New Alliance: Gutbuster Brigade

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker073

I have run many alliances, large and small, elite and normal. There are zero circumstances I can think of where it is legitimate for an alliance to intervene in a 1v1 kingdom situation. To do so would instantly provoke a proportional response from any friends and allies of the kingdom being targeted, and could easily lead to alliance war. It simply is not acceptable behavior.

---

You speak about this as if it would be a bad thing. Awars are fun!

An alliance should exist for the sake of it's members, not for the sake of the alliance. Otherwise, what would be the point in joining.

You also speak of 1 v 1 kingdom situation as if you were speaking of equals.
The point of the alliance is to right injustice, not look the other way.

Is like saying that if in RL one of your buddies was getting hit you wouldn't get his back. You'd turn & walk away?

Players need to be loyal to their kingdoms first before any friends in other kingdoms and definitely before some province alliance crap. Your only friends are your kingdom and other friendly kingdoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

You speak about this as if it would be a bad thing. Awars are fun!

---

Alliance wars are not frivolous affairs declared over minor offenses. They represent a serious breach in honorable conduct by the offending party that cannot be resolved in any other way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

An alliance should exist for the sake of it's members, not for the sake of the alliance. Otherwise, what would be the point in joining.

You also speak of 1 v 1 kingdom situation as if you were speaking of equals.
The point of the alliance is to right injustice, not look the other way.

Is like saying that if in RL one of your buddies was getting hit you wouldn't get his back. You'd turn & walk away?

---

Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions, or to intervene in normal utopian affairs just because the member is coming out on the losing side.

Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, whatever the circumstances may be. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad.

Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill.

No, GUW was a boxing match setup. Utopia pretty much is a bar fight. If an alliance chain hostiles a kingdom is that still 1v1? Plenty ways to gang up on people while playing 1v1.

I still find it interesting that absolutes are used in terms of what's legitimate and what's dishonourable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker073

Alliance wars are not frivolous affairs declared over minor offenses. They represent a serious breach in honorable conduct by the offending party that cannot be resolved in any other way.



Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions, or to intervene in normal utopian affairs just because the member is coming out on the losing side.

Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, whatever the circumstances may be. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad.

Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill.

---

*********************


"Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions"

How stupid is it to exist? To have your own little kd setup, be minding your own business, to make no hostile actions & suddenly have a kd way bigger than you descend in a wave? Is like calling the people who got hit by a Tusnami stupid.

************************

"Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, ----- whatever the circumstances may be -----. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."

If it were about self-sufficiency, we would not be playing in kds. Be just one big server with a buncha loners running around. Game would totally lose it's social side.

"whatever the circumstances may be"? Might is right?

"Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."

I have realistically defined it as bad.

If the top keep the bottom suppressed, they have very little chance of getting there. With topfeeding & the top having to actually fight to retain their position, everybody has a chance.

"Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill."

That's just silly.

Next, you're going to tell me you support respawning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker073

Alliance wars are not frivolous affairs declared over minor offenses. They represent a serious breach in honorable conduct by the offending party that cannot be resolved in any other way.



Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions, or to intervene in normal utopian affairs just because the member is coming out on the losing side.

Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, whatever the circumstances may be. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad.

Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill.

---

*********************


"Alliances exist for the sake of their members, yes, but that does not mean they exist to bail members out of their own stupid actions"

How stupid is it to exist? To have your own little kd setup, be minding your own business, to make no hostile actions & suddenly have a kd way bigger than you descend in a wave? Is like calling the people who got hit by a Tusnami stupid.

************************

"Utopia is about self-sufficiency. A kingdom forms the basic unit of Utopia, a merging of twenty-five players towards a common goal. 1v1 situations are the norm in Utopia, ----- whatever the circumstances may be -----. Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."

If it were about self-sufficiency, we would not be playing in kds. Be just one big server with a buncha loners running around. Game would totally lose it's social side.

"whatever the circumstances may be"? Might is right?

"Bottomfeeding is just one of many regular forms of landgrabbing that you have just artificially defined as bad."

I have realistically defined it as bad.

If the top keep the bottom suppressed, they have very little chance of getting there. With topfeeding & the top having to actually fight to retain their position, everybody has a chance.

"Utopia is not a barfight. Think of it as a boxing match instead. Just because one boxer is losing, doesn't mean that he gets to call in some friends to help out because of the other's superior strength or skill."

That's just silly.

Next, you're going to tell me you support respawning.

