Hi all, I'm pretty new and am having trouble grasping the whole "etiquette" part of this game.
My current annoyance, in particular, is the instructions given to other players on various warlords' noticeboards. I'm talking about things such as "don't hit me below ___k land, or "don't use these troops".
The most viewed ingame page is the scores page, in which warlords are RANKED, this would seem to infer that RWL is, in fact, a COMPETITIVE game. May I ask since when, in competition, was it acceptable for competitors to dictate to others the manner in which they can compete, for their own advancement.
This also applies to so-called "passive" or "peaceful" players. This game is about WARlords, it is not passive or peaceful, and players should not be able to dictate it to be. I have annoyed a few of these players in my short time in the game, but I'm not too phased - they don't attack me back :P
P.S. I play indy, so I would prefer it if no one leaders me, or knocks me below 50k land. Ok thanks guys!
Agree completely.
To use our favourite expression, 'This is Redwall: Warlords, not Redwall: Happy Pony Raisers'.
There are lots of "unwritten rules", and they vary between players. But oddly enough, this has produced an intolerant player base. Players constantly hold others to their own standards, but cry foul when met with someone else's.
Everyone has the right to play however they like, within the rules of the game.
Well I hit people as low as I like, but usually below 15k is an act of war after the first week or so imo. I think if someone has a hole you should use that as it saves ya both troops.
On passiev, I've never tried passive play, but people use it as a test of their ability. People who can use 20k all round and get in the top 5 are exceptional players. Most passive players are of a high quality. It's pretty stupid hitting them when there's others with more land, but if you do they probably will end up retaliating.
But yeah play as you like, just my take on it. I agree with Holby that as long as it complies with the rules, you should be able to play as you like.
I agree with everything that has been said here. Lol.
I don't tell people how to act around me and if someone says the they'd like to be attacked with a certain troop. I enjoy that because I don't have to work very hard to find the weak spot.
if anyone gets mad at you for something stupid like disobeying their notice, who cares. they are not up for the challenge of what the game is all about. you are
Eh, there's a limit. If the way you are playing is causing others to leave, you need to stop doing it. But the rest is valid.
Meh, I don't generally pay attention to what other people are doing, or what they ask. If I am annoyed enough by something, I'll send a message, but otherwise I just play the game. I regard murders and such as acts of war, and will only resort to them if I have no other option, or if I am at war. I don't generally hit people to much lower than 20k land. In fact, when I'm not provoked, I'm a pretty nice player. Not passive by any stretch, but pretty nice. However, if I am moved to send a note, ignore me at your own peril, as I'm sure quite a few players can attest too.
When I came back I adhered to the "5 is fair, spread attacks" rule I was told was proper a long time ago, but the first time I got maxxed by a single person I threw that out the window.
But only to the point of averaging them with everyone else. If 10k seems to be the average, then I wont take them below 10k.
QuoteMy current annoyance, in particular, is the instructions given to other players on various warlords' noticeboards. I'm talking about things such as "don't hit me below ___k land, or "don't use these troops".
Actually I hsould say a bit more. First, most players ignore those and just do their thing. Telling people what to attack with is generally something that saves you both troops, and gives new players a bit of a boost, so it really isn't a problem usually. It only becomes a problem if the person with the notice becomes militant when people don't listen.
Quote
This also applies to so-called "passive" or "peaceful" players. This game is about WARlords, it is not passive or peaceful, and players should not be able to dictate it to be.
THat is just diplomacy - passive players that are able to be successful passive get that way through the respect of allies who are willing to not attack them. If a player can play peacefully, then more power to them. It is still a valid and far more difficult way to compete, as Peace Alliance has proven time and again.
QuoteP.S. I play indy, so I would prefer it if no one leaders me, or knocks me below 50k land. Ok thanks guys!
There's an example of something that would get ignored. However, putting something like "murder me and ill own you" is perfectly valid, since if anyone murdered me I would own them regardless, but the message might just stop them doing it in the first place and save me the trouble. So it's not all bad, really.
I believe that last bit was a joke, shadow. :P
Lol I know, I was just saying that it isn't as bad as all that ^_^
Quote from: Shadow on July 09, 2009, 02:48:26 PM
It only becomes a problem if the person with the notice becomes militant when people don't listen.
That's why I was driven to post this topic.
Quote
If a player can play peacefully, then more power to them.
