~ Beerfest: Age 75 Virtual Kingdom ~

~ Beerfest: Age 75 Virtual Kingdom ~

PORTER
Dark Elf: mystic ~ Otto
Dwarf: paladin ~ Hammacher
Elf: sage ~ Jan Wolfhouse
Faery: heretic ~ Operation Stein Grab
Orc: undead ~ Mr. Schniedelwichsen*

ALE
Dryad: warrior ~ DAS BOOT!*
Elf: mystic ~ Barry
Faery: rogue ~ Rolf
Human: sage ~ Wolfgang Von Wolfhausen*
Orc: tactician ~ What's A ZJ? *

DOPPLEBOCK
Bocan: rogue ~**Brauheist 2006
Dryad: undead ~ Landfill
Dark Elf: paladin ~ Great Gam Gam
Dwarf: war hero ~ Gunter
Human: tactician ~ We're Not That Drunk

PILSNER
Avian: tactician ~ Who's Barry Badrinath?*
Avian: warrior ~ It's Fwustwating
Bocan: rogue ~ Pim Scutney
Dryad: war hero ~ Gil
Faery: mystic ~ Fink

STOUT
Bocan: heretic ~*Zimas and Smirnoff Ices!
Dark Elf: sage ~ What Are You Looking At!?*
Dwarf: paladin ~ Schlemmer
Elf: heretic ~ Todd Wolfhouse
Human: undead ~ Cherry

Witch!

A heartfelt thanks to RattleHead, Twily and Madchess. I'm interested in your views on hybrid and bottom strats because these would be the less known areas of the game. If you have secrets then please keep them to yourselves; we all still play for the competition.

The two races and personalities skipped this age is one orc, one avian, a warrior and one war hero. These weren't strategic decisions based in lack of ability, it was to explore the alternatives offered this age. It's important to point this out because orcs are possibly the most meter efficient race and every avian is an unparalleled control mechanism vs enemy cores. Last age my kingdom boasted some avians capable of cracking t/ms and their speed allowed them to massacre and raze where other races would face certain chaining.

Madchess was a direct influence on the decision to opt for an avian warrior and dryad war hero. In my time creating virtual kingdoms the avian enthusiasts have consistently recommended warrior. In my own experience, one of the most memorable losses I recall was hinging on an avian warrior and tactician. The enemy ran textbook zone against my bigger, more active kingdom. This age, avian has no offensive negatives other than the traditional stable usage.

As for the dryad war hero, I was in kingdom with Madchess and witnessed his brilliant work with this combination the first age they appeared. We were in a micro kingdom so this was as close to field certified success as possible. With no place to hide and every kingdom in the game larger than us it offered the most undistorted view of a race/personality combination. We did not CF powerful bullies, to reinforce the true prowess of the build.

What was gained? That depends on how you see the game. Here it is for me: t/ms will be in abundance so the dryad choice was based in the vacillating world between meter, war and CFs. The dark elf decision was actually a bocan decision in that now we can link nightmare across twice as many provinces. If nightmare is the common thread there was attention to chastity over meteor swarm as a staple ops strat. I like meteors as much as the next guy but the expenditure of mystic on elf alone yields only 3 chastity casters. We compound chastity with plague because we are attacker light in The Virtual Kingdom this age.

Thus, if we are outnumbered by attacker provinces we become obligated to control total enemy army. We begin to see the paladin effect here.

Mostly I came up with that 'bottom-assault' (tee-hee!) was because I preferred to use Rogue and Heretic spots elsewhere, for the most part.

So, Bocan needed to be an Attacker, or Hybrid. Since Bocan isn't likely to be a force at the top as an attacker, and since I despise mixing plague onto my non-immune, top attackers (although I see the draw of potentially spreading to a highly defensive enemy, I picked 3x Dryad Warriors as well, they will be a plague in and of themselves), pairing Bocan with Undead and sticking them at the bottom solves a lot of problems for me! hahaha

Now, the Bocan is going to build with OS and Elites for defence, so it has suicide potential, and maybe it could open a War with a plague gambit on a big province if I really needed it to? Surely this move would send it to the bottom where I want it pretty quickly, anyway, and with TW it could probably save what military it needs to be useful.

They have low NWPA, so taking gains from the bottom, or at the end of a chain will be right up their alley... Cheap to maintain offence, combines nicely with reduced losses from Undead. As well, the sabotage bonus once people are made to release thieves, or once they have been massacred, if necessary, will enable the Bocan to impose their will on chainees.

Add an Avian Undead for Attack support, and those 2 Paladin (DE and Dorf) to this 'bottom' group and enemy chainees are forced to choose between trying to outhit an Avian/UD, or to try to climb out with gains from the (likely being left slightly larger) Dark Elf or Dwarf, who have tougher def, as well as defensive losses perks. You aren't going to outrun the Avian, escape the Plague, nor are you going to claw the Paladin defence down fast enough while all of the above are working on you.

I cannot attest to the efficacy of this in the field, but the idea is that as people become more an more willing to run their province's on nothing but OPA and aided wages, a dedicated group like this might be nice in order to keep chains from 'bobbing' back up!

Brilliant, RattleHead.

Couldn't help it: Spinal Tap 'big bottom' started playing in my head.

This is on the order of strategic feint, reestablishing the lower jaw of the clamp relatively unopposed. I've toyed with containment plots, but well thought out progressive stage war concepts are a welcome evolution.

Thank you.

The Alliance In The Kingdom

For those not familiar with my roleplaying premise for The Virtual Kingdom, it's in the division system. Each age I attempt to tally kingdoms that fit the profile for a virtual division. Generally these would be kingdoms that are taking an age off or disbanding. My intuition tells me not all players from a kingdom of old friends will enjoy a total breakup and therefor we have virtual potential.

3 kingdoms that've recently dissolved were Freeakstyle, Carnage and The U. The division system is designed to place each kingdom fragment with the same players they were with before their respective kingdoms broke up. Obviously these players can enjoy interacting with players from 4 other kingdoms, but they retain the familiarity and shorthand teamwork earned through the ages with players they know.

There is potential for healthy competition between divisions and the ability to compare notes on how objectives are achieved. Each division is granted the ability to recruit for themselves or offer help to divisions that suffer a recruiting drought. Each division will submit a member to council.

Generally we don't have kingdoms as renown as Freeakstyle, Carnage and The U disbanding, so I don't want the reader to feel The Virtual Kingdom was idealized with already successful kingdoms in mind. I've spent the majority of my ages in the lower tier and have interacted with players capable of playing at all levels. Most are happy where they are and that's good for the game. I'd like to get the ones floundering with a faithful few players. If we took the grind of recruiting and strat oversight out of the picture and changed the focus to achieving objectives.....my endeavor is to have happy players enjoying an age of challenging goals.

