Note from an oldy.

[DeletedUser911]

Activity in this game is strange when you aren't giving into it's obsession anymore: it feels as if I'm not being inactive at all. Of course the fact of the matter is that I am rather inactive--but mostly out of a lack knowing what my goal should be and less because I don't have the time to play.

When I ran Plight, it gave me purpose--to become a tribe known for Euthanizing the world. At this point it seems as if a 'war' is considered some little dinky tribe like PNX. My entire point in asking 'where is the war?' had more rhetoric behind it than an actual question.

The rhetoric goes something like this: I don't know if you are having problems with inactivity other than myself, but the good players in a tribe generally like standing apart in purpose and stature. Or at least the players I've always been after--they enjoy this game only when their is a ridiculous challenge ahead of them and one that only a few can achieve. Which leads me to my second point: their are an abundance of small childish players in this tribe that I would have never considered inviting into Plight. While this is probably in result of so many large quality players leaving--and you trying to fill their shoes--it in no way inspires any of the good players to remain.

If I was leader of Plight again, I would cut down to size in order that only a few good players remain. I'd do this not because it was a good strategy to win, no, I'd do this because it made the game more exciting and more enjoyable for a select audience.

And now hopefully you understand the dilemna I face in continuing to play TW.

Earnestly,

SocratesJC
Prior Duke of Plight

 

[DeletedUser]

I love you SJC :lol:! I can understand what you mean though, and I understand your dilemma . I hope you stay, you were an awesome player and PnPer, and we miss you :icon_redface:.

 

[DeletedUser]

I agree 1 year ago Plight where my hero.They were agressive,powerful,well lead...But now there just plain old broing tribe with no more agrisiveness.:icon_redface:

 

[DeletedUser911]

...
We would be even fine if another pnx had been attacking BANG!?.
...
Good luck ~Pnx~, you will need it. :icon_wink:

This is exactly my point. Kerbogha (who is a dear old friend to me) has pointed out the cornerstone to my opening argument about war. Why not just assimilate barbarians instead? Wouldn't that provide just the same excitement and risk of loss?

Let me just point out a few wars Plight endeavored upon, (not to toot my own horn):

Plight versus BoE -- one of the top 5 tribes of the time; completely dominating at least one continent (K45); Plight was hardly a blip on the map at this time in the eyes of the world.

Plight versus NA and Hippos -- given that they were in the middle of a war already; Plight was not at all to be considered on par with a tribe of this magnitude; the tribe recruited nearly half of K45; BoE was their puppet tribe, and we were to have our victory over K45.

Plight versus ORC, GUNs, and LOD -- Meanwhile we had other trivial battles going on in the midsts; we took on a three front war without worry of defeat; (although props to GUNs for their great assault on our Northern front, I never would have hoped that they would backstab us).

My apologies if you do not have enough history to understand the significants of these wars--their magnitude and vivacity. What is most important to note is that none of them had certain, ensured, victory.

It is more entertaining to open aggression up to a point where strategists would criticize you.

 

[jakeeboy]

I remember the war with ORC. Managed to scrape out of that one to didn't you, lol.

 

[DeletedUser22370]

This is exactly my point. Kerbogha (who is a dear old friend to me) has pointed out the cornerstone to my opening argument about war. Why not just assimilate barbarians instead? Wouldn't that provide just the same excitement and risk of loss?

Let me just point out a few wars Plight endeavored upon, (not to toot my own horn):

Plight versus BoE -- one of the top 5 tribes of the time; completely dominating at least one continent (K45); Plight was hardly a blip on the map at this time in the eyes of the world.

Plight versus NA and Hippos -- given that they were in the middle of a war already; Plight was not at all to be considered on par with a tribe of this magnitude; the tribe recruited nearly half of K45; BoE was their puppet tribe, and we were to have our victory over K45.

Plight versus ORC, GUNs, and LOD -- Meanwhile we had other trivial battles going on in the midsts; we took on a three front war without worry of defeat; (although props to GUNs for their great assault on our Northern front, I never would have hoped that they would backstab us).

My apologies if you do not have enough history to understand the significants of these wars--their magnitude and vivacity. What is most important to note is that none of them had certain, ensured, victory.

It is more entertaining to open aggression up to a point where strategists would criticize you.

Enough of this terrible pnp, I would obviously like to side with you, but seriously, I can't.

Plight vs BoE wasn't a war, you merely singled out one player I happened to be sitting and impressed me so you were able to use your serpents tongue to win me over. You took the decent BoE players and that is how you gained a foothold on K46.

Plight versus NA and Hippos, several mistakes here (not sure if they are deliberate or not) its K46 we are talking about, probably such a long time since you played your account that you have forgotten that... and BoE was disbanded by then. Plight vs Hippos was really more of a stand off until Hippos disbanded and merged into us.

