Who are the great players? [borrowed from W14]

Sinful Angel

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
818
Eddie, people who stick around and keep playing often beat players with massive skills who burn out quickly in the world. People like Nauz are known as "good" but never win worlds, when I say good I mean most likely to win worlds they play and when it comes to that id stick with Mint and Four Nerds
 

DeletedUser118341

Guest
To me, winning a world is nothing. Absolutely irrelevant when discussing the best players. I don't know a single good player that really cares about world wins. Tribes that win worlds, it is generally not their very best players that stick around from start to finish. I'm not saying winning a world isn't an accomplishment(for people who value it), but the ones that technically pick up the world win, aren't always the ones that pave the way for the win, the ones that assert their tribes dominance early on(probably explaining this point rather poorly, but I hope you see my point).

As for Garrocks point, about who you would want in your tribe, fighting your corner. I understand your point and agree. There are a number of players who I love to have in my tribe. People who I get on with very well, who are all good solid players. But to me atleast, this thread was about the best, the players that stand out from the crowd even when they are in a good tribe. The players who could single handedly bring down top tribes.

Sometimes the best players are actually on the losing side. Maybe their tribe just didn't gel as well, or their tribe was hit by inactivity. Tribes win world, but we are discussing individuals here.

PS. Lets be honest, we all know some god awful players with multiple world wins :lol:

Edit: To put it another way. The tribemates you want in your tribe, will group up, all work together to take down another group of players. The best players, will just come in and tear them apart on their own.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sinful Angel

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
818
I was kind of just playing devils advocate. I think that the idea of one single "best" type of player is flawed, there are many gameplay types and who are we to say what is best?
 

DeletedUser119020

Guest
Many of the players these days are just soft as baby shit but the players mentioned below are in a different category to the massive ego players playing these days. Imagine a tribe with those players and if they their invited friends :icon_eek:

Leather and Latex
zeaho20
Nwaro
c0vert
faaaaark
dylar
Lakewind
Vodka Brass
stormbringer2012
Amigos/war-peace
Major Pleasure
 

DeletedUser88324

Guest
drew/dylar
Matt/Lakewind
Debbie/sweetmisery
Thom/Nwaro
Olly1234 <3
Sjaak zwart <3

i know i'm missing several more. some from this list don't even have external accounts, others do and just read. I agree 100% on the comment made earlier, that a lot of the people on the lists provided are people with a lot of propaganda... another thing that really bugs me alot is.. considering so many people that rarely ever play past startup as great players...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
1. Jayjayjay68 also known Raven24 (Jay)
2. Von Hallander (Nic)
3. Drew-Waylander (Drew)

Speaking of being borrowed from W14.
Aren't those three guys all from W14 to.
Going old school with the list.
 

hurod

Guest
Hmm this thread is borrowed from w14 US server.

My named players are from w14 .net

The best world.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Many of the players these days are just soft as baby shit but the players mentioned below are in a different category to the massive ego players playing these days. Imagine a tribe with those players and if they their invited friends :icon_eek:

Leather and Latex
zeaho20
Nwaro
c0vert
faaaaark
dylar
Lakewind
Vodka Brass
stormbringer2012
Amigos/war-peace
Major Pleasure

Faaaark is highly overrated as a player. W12 is a long long time ago. I noticed you forgot Olly123; not only skilled above average, but a beast when it comes to OD and 1 of the most loyal guys I've ever seen. (has to be coz putting up with my crap....)
 

DeletedUser58259

Guest
Many of the players these days are just soft as baby shit but the players mentioned below are in a different category to the massive ego players playing these days. Imagine a tribe with those players and if they their invited friends :icon_eek:
c0vert +0.5 (Seen him a few times, but he doesn't seem to stick around?)
faaaaark +.05 (This one came with the ego you'd imagine these days)
Vodka Brass +1
Major Pleasure +1


1. Jayjayjay68 also known Raven24 (Jay)+5
 

DeletedUser117881

Guest
the only experience I've had with faaaa(....)rk was w75 and he got wrecked so idk how you call him great
 

DeletedUser118341

Guest
Everyone has different opinions of what winning is though.

For a new player, that first world. Winning might be getting that 2nd village. Conquering another player.

Then it might progress to try to hit 50K. Or top 100.

Then top 20, or rank 1, or world win, or be in rank 1 tribe, or teach an apprentice so he reaches top rankings.

My point is, this is a game, and there is no definitive answer to who succeeded in each world. I know some of you might come back with 'world win' being the answer. But as I pointed out early, nearly every good player I know, doesn't care in the slightest.

So, for instance, the above poster just said they succeed every time (baring RL issues), but to me, to my standards, maybe they have never succeeded.

PS. Sinful Angel, I'm not saying anything against you personally, it was just you provided the perfect response for me to base my point on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Garrock

Guest
No, they are different definitions as to what the game is.

I would have to disagree brother... personal achievements and actually winning are two very different things. There is an end game in TW by definition now, winning conditions set before every world begins. A selfish athlete may only be interested in his/her personal achievements, and they may well be satisfied with those things, but if they don't win a championship then they didn't win. Futbol (soccer), American Football, baseball, rugby, hockey, basketball etc... a game is a game whether it is on a field or court or here in this digital world.

This is not arguing why you or another person play, or what each individuals goals are, and kudos to anyone who achieves their goals, but winning by definition would be attaining the defined victory parameters set forth pre-world, or in any contest for that matter. That would be like a marathon runner only wishing to be in first place at the 15 mile marker, then falling to third by the time the race is complete, and then claiming victory. Did he achieve his goals? Yes, did he win the race? No
 

DeletedUser57316

Guest
I disagree, but I wont go back and forth about it, no idea how you can think someone who achieves 100k (or whatever) and then quits can be considered winning.
 
Top