Target Distribtion

There are countless ways to approach the game. Assuming war, let's look at match ups. Say TVK is facing the current war leader comprised of 7 dark elves, 5 faery and 13 humans.

PORTER vs
1 dark elf, 1 faery, 3 human

ALE vs
2 dark elf, 1 faery, 2 human

DOPPLEBOCK vs
1 dark elf, 1 faery, 3 human

PILSNER vs
2 dark elf, 1 faery, 2 human

STOUT vs
1 dark elf, 1 faery, 3 human

Now we all know targets, objectives and resources will change dynamically in conflict, so we begin reverse engineering based in mutual vulnerabilities. This is a study we do before during and after war. We might assume the enemy would target our bocan 1st, dryad 2nd, elves 3rd but we could be wrong.

We know the humans grant an advantage in dragon funding but are poor at rituals. The enemy has no elves for rune efficiency so we can guess the dark elves won't use NM liberally or they will ride particular rituals in the interest of early leverage. We can imagine the faery will distribute self spells to protect the kingdom.

An educated guess would tell us to target faery 1st or as priority. The dark elves can unleash tremendous damage and build to unbreakable through marching which will dilute tpa and wpa. This is why constant pressure across the field is necessary. If the humans are rogue we can see the beauty of the enemy kingdom distribution.

We don't look at strats in the light of losing match ups but learning what tools we can use to overpower them. - If the humans are tac we can imagine the faery self spell distribution being more efficient. We then can begin to understand the value of the undead in TVK to create problems in the enemies army yield due to plague further enhanced by chastity. Remember that humans have inherent economy and science advantages that can be quite telling as the age progresses. You might understand here why having an amnesia game can offer certain leverage where traditional methods fail.

Suffice to say, we could come up with a plethora of possible scenarios. First we turn to fundamental match ups AND strategic fluidity is the no-brainer constant.

The Team Is The Band

In this age of social networking 'the old one's', like myself notice that there's a deficit in many younger players understanding of the team concept. While this generation is equipped with immeasurable team building tools the real life experience is more isolated than pre-Internet culture.

So I found a Q&A on a concept that defines an iconic team symbol of James Brown: on one.


dead of night said: ↑
Hi. I'm watching a great, bio of James Brown right now on CNN. It is stated that one of Brown's musical epiphanies is to emphasize "the one." The one is always dominant. Does this mean simply that the first beat of every measure is the strongest? Or does it mean something else?

Answer:
Yes, on the first beat, everything has to fall on "the one", the moment of impact, the beginning of the groove. Listen to "Funky Drummer", "Cold Sweat", "Give It Up Or Turnit A Loose", or Lyn Collins' "Think".

Other times when he said "the one", it would usually be in a live setting and when he would give a command (either verbal or by hand), it meant that the band needed to stop on the first beat. If any member kept on playing, he would fine them.

Someone who went further with it was Prince, who would often call for the band to stop on "the one", "the two", "the three", and "the four", and I've even heard "the sixteen", where he's playing with the band to see if they're paying attention. With Prince, as well as James Brown, sometimes the command wasn't verbal, so as their musicians you needed to watch him at all times. Prince had taken a lot of cues from James Brown, so if Prince held up one finger, the band would get into it "on the one". If he held up two fingers, they would vamp "two times". If he held up a 1, but did a gesture as if to say stop, the band should stop. A perfect example of this is the full live version of "America".

With James Brown, he was at his best between 1966-1974, although most of the footage circulating is from after that.
johmbolaya, May 5, 2007 #4

^ This doesn't mean in kingdom that we cower under absolute authority, it's that we function in shorthand as we hone our personal skills to serve the team. It's not just you: your teammate has to be there for you. If not, a ball drop is declared in the name of picking it up. Things will go wrong and criticism in the moment squanders valuable energy and time. Maybe 3 guys make any money playing Utopia, so keep it friendly and remember we're all human.

How do we interpret across the concept of the arts, sports and gaming?

One example: Since faery can cast self spells on teammates we can conceive various packages.

1. Economy
2. Prelude to War
3. Razed and Land Fat in War

We can institute attacks based in enemy reaction. Since the division system can distill targets to a narrow field we can shorthand attack intel for immediate turnaround. Enemy provinces with stupid names can be reduced to SN 98k defense *active: meaning the enemy being active can result in bounce potential so proceed with caution and possible oversend.

So let's see the master in action:

http://www.google.com/url?q=https://...dQMdd27mmrEN17

Analog Toughness in a Digital World

I'm not going to recommend players do as I do, but perhaps understand what I'm doing. Put your mind the place of a blue-collar guy who played football on weekends, drank hard and played pencil & paper RPGs for nearly 40 years. I know that last part seems odd, but pencil & paper RPGs have brought me together with everything from marines to ex-cons, common thugs to doctors, drifters, computer scientists to successful businessmen.

In RPGs and many strategy based pencil & paper games we most often faced enemies of equal or higher strength than our own. It was high adventure that drove our mutual interest. When we learned of dragons, demons, devils and giants we sought to battle them. In Starfleet Battles we'd match ships and slug it out, pushing the limits of our strategic knowledge.

When I started playing Utopia there were more players and a variety of dispositions. It was easy for me to find kingdoms with like minded players who'd face any enemy of any strength any time. The fight was everything. I'm accustomed to trying to beat the odds and no part of me felt comfortable attacking smaller kingdoms or inexperienced players.

Since roughly age 60-61 my practice has been to implement a set of simple challenge idioms. No longer would I random or partake in actions against poorly matched opponents. Because I don't attack unprovoked my army gets hit at home quite a bit and my province suffers losses much higher than the time I was a predator. I will attack on behalf of my kingdom and retaliate in the interest of t/ms that can't defend themselves.

What I'm saying is there's no fear of superior opponents because my investment is personal honor, not digital resources. When my province is struck by renown badass kingdoms I feel an exhilaration to match blades with great players. And this at the disadvantage of having my army hit at home. There is only the fight. It's not to prove something to the opponent, it's to see if I'm capable of going over the top despite being at the disadvantage. - When I was a teenager playing football I remember the toughness of the adults; hitting them was like hitting a piece of wood and their strength was overwhelming. Learning the difference between being a man and being a boy was frightening but compelling.

In Utopia we can learn when we push our limits;when the scary part is facing a bigger and better, well organized kingdom. Sometimes we have to give more than we take to reach an objective. Sometimes it's not enough. We should strive to be eternally insightful and aware of our environment. We should be respectful of our enemies and humble in victory. I'm too old to get excited about winning, but I do experience satisfaction.

