down. You are advocating making worlds easier not harder.

Yup, pretty much. Although perhaps competition is not quite the right word. Challenge fits more accurately I believe.

 

[DeletedUser]

You mistook my meaning. I was making the suggestion in response to Galum claiming no competition, not about other people complaining about Pandas. If he want's competition then instead of expecting everyone else to get better, perhaps he should make it a bit harder for himself. That is all.

Hrm alright, but then again Galum making life more difficult for himself to experience more competition is not:
1) a sustainable solution, how far can anyone handicap themselves
2) does not solve the problem for the server itself, the server will just keep jobbing to skilled people who won't handicap themselves.
At best its a temporary solution to Galum's gripe and doesn't help anyone other than him

I do not think it will work on the uk servers... there is just not enough people to make it 'credible'.

.uk has been around for more than two years, at this point of .net evolution (roughly up to the beginning of W12, I think) a lot of the people that raised the bar and are still at the top today had emerged homegrown from .net worlds.
What homegrown talent has .co.uk produced ? And .uk inherited the book from .net, .uk forums were full of guides written by top .net players from day 1.
.net inherited nothing from .de or .nl (the two major versions that came before it), we wrote the book ourselves.

Why is a server that has been out for two years and have certainly not had bad management not produced any homegrown players that can hang with the players the very early worlds of .net forged:
[Disclaimer : these are just examples -recognizable ones to you- of people who first became known in those worlds that can hang at the top today, they're not the only ones and it wasn't their first world necessarily, not including .de vets in .net]

W2 - vpar2, champion, myself, darth earth
W3 - Norach, Cyrano, Lance, devil667
W4 - Kenved, Openeye, slytown, lauradestroya
W5 - K-Magic, russki
W6 - Sneggy, lardingd, mattcurr, Red
W8 - Krono5, allyboo, sacredfool
W9 - 4leaf, pistol, powor! guys
W10 - robj
W11 - Galum, James Childs
W12 - Tom, purple predator

List goes on, I'm sure I'm leaving out dozens of deserving names.

Who has .co.uk made ? And why aren't they making any top players ?

 

[DeletedUser1508]

Hrm alright, but then again Galum making life more difficult for himself to experience more competition is not:
1) a sustainable solution, how far can anyone handicap themselves
2) does not solve the problem for the server itself, the server will just keep jobbing to skilled people who won't handicap themselves.
At best its a temporary solution to Galum's gripe and doesn't help anyone other than him

Fair points. It was only a suggestion anyway.

.uk has been around for more than two years, at this point of .net evolution (roughly up to the beginning of W12, I think) a lot of the people that raised the bar and are still at the top today had emerged homegrown from .net worlds.
What homegrown talent has .co.uk produced ? And .uk inherited the book from .net, .uk forums were full of guides written by top .net players from day 1.
.net inherited nothing from .de or .nl (the two major versions that came before it), we wrote the book ourselves.

Why is a server that has been out for two years and have certainly not had bad management not produced any homegrown players that can hang with the players the very early worlds of .net forged:
[Disclaimer : these are just examples -recognizable ones to you- of people who first became known in those worlds that can hang at the top today, they're not the only ones and it wasn't their first world necessarily, not including .de vets in .net]
...
Who has .co.uk made ? And why aren't they making any top players ?

Ok, I am not looking to enter into a debate here, but I will try to point out a few things...

Firstly, do remember that this is an English speaking server, so naturally NET is UKs 'parent', with UK picking up NETs trends and habits. Now I was not around in the early stages of TW, but I do not think the same ancestory can be traced from DE to NET.

And what about the possiblity that it is because NET had already 'written the book' that UK has not needed to do so? TW is and always has been an evolving game. Naturally it was the early stages of it's growth that the largest changes were made, the basics shaped. Using LC to farm. Moving away from mixed villages. Noble trains. All of this we now take for granted, and yet it was not always so.

But what now? Have there been any ground-breaking new strategies or ideas in recent years that have changed the way we play? And if someone was to make such a breakthrough, chances are it would be someone from NET, which has the more experienced players and a larger player base. Sure, some small changes might be developed here... but nothing of much consequence. For better or for worse TW is becoming refined, and the onus should not be on UK to develop it further.

As far as homegrown players go, I believe you are wrong in your comparisons. The players you mentioned were the forerunners, striding forward, exploring and developing the land of TW (Maybe too much drama?). And yet you want to compare them with UK players? That is not very fair. You are taking the top players of a large server, who also have many years of experience, and comparing them to players from a smaller server and only 1-2 years experience and expecting them to come out equal.
If, however, you were able to compare a current UK player with someone such as yourself playing on NETs w10 the difference might not be so great. For to say that you, mattcurr, Sneggy, Galum etc all currently play as well as you did back then would be false.

In any case, that is my opinion. Rip it apart if you so desire :icon_biggrin:

 

[DeletedUser]

Fair points. It was only a suggestion anyway.


Ok, I am not looking to enter into a debate here, but I will try to point out a few things...

Firstly, do remember that this is an English speaking server, so naturally NET is UKs 'parent', with UK picking up NETs trends and habits. Now I was not around in the early stages of TW, but I do not think the same ancestory can be traced from DE to NET.

And what about the possiblity that it is because NET had already 'written the book' that UK has not needed to do so? TW is and always has been an evolving game. Naturally it was the early stages of it's growth that the largest changes were made, the basics shaped. Using LC to farm. Moving away from mixed villages. Noble trains. All of this we now take for granted, and yet it was not always so.