Not when they get their friends to murder whoever gets in their way! grr.
Quote from: Shadow on July 09, 2009, 12:49:04 PM
Eh, there's a limit. If the way you are playing is causing others to leave, you need to stop doing it. But the rest is valid.
This might cause me to leave.
Quote from: Neobaron on July 09, 2009, 02:51:44 PM
I believe that last bit was a joke, shadow. :P
Oh yeah, I'm quite the comedian.
Quote from: Genevieve on July 09, 2009, 05:54:39 PM
Quote
If a player can play peacefully, then more power to them.
Not when they get their friends to murder whoever gets in their way! grr.
If your talking about me, no one asked me to murder you I did it myself. Attack a passive again and ill completely end you. This is my warning to you.
Quote from: Gen. Volkov on July 09, 2009, 02:41:16 PM
Meh, I don't generally pay attention to what other people are doing, or what they ask. If I am annoyed enough by something, I'll send a message, but otherwise I just play the game. I regard murders and such as acts of war, and will only resort to them if I have no other option, or if I am at war. I don't generally hit people to much lower than 20k land. In fact, when I'm not provoked, I'm a pretty nice player. Not passive by any stretch, but pretty nice. However, if I am moved to send a note, ignore me at your own peril, as I'm sure quite a few players can attest too.
I will take this as permission to ignore your ridiculousness in reg.
QuoteThu, 09 Jul 2009 13:20:26 -0600
From The Hounds of Ulster (#34) (?)
Leave a hole please. Or I will be forced to murder you next time. I really don't want to do that, but I don't want to be spending all my money buying troops to break you either.
Here is my problem with passive players.
They don't attack anyone, so they expect others to not attack them. Then they moan and whine if they get attacked, even if they have more land than most other players. This does include the all-powerful Peace Alliance, btw :P
I see nothing to respect in that. Because whether they are passive or not, they are still competing. And if they want to compete, they shouldn't have the right to dictate how players interact with them. It's like saying they have a free pass to never being murdered, poisoned, or stolen from. If I could compete in a round passively, rarely get attacked, and never have people try to destroy my Net, then I would play that way all the time. It's goddamn easy.
So I don't respect the multiple people crying "Passive, don't attack me", because it's a cop out.
Playing Turbo lately, I've seen people going nuts left, right and centre. Getting aggro for being max attacked, and responding with steals/murders. Trying to ruin other players just for the sake of ruining them. It's pretty darn bloodthirsty. And although that doesn't make me want to play very much, what really is turning me off, is those same people complaining when other players respond. Nearly all of us are hypocrites, and it's ruining the game.
This game used to be remotely friendly. Playing under alias, I've just been met with waves of abuse.
We need to pull our heads in, or at least perpetuate a better environment.
Heh i know completly what this topic is about as it concerns me completly.
Btw for Geniveive i am Ichigo
Ok i did three steals on Geniveive in order to see if she had sheilds up the next day i logged on to find i had been hit to 3k land.
So i retalled killing off 60 mil net.
I sent a message saying that it was retal and that i could stop there however her clanmate then proceded to take me down to 4k land.
So then i got a bit angry i onlined Geniveive, murded their highest player into the ground and left it at that.
It was all retal I put the message take me below 12k land and pay up so i have to show people that i am willing to enforce it otherwise no-one will obey it.
So there you go the whole story.
I knew who you were, obliterator, but don't flatter yourself, it wasn't just about you.
Well considering i was told by one of your clan mates that i wouldn't last i thought you had no idea who i was.
Technicly anyone can put up a sign like that and no-one has to obey them.
But as you said this is a war game so if we were in war and i want up to the border with a shotgun and said dont come across or ill shoot you it doesn't stop you from comming across but it sure provides a big deterent.
In the same way im saying dont take me below a certain amount or ill hit you.
It doesn't stop you but it provides a deterent.
If we were in a war, and you did that, I would just shoot you first duhh
So what are you complaining about
I shot you you shot me and somhow where both not dead
I must say though it was rather amusing.
In the past few days iv been called a twat and idiot and iv been told i wouldn't last at redwall :D
You still don't get it do you, I'm not complaining about what you did. I'm complaining about the pretense under which you (and others!) base your acts of retaliation - that someone deserves it because they didn't obey your high and mighty instructions.
