This is a fact. I was in there and the rest of HRS that hasn't retired is decorating the top like whipped(emphasize H)cream at a dorm party. :-DQuote:
Originally Posted by Palem
Printable View
This is a fact. I was in there and the rest of HRS that hasn't retired is decorating the top like whipped(emphasize H)cream at a dorm party. :-DQuote:
Originally Posted by Palem
are you upset that now if you ever change your signature people will consider you a coward who caved in to peer pressure?Quote:
Originally Posted by Godly
There have been more than 1 occasion where I've crafted super long responses and either "timed out" or I never "logged in" to begin with and then my post is lost, then there's the question whether its worth it to re-type and odds are its not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zauper
Interesting find on it only being 3 deletions, as in my talks with ASF I've certainly forgotten quite alot after 10 years of not insignificant alcoholic consumption. Good catch on the 1 in a 100 being a halfling.
Have you ever remember a rule change (raze costs & never again build time bonuses near as extreme being added) being implemented because of an imbalance that 1 of the top 100 provinces exploited? We had 20 of them. As you showed, barely anyone else had a single one. That was just how mocked and ridiculous the idea was back even amongst experts who talked about things more freely back then pre-age. I found the exploitation ~20 hours before age-start, spent 12 hours convincing my co-monarch, and we managed to get most of us to go the race before the age started. Its been a pretty reknowned strategy ever since.
A couple of things to note:
1) On the link you posted I noticed one of the provinces deleted was my co-monarch (jurassic army = eekthedog). Odds are he he one of our most important provinces if not the most important province. He's the one who introduced me to utopia (we were both top red alert players), and without him being able to play I wouldn't want to play and that will quickly disband a kingdom as from the comments from our players most people tended to mention both me and him as the lifeblood of the kingdom.
2) "Crowning" or trying to win wasn't as big of a thing back then. After we got our first one we mostly just played to FSU and did irrational things that cost us wins. We actively seeked alliance wars/gangbangs for the most part. I can't recall how much of a deal losing the 3 provinces was to the crown chances.
eek is playing now back in BB, maybe he remembers better than I do
But in general, anyone trying to go back through the charts and find out who was dominant or played well in any given age aren't really going to be able to do it for the first 13 ages or so (and maybe after that, I wouldn't know). If you looked at our kingdom you would see the first double landcrown winner. However, I didn't even remember the first landcrown as no one cared about landcrown then.
What I remember is that I can't recall another kingdom even REACHING #1 at a single "arbitrary" point in the age more than twice. Shadowlight might have done it a 2nd time in ages 7 or 9 that I took off, but that's at most 2. Godly could clarify that. On the other hand, our kingdom was #1 for a good part of the age 5 of the 6 last ages we tried. The age we didn't reach #1, we almost wire to wire #2'd with the top 2 provinces, and our goal was prov crown (I would know as I was the province).
So if we're reaching #1 5 times and at most one other kingdom did it twice (which I frankly, don't even remember happening) mixed with probably the most diplomatic power the game has ever seen, the pansies stats sound impressive but I'm giving them an asterisk solely because they probably wouldn't have been allowed to exist, kind of like barduvia, absalom or chai, if we were still around. ;p
ChubbChubbs!Quote:
Originally Posted by Zauper
I grabbed the top halfling. There are others. Not many, sure. I think the age is much more well known for HODF's honor exploits than halflings.
I do remember rule changes that were implemented because one kingdom exploited them. I'm thinking about minions inventing the fakewar and hitting out of it for full elite conversions.
Sure, you had two provs deleted, maybe three. Some of them may have been important. If you were 2x the size of everyone else, it wouldn't have mattered.
In a quick look, RA does not have two land crowns. My vague recollection tells me that Pansies were the first kd to secure two NW+land crowns, which means there was one kd with at least 2 split crowns prior.
Reaching #1 doesn't mean near as much if you don't finish there. But you aren't even bragging about being there, you're bragging about the margin by which you were there, even though you clearly were incapable of sustaining that margin prior to your deletions. Like, your argument for how it was the most dominant age ever is you got big fast, but you couldn't sustain it which indicates it was more of a flash in the pan than dominance.
