Clearing up a common misconception.

[flogger]

I feel like Wilt gets put on a pedestal too much, sorta like flogger's performances. Yeah, you hear about it, but there is neither video nor log recordings of his greatness. On the other hand, the present day hero, Mr. Don Proteus, we have logs and youtube videos alike. It's just not the same.

True greatness is found when your enemies compliment or acknowledge your superiority. Luckily for this and archives, you youngbloods can be kept current. If your enemy can simutaneously call you a slur yet acknowledge your claim to the iron throne, that is all that is needed.

http://www.utopiatemple.com/news.php?id=220&fpage=all

JRRTolkien
Posts: 1
(10-Sep-2001 09:04 am)
Report
Cmon guys, it doesnt mean that if one KD feeds.. everybody who belongs to that alliance feeds also. We all know that one or more KD in ES, EoS, AA, VLaOS, KLA, BLADES, HaLL, OS etc feeds.

*flogger is feeded*

And about this Alliance war.. this is adding spice to Round 13

ES/Eos/AA is winning on some war and losing in some. the same is also happening with VLaoS/HaLL/OS/BLADES/KLA.

We can never tell w/c alliance is honorable or not becoz in every alliance there can be a player or more who plays dirty.

Lets just wait and see who wins this war.

As for Flogger starting this whole Alliance War.. for me, he has the intention on reigning over Utopia again and ES stands on his way. and we all know his gay. =P

[Godly]

I think the smartest thing to do would be to ignore age difficulty because it would be near impossible to rate each age (especially ages from a long time ago that only a handful of us were actually a part of). But I think NW crowns should be completely removed as should NW in general.

[flogger]

I think the smartest thing to do would be to ignore age difficulty because it would be near impossible to rate each age (especially ages from a long time ago that only a handful of us were actually a part of). But I think NW crowns should be completely removed as should NW in general.

Problem is in old days NW is what mattered more, had it not, I would have had b2b2b crowns 4/6, but got in an awar age 5 over prov NW crown with a few days left and threw away land crown.

[Farore]

Until a crown is made part of the game officaly, and your account is actually tagged with tiny little crown somehow, a crown is whatever you want it to be.

This is by far my favorite post in this entire thread. <3

[Lestat]

Maybe cause the system hasnt been revised for a warwin chart? Ask Syntico if he want to include that.

He doesn't. He only begrudgingly records honour.

[Syntico]

Problem is in old days NW is what mattered more, had it not, I would have had b2b2b crowns 4/6, but got in an awar age 5 over prov NW crown with a few days left and threw away land crown.

Networth was the main thing back then, only those who played back then understand this. The rest of them are just ignorant Flogger. :)

[Hurlin]

And about this Alliance war.. this is adding spice to Round 13

ES/Eos/AA is winning on some war and losing in some. the same is also happening with VLaoS/HaLL/OS/BLADES/KLA.

Best alliance war I've ever been in ...... Beats hands down 1st KLA v AA ......... & Spirit v Abs & pets wars

[Realest]

Quote Originally Posted by Spahrep View Post
Until a crown is made part of the game officaly, and your account is actually tagged with tiny little crown somehow, a crown is whatever you want it to be.

This is by far my favorite post in this entire thread. <3

crown virgin talk

[flogger]

Networth was the main thing back then, only those who played back then understand this. The rest of them are just ignorant Flogger. :)

Well lets enlighten the nubs then. I think most all can agree that Kanga was one of the greatest utopians ever, lets take some snippets from his interview:

Q: It must be very frustrating to see a month and a half worth of constant work go down the tubes because of obvious multis
A: I was saying that the damage done to me the worst of it wasn't by multis it was from 2 individuals who had exploited the problem with thieves perfectly.

Q: Anybody we've heard of?
A: Callista (flogger edit: Callista = b1acksun) had a 1000 acre 800k nw, 60:1 thief ratio province.