So Striker,

Absalom kds making it impossible for anyone but them to win the nw chart isn't an injustice?

and makes it hard on individual kds to get to the top alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

How stupid is it to exist? To have your own little kd setup, be minding your own business, to make no hostile actions & suddenly have a kd way bigger than you descend in a wave? Is like calling the people who got hit by a Tusnami stupid.

---

Sorry to burst your bubble, but larger kingdoms wave smaller kingdoms all the time. That's part of the game and not some sort of grievous offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

If it were about self-sufficiency, we would not be playing in kds. Be just one big server with a buncha loners running around. Game would totally lose it's social side.

---

Obviously you completely ignored my statement. Self-sufficiency was obviously referring to kingdoms, which I said were the basic unit of Utopia. Twenty-five people should be more than enough to deal with any situation. This is why 1v1 situations are the normal operating procedure of Utopia and not something one goes around complaining about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

Might is right?

---

Earth to Prince Blood - Utopia is a war game. The stronger kingdom beats the weaker kingdom. This isn't the UN let's all be friends game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

I have realistically defined it as bad.

If the top keep the bottom suppressed, they have very little chance of getting there. With topfeeding & the top having to actually fight to retain their position, everybody has a chance.

---

I wouldn't think it is realistic given that just about everyone else in this very thread thinks your definition is ridiculous, and I know it falls far outside the utopian norms for "bottomfeeding." I've already refuted your absurd arguments that bottomfeeding has magically kept smaller kingdoms from competing with better ones, but I'll say it one more time.
*Bottomfeeders hit outsize selfish players who massively outgrow their kingdom and run no offense*
These players are frankly just a waste of a kingdom slot and the explore pool. Bottomfeeders are probably doing the kingdom a favor by forcing them to stop playing so selfishly without consideration of the their kingdom's needs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

That's just silly.

Next, you're going to tell me you support respawning.

---

Saying something is "silly" isn't an argument.

I have really have no clue this time what you mean by respawning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Narkissos

So Striker,

Absalom kds making it impossible for anyone but them to win the nw chart isn't an injustice?

and makes it hard on individual kds to get to the top alone.

---

Nice myth. Perhaps you should ask for tips from a decent independent kingdom, say Seasons, who won the nw chart just a couple of ages ago?

Absalom as an alliance goes out of its way to not coordinate its actions. It gives its member kingdoms complete independence on what is to be done. There has never been an effort from Absalom to hit down anyone. Quite simply, Absalom is better than you are, and has been since it began in Age 2-3. You find a kingdom with the skill to match Absalom, like Seasons has, and you will have no problem competing.

Besides, no one in your little ghetto alliance could even fathom making it anywhere near the top of the networth charts, never mind winning it.

ABS is a defensive alliance at best...
its more a case of a bunch of kd's who have agreed not to be hostile with each other, rather than kd's who band together to stop anyone else winning

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker073

Sorry to burst your bubble, but larger kingdoms wave smaller kingdoms all the time. That's part of the game and not some sort of grievous offense.



Obviously you completely ignored my statement. Self-sufficiency was obviously referring to kingdoms, which I said were the basic unit of Utopia. Twenty-five people should be more than enough to deal with any situation. This is why 1v1 situations are the normal operating procedure of Utopia and not something one goes around complaining about.



Earth to Prince Blood - Utopia is a war game. The stronger kingdom beats the weaker kingdom. This isn't the UN let's all be friends game.



I wouldn't think it is realistic given that just about everyone else in this very thread thinks your definition is ridiculous, and I know it falls far outside the utopian norms for "bottomfeeding." I've already refuted your absurd arguments that bottomfeeding has magically kept smaller kingdoms from competing with better ones, but I'll say it one more time.
*Bottomfeeders hit outsize selfish players who massively outgrow their kingdom and run no offense*
These players are frankly just a waste of a kingdom slot and the explore pool. Bottomfeeders are probably doing the kingdom a favor by forcing them to stop playing so selfishly without consideration of the their kingdom's needs.



Saying something is "silly" isn't an argument.

I have really have no clue this time what you mean by respawning.

---

**********************************************************

Still so lazy? Why no competitive spirit? Is it just far tooo cool to be able to tell ppl you play in a top kd ...... do you fear the lack of respect if your lack of skills was outted & you were forced to play mana y mana rather than slapping babies.

You have a double standard. One for 95% of Utopia. One for you & your cushy rich friends.

*****************************************************

"Obviously you completely ignored my statement. Self-sufficiency was obviously referring to kingdoms, which I said were the basic unit of Utopia. Twenty-five people should be more than enough to deal with any situation. This is why 1v1 situations are the normal operating procedure of Utopia and not something one goes around complaining about."