I mean, yeah, what you did to me and my clan was kind of annoying. But I wouldn't care so much if you didn't say that I "deserved it".
Quote from: Genevieve on July 09, 2009, 08:11:01 PM
I'm complaining about the pretense under which you (and others!) base your acts of retaliation - that someone deserves it because they didn't obey your high and mighty instructions.
So that makes you a hypocrite then cause you have things like that on your clan page, +4 steals/murders while shielded and such will get you beat, I'm a leader player, not my fault you choose to Indy and leave your billions exsposed, yet utilizing my abilitys to take your money will result in me being beaten badly, well that is the same thing In my eyes.
I'm not a hypocrite, I wouldn't have put that up if I was clan leader. But I would beat someone who did that many steals/murders on me regardless.
Quote from: Genevieve on July 09, 2009, 08:11:01 PM
You still don't get it do you, I'm not complaining about what you did. I'm complaining about the pretense under which you (and others!) base your acts of retaliation - that someone deserves it because they didn't obey your high and mighty instructions.
I mean, yeah, what you did to me and my clan was kind of annoying. But I wouldn't care so much if you didn't say that I "deserved it".
Eh. Being taken down to 3k acres when there's tons of land in the game is rather inexcusable, whether there's a warning or not.
I dont bother with warnings, if someone hits me that low I smash them back and generally send a message "plz to not take me so low again kkthx"
If you consider that whining so be it. I would still say you deserved retal for being a turd, warning or no.
Granted, being sent a message "I told you not to do that" is prolly a little grating, but so is logging in and finding you have 1/4 the land of the next lowest active player.
I kinda appreciate the notices that give troop holes ("plz attack with stoats"). I usually doublecheck their news before I attack anyways, as failed attacks are wasteful, but a heads up is nice.
Generally I run with a flexible "code," if someone slams me I slam back. If I see someone maxing others to get land I max them, granted they have land to take. Else, I generally try to not attack anyone more than 8x turbo, 6x reg.
The warnings left on notices are generally ignored. Mostly they're common sense anyhow: "plz to not murder/poison" "dont take me under 10k acres" "attack with stoats" etc
i prefer kicking butt to kissing butt. nice job to juska nad corrado though failing twice in a row.
Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:57:26 -0600
From Corrado (#28) (?)
darnit! You wernt supposed to be online for at least another 20 mins then i would have had you.
Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:47:35 -0600
From Juskabally (#16) (?)
Fitting that you logged in.
That run was a warning, you have become too much of a nuisance. I have had enough of your leader attacks on my clanmates, if you want to bring us down do it with standards. If you continue next time you will be dead.
~Juska
Quote from: windhound on July 10, 2009, 01:10:14 AM
Eh. Being taken down to 3k acres when there's tons of land in the game is rather inexcusable, whether there's a warning or not.
To be honest, the only reason I actually took that much land, is because of his "don't knock me lower than 12k". It made him seem like such a
-edit- that it was more of an invitation than a deterrent. I'm pretty evil in that way >:D
Warning for Language.
Holby, modding.
Well in that case im glad i hit you as hard as i did.
Oh and Bob message me ingame.
Oh no and I thought we were at the beggining of a beautiful friendship :(
QuoteI will take this as permission to ignore your ridiculousness in reg.
Read what I said again Gen. I'm a nice player, but if you annoy me and I send a note, you'd best heed what I say.
Anyway Gen, would it kill you to leave a goram troop hole? You'd actually be better off just concentrating on one troop type when you indy, it's more efficient. Actually, if you want, I could teach you how to indy much better than you currently are. I really don't want to be unpleasant you know. I'd prefer to just do my thing, teach newer players better strategies, that sort of thing. It just gets annoying having to spend so much time on a simple thing like getting land.
Quote from: Genevieve on July 10, 2009, 06:36:22 AM
Oh no and I thought we were at the beggining of a beautiful friendship :(
:P well the friendship may have to wait a bit...