Plight vs ORC, GUNs, LOD. I hardly see it fair to call that a war either. I think perhaps Plight exchanged a village or two with LOD, but we did not actively engage them, the real winners were HOT, HRV and I. As for ORC and GUNs, sacredfool messed that up for us, and GUNs wiped the floor with us in the north, we agreed to end the war and merge with GUNs (probably that serpent tongue of yours again). Notice a common ending to all of these wars? A merge. And then of course you slowly became inactive and left Mikebro and Seagryfn as leaders. As a result, Plight has grown from strength to strength and has never been better.

Again, I really wish I hadn't had to say any of this, but you seem driven on lying to the public about the old Plight and the new Plight.

 

[supericeman]

I never personally dealy with you SJC, but the leader of both XXL and HOT spoke highly of you. I did enjoy reading your posts. I wish you luck in RL and in other worlds if you stop playing here.

 

[DeletedUser911]

Enough of this terrible pnp, I would obviously like to side with you, but seriously, I can't.

Plight vs BoE wasn't a war, you merely singled out one player I happened to be sitting and impressed me so you were able to use your serpents tongue to win me over. You took the decent BoE players and that is how you gained a foothold on K46.

Plight versus NA and Hippos, several mistakes here (not sure if they are deliberate or not) its K46 we are talking about, probably such a long time since you played your account that you have forgotten that... and BoE was disbanded by then. Plight vs Hippos was really more of a stand off until Hippos disbanded and merged into us.

Plight vs ORC, GUNs, LOD. I hardly see it fair to call that a war either. I think perhaps Plight exchanged a village or two with LOD, but we did not actively engage them, the real winners were HOT, HRV and I. As for ORC and GUNs, sacredfool messed that up for us, and GUNs wiped the floor with us in the north, we agreed to end the war and merge with GUNs (probably that serpent tongue of yours again). Notice a common ending to all of these wars? A merge. And then of course you slowly became inactive and left Mikebro and Seagryfn as leaders. As a result, Plight has grown from strength to strength and has never been better.

Again, I really wish I hadn't had to say any of this, but you seem driven on lying to the public about the old Plight and the new Plight.

I believe you are suggesting that my tongue is the sharpest weapon in my arsenal: on that note, I would not likely endeavor to disagree. You seem to be confusing my hope to encourage players into action and out of apathy with, what you call, a 'serpent's tongue'. A serpent has no desire to help those it speaks with; rather it desires to spread it's venom into those it fools. The people that joined my tribe and were inspired to fight hard, were they ever victims of tragedy? Were they tricked into fighting for a lesser cause or with a lesser team of players?

On all accounts I should assume the answer is most definitely 'no'! In fact, whether self-fulfilling or not, you were convinced to indeed fight for one of the greatest tribes on World 16, while your tribe BoE was headed nowhere for any length of time.

Indeed I've made use of my tongue, but I am not ashamed of it in the least. Nor do I stand here in guilt of the charge made against me: 'Serpent tongue'!

Indeed I owe the success of Plight to the real warriors of the tribe--not my only my own axes in the least; but in no way am I ashamed of rounding up some of the best players of World 16 all into one tribe. And in no way can you consider the wars we fought in 'lacking of action'. There are many ways to win wars: none of them include solely physical weapons.

 

[DeletedUser]

Oooooooh, this is gonna get good. Both of these guys make good PnP :icon_eek:.

/fetches popcorn

 

[DeletedUser]

About the whole vs Hippos thing aswell.

I belive Center/CND did most of the work there (by far) and took most of Hippos attention.

 

[DeletedUser911]

About the whole vs Hippos thing aswell.

I belive Center/CND did most of the work there (by far) and took most of Hippos attention.

I would agree completely; but I think CND leadership would attribute sufficient credit to us keeping Hippos occupied in the North East as well. In fact, Hippos were quite confident that they would be able to wipe out CND if they were able to arrange a way to get us off their backs. They hoped to use the NE to support their fronts against CND.

 

[DeletedUser]

I would agree completely; but I think CND leadership would attribute sufficient credit to us keeping Hippos occupied in the North East as well. In fact, Hippos were quite confident that they would be able to wipe out CND if they were able to arrange a way to get us off their backs. They hoped to use the NE to support their fronts against CND.

Oh there's no denying you certainly helped. Just that Center/CND were warring them long before you and did most of the damage that caused them to disband (barring OE's crash ofc :icon_sad.

 

[DeletedUser]

Nice to see ya here again SJC, one of the few people in the W16 forums that can actually use proper spelling and grammar, as well as making sense.

