Tribal Tribune Chaper XI

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

so a player who gives you threats, and cramps your style you rim him?

What's this referencing? Just seems random and out of the blue.

 

[Williamthefirst]

I am looking for answers

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

I am looking for answers

You're looking for an answer to what is likely an intentionally ambiguous question. It's typically setup for a strawman argument, forcing someone into defending a stance they never actually intended to take.

The best response to someone sending threats is to ignore them. If it wasn't strategically sound to attack someone initially it doesn't become any moreso just because they send you rude mails.

If on the other hand "cramping my style" means a neighbor who's repeatedly sending cats at me, sure, rimming them is a logical response, even if their village is smaller than you'd otherwise deem worth nobling, as getting rid of an aggressor is a valid strategic move.

Being easily triggered or manipulated is obviously not the hallmark of strategic play.

 

[Lord BillyNoMates]

actually i disagree

if someones sending threats noble them ^^

itll annoy them more then ignoring them xD

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

itll annoy them more then ignoring them xD

Well, yes. I don't think anyone would dispute that.

That just seems to me to be an overreaction. The kind that led to the idiom "Cut off your nose to spite your face.".

 

[Lord BillyNoMates]

well people need people to noble and that sounds like a really good excuse to noble him

 

[=RedFox=]

I'm likely one of the top 5-10 startup players at TW......I've been rank 1 on more worlds than anyone else on TW.

Startup? I don't understand this concept. Try to get to number 1 then quit while you're ahead? Is there something that delineates startup or is it an imaginary place that's right before you quit and move on proudly before someone comes along and takes you out? Please explain this startup of which you speak.

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

Startup? I don't understand this concept. Try to get to number 1 then quit while you're ahead? Is there something that delineates startup or is it an imaginary place that's right before you quit and move on proudly before someone comes along and takes you out? Please explain this startup of which you speak.

If you're going to try and suggest that I've quit worlds out of fear of someone taking me out provide proof, not just baseless conjecture.

It's the early stages of worlds that are the most competitive. There are more players, the players are more active, the game is more about micromanagement and less about macromanagement. Errors matter more as any inefficiency is a larger setback, and an error that lategame would lose you one of your hundreds of villages will instead often result in you being rimmed. It's heaven for the people that want their errors to matter and don't want to be able to get away with sloppy play.

Startup requires far more technical ability than lategame - by a large margin.

I don't quit worlds when things look grim or when someone looks like they're going to pass me. I quit worlds when they cease to be fun, that is after all, the primary goal when playing a game - to have fun. Lategame is not fun to me, it is more like work, and less like a game.

The only worlds I have "won" and will likely ever win are HP rounds, or other similar events that end faster than standard worlds. That has nothing to do with ability and everything to do with being unwilling to play a world for a year after it ceases providing anything resembling entertainment just so you can say you won.

I've played worlds where I had more than twice as many points as rank 2, it's pretty hard to blow such a lead, as once you're that far ahead everything tends to snowball and your lead gets larger and larger - not the reverse.

And yes, I've played past startup to know that it's easier.

http://www.twstats.com/en39/index.php?page=player&id=4927414

That account was rank 1 till 600,000 points, and rank 2 till close to 2 million points. Nowadays that's close to the size accounts are when worlds end.

There are a large # of players that predominantly play startup, because they enjoy it more than the later stages of the game.

If I quit worlds to avoid getting rimmed, or to save face I'd be a lot less honest than I am about my failures.

http://www.twstats.com/en62/index.php?page=player&id=2904452

That was the last world I got rimmed on while actively playing.

Before that I got rimmed on this world:

http://www.twstats.com/en47/index.php?page=player&id=8244511

Maybe you only think someone is good if they win worlds. That's cool, I don't care enough about your opinion for that to cause me to lose sleep over it, nor enough for me to go out of my way to win a world to impress you. I've rimmed several players that have "won" worlds. They typically weren't anything special. Not even the ones that ended worlds at rank 1.

And no, rank 1 at startup doesn't mean hitting it for 10 minutes day 1.

 

[DeletedUser120589]

Im good and this is my first world =D jk but I'm not doing bad lmao

 

[DeletedUser]

Guys, you have to realise, if you followed a formula for the first two weeks of the game and had a decent enough area, you can easily get ranks 1-5. Lets not make it more of an accomplishment than it is. Most people didn't know or didn't care to follow up on that formula for the full two weeks which is why they were rank 20-50. That's why startup was boring and why mediocre players could get rank 1 back in the day, like yours truly. It was a lot less intricate than people thought and the most boring and easiest part of the game. It was a feat of mechanical skill to get rank one though, it meant generally you spent your resources and gained them more efficiently than other people, but since there is a logical route for these things, as long as you knew what you were doing, you could consistently get high ranks. As long as you sucked other people off and essentially lied to them about your intentions, you were probably not going to get rimmed until it was too late either.

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

Guys, you have to realise, if you followed a formula for the first two weeks of the game and had a decent enough area, you can easily get ranks 1-5. Lets not make it more of an accomplishment than it is. Most people didn't know or didn't care to follow up on that formula for the full two weeks which is why they were rank 20-50. That's why startup was boring and why mediocre players could get rank 1 back in the day, like yours truly. It was a lot less intricate than people thought and the most boring and easiest part of the game. It was a feat of mechanical skill to get rank one though, it meant generally you spent your resources and gained them more efficiently than other people, but since there is a logical route for these things, as long as you knew what you were doing, you could consistently get high ranks. As long as you sucked other people off and essentially lied to them about your intentions, you were probably not going to get rimmed until it was too late either.

