Truth

DeletedUser

Guest
FrailBeauty said:
Virus, you seem to argue your statements with nothing more than personal attacks on those with a different opinion. Through reading all your posts, I've derived that you think early game diplomacy is dumb because you don't like to play Tribal "Hugs". You have not stated why your way is effective, whereas both Nauz and Matt did so with their arguments.
Click to expand...

I know their way is effective, i don't agree with diplomacy early game. If you please read the following quote you will see the reason i got into the debate on early world dip was the way Mattcurr reacted to another member of the forum. Then at the very bottom there is a tiny bit about diplomacy in early game. I didn't really want to get into a debate about it. It happened and i played along. The forum would be dead without this thread right no, be haoppy you have something to read :icon_wink:

ViRuS. said:
He was curious as to who you were, you stated that you were making a return. You reinforced the fact that you were a player from older worlds by commenting on the changes (which btw i don't think have changed at all for the last 5 years) so he was interested as to who you were which was quite obvious no need to go all defensive on your previous worlds because you have an emotionally unstable personality disorder. Get over it, take some pills if necessary.

We have always had noobs writing the same shit on the new world forums every time they open, as well as older players coming in giving it billy big bollox, you fall into the latter. If you don't want a pissing contest on past worlds, why not give you opinion on why you think early world dip is a good thing. Your opinion seems really strong in this otherwise we wouldn't have the amateur dramatics. The only person bringing up other worlds here is you please keep on topic.

Me personally, i think diplomacy sucks early game. As does this thead at this moment in time so please do keep it going i need something to read when i wake with my morning coffee.
Click to expand...


If i cared so strongly about having no dip at this moment in time i would raise the issue with my leadership. I didn't and i won't because i just don't give a shit to be quite frank. They know what they are doing in terms of diplomacy and i know what i have to be doing in terms of being a member.

FrailBeauty said:
If I didn't know who any of you were, and I read this argument objectively, I would still have more respect for those arguing against you, because they had more to say about the actual strategy of the game. It's not always about player ego. You should realise that.
Click to expand...

As for the ego. I haven't shown any. How have i? because i think early diplomacy sucks early game and don't like tribal hugs? I guess i was wrong, things have changed around here. I'm debating and 90% of it has nothing to with this world but that isn't down to me, Matt and Nauz both raised their previous worlds, which i care little about and have no interest in. However monkey see monkey do.

ALessonInPointWhoring said:
Diplomacy early on is just as useful as diplomacy later on. It may not be necessary to do well early on, but that doesn't mean it can't be beneficial. While true on both tribal and personal levels it's easier to show why on a personal level.

Let's create a hypothetical scenario: We have two equally skilled players in identical areas. One clears all their own noble targets and plays the "standard" way. The other one makes friends with all of their neighbors and convinces them to attack each other and then cleans them up once they've lost the majority of their troops doing so. The first player may do okay, but he will never be able to grow as fast as the second player because the second player is conserving his or her troops far more effectively than the first player is. The same principles can be applied on a tribal scale. If I can manipulate an entire tribe to do my bidding allowing me to use their troops as my own it is obviously going to benefit me.
Click to expand...

Different contex of diplomacy in my opinion this type of diplomacy has no respect from one side and all of it from the other, usually due to fear or giving too much respect. Most of the tribe wouldn't need informed of it and no change in the maps colour code needed. Usually used on noob tribes or mass recruited tribes and wouldn't share the situation with the outside world. Effective strategy which i would expect most players not just tribes to be using. I use it and will use it every time i start and play throughout a world. Do i class myself as having diplomatic relations with these tribes/players in the context that this debate is formed on, no. I owe them nothing, you are leading them along for your own good and hold no -Honour- between the 2 parties.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mattcurr

Guest
ViRuS. said:
Matt and Nauz both raised their previous worlds, which i care little about and have no interest in. However monkey see monkey do.
Click to expand...

Oh gosh perhaps I'm becoming senile in my old age but would you mind quoting where I spoke about MY previous worlds and how I did.

*Spoiler alert*

[spoil]He cant because I never did >_<[/spoil]
@Yankeesfan90
Your tribe came in second place :S................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................


The sim city comments are funny. And I can't even believe that you two are taking your own comments as logical let alone anyone else in reading this. Though it would be funny if you were serious.


Charlesesq said:
Mattcur:

The type of diplomacy that is usually concluded in the early game isn't worth being called "diplomacy". It's often overdone, just a reaction to the misunderstanding that new players often have that numbers are the only important quality. While a small amount of diplomacy may be valuable in early game, it's relatively difficult to determine which tribes would be worth having diplomatic relationships with. If you don't ally/NAP VERY selectively, then you end up in a situation where, because of the diplomacy, your tribe is choked out, unable to grow because of the inability to attack the players that are farming their area dry, and in many cases, unable to form the farms as the newer tribes take in players that should be farmed, not taken in.

Granted, the way that they expressed their opinion is an overgeneralized statement that, if taken to the full extreme, could result in similarly misguided views. However, it's a common statement because the issue of over-diplomatic tribes is much more common than that of under-diplomatic tribes. Trying to prove the exception, which is a tiny portion of the actual issue, when the exception does not likely apply to the tribe on which this thread is originally based, is arguing semantics.
Click to expand...
Okay you seem smart, smart enough to think for yourself. So just think about this for a second.

Why must diplomacy be long term? Why can you not mutually agree on short term diplomacy, or unilaterally? You assume too much in your view.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser

Guest
mattcurr said:
Oh gosh perhaps I'm becoming senile in my old age but would you mind quoting where I spoke about MY previous worlds and how I did.