Again -- Pansies tried in ages 17-22, roughly; and they actually won 4 of those. They hit #1 in at least one of the others. Saying they wouldn't have been allowed to exist is dumb. 'They were better than us, so we wouldn't have let them exist'. Highly unlikely you could have done anything to stop it.
(if those were the deletions, you lost two not three :P)
Sorry, but I could pick 25 players from CR, AMA & BB and it would trash any kingdom from rounds 0-22 and it wouldn't even be close. Hell, even the current CR roster would. This includes round 5 Shadowlight avian boatless soldier army as well. I was one of the best players there but the difference in the amount of knowledge that I know about the game now compared to then is huge. I would call the round 5 version of me a total noob.
If the argument is what was the kingdom that dominated their round the most, we could have a discussion.
If the argument is what is the best kd of all time, sorry but most of those kingdoms had like 5-10 good players and the rest sucked. They would get dumpstered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godly
The players today may have more experience and game knowledge than those of earlier ages (including younger versions of themselves), however my experience has been that the top players were also more motivated and more active back then. I think more effort, planning, and activity was involved in the elite kingdoms of that era than those of the last 10 ages.
It is possible that a modern kingdom of all stars could compete with an "Age 20 Pansies" for a war if the modern players committed to it and perhaps even for an age with the right selection of people that can afford to put their lives on hold for a few months. However, I've found that the modern kingdoms are generally more lazy and the skilled players generally can't commit to the level of activity that the elite could in Age 20.
FYI, Pansies in Age 20 did not have 5-10 good players. Nearly every one of them would be an elite player in any top kingdom of the last 10 ages including yours. Mango I suppose is a good example of this since he was considered just an average Pansies player and not even one of their more well known elite players. As we both know, the leadership of a kingdom is it's most defining critical factor and Sid was probably the best there ever was in that department.
Whats the age 20 pansies roster?
They had Sid. Sid > flogger
That's all the discussion that needs to be had.
Godly where are you from and whats your phone number I wanna have sex with you !
Yes because someone from 10 years ago knows how to play better than the current top.
Either world you look at it from, it's nonsense:
1) A timewarp where current players play against them from 10 years ago.
2) They do a reunion and play us now.
This conversation is becoming borderline ridiculous. I could outstrat any of these people in either of those worlds.
Gody you are the best !
GODLY, GODLY, GODLY !!! <3
This is absolutely adorable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Godly
You can't outstrat the CURRENT players, let alone the all-time greats.
That arrogance is why none takes godly seriously.
dude pansies didn't even have android phones
Godly, he would have been one of many in a big minority of skilled players. In the hundreds among thousands and thousands of players.
I was really happy that I came back from a trip and this thread was still going good.
Palem when did you start playing utopia?
I have no opinion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBBni_-tMNs
I think godly is correct in some ways that knowledge about the game is cumulative and evolving etc. Having played for 10 years instead of 2 years would extend an advantage to the top players still playing, in terms of strategy and general skill/experience in running a province optimally. Plus, familiarity with all mechanics would be relevant as well, to avoid having to re-learn the game.
That said, everyone I've ever spoken to about Sid has said that he was the nut in terms of leadership, one of the best players ever, etc., and this has to count for something.
Given the new anti cheating detectionQuote:
Originally Posted by tetley
Current technology to make the game more accessible
Accumulated skill over the last several years
The game is totally different then it was 8 years ago. CR/AMA would likely easily beat any kd from 2002. If they had to do it with tech from 2002 i think they would lose (unless of course munk just reopened umunk for his kd). Just attacking in/out for a week straight was extremely hard when you couldn't do it via your phone.
Although strategy was hugely important sheer activity was hard to beat back then.
I played this game when it first came out and came back a couple years ago. Between that time I learned the value of actually enjoying the games vs exploiting their weaknesses.
Among my friends we have a guy who can't control himself from trying to push the limits. We find it funny because we've all been down that road and the game loses its charm. I personally enjoy having a few mysteries left in a game and try to make up for it with gaming experience and activity; in the case of Utopia.
How does this relate? Depends on how you approach playing games.
I would beat them with carrier pigeon tech. Obvious exaggeration but you get the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by goodz
Players like flogger prot Elit Cello maxi zauper topsy and myself etc have refined the strategic portion of the game to perfection. It basically just comes down to whichever kingdom has better prep at this point.