After wins or losses I'm prone to offer respect to our opponents as soon as the conflict ends. Always remember not to feed the trolls.

Because You're Suppose To Grab Intel

There are too few kingdoms and too small a player base not to share common strategy. Perhaps even fundementals should be reiterated and I'm glad the devs have sought tutors to convey this need. I'm not a mechanical genius but there are some basic matters I've seen in many kingdoms that require attention.

Tacticians should be grabbing the majority of intel because they can do it with 100% accuracy with 1 thief. This is actually not happening and at times I get the feeling tacs are sending the same number of thieves as the rest of us. Players tend to hide their lack of knowledge out of shame or apathy: both are bad.

And advancing the idea that tacticians should be grabbing the majority of intel is to support them in this role. Many kingdoms again take chaining for granted and then we have players who don't understand proper release mathematics. But let's get back to support. In the instance the tactician grows land fat they suffer tpa dilution and most players go around just dealing with it. Oh, they'll train specs and maybe build credit acres but maintaining suitable tpa never crosses their minds.

You see blindness is a disadvantage in a game without sound, smell, touch or taste. The inability or the struggle to grab intel is a crippling condition and one that many kingdoms ignore as a sign of impending defeat.

We are more efficient when we keep our tacticians in working order, and understand why. Now I could make this argument across all races and all personalities because:

I WANT TO IMPRESS UPON YOU THE PHILOSOPHY OF NOT HURTING YOURSELF

Respectfully, I'm watching t/ms hitting undead that need not be dealt with by the non-immune. I'm not saying we don't hit undead, we hit them when it's strategically beneficial despite plague. Why not leave them to the paladin and undead, if you have it under control? A proper land farm can be prepared and that land farm is the enemy non-immune t/m. Ergo, you get a t/m out of my news and I'll get one out of yours.

Have not all of us seen a chained province asking for gold the first tick they're in ruin? Yeah, they might have their gold stolen, but more often than not they have no reserve. Not only that, the kingdom never really actively "gets" that provinces will be chained and will need support. It's like a slop mechanism ~ whoever walks by the bum throws 'em a quarter. We should be thinking stage two a lot more than we are.

The dragon is an automated weapon. I'm under the impression people think I don't like dragons, but it's not true. Why do you think I'm an economy guy in Utopia? It's that you shouldn't fund at your detriment. I've seen many kingdoms lose wars in part because funding was prioritized. I don't mean a little part, I mean a big part. People going untrained for days, getting razed and pouring money into the dragon that's 10 million gold away from completion. It's like trying to buy a Cadillac when you're being mugged by a knife wielding maniac: "As soon as I buy this Cadillac I'm gonna run your ass over!" - he slides down the glass at the pay booth in a pool of bad decisions.

People know what you're doing. Wave time is like a sniper waving to his target. So....

Targeting is just horrible in certain places. If I didn't know better I'd suspect these monarchs were multis working for the government. I mean, you know what I mean.
But suffice to say, many kingdom strategies are so so bad that they are virtual FW vs a competent opponent. It's tantamount to giving it away. And then you get the odd discipline vibe about how the important thing is sticking to the plan. REALEST, a former badass and intuitive smart guy, recommends max gains and I have to agree when we can't get sophisticated. Nobody even tries max gains till they're WDing from war. It's incredible to see a better attack philosophy relegated to the basement move of hapless kingdoms getting obliterated.

Follow me here; and if I did say "max gains" then most guys see it as an all the time thing. Lack of nuance is so prevalent you can barely speak pragmatically with people. Life and gaming is not full blast. Any of us can go full ridiculous, but you notice some are refined and easy with the power knob.

So when I'm speaking about objectives, what do I mean? It means we need to establish our dominance in a given field. So the targets can be defined or visceral. In an earlier post I demonstrated a target based array of matching enemy to division, but that's just a demonstration of an option. The division determines the conduct and methods to acquire the objective. I like to keep people away from the staid manner that many kingdoms operate. In that scenario we are simply showing each division what it must overcome to see victory.

When you look at opposing divisions, as it were, you see the fundamental micro. We all know the macro, but you'll still have people doing inefficient actions against a kingdom with obvious macro advantages. Like letting big attackers hang around or ignoring the sabotage landscape.

Ask

I've been in several kingdoms that survey players for GMT then declare a wave time compromise based on how many are active during a particular tick. This in itself is a good idea, but it does nothing for the players where wave time is hazardous to employment, sound sleep and family obligations. To get around this some kingdoms only recruit for particular GMT(Greenwich Mean Time) which is a decent solution.

The problems we have dictating wave times is the wave window. I've had enemy kingdoms nearly go berserk because the kingdom I occupied couldn't muster the activity to satisfy their opening wave. We now have instant declare, but that's not a strategic solution.

Our virtual kingdom is just a template, but the order of business is fundamental: we want the best from all our players, not a hurried low quality effort. So we strat before the age begins with certain priorities in mind, the highest priority being quality of play.

When players choose race and personality we also want a coherent examination of prime activity and intent based in role. Let's say we have a quality player who can't make the wave time of 15 others. We can begin to imagine the ideal camper and rover roles.

If you're not aware of a camper role it is the practice of striking at opportunity and turtling otherwise. Imagine dwarves and dark elves making ideal campers. They often seem lethargic. You'll note they're online a lot but seldom engage until the environment dictates a measure of leverage. Campers can be deceptively effective but require great awareness and province strat discipline.

Rovers are the dogged high activity players who by measure of quality would be wasted in the confinement of wave based operations. Avian aficionados, certain hybrids, tacs and devil may care t/ms fit this role. Best left to sorting out their own targets. These players might appear arrogant but let them work for you and by the end of the day you won't regret it.

The wave community are the largest populace in the game, but quality is no less imperative. I'm not one of them but there are plenty of players that truly enjoy a seamless unified effort. Their euphoria is obvious throughout the wave and their attention to expediency is charming. The secret here is to assure the fanatic neat freaks stay in their wheelhouse. What wheelhouse? They should be concerned with the wave and leave the campers and rovers to attend their special roles.

There are certain personalities I've observed with particular skills the kingdom will find desirable:

The Monarch - Expectations for monarchy are often out of whack for their actual ideal purpose. Natural leadership qualities are a given, but they don't have to be the primary strategist unless that strategy is delegation. Cool heads prevail but even nut jobs can be fantastic monarchs. Let's just not expect miracles from people just like you and me.