Q: Why yes it is :)
A: :) In age 3, Callista would burn me out whenever I reached number one we had this rediculous scenario for a couple of weeks where I was giving away huge amounts of aid trying hard to stay out of number one while Twinkle and Flip were doing the same thing I singlehandedly boosted one of our bigger provinces from outside the top 50 to 12th in the world.

Q: lol
A: But in the end Callista was just a pain, this other guy, Orc of Baliluba in Age 2, no idea what his ICQ nick is, he burned me totally out of the game. He also had about a 30:1 ratio and there was literally nothing I could do to stop him he was a bit smaller from memory - maybe only 700 acre but could still destroy me. Others got ruined by 200 and 300 acre multis. I got hit by the big thief provinces Callista didn't want me to win twice Baliluba- probalby the same, I dont remember, certainly nothing i'd actually *done* to him age 3 was basically pointless but I enjoyed it because my kingdom won but even that was helped by the sheer amount of damage done to Hydra.




Crowns were generally meaningless the first 10 ages. When the goal of 90% of the age to crown involves not being #1, clearly who wins can be influenced by simply one or two 300a multis. The age we did end with the crown, me as monarch ended the age on 66 NWPA due to 2-3 300a thief provinces. Top 20 in land in the world, not even top 100 in networth on my island. Everyone knew who was impressive and who wasn't. Who spent the majority of the age at a certain spot was generally the main recognition of skill.

From my knowledge, between ages 1 and 13, there was not a single kingdom that spent significant time as the #1 kingdom during an age more than once, other than Relentless Armies. I was a college student at the time, so generally I and most of my kingdom played every other age during this stretch. So during the 6 ages played, RA was either #1 a large portion of the time, or #1 very late in the age 5 out of 6 times. The one time it never reached #1, it was #2 for 95% of the age, with me and flip as the #1/#2 provinces 95% of the age. Again, no other kingdom even reached #1 more than once.

I'm not terribly aware of the dominant eras of PBs and Pansies. From my understanding there was rampant x-logging during those eras. All I do know, is that due to RA's dominant performances during the beginning, no kingdom had more power or influence in the history of the game, and had we not all had lives and quit, it was unlikely that the absalom, pbs, or pansies dynasty would have ever gotten off the ground without our blessing, since we basically ran the server at that point.

[DDodge]

Damn that is how **** was run fellas

[Syntico]

If you think Pansies x-logged then you've been terribly misinformed.

[American Badass]

I have never met a group of people that care so much lol. You could argue that age 1-xx was full of cheaters with "scripts" and multis so should not be counted either.

[pmyraje]

Crowns are for Kings, Queens and egotists with ADHD

[AquaSeaFoam]

Fail thread.

The first real talk of "crowns" was in reference to a triple crown which meant winning the three kingdom charts and was also used for winning the three province charts.

Triple crown means "three" crowns.

Realest would have everyone believe that there were no crowns at all in all the ages where kingdoms split nw/land which is quite silly.

Obviously it's preferred to win both land and nw crowns together and if you're only going to win one, land is the current chart of choice, but that doesn't make the nw chart irrelevant, nor does it mean that winning the land chart without the nw chart is not a "crown".

Although Syntico, Realest, et al. have advertised "crowns" as being "everything" in the forums, the crown term was brought to utopia well before their PR campaigns and has always just meant a chart win as exemplified by the triple crown usage.

[Anri]

Fail thread.

The first real talk of "crowns" was in reference to a triple crown which meant winning the three kingdom charts and was also used for winning the three province charts.

Triple crown means "three" crowns.

Realest would have everyone believe that there were no crowns at all in all the ages where kingdoms split nw/land which is quite silly.

Obviously it's preferred to win both land and nw crowns together and if you're only going to win one, land is the current chart of choice, but that doesn't make the nw chart irrelevant, nor does it mean that winning the land chart without the nw chart is not a "crown".

Although Syntico, Realest, et al. have advertised "crowns" as being "everything" in the forums, the crown term was brought to utopia well before their PR campaigns and has always just meant a chart win as exemplified by the triple crown usage.

I agree with ASF