Although we can still be friends whild killing each other its rather fun you know
Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:13:53 -0600 Ichigo (#39)
Clan: Dunno Genevieve (#26)
Clan: [][][][] Mission: Steal
Success
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:13:51 -0600 Ichigo (#39)
Clan: Dunno Genevieve (#26)
Clan: [][][][] Mission: Steal
Success
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:13:49 -0600 Ichigo (#39)
Clan: Dunno Genevieve (#26)
Clan: [][][][] Mission: Steal
Success
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:13:47 -0600 Ichigo (#39)
Clan: Dunno Genevieve (#26)
Clan: [][][][] Mission: Steal
Success
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:13:44 -0600 Ichigo (#39)
Clan: Dunno Genevieve (#26)
Clan: [][][][] Mission: Steal
Success
Looks like 5 times my friend. It only takes 1 to see if a shield is up. 5 is a violation of our clan policy. You sir are the aggressor.
I'm sorry that Genevieve is not following the "almighty" rule here at RWL: Give up your land. And just for that she is a better player than 9/10ths of the people here.
Quote from: The Obliterator on July 09, 2009, 07:17:35 PM
Heh i know completly what this topic is about as it concerns me completly.
Btw for Geniveive i am Ichigo
Ok i did three steals on Geniveive in order to see if she had sheilds up the next day i logged on to find i had been hit to 3k land.
So i retalled killing off 60 mil net.
I sent a message saying that it was retal and that i could stop there however her clanmate then proceded to take me down to 4k land.
So then i got a bit angry i onlined Geniveive, murded their highest player into the ground and left it at that.
It was all retal I put the message take me below 12k land and pay up so i have to show people that i am willing to enforce it otherwise no-one will obey it.
So there you go the whole story.
so that's who you are ><
i thought you were a new player
Bleach Fans Unite!
QuoteI'm sorry that Genevieve is not following the "almighty" rule here at RWL: Give up your land. And just for that she is a better player than 9/10ths of the people here.
Or maybe it just makes her stubborn. The way I see it, people trying to hold land just makes things bloodier. If person using a leader strat can't easily break for land with troops, they're liable to either attack with leaders, or murder the player doing so, especially if they are an indy. Neither situation benefits both players especially and generally just tends to increase the amount of bloodymindedness in the game. I suppose if you are looking to make a more combative and nasty game environment, then holding land is good. If you are trying to make the game at least somewhat civil and more welcoming to new players, then perhaps land passing is the better way to go.
To be fair, this game isn't about benefiting everyone, it is about benefiting yourself. And holding land does that, if you are able to keep it. So more power to her. However, in doing that, you acknowledge that if you fail to hold you are going to get hammered a lot harder than were you not trying to hold. So, defend all you want, just don't complain when people come after you for it.
On the other hand, murdering is generally not necessary - you can free the land with leader attacks in the case of an indy, so murders are usually done out of spite if it is leader vs indier. Leader vs leader, murders are usually necessary to keep the land freed.
QuoteOn the other hand, murdering is generally not necessary - you can free the land with leader attacks in the case of an indy, so murders are usually done out of spite if it is leader vs indier. Leader vs leader, murders are usually necessary to keep the land freed.
You can, but it's far less harmful to your leaders if you murder them instead. This run was the first in the last five where I didn't manage to get a 100 leader ratio at the end without dropping land. If it's a choice between spending enough cash to break, losing huge amounts of leaders attacking with them, or murdering for a few turns, well, murdering seems like the best option.
i agree with volkov there
i would murder someone to make it cheaper.
In that case, I agree with Shadow. LOL. Just kidding Sevz.
Quote from: Gen. Volkov on July 10, 2009, 02:21:02 PM
If you are trying to make the game at least somewhat civil and more welcoming to new players, then perhaps land passing is the better way to go.
Volkov, I am a new player and this whole idea that you not only have to worry about playing the game well enough to go up in the ranks, but also the convenience and welfare of all the other players is really turning me off. It is not me pushing new players away. I will probably stop playing after this turbo round.
And I know you've been playing a lot longer than me, but I'm pretty happy with the indy strat I was taught and I really don't think yours would be better.
genevieve, don't quit, i'm starting to like you.
you do whatever you want and if anyone gives you any hassles let me know and i'll take care of them.
if they're to small for me to take care of i'll pay my bounty hunter
i wanna see more of you Gen
Quote from: Gen. Volkov on July 10, 2009, 04:02:43 PM
QuoteOn the other hand, murdering is generally not necessary - you can free the land with leader attacks in the case of an indy, so murders are usually done out of spite if it is leader vs indier. Leader vs leader, murders are usually necessary to keep the land freed.