The Steward - Another high variable, the most commonly effective stewards I've seen are the wave managers and spread sheet faithful. The reason this power with these skills is desirable is because they can act within the scope of their activity. Again these are just guidelines but it's what I've seen from the best. Oftentimes you'll find the fanatics gunning for steward. They're a bit too extreme for monarchy, but wonderful under duress.

Snatch News Cipher - Rare as hens teeth, I've never had the pleasure to be in kingdom with a good cipher but have faced them in war. This, either talent or skill, is one of the greatest efficiency assets a kingdom can recruit. You really don't know till you see their work, but it's wise to take what they say very seriously. A good SN cipher can shorten wars and keep the kingdom out of trouble. Their skill lends greater yield from operations, sabotage and target selection. Top kingdoms with old lineage, a very very few top warring kingdoms and incredibly rare casual kingdoms are places I've witnessed cipher work.

Note: One practice I've encouraged is the idea of every province in the kingdom choosing one kingdom to snatch news from throughout the age. The hope is to develop an interest in intel deciphering.

Random Ace - These cocky players are fairly important for the prelude to war and leverage mechanics. Many players are just bad opportunists and waste meter for negligible gain. The Random Ace is the clean killer who knows who to hit and when. Top kingdoms love these guys so they can be difficult to find in the trailer parks of Utopia central. Like Snatch News Ciphers the Random Ace is part knack part skill.

Sizzle Snake The Diplomat - "Salesmen. Why'd have to be salesmen?" ~ Indiana Jones ~

You can tell the guys who love and excel at diplomacy by the number of players that hate them but keep coming back to deal with them. These are the last people I want to talk to, but it's not out of anything but admiration. Admiration for stomach turning crap. I've known a number of salesmen and met a few saleswomen and it's always an eye rolling experience. That said, a dealer in snake oil is an invaluable member of a complete kingdom. Always look for the best because diplo is an above the game skill that very few master.

Wave Management Expanded

In the previous post we gleaned upon the steward as wave manager. Wave management is a fairly involved strategic exercise involving not just a breadth of mechanical and intel knowledge but fast thinking and adaptation on the fly. Here I'll attempt to offer what I've seen, organizationally.

We'll approach this demonstration from the often used chain wave. Certain aspects will be simplified to assist mental digestion and you can use your imagination to add your own flavor. The wave is organized via com system; the com system we used was the old irc utilizing 3 private channels - 1. leadership, 2. wave channel, 3. finishing/left overs.

Players are instructed to keep to answering instruction only in the wave channel.

Targets are chosen. In our case we'll imagine the enemy kingdom largest heavy attackers. We are running a Nightmare wave in this instance.

1. Highest modified wpa is instructed to cast Mystic Vortex on the first target. Once the prefered defensive spells are eliminated the Nightmare run begins.

2. Nightmare capable provinces are instructed to cast; in our case, till the target troop yield drops just below 100 per cast. Once achieved the ops stop with spare runes/mana saved for the next target.

3. Sabotage begins. The type of sabotage depends. Let's assume our target is heavy in Guard Stations. Rogues will use Greater Arson to eliminate Guard Stations while non-rogues may be instructed to Nightstrike additional troops, Watch Towers may also be targeted to reduce thief loss during the sabotage run.

4. Our attackers have already been instructed to declare nw/acres and modified offense. Immediately after the Nighmare ops/Sabotage package the attackers are instructed to attack in nw/acres highest modified offense order. In our scenario we will use Cross Chaining. Cross Chsining is the practice of having the highest nw/acre mod offense to hit first and last. I'll illustrate how this is organized. For speed and efficiency the wave manager will already have the relevant intel and will instruct how much offense to send on each tap of each attacker. In this example we will imagine 3 attackers for simplicity sake, thus:

Highest nw/acres mod offense - attacks 1st for highest gains
2nd highest nw/acres mod offense - attacks for 2nd highest gains
3rd highest nw/acres mod offense - attacks for 3rd highest gains
3rd highest nw/acres mod offense - repeats for 4th highest gains
2nd highest nw/acres mod offense - attacks for 5th highest gains
Highest nw/acres mod offense - attacks 6th for lowest gains

The reason we Cross Chain is multifold. First, we have relative gains across the chain alignment so that all attackers maintain chain alignment. Second, the target is faced with ambush possibilities that offer meager gains on the initial ambush. Because the gains are relative, the choice of enemy counter measures are reduced to pick'em rather than provinces with low incoming acres. The system is easy to remember and we each get a portion of our army out ASAP rather than waiting for any number of attackers to complete taps. This results in higher offensive sustain.

* In this demonstration you should note that 2 generals were used on the 1st target. The exercise is repeated from the highest wpa Mystic Vortex cast down to the last general of the highest nw/acres mod offense on the 2nd wave target.

The finsh/leftovers channel is where t/m commence marches against the chained targets.

This concludes my recollection of a Nightmare Cross Chain wave. There are several ways to approach waving. My hope is to offer perspective on what some of the more polished kingdoms might do. Not only are we studying how to attack but also offer perspective. There are ways to derail waves through proper micro, if you use your intuition on how certain waves are implemented.

The Other Stuff

I've spent a minute explaining a Nightmare wave in kind of a blobby, fill in the blanks kind of way. Not to deflate our faith in the Nightmare wave, when I was in Pyro and we lost our war to Freeakstyle it may interest you to know FS didn't NM wave. Those unfamiliar with a classic FS strat, they ran roughly half faery, half undead. Despite having half a kingdom of faery the NM aspect wasn't the focus...at least in our war.

So lesson one is that great kingdoms adapt and may act totally unpredictable. We were orc cleric core in Pyro so we had Reflect Magic but didn't have Clear Sight. Thus:

I WANT TO IMPRESS UPON YOU THE PHILOSOPHY OF NOT HURTING YOURSELF

Because fundamentally, FS didn't hurt themselves. They, at the basic level, exploited the obvious hole of not having Clear Sight by focusing more on sabotage and theft. Second basic was to raze, thus crushing Watch Towers making sabotage less hazardous resulting in thief sustain and stealth reliability. Most kingdoms that pursue the idea of shelling big attackers sometimes miss the macro and get caught up in honor farming or population control without a vision. There are kingdoms that understand the value of Chastity and those that feel landing Meteor Swarm justifies itself. We should try to recognize the game in the breadth of objectives over pretty pictures like full op blankets or full activity kingdom pages. This goes back to my comments concerning dragon funding and kingdom well being.

Now to get you to the micro, I'll use a Seinfeld quote ~ Cherish the Cabin ~
Because in Pyro, the micro was being controlled from a central province, the monarch, our micro was telegraphed. FS was able to derail our intent before implementation because they were nimble.

To be continued...Edit: friend walked in and social graces being what they are I put this off.