Now I'ver heard from some Plight members and even some people outside of Plight that they believe Plight is stronger than ever with the new leadership. I'm not trying to put down neither Seagryfn nor Mikebro, but when SJC was the leader, I remember Plight for being the tribe that was always known for taking out everyone else in their area and for having the top ODA in the world.

Now it seems like Plight has gone quiet, slowly sinking in the ranks, ceding its number one ODA to ORC, and not entering any real war since the conflict with ORC/Guns. And no, I don't count DNC (tag right?) who disbanded quickly after the start.

Maybe its a change like SJC has stated, or maybe its only the calm before the storm. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. But please don't make us wait too long :icon_wink:

 

[DeletedUser22370]

I believe you are suggesting that my tongue is the sharpest weapon in my arsenal: on that note, I would not likely endeavor to disagree. You seem to be confusing my hope to encourage players into action and out of apathy with, what you call, a 'serpent's tongue'. A serpent has no desire to help those it speaks with; rather it desires to spread it's venom into those it fools. The people that joined my tribe and were inspired to fight hard, were they ever victims of tragedy? Were they tricked into fighting for a lesser cause or with a lesser team of players?

On all accounts I should assume the answer is most definitely 'no'! In fact, whether self-fulfilling or not, you were convinced to indeed fight for one of the greatest tribes on World 16, while your tribe BoE was headed nowhere for any length of time.

Indeed I've made use of my tongue, but I am not ashamed of it in the least. Nor do I stand here in guilt of the charge made against me: 'Serpent tongue'!

Indeed I owe the success of Plight to the real warriors of the tribe--not my only my own axes in the least; but in no way am I ashamed of rounding up some of the best players of World 16 all into one tribe. And in no way can you consider the wars we fought in 'lacking of action'. There are many ways to win wars: none of them include solely physical weapons.

Ah no, you read me wrong. I was merely suggesting that all of those wars were won because you had used your diplomacy skills than actual combat aggressiveness. Sure, you probably would have beaten BoE in a normal war, but you chose not to, and that is why I believe the public should know that. For these wars rather than tooting your own trumpet about victory (which seems rather misplaced) I believe the kudos should go to the great players that chose to join you, what if they hadn't?

Seagryfn (Duke) - Hippos
Mikebro (Ex Duke) - BoE
walkara (Baron) - GUNs
RealXT (Baron) - GUNs
ronpaul2008 (Duke) - Hippos
Qoffee (Duke) - ~SS~

These are just a few of the brilliant players you recruited from other tribes, and now they form the whole leadership. I think that rather than gloating about past wars that you won (one way or another...) you should appreciate what these players have done for you in your absence. If they hadn't stepped in Plight would be dead right now, I have to agree, it is different without you, but our new leaders fully make up for it.

 

[DeletedUser911]

Oh, I couldn't agree more with you Legendary. Indeed all the credit goes to so many of the great players that I was able to fortunately gather into Plight. That is what you do when you are a leader though: you delegate more than you actually fight (often times). In fact, my most revered mentor -- from World 1, Twisted Monkey -- had settled for having just a meager sized account to make more time for actually leading the tribe, (named 'Death'). I was the one of those giant players gathering size at the time because I had less leadership responsibility--(in world 1 that is).

I don't think any of those players in Plight feel shafted, tricked, or deceived in any way for being recruited into Plight. Certainly, I don't think, they would ever use the words 'Serpent Tongue'.

There have been many times where I wished that somebody could round up good players, and keep out the temptation of recruiting bad players, as good as I can--that way I could just kick ass without worrying so much about tribal foresight and diplomacy.

You are right about one thing though, I enjoy euthanizing the weak and recruiting the good players: tribes fall faster that way. And I did that to several tribes--you are correct.

Edit-- (oh, and I never intended to toot my own horn! Just like I tried to say here:

(not to toot my own horn)

I was using it as a referrence to the point I was trying to make which is here:

What is most important to note is that none of them had certain, ensured, victory.

It is more entertaining to open aggression up to a point where strategists would criticize you.

The mentioning of the wars was entirely made in order to make my point--which had nothing to do with making a show of all my great deeds. In fact, I also make a point to say that credit is due to others:

Indeed I owe the success of Plight to the real warriors of the tribe--not my only my own axes in the least...

 

[DeletedUser22370]

ok lets skip the chase, you main point is that you feel Plight isn't as it used to be - like it should be in your opinion.

I respond to that by saying that in your absense Plight is still as great, I should know, I have been in both old and new Plight. Seagryfn is a different leader than you, but I believe she does have an aggressive flair similar to yours, and I think the only reason the players of world 16 are unsure of this is because of the lack of pnp on Plight's part.