You can, but it's far less harmful to your leaders if you murder them instead. This run was the first in the last five where I didn't manage to get a 100 leader ratio at the end without dropping land. If it's a choice between spending enough cash to break, losing huge amounts of leaders attacking with them, or murdering for a few turns, well, murdering seems like the best option.
If they have their shields up, murdering won't do heaps. Especially if they have towers. You'd have to spend at least max attacks just to murder enough to get their troops down, then buy enough troops to break their towers + what they have remaining. If they have shields, it's better just spending more outright and getting enough to break than wasting the turns/loyalty/health.
QuoteVolkov, I am a new player and this whole idea that you not only have to worry about playing the game well enough to go up in the ranks, but also the convenience and welfare of all the other players is really turning me off.
You don't have to worry about the rest of them if you don't want to - just be prepared for the retaliation when you step on toes. But you sound like you like the retal side of things anyway, so no worries. Seriously, why is this such a big deal? If you don't want to play like that, then don't. Just don't get mad when people fight back.
Quotebut I'm pretty happy with the indy strat I was taught and I really don't think yours would be better.
There is -always- a way to improve your play, even if it is only circumstantial.
QuoteAnd I know you've been playing a lot longer than me, but I'm pretty happy with the indy strat I was taught and I really don't think yours would be better.
Going by your current NW and amounts of troops, I could help you do far better than you are. I dunno who taught you your indy strat, but I think he or she gave you bad advice. Contrary to what you may have been told, I am one of the elite players of this game, and I know I could have you at a much higher rank than you are now within 1 run. My advice set Neo in the top ten from somewhere in the 30's or 40's in one run.
Quote
Volkov, I am a new player and this whole idea that you not only have to worry about playing the game well enough to go up in the ranks, but also the convenience and welfare of all the other players is really turning me off. It is not me pushing new players away. I will probably stop playing after this turbo round.
Well, that's too bad. But if all you want is the competition, and not worry about what other people do, as Shadow said, you should be prepared to accept the consequences. Which includes people being very mean to you. I dunno how many in this game would have even sent you a warning like I did before they did something nasty to you. I certainly never receive warnings when I get hammered, even though I always send them before I hammer someone. It's funny how I always warn someone before I come after them, and then they get all mad when I carry through. Snare wanted to kill me after I punched out the top guys in BlackFly for the first time in the Woof-BlackFly war. Even though I told them I was coming for them, and they said they were ready.
QuoteIf they have their shields up, murdering won't do heaps. Especially if they have towers. You'd have to spend at least max attacks just to murder enough to get their troops down, then buy enough troops to break their towers + what they have remaining. If they have shields, it's better just spending more outright and getting enough to break than wasting the turns/loyalty/health.
Well, shields do change things, but it would still be cheaper overall to murder even with shields than either buying up outright or using leader attacks. I don't lose any loyalty when I'm murdering, and only 2% health. So it's just the turns wasted, and I'd rather spend those than fail a bunch of times and have to use open atk opportunity anyway. Why buy a bunch of troops with a marginal chance at achieving superiority when I can spend a few extra turns and ensure that I will break? Besides, Gen sounds like she wants to play hardball.
Quote from: Gen. Volkov on July 10, 2009, 05:13:28 PM
Well, shields do change things, but it would still be cheaper overall to murder even with shields than either buying up outright or using leader attacks. I don't lose any loyalty when I'm murdering, and only 2% health. So it's just the turns wasted, and I'd rather spend those than fail a bunch of times and have to use open atk opportunity anyway. Why buy a bunch of troops with a marginal chance at achieving superiority when I can spend a few extra turns and ensure that I will break?
Volkov, you know that doesn't even make sense. :P
QuoteVolkov, you know that doesn't even make sense.
What the not losing loyalty bit? It's true, as a stoat, I don't lose much loyalty when I murder, I might even gain some. It's only 22k loyalty per 2 turns, and I probably make more than that on a per turn basis. Health is basically a non-issue, since max-attacks murders would be only 80 health or so, and heal will get that back in 16 turns. So it really is only turns used. Given that I'm going to be using academy to get my leaders up to full anyway, I really don't see any disadvantage to murdering someone to ensure that I can break, and more than a few advantages. So where am I not making sense Holbs? If people wanna play hardball, then I don't see why I should hold back on their account. Murder is definitely the best option, in my opinion, and I'd be a fool not to use it if people don't want to give me any breaks. Not murdering people is one of the things we collectively decided was a polite thing to do, just as leaving troop holes was decided to be a polite thing to do. If people don't want to be polite to me, then I see no reason to be polite to them.