So ~ Cherish the Cabin ~. FS was quietly adamant about defending their means of victory; that was the practical unbreakability of their faeries. When I was instructed to engage a faery, FS began to buzz my province and attacking my army at home. They apparently soldier balled(if I remember I'll explain later). The giveaway was our slow and overly optimized micro. We had quite an argument when my attack bounced.

Let's examine why:

1. I'm a veteran of many chaotic and long endurance wars so I was confident but the monarch wasn't confident in me.

2. My instructions were not to "get the faery" in no matter how much esoteric math we'd like to explore. Because we were so tightly microed my initial attacks were for measly land targets with my leftovers going toward the faery. My argument was that the faery should've been the primary target so the attack would be immediate, untelegraphed and the majority of my offense would've been in/out very quickly.

3. We were not gathering our own intel(see wave management above) so my faith was forced by meta. Thus, any intel gathered by particular provinces in Pyro were known imminent targets in FS. Do you see how that works? FS knew if intel was gathered by what appeared to be Pyro council and armies consolidated it meant a big hit was in the works.
We're talking about championship kingdoms here and activity is furiously high. Things move very quickly so your fundemental is integral to victory.

The point is that FS was keenly aware of their challenges vs a whoring kingdom. They knew how to walk down a kingdom strat that didn't boast the defensive integrity they've perfected over the ages. In retrospect this was a great learning experience for both me and Pyro council. I think those guys are better players for the FS loss. That loss influenced much of my approach to The Virtual Kingdom.

THE DIVISION SYSTEM: Weatherby Mark V bolt action rifle
Is not an improvement over kingdom wide waving, but incorporates universal mechanisms I've learned elsewhere. In my experience I've seen waves get jammed and fail so my thoughts went toward a feature you see in the Weatherby Mark V action. Despite being overbuilt and perhaps the strongest production rifle action in the world, the Mark V has a thoughtful gas dispersion design with gas ports. The locking bolts are recessed so the bolt sleeve is the width of the action cavity so the gas escape externally goes through the magazine. The rear of the bolt has a massive steel hood that prevents gas from dispersing from the firing pin into the shooters eye.

How does the division system apply? We aren't in a domino alignment that can cause catastrophic failure. If you've seen the opening chain wave mystic get their Mystic Vortex blocked by Mystic Aura etc. Then you're watching the collapse. Then the timer starts ticking. The needle point of the spearhead getting blocked suddenly keeps the entire blade from slicing through. This is where ego gets in the way and action is paramount.

You not only should have a plan B, but it should be a comfortable dual threat. Like I've said before, in D&D the running joke was plan A never works and plan B was Get'em. We would spend a great deal of time planning plan A but you can't underestimate your enemies in real time and expect positive results.

The division system offers an escape port, if you will, at the 5 province mark. A catastrophe that effects 5 provinces is a kingdom disaster but not a war ending one.

The reason I'm not encouraging timed waves here is multifold in that most players can't pull a full 24/7 activity and we have an elliptical system in place anyways. The 5 divisions will overlap in a kind of controlled chaos undulating way. There will be moments when apex ability will concentrate and fade from division to division. The traffic will be almost unsightly, but it will have a hidden grace to those who can read the flow.

Wave Derailment

Fact is activity is critical in Utopia in the competitive arena. I've been very active so I can attest to the differences that win wars before they begin. Many midlevel t/ms don't have the activity necessary to defend kingdom interests so we see them rendered nearly useless early in conflict by active competitive kingdoms. This is simply a condition of real life. We can't blame someone for running a turtle to continue playing Utopia.

What can we do? This applies to active players or players that are active during critical moments.

Let's start with Dwarves and Mystic Aura. Dwarves can spam Mystic Aura to block ops. In itself this isn't so spectacular, but we can transform this moment into a rally point. The dwarf will probably go down anyways, but we can make it costly.

The next and commonly used tactic is Soldier Ball. Soldier Ball can take on a pamphlet worth of forms and the utility has been nerfed ages on end. When bocan were halflings and halflings had 2 point soldiers some kingdoms mastered the tactics to an art. BeastBlood used a Soldier Ball to reap such magnificent rewards that certain mechanics were changed in Utopia to blunt the tactics further.
Still, there is the benefit of bouncing attacks and augmenting offense where no other option would suffice. Against waves based in the stealth efficient practice of taking a single SoM, Soldier Ball can rear its ugly head.

Soldiers can come from anywhere; just remember orcs draft free. Avians are fast and have the Aggression spell, so we can see some basic formulas for attack purposes. Soldiers can be bunched into a single kingdom ball or you can have a number of them moving from place to place. The instantaneous nature of aid allows us to explore the possibilities. Don't forget to evolve in war. When attackers are fat and offenses dwindle we can use these tactics for offensive and defensive purposes just as well. Practice and learn.

The last thing I'll mention is relay tapping where armies are in/out at progressive intervals. Controversy surrounding this practice is in the diluted total offense available at a time and the possibility of having armies hit at home. My philosophy on the later is if you want to hit my armies home you must do it rather than say it. The relay tapping province must be incredibly active and a nose for opportunity is a boon.

I've run relay taps at the highest levels against some of the best micro and it works. One of my journeys to the top was to experiment against kingdoms that were best able to combat the tactic. In the interest of derailing waves the relay taps are used to knock enemy wave alignment out of nw/acre max.

I've often found it odd that kingdoms who complain about having max offense bunched into a single tap also ignore t/ms more often than not. Relay taps are complimentary to bunched attacks in our kingdoms interest. It's about approaching your enemy with a complexity of offensive caveats rather than a known wave time. For simplicity sake consider relay tapping rover/hunter/killers and wave time crushers working together in spearhead and interference roles. I've run relay taps for ages. In my experience the benefits outweigh the negatives. If anything, I enjoy a few rounds vs the enemies intent on stopping the relay.

Ahhh, gotta love catching someone casting on you when you have access to MA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StratOcastle

Wave Derailment

Fact is activity is critical in Utopia in the competitive arena. I've been very active so I can attest to the differences that win wars before they begin. Many midlevel t/ms don't have the activity necessary to defend kingdom interests so we see them rendered nearly useless early in conflict by active competitive kingdoms. This is simply a condition of real life. We can't blame someone for running a turtle to continue playing Utopia.

What can we do? This applies to active players or players that are active during critical moments.

Let's start with Dwarves and Mystic Aura. Dwarves can spam Mystic Aura to block ops. In itself this isn't so spectacular, but we can transform this moment into a rally point. The dwarf will probably go down anyways, but we can make it costly.

---

Did this last age.. Hilarious fun was had. Works better when you aren't already almost out of mana though.

