What would be everyones greatest war of wars with tribes past and present? tribes from the UK server

[Nauzhror]

We do not appreciate our success on W7 being disregarded as worthless by the start up players who got their kicks and then left. It is their opinion that they would have beaten us in the long game - but that is only their opinion. Our opinion is that they would not. Both opinions are allowed, and we are allowed to disagree with each other - but perhaps there is now a time to say that it is pointless to continue a debate where we will never agree.

Are your arguments always this weak?

Much like I want to see where any respectable player has ever called themselves elite, I also want to know where any of the respected startup players have called KnK worthless, or guaranteed they'd have beaten them had they stayed.

The only people I see posting such are not particularly skilled at startup, and as such are not "the start up players". I played what was the largest account in TuTor for most of its early stags, not cold-fusion, not Adellion, if anything they both learned how to play startup on UK7, they were certainly not the dominant players that left early and are no bragging that they'd have won had they stayed like you're making them out to be, primarily because their accounts were never dominant.

It appears that TW is played in two distinct ways by two different types of player who cannot be compared fairly and in a manner everyone can agree on.

1. The adrenalin junky - after immediate kicks and statistical supremacy
2. The strategist - who methodically and strategically positions themselves and their tribe mates in a manner which results in tribal supremacy which lasts to the long game.


The styles of play are very different, and both sets of players can possess an equal level of skill, the skill sets may be slightly different as they are honed for different end results.

Most successful startup players are anything but adrenaline junkies, if anything, more the opposite, startup requires less activity, not more. It also requires more polish and technical skill. Many skills that are useful past startup, but not completely necessary, are completely necessary at startup. Most late-gamers can't split a 20 ms train, but then again, they don't need to. Successful startup players on the other hand, typically can split 20 ms trains, largely because they do need to be able to, they can't just stack themselves with 200 D villages to make the threat go away.

If others wish to use the game for short term success then so be-it, but they should not assume on that measure alone that they out skill the strategist player who will maneuver in much more subtle ways.

I've stated this before on several occasions.

I have nothing but respect for the players that excel both at startup, and then stick around to continue dominating into late-game.

If you can be rank 1 at 100,000 points and at 10,000,000 I take my hat off to you.

At the same time. I've met lots of people who have been top 20 at late-game, but could never be so at startup. What I have never met on the other hand is someone that is truly dominant at startup who couldn't do at least passably well at late-game. That's not to claim that if you're rank 1 at startup you will necessarily continue to be rank 1 well into late-game if you apply the effort, but that if you are rank 1 at startup, and continue applying effort into late-game it is unlikely you will drop from the top 10/20/etc.

The problem in my eyes, is that late-gamers don't necessarily need to be particularly skilled to become rank 1, whereas at startup you typically do need to be skilled to do so.

Example:

Player A is rank 500 at startup, he has 2 villages. Player B is rank 1 at startup, he has 25 villages. Player B quits and gifts many of his villages to player A. Two months later player A is rank 1 with a solid lead on rank 2 after nobling several other tribemates that have quit.

In the scenario above I have absolutely no respect for Player A when it comes to their ability to play the game properly. If on the other hand they had been rank 1 at startup, I'd have plenty of respect for them as they'd have proven that they were at least passably good at all stages of the game, rather than solely good at being a vulture and internalling trbemates who quit due to having lower tolerance for repetition.

 

[DeletedUser]

Look, you all suck, -V- was the stuff.

 

[DeletedUser3642]

Are your arguments always this weak?

What is the point of arguing a point where the person you are arguing against doesnt have the ability to understand or are too arrogant to accept that perhaps they were wrong to say something.

Many skills that are useful past startup, but not completely necessary, are completely necessary at startup. Most late-gamers can't split a 20 ms train, but then again, they don't need to. Successful startup players on the other hand, typically can split 20 ms trains, largely because they do need to be able to, they can't just stack themselves with 200 D villages to make the threat go away.

I agree - and as you also state, some late gamers are also as skilled as start up players. Unless you have played against a late gamer though, you do not know whether then can do this. So where others have suggested that the outcome of W7 should be dismissed of any recognition as had they stuck around things would have been different - I don't believe they have any basis other than a flawed assumption that because they are good at startup they are better than everyone else.

The problem in my eyes, is that late-gamers don't necessarily need to be particularly skilled to become rank 1, whereas at startup you typically do need to be skilled to do so.

Example:

Player A is rank 500 at startup, he has 2 villages. Player B is rank 1 at startup, he has 25 villages. Player B quits and gifts many of his villages to player A. Two months later player A is rank 1 with a solid lead on rank 2 after nobling several other tribemates that have quit.

In the scenario above I have absolutely no respect for Player A when it comes to their ability to play the game properly. If on the other hand they had been rank 1 at startup, I'd have plenty of respect for them as they'd have proven that they were at least passably good at all stages of the game, rather than solely good at being a vulture and internalling trbemates who quit due to having lower tolerance for repetition.