*Spoiler alert*

[spoil]He cant because I never did >_<[/spoil]
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought you had but it was in fact Nauz.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I cleaned up all the insults. Next time insults like that are made there'll be some harsh punishments, so please be careful.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
mattcurr said:
Okay you seem smart, smart enough to think for yourself. So just think about this for a second.

Why must diplomacy be long term? Why can you not mutually agree on short term diplomacy, or unilaterally? You assume too much in your view.
Click to expand...

My view did not address the issue of long term versus short term diplomacy at all. It merely stated that the majority of diplomacy at this stage is bad diplomacy, and that when an example of a tribe more likely to be using bad diplomacy, trying to argue the exception to the rule doesn't make sense, as far as contextually. Yes, there are instances wherein diplomacy can be useful, early game. They are overwhelmingly outnumbered by the instances in which tribes commit themselves to horrible diplomacy in the early game, and choke themselves to death in a sea of "allies".
 

DeletedUser

Guest
u6s5l. said:
I cleaned up all the insults. Next time insults like that are made there'll be some harsh punishments, so please be careful.
Click to expand...

im insulted by that comment,.. please punish yourself harshly :|
 

dukeyp123

Guest
Early dip may be the path of least resistance, and therefore the most efficient way of minimising future threats, and remaining high in the rankings. But, as time progresses the amount of fun to be had is inversely proportional to the amount of diplomacy the tribes diplo's have decided to secure (in there moments of greatness :icon_wink:).. Unless of course you surround yourself in diplo early on and then proceed to systematically drop the agreements one by one, as and when it pleases you :icon_twisted:

On the whole, I personally think it's still too early for any diplo to be considered long lasting and meaningful.. The main reason: it is too early for any serious wars to take place.

I don't know any of the participants of this pissing contest, and for me at least - you will l33t skills will be judged on your performance here on 64.

My $0.02
 

mattcurr

Guest
Charlesesq said:
They are overwhelmingly outnumbered by the instances in which tribes commit themselves to horrible diplomacy in the early game, and choke themselves to death in a sea of "allies".
Click to expand...

Most people use lc wrong, I am not going to say that they should stop using them... Your point makes no sense. Diplomacy is good in early game if used right. Can it be done wrong? Sure. Does that mean diplomacy is bad? No that's just a logical fallacy.

@ dukeyp123 and everyone in general I think you guys are misunderstanding diplomacy, and manipulation. You all narrow it down to allies and naps and enemies. There is a lot more to it than that, it's not just making alliances, it's gathering information dispersing or creating massive alliances(which you don't even have to be involved in). Disbanding top tribes with words alone, causing dissent in their membership destroying tribes that will be threats if left alone and are too far to touch yourself right now. There is a lot more to dip than you guys are thinking. You can shape the layout of the world right now if you move the pieces around.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser

Guest
You just had to be the 69th reply to this thread, Matt :icon_eek:
 

DeletedUser64969

Guest
People do realize this is TW you can do whatever you want, (as long as you don't get caught) if you want to have a million allies go for it, if you want to have non doesn't really matter either way, all that matters is you play the way you want to play, regardless of if you win or not, my idea of the game is too win by any means (if the odds are against you), if the odds are not against you then make a decent fight out of it (if possible)

and to answer the original question i think they will disband, might be a week a month maybe a year, but they will disband regardless in my opinion as probability says they will disband in my experiences of the game :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Such a shame, really. The tribe is lead by Mariotty69 & Vertirium. Well, I say that, Vertirium is inactive, he's on holiday and is being sat to put stuff in the queue and log off again, mainly to keep himself from going yellow.

This allowed Mariotty69 to run the show, he removed 3 members for failing a mandatory account sit 6 days into the world because they "Weren't good enough" even though I have proof of him admitting to me on skype that he DOESN'T know what he's doing (No one sat him might I add).

IEdwardson was said to be given a rollocking for making this topic, and was stripped of his "Recruiter" rank for doing so, but he still has that power. After 2 days of discussion about this topic and how bad it was for the image of Truth, Mariotty69 still didn't have a clue what we were on about, and instead resented me for being "Un-cooperative" ... When I sent him the link to this topic (which was 2 days old) he flipped a nut and demanded I post on here saying that we DON'T have NAP & Allies and that Speedy is a liar and doesn't know our diplomacy situation. Truth is, They DO have NAPs and Allies. 3 Allies, 3/4 NAPs. One of the Allies included is Elite, the tribe getting trolled on the forums after we got Ehjookayted. I believe Mariotty69's plan is to drop allies and NAPs, forget about Grace Periods and just try and attack them all when he feels the tribe is strong enough.

MRMR, being their offensive co-ordinator, organised an operation against a player who was successfully becoming a pain in the ribs for a few of Truth members. And rightly so, he did his job perfectly. The guy was cleared, and kept cleared. Reports were constantly being posted about the latest attack on him. IEdwardson, decided to invite the player to the tribe. Giving him full access to the forums, where he managed to get all of the information about the OP on him amongst other things, before he was swiftly removed by Mariotty69.

Then there are their planned ops. They're planning to "War" with LEGEND, with all their attacks hitting between 1500 & 1700 tonight. Even though we were told not to attack them because they're helping us with an OP and the plan was to stack the villages around them to surprise them when the OP was over.

A couple other members within Truth are also planning to go inactive/leave the game, however, I've become quite good friends with them so I won't be sharing their names publicly.

On W63, the tribe Truth got demolished. They really didn't want the same to happen again. And they've got what they wanted, they won't get crushed externally... They're doing it themselves internally at the hand of Mariotty69 and his P.O.W Camp leading techniques. If you can call them that. So I agree with most, this tribe probably will fall apart. Sooner rather than later. No doubt after they've tried to force me from W64 for posting this.
 

DeletedUser106940

Guest
hey pwntzor!, you might know me just want to say thanks for the info this will help us win the war more :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top