I expect my T/Ms to be the most active in the kingdom. It is way too easy to disable a T/M that has a predictable schedule, if they refresh all the MS/Riots on the same tick everyday, just hit them with SW (or ET for thieves) the tick before they usually login. It is MUCH harder to disable a T/M that is online every tick to spend their stealth and mana. You can ET or SW (Expose Thieves or Sabotage Wizards) as much as you like, but you will probably expend more stealth or mana than you actually remove.

Now, that is still a viable strat if you do it right at tick, and you have more folks doing it than they have T/Ms. If your attackers can land ET on their rogues, it can be worth it, but you have to be fast. A good T/M will expend those resources at the start of the tick.

As well, you will probably be more efficient doing more damage as well.. For an attacker, you really only need to login the tick before your army returns twice a day to make sure wages are paid and you have options to deal with overpop. More active attackers are more effective, but the returns are much less apparent. That is why when someone tells me they won't be that active, I tell them to go attacker.

Just to toss something in about Hybrids, you need to combine the activity of the T/M with a competency level of managing both roles. If you can't manage a province efficiently, you won't be very effective at either role. Hybrid is a lot of fun to play, but it is challenging to play well.

Hello, guys.

I'll continue with some other stuff that's not as reliable, but have used in the past.
I keep getting caught in social situations at the cigar lounge, which is where I write most of my tripe :)

And thank you for your input.

Tactical

In RPGs, paper & pencil wasn't all about magic item accumulation, level and hit points. Some of us had casual interest in history and military doctrine. A long while ago a friend of mine gave me a soviet war doctrine manual; it was a military perspective on soviet logistics, strategies and tactics. The most interesting outcome in reading the manual was that it enlightened me on the US war perspective.

My familiarity with firearms allowed me to draw an understanding of the posture and expectations of both soviet and US doctrine. We're best served in knowing the operational differences in sidearms and rifles. From caliber to action to fit and finish we can begin to understand the support platforms: why this pistol, why this rifle.

My overall assessment was that the US was built for the initiative and the soviets were built to react. Soviet doctrine was best served by a pattern of durability, survivability and firepower. The US was patterned much like blitzkrieg with focus on communication, accuracy and speed.

AS APPLIED TO UTOPIA

Many kingdoms focus on the offensive potential of enemies and less about the defensive potential. One aspect drawn from US doctrine was the flanking sweep in that units would sweep an arc from edge to edge with the intent of narrowing the enemy into pockets that could then be subject to pincer maneuvers. In Utopia we might interpret this as engaging the highest offenses and highest defenses simultaneously rather than pounding down every big offense first.
This philosophy was apparent in Freeakstyle though they may not have even known it had military lineage.

The Utopian world has wpa, tpa, offensive and defensive troops. Thus, at this point you might see why we've spent time illustrating the triangle principal. We can start looking at the post regarding the 5:20 kingdom breakdown and regard the sweep in the divisional array. This doesn't mean we don't incorporate aspect of soviet doctrine; we need only look at Freeakstyles winning ways to see both adaptations.

It's my opinion much of the Utopian culture has stagnated in mechanical traditions rather than actually finding apex utility of a given tactic.

Nightmare waves are one of those bizarre dictums in Utopia. Many a player will state as fact that NM is a wave spell. I can tell you from personal experience both in using NM and getting hit with NM that this is one of the most misguided myths in game. NM is woefully limited by the masses because they aren't looking at what the spell does.

In the last war we were in I finally saw it: the opposing side had activity limits, but one of their t/ms struck me with NM anyway. And you know what happened? A few others jumped in at various hours through the night and eventually enough attackers were online and I found myself completely wrecked well below 200 acres.

I've used NM as a self utility spell for a while, though I've not run a t/m for some time. You might want to open your mind to what we've been talking about: that's a lot. Ok, let's talk about NM and the possibilities.

What if you're a dark elf heretic rover or camper? What if you cast NM on a perspective attacker ready to march in the chain wave? We don't always have to use NM as prelude to a trad march. We can reduce an enemies offense to reduce taps or prevent them from hitting our big defensive provinces.

Well..work is about to begin, so I'll see you later.

Another experiment I'm working on is the Amnesia-Nightmare Recoilless Howitzer. Things like ETs work vs rogues, but when there's a crack in coverage the rogue effect is full blast. My intent for this combo is to mute effects and soften enemy punches.

Spy vs Spy

I've probably already emphasized the value of thieves. Utopia isn't the only game where the aspect of stealth and sabotage can change the way we approach our strategy. In D&D the strength and durability of fighters is foremost in our minds: we envision slaying dragons through violent confrontation. In Starfleet Battles there are dreadnoughts brissling with an array of weapons and powerful shields. Bushido incorporated an honor system that encouraged fanatical bravery and displays of heroics.

In each of these games there was also the feature of the rogue. In D&D there was the infamous backstabbing, in Starfleet Battles we had the cloaking device, electronic counter measures and electronic counter counter measures. Then in Bushido there was the ninja who operated with no honor.

In Utopia we can go further than simplistic Nightstrikes and Greater Arson. One of those aspects is the practical blinding of the enemy. Some tactician based cores may be familiar with the effect, and many rogues, but often I've noted little attention is payed to the inability to gather intel by the hapless kingdoms I've occupied.

I've been in kingdoms with no less than 7 tacs and been asked to gather intel as a cleric or warrior. This is one of my great pet peeves. The expenditure of theft defense to gather intel for lazy tacs is more self defeating than inactivity.

Work begins.I'll see you later :)

Does that seem exaggerated? When you squander resources unnecessarily and ignore 30% of your strategic virtues your nw and acres are poor equivilent to actual value. When this happened in the real world a German army was destroyed at Stalingrad. So this isn't real life, but the incoherence with essential mechanics can result in consistent failure for your kingdom.

To task is the battle for each aspect of game dominion. With regard to dragons we look at the cost benefits analysis. The dragon, like most options in the game, strengthen or weaken the triangle:

Again, the triangle is ~

-------------^
----------Troops
----< Magic * Theft >

* What supports or causes decay to these aspects. In war these aspects are relative to your enemy(usually) and out of war relative to the Utopian sphere. For instance, in game a tac has access to Clear Sight and the ability to gather intel with 1 thief resulting in sustain(>). A faery paladin can stack Magic Aura, Magic Shield, Divine Shield, Scientific Insight and Reflect Magic(<).

A pure unbreakable is rare indeed. What most of us really mean is virtually unbreakable. When one aspect is reliably breakable the other two can be made breakable also. This is not why but how dragons can be detrimental unless funding can be done without catastrophic failure in a particular aspect.