I agree - some internals are necessary for strategic reasons, others are not and are performed by point whores who do not deserve respect as they achieved their position through greed rather than skill.

 

[Nauzhror]

What is the point of arguing a point where the person you are arguing against doesnt have the ability to understand or are too arrogant to accept that perhaps they were wrong to say something.

I meant that you seemed to be arguing something that was never said. I never claimed KnK's achievements were worthless, nor did anyone who is a successful start-up player, yet it is the start-up players that your posts have been aggressively verbally attacking.

The only thing I can think of that I've said that could even be construed as arrogant is that if I started near you (or anyone else on pogue mahone) and we were both aiming to rim the other that I am fairly sure I'd win with relative ease. That's a claim I'm quite sure I could backup. I don't make claims that I don't think I can back up.

ie. I have not once claimed that if I'd kept playing uk7 that I'd still be rank 1 on it, or that if all of TuTor had kept playing that they'd have dominated the server. Those are both open for speculation, speculation which is pointless since neither of those things did happen, so whether they could have or not is irrelevant.

 

[DeletedUser6603]

Nauz - I agree with most of what you said in your last post to be honest. As ive already said, the reason this whole debate started is precisely because our achievements on W7 were belittled, and it all spiralled from there to where we are now. Weve never disagreed there were good players in Tutor and that things would have been different had they stuck around. The argument isnt at you individually, its been claimed a few times now that our achievements are nothing because the good players didnt stick around. Naturally we are going to disagree with that, and were going to defend what weve done on W7.

Nauz, individually you probably would beat any one of us. None of us are claiming to be great players. I certainly know im not. I personally would put my ability somewhere in the middle of average and good, but no better than that. The point weve been trying to make is that our achievements are off the back of a tribe that understands completely the teamwork aspect of the game. If one of us were to end up in your 15x15, and we had the same group of players behind us that we do on W7, we know we could count fully on their support in our battle with you. Thats why we say you wouldn't find it easy, because KnK has an all for one and one for all mentality that were really quite proud of. You might well still beat us, everybody knows what you are capable of, but at the same time I know what the KnK members are capable of, and we defend each other to the last spear. Is that not something to be proud of?

You may not have made those claims Nauz, but other people have, at the same time saying that because yourself and the others didnt continue on W7 what weve achieved is meaningless. Weve not once tried to discredit anything any of you guys have stated you have achieved in this debate. The original point was that we feel Tutor were never dominant on W7 when they were there. If youve won worlds, been rank one at any point in the game, led tribes to big wins, or whatever else you choose to view as an achievement, well done to each and every one of you. I have no problem with praising people for their achievements, but it seems as if others do if it doesnt fit in with their view of what is success and what isnt, which is a shame really. I know I am biased, but I really do feel we as a tribe deserve credit for what weve done on W7. As do W1N on W1, TFF on W3, and all the other tribes that are on their way to hard fought wins on their worlds. It takes a lot of time and dedication to lead a tribe for so long, and its something I have nothing but respect for those that do.

I also couldnt agree more with your last sentence. Im sure ive made that point already though, hopefully it will be listened to now somebody else has made it ;-)

 

[DeletedUser]

That is not correct mate.

To prove something by induction you must first show that a statement is true at a time equal m. Then you must show that if a statement at a time equal n holds true, then said statement will be true at the time equal n + ε, ε > 0.

If those prerequisites are shown, induction says that the statement will be true for all times greater than m.

However, the argument put fourth by some tutor players in this thread breaks down in the inductive step of the proof. If their claim that a player leading at an arbitrary time would have lead until the end if he continued is true, the first player to join the server would win every time if he played to the end.

Said proposition is obviously nonsense.

misintepereting and skewing statements is funny. No where has anyone said that. I believe our claim was simply that a player rank one at an arbitrary time after the first say, 3 days, and before say, 10K points continued playing until end game, they would most likely be rank one (or at least top 3, I don't deny there are good lategame growers).

 

[DeletedUser4320]

Funny is who funny does as the saying goes.

The time frame for which the inductive step was valid has not been limited before your post, thus that was what I used to shown Ade that his proof by induction was erroneous.

As for your proposed limitations, they too do make out for some interesting thought exercises.

What if there were 4 different players juggling for the top spot within the interval of eligibility? How could all 4 be guaranteed a top 3 position under the proposed regime?

Food for thoughts as the saying goes.

 

[DeletedUser7179]

2 years have passed and still you are saying the same old rubbish Dubby the fool

 

[DeletedUser]

Didn't you moan before on the speed forums when someone made an insulting nickname for you? Please shut up.

Yeah KnK wouldn't have been there had TuToR stayed but its basically the same for UK2,UK3,UK5,UK9. W1N only staying dominant from the start on UK1 due to good recruitment. UK4 only had Bi! as a startup tribe which wasn't great anyways and I didn't play uk6-uk8 so can't comment. UK is so bad that one tribe will basically always dominate if the playerbase stays as it is.