*****************************************************

Yet, in the same breath you tell us the top kingdoms must allie for safety. Not only that they must ally but ALL THE TOP alliances must ally to keep out the riff raff.

Kinda sounds like those rich folk in the walled cities who hire guards to protect their precious suburb. The elite of society! Double standards for all!
A war game? Or people that would do anything to hang on to what they've got ......... including not compete. Seems more like a cartel than an alliance. Nothing that making bottomfeed gains more stringent couldn't cure,

Quote:

---

Yet, in the same breath you tell us the top kingdoms must allie for safety. Not only that they must ally but ALL THE TOP alliances must ally to keep out the riff raff.

---

Cov and ABS are often clashing
and when it makes more sense for you to CF a kd to get to the top, rather than attacking them, why wouldnt you CF them?

Quote:

---

Nothing that making bottomfeed gains more stringent couldn't cure,

---

please, enlighten us, what does your definition of "bottomfeeding" entail?
cause all you have EVER said is "STOP BOTTOMFEEDING!!!! OMG!!!111+shift!!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Blood

**********************************************************

Still so lazy? Why no competitive spirit? Is it just far tooo cool to be able to tell ppl you play in a top kd ...... do you fear the lack of respect if your lack of skills was outted & you were forced to play mana y mana rather than slapping babies.

You have a double standard. One for 95% of Utopia. One for you & your cushy rich friends.

Yet, in the same breath you tell us the top kingdoms must allie for safety. Not only that they must ally but ALL THE TOP alliances must ally to keep out the riff raff.

Kinda sounds like those rich folk in the walled cities who hire guards to protect their precious suburb. The elite of society! Double standards for all!
A war game? Or people that would do anything to hang on to what they've got ......... including not compete. Seems more like a cartel than an alliance. Nothing that making bottomfeed gains more stringent couldn't cure,

---

lol?
Are you on drugs Prince Blood? Where have I ever said that the top kingdoms ally for safety (they don't) or that the top alliances cooperate with each other at all (they don't). You should really try discerning between what I actually say and what I would say if I was as stupid as you are. Seriously, if you have to make up nonsense I supposedly said now, you've lost this.

I always admire those who make an effort to join forces to fight the ones who try to dominate this game. You got my support. I just hate hanging out in AR site. Too many ABSers that hide behind there monarch like a little scared baby.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _greenie

Cov and ABS are often clashing
and when it makes more sense for you to CF a kd to get to the top, rather than attacking them, why wouldnt you CF them?

*********************************************************

Greenie, Greenie, Greenie ......... ofc you would cf your alliance. So maybe there'd be 3 top groups. All vying & scheming for the coveted top kingdom spot. There would be Awars every age! It would be fun again.

You wouldn't cf every single alliance at the top. Is called static. Boring. Is anathema to a war game. THIS IS A WAR GAME. Was. Not quite sure what it is now. Some old boys retirement home. With more stringent controls on bottomfeeding you would be forced to fight each other for your land & the game could get on it's feet again cuz you wouldn't be after the vast majority of Utopia you think of as food.

(This is me speaking, not Greenie lol - wrote in his quote*)

**************************************************************
**************************************************************
(Back to Greenie)

please, enlighten us, what does your definition of "bottomfeeding" entail?
cause all you have EVER said is "STOP BOTTOMFEEDING!!!! OMG!!!111+shift!!"

---

*********************************************************

For your edification:

Bottom feeding - a guy leaves 65 - 70 dpa at home - very little risk
Lateral feeding - a guy leaves 50 dpa at home - more risk
Top feeding - a guy leaves 40 dpa at home - heavy risk

The game should be commensurate with the risk.

"Utopia is about risk. The more risk, the more reward."

- Original Utopia Guide

*********************************************************

What's the difference between a bottomfeeder & a turtler? Turtler sits in war with his 65 - 70 dpa. He doesn't take big hits. He just sits there like a slug. He never worries. Cuz his mates are taking all the hits for him. You know how you feel when you get a turtler in your kd. I do. Out the door he goes.

Then when the stats are posted the turtler brags about what a good player he is & how well he does for the kd. He looks down on his mates who've been chained because they were threats. He doesn't get it that he never gets hit cuz he's a useless piece of sh*t. Turtler is to war what bottomfeeder is to Utopia.

So imagine now Utopia's your kd & you got a whole fleet of turtlers in it.

Scary stuff!