I mean look at how close CR and BB's setup is:
CR:
2 DW/ME
10 DW/Sa
3 Fa/My
4 Fa/Ro
4 Fa/Sa
2 UD/Ta
BB:
3 Hu/Sa
17 DW/Sa
2 Fa/My
3 Fa/Ro
Dwarf/Sage core on both - Both kingdoms correctly identified dw/sa as the strongest and most reliable core in the game with the nerf to undead elite training (UD was previously the best).
CR exchanged 6 dw/sa core for 2 ud/tact for explosive OOP to secure CFs and get #1 and faery for better war survivability / synergy with T/Ms, but we did have a mock setup with full dw/sa core ready to go.
Banks DW/Merc vs Hu/Sa. Both strong, tradeoff is DW merc has higher explore potential due to BE bonus on new buffed mills, Hu sage has better late game military potential. Personal preference choice there based on your macro strategy (see reason for picking 2 undead).
2 cores went into faery/my faery/ro because we just prefer more T/M based warring (personal choice). We both found faery to be the best T/M race. No elves, no halfers because they're inferior in every way.
We also both successfully identified rogue as playable this round (it previous wasn't).
Like there are 56 combinations of race/pers possible and we both basically narrowed the best combinations to 7 (3 common, 4 unique). I wonder if BB picked less combinations due to ease of management? We prefer doing the extra planning for more options available.
With regards to AMA's setup, I have no clue wtf they were thinking. IMO, they picked a really bad setup for competing for land crown with undead/mystic core. Undead anything core is too unreliable without being able to train elites, but mystic is fairly useless late game. We entered the round fully prepared to reset the undead/tacts at the conclusion of a very early conflict.
Sid's great, Sid's awesome, but you've got people that have been dominating utopia for upwards of 16 years still playing. If I could take my current kd and move it to 2002 with all experience in tact, I don't think that we'd come close to losing a round.
Godly it is undeniable that you think you are the best utopian player (both currently and ever). What else are you the best at?
Considering this is a utopia forum, I find your question to be out of scope.Quote:
Originally Posted by SillyRabbit
There was 50 CRs and AMAs back then.
Sure xp plays a part, but most of them would have beat you. I dont care about this Sid guy or any other dick. But activity and dedication overall in this game is not even near what it once was even in CR and AMA. Sure you would have more experience, but you had to navigate thru a competition so fierce that if you open your mouth like this in the forum you would get bounced/razed by multis for the sake of it. One fart in wrong direction and you got doubled and age could be at risk. Like stepping on a landmine. Hell even a guy with 1000 icq contacts and noob followers like muhaddib would probably have raped your ass by letting his noobs feast on you.
nahhh, im just ****ing with you, you are the boss of all times
This is a thread about Godly that has been up for 10 days now. Anything pertaining to Godly is within scope. Don't be shy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Godly
This thread was not started by me. When I post a "I am Godly AMA" thread, you can feel free to ask me all your questions.
Anri, considering my opinion is in the minority of my kingdom, I don't think that holds true. zauper and the rest seem to agree with you. I already called them nuts and I'll do the same with you.
I played in round 20. The competition wasn't that great, it was just more people to farm. Compare that to now: we've got 4-5 kingdoms that we can even war and they're all top notch and generally have to B2B at least once. Isn't exactly a cakewalk. You could lose a war, farm 2-3 kingdoms and be right back at #1. Here, if you lose a war, you're basically bottomfed the rest of the round by highly skilled kds who can just explore more than you gained in war while you can explore nothing, they have tons more cash, and you're OOR of hitting anyone smaller than you. Even if you do get a smaller conflict, you just get vultured OOW by the aforementioned kingdoms. One mistake and your round is basically done.
More players does not mean better competition. It's actually the opposite. We run out of whoring targets in as little as a week now and go into pump/fight tough kds mode. It's actually a fairly ****ty land crown playing experience. I strongly contemplate retirement every round but somehow get talked back in. I usually tell them that I'll do the OOP stuff and then someone can take my prov but that never works :(
I think going warring is probably the most fun user experience one can have. Warring at the top is not currently ideal because you just get into one war and another kingdom out-explores you and then you're basically stuck. The most obvious change is to allow exploration in EOWCF to be normal cost. If I ever do "retire," I'll probably start my own small warring kd and do some consulting on the side.