Theft domination can lead to Assassinate Wizards and zero sum peasant advantage through Kidnapping. It's not that thieving is the most important, it's that it is the most neglected in the majority of Utopian kingdoms. Part of this is thieves are a soldier that has to be paid for because we don't get theft credits. This is exactly how the correlation with dragon funding becomes a detriment. An option is to look at dragon funding from the position of thieving gold, training back lost thieves and the excess goes toward the dragon. This concern is diminished if your kingdom already has the advantage in this aspect.

The less theft advantage your kingdom has the more you should be attentive to Snatch News. It's the best way to draw a dotted line between enemy positions of strength, where they come from and where they're going. Cross reference with kingdom pages and note nw differences.

Potential and Performance

One of the funniest personality types in Utopia are the random aces. In top kingdoms these guys don't suffer the slapstick fate they often experience in casual war kingdoms. This is out of pure respect, it's just that gaudy honor/science/offense on attackers usually lights up enemies radar like the Vegas strip.

My respect for these glory hounds is such that interference tactics in the division system were partially designed to protect them. In knowing a few of these archetypes there are nuances in how they might react to enemy endeavors to grab all that's precious to them in war. My interest is in keeping players happy.

What I don't want are players to have preconceived notions about what a good attacker is supposed to be. The idea that our "best attacker" got taken out early in war isn't the mindset conducive to winning. This calamity is bad both on our side and our conception of enemy strength. This can result in poor targeting as we may ignore highly capable enemy provinces in war. We might also underestimate players in our kingdom that think in the theater of campaigning rather than individual victories.

Like our new friend in forum running an undead dark elf, the function of sustainable conversions might be missed. A player that understands position is a valuable asset. Big offense is definitely important but it is a raw and highly visible commodity the enemy will consistently aim to stop in every war. Part of our understanding of core dynamics is in what an unchecked province can mutate into.

When in war I'm of the opinion we should have our mitts on every enemy province to some degree. Many kingdoms may think they've contained the enemy core by chaining only to find hybrids creating havoc late in the game. Sleeper aspects like dark elf conversions, dwarf build speed + economy and dryad training time can seemingly sprout up out of nowhere. While the enemy orc war hero may be relegated to the pits we can't forget to watch the provinces that thrive untouched.

Game Related

I've encountered players that have imagined both province and kingdom in different ways that add character to their styles. One imparticular imagined their province as a character like you might play in D&D.

A few versions of a kingdoms reimagined have occurred to me related to games I've played in the past.

Top Secret was a spy game that included one of the best combat systems I've seen in RPGs. You could study martial arts and become proficient in hand to hand combat, from wrestling to boxing and knife fighting. The cool part was they would categorize limbs and you could choose strikes and blocks for each limb.

Thus, my thoughts ran to a Muay Thai way of thinking for the division system. Two arms, two legs and head to configure martial forms. Even still you might include grappling and submission.

In Starfleet Battles you can run individual ships or several, depending on the scenario. There were base stations, star bases, planetary colonies...Anyways, we had allocation sheets for power distribution and ship templates called SSD sheets that illustrated the raw traits of each ship from weapons banks, shield power, maneuverability rating, hull integrity and several others. This was very similar to the raw strategic breakdown we have in Utopia. Dreadnoughts, carriers, destroyers, frigates, specialized ships like the Romulan Mauler to modularized designs like the battle tugs that could be converted from troop carriers to mine layers. All were echoes of the province template we use.

Champions was a superhero game where you built your character from scratch based in an allotted point system. You could have mind controllers, bricks like the hulk, invisible guys with death rays. Basically you could build whatever you could imagine within the power base of the world. Yes, power absorption to!

If anyone is familiar with being in a band, you can apply these philosophies as well.

I'm just trying to say there are more ways to approach the way we address the game than what we do. Chess, poker, what have you.

Edit:

Peasant Magic ~ The trials of war can force you to brainstorm out of desperation. We all know homes pump and strats, and this subject brought up an idea from Palem. He was curious about a Dungeon strat. Essentially the idea was shot down in its splendor.

I've found that when you are subject to constant Chastity ops and shelling that alternative means can be difficult. Aid is unreliable and depends on the resources of fellow kingdom members. So I build extra Dungeons to augment the needs and desires of self reliance at the expense of my enemies. Part of the zero sum game of not hurting yourself.

Retirement & Time Off

A great number of players will retire from the game with the majority of a mind for never returning. I for one know something of nostalgia and choose to see the game as something I'll return to whenever I take time off. Provided the game sustains for years we should be welcoming to returning players. Part of this is understanding what they use to know and how the game is played now.

We should be gentle to both the rare new player and the returning veteran. We do this by not forcing agendas that are alien to their way of being. If they aren't in the right place we should put effort into getting them to a kingdom that fits their lifestyle.

The Virtual Kingdom template is designed for enthusiasts, but doesn't force the whole of the kingdom into rigid molds.

When to say When

Since my challenge idioms include only retaliating and never attacking unprovoked I can talk on the subject of when to offer CF. IMHO you don't offer CF without retaliation. This is a game and it's a game of competition - yet, I've sat with my army home and watched enemies take intel and hit my whole army. Why?

Well for me it's about overcoming significant odds. Exiting our last war my province was under incredible pressure from several kingdoms running abduction and trad march. My intent was to abandon my province eowcf but we had several provinces that'd been chained. My experience has taught me that a lot of players go almost totally inactive during eowcf so I knew I'd be providing aid the last day despite warning players that it's harder late then early. But I digress...

In completing my retaliations I informed my monarch I was ready to leave, but it was imperative for me to even the score with every kingdom that had invaded my province. The reason I'm not jumping on every kingdom that attacked ours is because different players have differing views on the subject.
Many worry about retaliating powerful kingdoms, but these are the most important to retal in my opinion. It's funny because in waiting my 24 ticks to abandon province I noted a number of counter attacks. The prevailing mindset of these aggressor kingdoms might be that "we" are afraid or feel incapable of matching their aggression. That would be a mistake, and it's important for small kingdoms to understand this.

I'll repeat myself, not because I'm forgetful, but to let this sink in: I've been alone in a kingdom shell and only accepted CF or only offered CF to a worthy challenger. I've never offered a CF to a kingdom that disrespected mine, ever. There is no amount of pressure, be it PK or total shelling of all resources that I'd offer a CF to a disrespectful opponent. My opponents have included top warring and whoring kingdoms: Divinity, Green, Emeriti, BeastBlood, Sleepy, Pew Pew and a plethora of considerable challengers from every tier.