 

[MichielK]

The way I see it, as time goes by the game of TW progresses into new stages and priorities change. In the early stages of the game, operational skills and activities are most important. These get replaced by tactical tasks, and eventually by strategic tasks.

For example, a 50K tribe does not need to worry about inactive management, a 500K tribe runs into it from time to time, a 5M tribe needs to have some structure in place, and for a 50M tribe it's one of the most important tasks. Similarly, farming is the key to success and survival for a 25K player, a useful bonus for a 250K player, and no longer required for a 2.5M player.

I believe these changes also explain why inactivity exists in this game, and why good players leave. Take a player who is great at farming and finding new expansion targets...his skills eventually become much less significant, and other tasks (e.g. account management and time management) become much more important. Or take a duke or baron who's great at recruitment or teaching newbies how to play, and now needs to learn inactivity management and diplomacy. What if he's not good at those new tasks? What if he finds them boring?

SJC, perhaps the "abundance of small childish players" that you described have the skills that are required to succeed at this stage in the game, but may lack some of the skills that were important when you were still very active. This does not make them bad players, simply different ones...and arguably more useful ones at this stage.

The bottom line? This is not the game it was a year ago, and players should not be judged by the standards that used to apply.

 

[DeletedUser911]

This does not make them bad players, simply different ones...and arguably more useful ones at this stage.

The bottom line? This is not the game it was a year ago, and players should not be judged by the standards that used to apply.

I like you; and I like your argument above. As accurate as you most certainly are in regards to winning strategies, I am more interested in creating an entertaining atmosphere for a particular audience. For the players I have in mind--we can call them the 'elite'--they do not enjoy babysitting childish players; nor do they enjoy playing alongside them all that much. They prefer to make light of their complaints as they wipe them off the map--(make light with a joke preferably).

So while I agree it is best to create a strategy to makes use of nearly every player: I like making use of 'elite' players on my team and wiping out everyone else--(even if some 'so so' players would be better used in another way). Which by the way: I do use 'so so' players outside of the tribe at times. I made friends with plenty of 'so so' players. Next to none of them were invited into Plight while I was Duke though.

Edit--at Legendary--(I think that Seagryfn is a great leader--as is Qoffee too! As it is, my argument had nothing to do with comparing strategies. In fact, I stated that strategists would criticize:

It is more entertaining to open aggression up to a point where strategists would criticize you.

And to make things better, they did criticize:

The way I see it, as time goes by the game of TW progresses into new stages and priorities change. In the early stages of the game, operational skills and activities are most important. These get replaced by tactical tasks, and eventually by strategic tasks.

...

...(*Remarks about SJC*)

The bottom line? This is not the game it was a year ago, and players should not be judged by the standards that used to apply.

 

[MichielK]

I like you; and I like your argument above. As accurate as you most certainly are in regards to winning strategies, I am more interested in creating an entertaining atmosphere for a particular audience. For the players I have in mind--we can call them the 'elite'--they do not enjoy babysitting childish players; nor do they enjoy playing alongside them all that much.

Fair enough. I'm probably not in that particular audience, but I can see the fun in that.

And to make things better, they did criticize:

To be fair, you said strategists would criticize your aggression, which is not what I did. In fact, I think I've always been pretty clear in my appreciation for your quest for euthanasia...it continuously brought life and excitement to W16 (doesn't hurt that I was in K72 either).

What I criticized (if you want to call it that) is judging players by your standards and your standards alone. These players must have value for Plight where it is now, even if you'd never recruit them. I think it's unfair to put them down like this (small, childish, babysitting) simply because they don't fit what you'd look for in a player...after all, very few people measure up to that to begin with.

 

[DeletedUser]

Fair enough. I'm probably not in that particular audience, but I can see the fun in that.



To be fair, you said strategists would criticize your aggression, which is not what I did. In fact, I think I've always been pretty clear in my appreciation for your quest for euthanasia...it continuously brought life and excitement to W16 (doesn't hurt that I was in K72 either).

What I criticized (if you want to call it that) is judging players by your standards and your standards alone. These players must have value for Plight where it is now, even if you'd never recruit them. I think it's unfair to put them down like this (small, childish, babysitting) simply because they don't fit what you'd look for in a player...after all, very few people measure up to that to begin with.

Yes being far away made it more entertaining for us.

And honestly I believe that new players can often become some of the best for a multitude of reasons. If you look at C2 now, quite a few of the members call W16 their first world, like myself and MK. And if C2 had only attempted to recruit what you call elite members, I think it would've failed a long time ago. Early on its a good strategy to recruit them, especially since there are more of them, but in later stages of the game, many of those players are no longer around. Tribes have to adapt and recruit newer players and train them, otherwise they'll fail simply through having too few members.