But what now? Have there been any ground-breaking new strategies or ideas in recent years that have changed the way we play? And if someone was to make such a breakthrough, chances are it would be someone from NET, which has the more experienced players and a larger player base. Sure, some small changes might be developed here... but nothing of much consequence. For better or for worse TW is becoming refined, and the onus should not be on UK to develop it further.

As far as homegrown players go, I believe you are wrong in your comparisons. The players you mentioned were the forerunners, striding forward, exploring and developing the land of TW (Maybe too much drama?). And yet you want to compare them with UK players? That is not very fair. You are taking the top players of a large server, who also have many years of experience, and comparing them to players from a smaller server and only 1-2 years experience and expecting them to come out equal.
If, however, you were able to compare a current UK player with someone such as yourself playing on NETs w10 the difference might not be so great. For to say that you, mattcurr, Sneggy, Galum etc all currently play as well as you did back then would be false.

In any case, that is my opinion. Rip it apart if you so desire :icon_biggrin:

TO save you some catch up time

[9/26/2011 7:12:23 PM] Zard: tell me
[9/26/2011 7:12:25 PM] Zard: comparing them then
[9/26/2011 7:12:25 PM] AAQIBULOUR: but he was from that generation
[9/26/2011 7:12:26 PM] Zard: to say
[9/26/2011 7:12:28 PM] AAQIBULOUR: sneggy was from there
[9/26/2011 7:12:30 PM] Zard: you or matt now
[9/26/2011 7:12:36 PM] Zard: which would win?
[9/26/2011 7:12:48 PM] Zard: of course there were good players
[9/26/2011 7:12:48 PM] AAQIBULOUR: if they had the same time to develop
[9/26/2011 7:12:49 PM] AAQIBULOUR: their concept
[9/26/2011 7:12:54 PM] AAQIBULOUR: we're from that time
[9/26/2011 7:13:01 PM] Zard: my point exactly
[9/26/2011 7:13:09 PM] AAQIBULOUR: thats like asking if matt 2007 vs matt 2011
[9/26/2011 7:13:14 PM] Zard: uk has created "good" players
[9/26/2011 7:13:16 PM] AAQIBULOUR: same person
[9/26/2011 7:13:17 PM] Zard: its just
[9/26/2011 7:13:20 PM] Zard: compared to you now
[9/26/2011 7:13:22 PM] Matt!?!: lets see
[9/26/2011 7:13:23 PM] Zard: they are crap players
[9/26/2011 7:13:25 PM] AAQIBULOUR: oh you mean if us back then
[9/26/2011 7:13:30 PM] AAQIBULOUR: could beat the .uk home grown
[9/26/2011 7:13:31 PM] AAQIBULOUR: now
[9/26/2011 7:13:34 PM] Matt!?!: in 2008 vs me now
[9/26/2011 7:13:35 PM] AAQIBULOUR: oh hell yeah
[9/26/2011 7:13:41 PM] Matt!?!: I would win in 2008
[9/26/2011 7:13:47 PM] Matt!?!: I am more refined now
[9/26/2011 7:13:51 PM] Matt!?!: much more active back then
[9/26/2011 7:13:55 PM] Matt!?!: and deticated
[9/26/2011 7:13:59 PM] Red:
[9/26/2011 7:14:06 PM] AAQIBULOUR: was more of a snakey bastard back in the early days
[9/26/2011 7:14:07 PM] AAQIBULOUR:
[9/26/2011 7:14:12 PM] Zard: (chuckle)
[9/26/2011 7:14:17 PM] Zard: but like aaqib
[9/26/2011 7:14:20 PM] Red: In the early days, I was... red
[9/26/2011 7:14:22 PM] Zard: compare locutas of borg
[9/26/2011 7:14:25 PM] AAQIBULOUR: no you werent
[9/26/2011 7:14:28 PM | Edited 7:14:36 PM] AAQIBULOUR: you were Ares Anger
[9/26/2011 7:14:30 PM] AAQIBULOUR:
[9/26/2011 7:14:30 PM] Red:
[9/26/2011 7:14:35 PM] Red: I mean, semi early days
[9/26/2011 7:14:40 PM] Zard: or GIXXER
[9/26/2011 7:14:40 PM] Red: not earliest days
[9/26/2011 7:14:51 PM] Matt!?!: cause I quit from like w25-34
[9/26/2011 7:14:54 PM] Matt!?!: came back and was rank 1
[9/26/2011 7:14:59 PM] Matt!?!: :^)
[9/26/2011 7:15:01 PM] Red: (red in reports, not name )
[9/26/2011 7:15:11 PM] Zard: that guy who's name I can't remember (nauz, really good uk homegrown guy)
[9/26/2011 7:15:12 PM] Luke Holmes/One Hit KO: Would you consider Baldhor being good. (think)
[9/26/2011 7:15:18 PM] Zard: to you guys then
[9/26/2011 7:15:20 PM] Matt!?!: I did minor start ups and would delete
[9/26/2011 7:15:21 PM] AAQIBULOUR: Baldhor was good
[9/26/2011 7:15:26 PM] Zard: or to top tier players then
[9/26/2011 7:15:27 PM] AAQIBULOUR: lol 40 O villages
[9/26/2011 7:15:33 PM] Matt!?!: the real way to compare it zard
[9/26/2011 7:15:34 PM] Matt!?!: is this
[9/26/2011 7:15:36 PM] Zard: and I doubt the difference would be as massive as you say
[9/26/2011 7:15:40 PM] Matt!?!: me from 2008
[9/26/2011 7:15:45 PM] Matt!?!: vs current .uk
[9/26/2011 7:15:47 PM] Matt!?!: I would win