 

[DeletedUser]

for gods sake, fight it out

edit: ingame, duh

 

[DeletedUser]

UK11, anyone? >.<

 

[DeletedUser6603]

Personally, I probably wont play W11, id quite like a bit of a break from TW once were done with W7! As for the others, thats up to them ;-)

 

[DeletedUser]

Funny is who funny does as the saying goes.

The time frame for which the inductive step was valid has not been limited before your post, thus that was what I used to shown Ade that his proof by induction was erroneous.

As for your proposed limitations, they too do make out for some interesting thought exercises.

What if there were 4 different players juggling for the top spot within the interval of eligibility? How could all 4 be guaranteed a top 3 position under the proposed regime?

Food for thoughts as the saying goes.

Even if there were no bounds, the statement, as you stated it was 1. never stated, and 2. never implied. Not sure how you arrived at it, but is was not through a logical process, either inductive or deductive.

 

[Nauzhror]

Nauz, individually you probably would beat any one of us. None of us are claiming to be great players. I certainly know im not. I personally would put my ability somewhere in the middle of average and good, but no better than that. The point weve been trying to make is that our achievements are off the back of a tribe that understands completely the teamwork aspect of the game. If one of us were to end up in your 15x15, and we had the same group of players behind us that we do on W7, we know we could count fully on their support in our battle with you. Thats why we say you wouldn't find it easy, because KnK has an all for one and one for all mentality that were really quite proud of. You might well still beat us, everybody knows what you are capable of, but at the same time I know what the KnK members are capable of, and we defend each other to the last spear. Is that not something to be proud of?

Working as a team is definitely something to be proud of. My claim was initially intended to mean that if both accounts were tribeless I doubt I'd have much trouble being the victor, with tribes in the equation it'd largely depend what tribe I was in I'd imagine. Though by no means am I claiming that with you in KnK and me tribeless that I'd take on all of Knk and win, or anything silly along those lines.

 

[DeletedUser4320]

Even if there were no bounds, the statement, as you stated it was 1. never stated, and 2. never implied. Not sure how you arrived at it, but is was not through a logical process, either inductive or deductive.

It was your statement that once you had proved to yourself that you could and should, if you stuck around, win the world, you'd leave (unless other forms of shenanigans and Tom Foolery come around) which made the basis for the deduction of my induction as the saying goes.

 

[DeletedUser]

It was your statement that once you had proved to yourself that you could and should, if you stuck around, win the world, you'd leave (unless other forms of shenanigans and Tom Foolery come around) which made the basis for the deduction of my induction as the saying goes.

Proving something to ones self implies belief, not necessarily logic.
(ie: my proof is the bibles says so)

 

[DeletedUser4320]

Oh, if you are applying faith into your argument it is an entirely different ballpark as the saying goes.

For those who believe, no proof is necessary as Stuart Chase once said.

(As for the argument that the bible says so, this has been a hot potato for all time. An example of this is the introduction of intelligent design in science classes which prompted Bobby Henderson to initiate Pastafarianism (the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster)).

 

[DeletedUser10297]

knk W1

If I recall correctly, KnK did well on UK1 despite being much smaller? That's what I've been taught to believe, at least.

More like back stabbing, fair weather allies............I remember what they did to Swarm during TR war

Omega

 

[DeletedUser3642]

More like back stabbing, fair weather allies............I remember what they did to Swarm during TR war

Omega

thats called tactics - and you can probably blame me and matt (rc1207) for the joint effort of causing swarms council to split and half to defect to TR and to also form an alliance with KnK who i'd had previous dealings with in my original tribe in K61

I was on the TR side at the time, but now being on the KnK side - I think its fair to say they weighed up the options and decided that the more interesting and fun solution would be to side with a tribe that was marginally less crap than Swarm was


War is all about ending up on top of the pile and hammering everyone else who gets close by whatever means you have available... i'm sure Dubby would have a relevant saying for it, something like: all's fair in love and war as the saying goes...

Diplomacy and behind the scenes dealing have a far more devestating effect on the game than anyones ability to snipe, out manouver or whatever other method you choose to employ to beat your enemy.

This was never felt more than when TR was completely out maneuvered and stabbed in the back by their one time ally T4H, who dropped their alliance with immediate effect within a day or two of TR declaring on W1N and having trusted the fact that they could empty their borders with their allies of any support troops - to support front lines 3-4 continents away... poor judgement from TR?, backstabbing by T4H? or tactical deception cleverly engineered and employed by the W1N/T4H alliance...

Whereas once I may have been bitter - I applaud their move

 

[DeletedUser10297]

knk W1

To Mikek

Of course being co-duke of KnK wouldn't at all colour your assessment of KnK's so called 'tactics' on W1...........my only consolation was that after all the hype, bluff and bluster (you can blame it on T4H if you like) TR imploded faster, and put up less resistance, than did Swarm...FACT


Omega