Oh you taught Neo, Volkov??? He certainly is an amazing player. You must be fantastic. *pump*
You're right, your indy strat is truely the best *pump pump*. No one knows how to indy as good as you *pump pump pump*. I really should feel honoured by your offer of help.
In fact, Volkov, you are so good, I don't think I really need to leave troop holes for you... I mean that would be just be making it too easy for you.
Quote from: Genevieve on July 10, 2009, 11:02:24 PM
Oh you taught Neo, Volkov??? He certainly is an amazing player. You must be fantastic. *pump*
You're right, your indy strat is truely the best *pump pump*. No one knows how to indy as good as you *pump pump pump*. I really should feel honoured by your offer of help.
In fact, Volkov, you are so good, I don't think I really need to leave troop holes for you... I mean that would be just be making it too easy for you.
Btw, you know only about a year ago I don't think there was even team indy at this site, now it's a very widely-used strat here.
You and volk should have a little war to resolve it :P
If you had an indy war id join.
I suck at leadering
QuoteOh you taught Neo, Volkov??? He certainly is an amazing player. You must be fantastic. *pump*
You're right, your indy strat is truely the best *pump pump*. No one knows how to indy as good as you *pump pump pump*. I really should feel honoured by your offer of help.
It was just an example. I also taught Oblit, Marell, Wolf Snare, Ruddertail, and several others how to play better. I never said I was the best indy, or even close to it, I'm just saying you could be doing a lot better.
Quote
In fact, Volkov, you are so good, I don't think I really need to leave troop holes for you... I mean that would be just be making it too easy for you.
Right, well, if that's how you want to play it, then enjoy the fruits of your attitude.
Quote from: The Obliterator on July 11, 2009, 07:33:39 AM
If you had an indy war id join.
I suck at leadering
You should try learning. You don't even need to be great at it to get good finishes, I suck and I've got quite a few of top 5 finishes leadering solo haha
If anyeone starts a war I'll...observe
QuoteIf you had an indy war id join.
I suck at leadering
Well, I suppose we could use this Turbo round to see who is the better indy.
*Yawn* The RWL Indy was invented in July 2004 by myself.
The only difference from other prom indies is the reliance upon the Mercenaries for your entire cash gain.
Then I suppose you're probably the best indy here. There's nothing wrong with a little friendly competition though is there?
Inventing somehting doesn't make you the best at it ^_^ plus there are at least 4 different indy strategies that I can think of off the top of my head, and several subtypes of each. So "RWL indy" is pretty unspecific. Not belittling your claim or anything, inventing the father of all those strats is pretty impressive - just making the point that indy has come a long way from its invention.
eh first problem id have to revert
I am the best solo indy Shadow.
meh go chew on your rats
ill beat ya at indy
lol accually im not sure whose the best iv never accually indied against you.
heh ill have to try it one day.
Quote from: Juska on July 12, 2009, 12:34:42 AM
I am the best solo indy Shadow.
Your average Turbo net is lower than several other indyers. But you have been doing it longer than anyone else.
I really don't know who the best solo indy is. If I had to make a call, I'd say Shadow.
1 ? promising pain (#39) 13,846 $1,761,614,207 1 Stoat Mossflower
2 ? C.P.L.5.9.3.H. (#14) 24,962 $663,573,368 Woof Stoat Mossflower
3 ? Peace Alliance (#8) 21,436 $505,785,754 BlackFly Stoat Mossflower
4 ? Night Wolf (#5) 25,445 $484,830,398 KOTW Stoat Mossflower
5 ? Axle The Unleasher (#22) 12,500 $230,465,809 Alliance Wildcat Mossflower
6 ? Quixote Katana (#25) 13,833 $202,838,203 EOTP Wildcat Mossflower
7 ? The Hounds of Ulster (#34) 20,144 $188,852,730 Woof Stoat Mossflower
8 ? White Night (#21) 11,267 $183,459,747 KOTW Wildcat Mossflower
9 ? Genevieve (#117) 62,768 $177,856,786 None Rat Northlands
10 ? The Obliterator (#12) 16,484 $166,747,532 1 Rat Northlands
Looks like I'm actually the best!