First things first. Moral high ground is where I stand. If I'm not the one to start trouble then reprisals are mine to inflict at my leisure. I'm not cruel or completely foolhardy. In my recent bout of retaliations I matched blades with the number 1 honor kingdom. When they went into the meter I showed them that I would cast Fools Gold, that I could disrupt their wave formation and that I'd remain focussed. They'll always tell you they didn't even notice, but then why do they counter and burn meter? I know all the reasons.

If you want to be good at diplomacy in the lower tier then you should understand that personal integrity is the key. If you're worried about your resources: scientists, honor, army, acres....you will stink at diplo. It's very simple. If you're going for resources your goal should be no shorter than being the best: number one. If that isn't your goal you're just part of a forgettable food chain. For me, the end of aggression happened on my terms. I decided based in my satisfaction with my retaliation. It should be that we grant CFs at the behest of enemies asking. At no point should you take the role of beggar. I've absolutely no problem with earning respect. I play to meet challenges and have no desire to chart on the backs of frightened, small, disorganized kingdoms. It isn't my opinion that this is wrong, it's that it does nothing for me.

War is different because war is diplomacy. Be it that my side is defeated it's my compassion for my fellow kingdom mates that motivates a desire to WD. Sometimes kingdom mates might misunderstand: if I have lots of acres they might think I want to WD because I'm a glory hound. And if I want to WD when I'm chained, massacred and clinging to life they might think I can't take it. These aren't the metrics I follow.

If we are winning a war I recommend never asking the opponent to WD unless they show signs of fatal disillusionment. That is, they show massive inactivity or randoming out. The goal here is to retain our fragile player base. In war I will avoid PKing opponents or driving them down to depressing levels. I'd rather WD and give the defeated kingdom the war win bonus to rebuild rather than crush them. This is the other side of Utopia being a game and showing compassion to kingdoms that have their own challenges. I've often ignored orders(sorry monarchs) to continue beating down tiny enemies; even if I'm in the same condition. I'll offer an enemy respite to get back on their feet. I'm not concerned with forgone conclusions because I'm challenging myself. In my kingdoms interest I'll defend them, but won't invoke bloodthirsty tactics unless the enemy wants it that way. I can enjoy black humor just like the next guy and if it's a war of cruelty for comedy sake I'll accommodate :)

This has been a lot of "I" and "me", but it's because so many lower tier kingdoms are self destructive without the inkling of how. Tactical mistakes are a given. We can screw the meter, send dragons early, target the wrong provinces and build useless strats, but we shouldn't be in the practice of experiencing fear of loss. Many small kingdoms don't see that the order of battle might well suit the aggressor kingdom. I try to demonstrate how you can turn that on its head and make the enemy work for victory or fail. Poor strategies by naive kingdoms allow good kingdoms to predictably farm honor, science, and good chain alignment. All the while the poor kingdom is looking at the acres and pat themselves on their collective backs. This happens so often in so many kingdoms I sometimes wonder if Utopia is a government test to see if they can drive me crazier than I already am.

I'm wanting small and casual kingdoms to learn dignity and start building strats pre age. I want these same kingdoms to start innovating new ways of warring and handling hostile like a roach infestation. In real life we might be fine curling up in a whimpering ball at the sign of aggression, but in game we should demonstrate a demeanor of poise and maturity.

Further Thoughts

I've often encountered kingdoms that say if we don't want war not to retaliate. Well screw them. They aren't the thought police and if anything this type of statement is the exact ammunition to institute the long hostile gambit. I'm fairly happy to accommodate universal victim status to any kingdom that thinks aggression should be met with capitulation. Again, this is exciting to me: I enjoy the tough odds and doing things that bring out regret when kingdoms act disrespectfully.

When you're kicking ass on a big organized kingdom that intends to farm you the key is concentration on provinces they need intact all age. Regardless of resources spent and lost you quarter off a segment of the huge kingdom and crush it. Think of it as cutting off an elephants trunk or some other cruel and terrible practice. Without respect we sometimes must resort to fear. People will always promise revenge despite being the bully. Don't be dissuaded. Let them know their chart is in your hands. You can abandon and strike from the outside. We all have significant power even vs multi abusers. Try not to communicate rudely. Be respectful even though your tactics may be savage.

I'll emphasize, you should plan your kingdom strat beginning of age to top feed if you're small and/or casual. Top feed strats aren't so good in war, but we aren't charting anyways. Spells and sabotage you imagine only good in war can be used when the meter is in your favor. Use them to augment the sparing use of marches.

We want to get to a point where the big kingdoms offers CF or we both walk away. I'm as good as my word and can be trusted to honor a cessation of hostilities. If my retaliation isn't countered then I will not continue an aggressive stance. I've no interest in hitting into war or taking advantage of the former enemy exiting a war. We can offer a CF if the big kingdom asks us for a CF.

Final Thoughts

Utopia, the game itself, is a very playable game unto itself. Sadly, the community has cacooned itself under the pretenses of "necessary" tools and com systems. I'm often approached as a fool because the argument is "why not do it this way, because it's easier?"

You see the problem is more sinister than the children really understand. My exposure to this wiz-bang age of instant statistics is tempered by my intimate knowledge of the age before computers. Did you know in my industry that we worked faster and more accurately than we do now? Statisticians will always argue non-truths with data based in proving their interests. They can't argue something you know and live. Well, they can to you because we can't share experiences telepathically, and youth is more inclined to believe in their environment. You grew up with virtual reality, I grew up with reality.

Let's put it this way; when our systems fail at work I notice the current generation stops working. There is no understanding of the work without the tools that guide them. Workers of my generation can pick up with the added complication that we have to record things for you, but we go on. But before that, we didn't have to record the information in the complex way we do now. Our actions were instantaneous, as in, the human brain with systems we honed long ago that were very simple. So there was no computer to fail, no IT guys to suck money from the bottom line. We basically created a world where to explain some guys job is to fawn about paperlessness and instant statistics.

These things have their place if you're controlling minds. I mean truthfully, in utility, it's not that big a deal if you're moving anything. The statistical relevance is overemphasized because that's where intelligent bastards knew the rabbit hole goes the deepest. As long as the populace is convinced that data in all its forms is relevant to something you will have customers standing in line to buy it: not just monetarily but ideologically.

This pattern amuses me because in real life and in Utopia I've stood outside the toxic realm of data addiction. Am I less than a player who uses bots and instant messagers? No. I've got instinct and I perceive the game organically from here, looking at the data with naked eyes. I feel war. I know how it dances. At work I know the laziness of those who fail to do things properly. They lean on the system with a molasses like apathy, incapable of free thought for lack of will.

We have to practice our inherent enlightenment and not simply plug into the next crutch at every turn.