Your post comes across as being salty more than anything.

You argue that being rank 1-5 was easy. Surely if it was that easy there'd be more than 5 people, out of the hundred thousand or so that used to join worlds, capable of doing it at the same level, which would obviously push some of them well below rank 5. Yet there are people I have never seen play competitively and be lower than rank 5.

Saying top 5 out of 100,000 was easy is saying it's easy to be in the top 99.995%.

If something is easy then the rankings should be fairly random, because everyone would have a pretty equal chance to be rank 1. Obviously not the case. Even among the top 20, ranks were never random. You had players that were often rank 10-20, because they were good, much better than most, but still head and shoulders worse than the people that consistently competed for rank 1.

People have had huge leads on worlds at the early stages typically due to superior strategy, not because their area was great. I've literally played worlds where rank 1, 2, and 3 were all in the same area and competing for the same farms. Pretty much anywhere else on the world was better for farming. I've also played worlds where Purple Predator was in my 15x15, and he and I still both wound up rank 1 and 2.

You claim you didn't become a good player till around W40-50. Incidentally, that's roughly the era where the game started becoming drastically less competitive. I don't think you realize how difficult it was to compete for the top spot on some of the earlier worlds.

1 Abducted By Aliens Hop! 2.908 1 2908
2 Garrock Ironforge Uruz 2.835 1 2835
3 Repentance Requiem Melite 2.768 1 2768
4 Name Required Hop! 2.705 1 2705
5 Educated Ignorance UseIt! 2.634 1 2634
6 aggresiv3 play3r Uruz 2.611 1 2611
7 DoGGz Leon 2.552 1 2552
8 MrBigChief Skittl 2.511 1 2511
9 Lady Predator. Hop! 2.502 1 2502
10 Purpose of Life N.K 2.484 1 2484

That was one of the most competitive startups I ever played. There were single days were the entire top 5 there was rank 1 at different times of the day and the order rapidly changed as each player had buildings finish. I don't think you ever had rank 1, or even top 5 most likely, on a world that was anywhere near that competitive.

 

[DeletedUser]

Someone belittling your accomplishment is not a matter of saltiness. I've played with you multiple times, I've played with practically all of your crew. It's just not the big deal you make it out to be.

I wasn't good in the 10s and 20s because getting a top rank at the 0-3000 point stage does not make you a good player in my opinion. Simple as that. I became a lot more well rounded as a player in the 40s-50s.

 

[DeletedUser119075]

Getting to 3000 points the quickest doesn't matter, especially when you don't have the mental fortitude to last very long.

Ouch ALessonInPointWhoring, I myself felt that burn on your behalf

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

Someone belittling your accomplishment is not a matter of saltiness..

Belittling the ability to do something you yourself were never capable of doing sure sounds like saltiness to me. When you've done something you can comment on its difficulty. Not before. Your comments on startup difficulty come across as a NBA rookie commenting on what it's like to lead the league in points. Sure, you have to be good to make it to the NBA, but it doesn't make you Jordan.

To claim it's easy to do something that only 0.0005% of people could do on a world is nonsense. Especially when you're not one of those 0.0005% yourself.

You can claim you think the game is basic and that many people should know how to be top 5, but top ranks isn't like general competency. Only 5 people can be top 5 at once. You have to be better than the other 99,995.

There's just not any task where it is trivial or easy to be better than 19,999 out of every 20,000 people at it. Because if it were that easy everyone would be able to be that good at the task.

As for mental fortitude, that's a term, that revolves around the ability to compete at something, and work hard at it, without losing confidence in oneself. Your comment doesn't make any sense. Playing the stage of the game ones find most enjoyable isn't a matter of mental fortitude. If anything weak fortitude would cause one to cave to pressures of the community to play lategame every world simply to prove they could.

Ouch ALessonInPointWhoring, I myself felt that burn on your behalf

That's strange, because I sure don't.

 

[DeletedUser]

I was belittling something I did because it is relatively insignificant in the scheme of things. I've been top five so many times I cannot count them all from W5 or so up until W56. The most recent was the last time I played TW seriously, where I was top five the vast majority of W56 peaking at rank 2-4 I believe. This is all rather boring though so I'll leave the discussion, wouldn't want to inflate the ego of someone who was far overrated back in the day as well.

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

I was belittling something I did because it is relatively insignificant in the scheme of things. I've been top five so many times I cannot count them all from W5 or so up until W56. The most recent was the last time I played TW seriously, where I was top five the vast majority of W56 peaking at rank 2-4 I believe. This is all rather boring though so I'll leave the discussion, wouldn't want to inflate the ego of someone who was far overrated back in the day as well.

Startups easy.

Proof: I was top 5 on a no hauls world.

Good logic. Because queuing mines in the right order is totally the same as a standard world where the complexity is ramped to 11 by comparison.

There was never a single competitive startup where I recall you being top 5, not one. And your claim of being "top 5 so many times you can't count" is sheer nonsense. It's more that you don't want to count them, because if anyone realized how infrequently you've actually managed to be top 5 your argument would look a lot sillier.

 

[DeletedUser119075]

So...... you two decided who's piece is bigger yet???