Quote from: Genevieve on July 12, 2009, 01:30:01 AM
1 ? promising pain (#39) 13,846 $1,761,614,207 1 Stoat Mossflower
2 ? C.P.L.5.9.3.H. (#14) 24,962 $663,573,368 Woof Stoat Mossflower
3 ? Peace Alliance (#8) 21,436 $505,785,754 BlackFly Stoat Mossflower
4 ? Night Wolf (#5) 25,445 $484,830,398 KOTW Stoat Mossflower
5 ? Axle The Unleasher (#22) 12,500 $230,465,809 Alliance Wildcat Mossflower
6 ? Quixote Katana (#25) 13,833 $202,838,203 EOTP Wildcat Mossflower
7 ? The Hounds of Ulster (#34) 20,144 $188,852,730 Woof Stoat Mossflower
8 ? White Night (#21) 11,267 $183,459,747 KOTW Wildcat Mossflower
9 ? Genevieve (#117) 62,768 $177,856,786 None Rat Northlands
10 ? The Obliterator (#12) 16,484 $166,747,532 1 Rat Northlands
Looks like I'm actually the best!
Lol if you went by that it would be Oblit, once you account for how much more land you have over him.
Its hard to judge who is the best solo indier here, because its not a common strat, as the best players here are usually smart enough to know its pointless :P
I have always been impressed with Juska's solo indying, which is more than I can say for his "I am the best solo indy" comment.
Players like Juska and Oblit I know to be excellent troop massers and are usually the two who get away to the quickest starts in turbo rounds...but others such as Shadow, Peace Alliance and Taek I have witnessed developing the strat further so as to be able to hold top spot with their troops networth
and have a strong enough leader defence to withstand leader missions..almost unbreakable in all aspects, which I find more impressive.
Hehe geniveive i haven't run turns on reg in about 2-3 weeks
relax guys, i was kidding.
Everyone takes this game to seriously
Prove that you're the best indy, instead of wasting pages on a forum about it.
Are you really accusing us of wasting pages on a forum? :P
Quote from: Genevieve on July 12, 2009, 07:45:33 AM
Are you really accusing us of wasting pages on a forum? :P
Noh I'm increasing my post count :P
You guys are silly. At the skill level in the game now, "best" is just circumstantial. Claiming to be the best, now that's just asking to be proven wrong :P
http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=5481.0
We'll I was the best and proved it back then, I suppose someone could have surpassed me.
Alright... So it's a shame i wasn't here for this conversation - since i seem to have taken a lot of flack here...
I only ready the first page, so excuse me if i'm repeating things or if i'm now off topic.
Geneviere, your original post was phrased as something of a question:
QuoteHi all, I'm pretty new and am having trouble grasping the whole "etiquette" part of this game.
That is a fair enough statement! There are so many social nuances here at RWL that you're right to be confused! Any new player, totally unfamiliar with RWL would be in a state of anomie (look it up).
However, after this original statement you proceeded to accuse and condemn these social structures. This is unjustified because, as you said, you haven't yet grasped these concepts and are thusly not well equipped to criticize them.
It has been said already that this is an OLD discussion here at RWL. Holbs referenced something that probably came instantly to the mind of any player who has been here long enough to remember it, and that is the famous quote from Ragefur long long ago:
Quotethis is RWL: Warlords, not Redwall: Happy Pony Raisers
This is true, it's a game of war, and it is competitive. However, by definition, RWL is a MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-playing game) and one of the important parts of that ugly acronym is the RPG part. We are all playing roles here. The way you behave in game is the type of character you are playing. For example, Shade is always
always scheming evil deeds. That is the
role he plays in this game. Windy is
always playing fairly, that is the role he's playing. Whether he plays that role intentionally, or if that's the result of playing the game with such ambivalence, doesn't matter!
You can play the game however you want, but the this game is social and diplomatic. It's interactive! It's that social connection that makes this game interesting. It's the human variable that makes the game infinitely different. There is an actual
social evolution to this game that, when i do my thesis, you will get to read about!
I could go on and on about this, but i'm trying to sum things up. One thing I would like to reference is a clan idea i came up with many many years ago, misspelled "Vengence". As an example of how complicatedly social this game is... as an example of the most spelled-out version of the "etiquette" that you are having a hard time understanding, take a look at this example!
http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=5195.0 (http://www.redwallwarlords.com/forums/index.php?topic=5195.0)