How'd you do?Quote:
Originally Posted by Godly
I'm honestly not too sure. I think I started making provs and deleting them around the late 20's to early 30'sQuote:
Originally Posted by Godly
I was doing honor crowns with andn00bs. Got one in 19, retired around 21-22, came back round 28 won another then retired again. Didn't play a whole lot in 20's and 30's due to double majoring computer engineering & premed. I think honor crown is the most fun crown.
So you were unable to compete with the real kds that you claim to be better than.
Got it.
It's an interesting debate, but you weren't even playing so your opinion is practically worthless. Everything you know about the so called "real" kingdoms is through hearsay. I'll just recap one more time since I'm tired of arguing with you: In round 20, Pansies would have beaten any kingdom I put together because they were the best at that point in time. If I could take a "round 63" kingdom there, we would win. It's not that hard to comprehend. Utopians aren't athletes. We don't have finite career lengths. We get better every round. I'll take 10 years of experience in utopia over anything.
oh god i miss that. i saw some people take hundreds of hits in hours haha. godly would definitely have been humbled back then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anri
also people keep failing to realize how easy it is to be highly active in utopia today as compared to earlier ages. NO SMARTPHONES, NO WIRELESS, NO LAPTOPS, AND FREAKING DIAL UP INTERNET CONNECTIONS, IM TALKING AOL BRO. those old kds would bend any of the new kds over and have their way with them if they had even half of the technology we have today.
yes, yes we would have. helluva rosterQuote:
Originally Posted by Palem
yes, yes we are. helluva rosterQuote:
Originally Posted by StratOcastle
HRS/AC was probably the best unknown kd in recent utopia imho. basically AC's private irc chan was always busier than BB's has been this age, by a good margin. though to be fair we talked about a lot of silly stuff besides utopia all the time. :-P
SHOUTOUT TO THE HRS/AC PEEPS! miss you all
I do remember some days OOP when we got located as being an absalom KD together with BiO on pure hearsay and happen to look like absalom setup. We got ganged by a total of 250 KDs in our news and i think BiO had over 300 different KDs hitting them. Mostly scripted provs. It ruined that age goal, from my memory we recovered and did well that age after some time.Quote:
Originally Posted by tras19
But point is, there was a lot of things like this that could happen even if that might been one of the bigger server actions ive personaly seen since bounces on hel of dim forest.
With all the prominent players in for example CR they would make a nice target back then to destroy in any way possible. Especially with someone in the KD claiming he or they are the best.
Sure there was a lot more KDs to farm from, but there was also another 50 CRs to compete with and many of them cheating hardcore with flawless activity and farms/scripts etc.
Godly makes it sound as it would been easy to win back then when its the exact opposite. Took 10 times more from a KD to win back then, in all categories. Dip, organization, tools, leadership, contact net, activity, skill etc etc
TBF there are alot more tools around nowadays than what there was in 20 etc, smartphones being one of them...
When I played, from beta to 14ish, (returned 3 age ago) things we're for sure a lot different. 50,000 players made controlling the top a lot more difficult. I did a few top ten finishes and two as #2 as Darwin's Dark Legion monarch. At the start we used to have a lot of fun with CQ. imo the fun part of the game started to drop off when the serious alliances started coming through. In DDL we always thought alliance gang bang s were the lamest thing in the game, hence I always had a lot of respect for Eekthedog and flogger, even tho we had a few run-ins over the ages. As to who were better players, imo, CR, BB or AMA now would wipe the floor with my old DDL kd, even our #2 finishes setups, full of imo awesome players, there was not the communication, activity levels possible, also there was less experience warring as in those days war was a lot less rewarding. Looking back, there were a few things which made me quit the game (we got raped with deletions by mehul a couple times), but probably one lame rape we took off Absalom kds was a big reason.
But having said that... If you took DDL best setup ever, with Glorat, Truskar, Eric, CGG, Loki etc, and gave us irc bot, target finder, smartphones etc, I'm confident we'd be crown competitive every round.
Only one way to find out breh, get the kd back together!Quote:
Originally Posted by ZenithSun
Unfortunately haven't been able to find any of those guys. Think Glorat is ignoring me ;). I know his bro was playing with u in RBL. But we getting together a fun group of new Naabs (me included) willing to learn at the moment