High House Shadow today at 01:36
Hi there. I suppose my intentions are fairly obvious... Nothing personal bud. :)
6li7ch today at 14:59
Of course it's personal. We're persons, aren't we?
I hope you have fun imagining the electronic screams of my poor defenceless villagers.
Have a nice day!
I hope you have fun imagining the electronic screams of my poor defenceless villagers.
Have a nice day!
High House Shadow today at 17:16
*Chuckles* That is an amusing image.
By the way... why don't you have a wall? D:
By the way... why don't you have a wall? D:
6li7ch today at 17:28
Well, no-one was attacking me. I didn't really need one before now.
High House Shadow today at 17:29
mmh... well you can't rely on your ability to build a wall after someone starts attacking you! XP
That thing can take like six hours a level when it gets higher up. =/
6li7ch today at 17:38
To be honest I wasn't expecting such a swift and focused attack from in-land so soon. You also happened to catch me on a day when my modem was down, lucky fella. I would have given a much swifter response if the universe hadn't decided to send a massive thunderstorm my way.
Anyways, best of luck to you - and just so you know, I wasn't a threat to you in any way. Attacking people is a dreadfully unmannerly thing to do.
Anyways, best of luck to you - and just so you know, I wasn't a threat to you in any way. Attacking people is a dreadfully unmannerly thing to do.
High House Shadow today at 17:41
D'oh. Sorry about that mate; I wasn't aware of your modem. That was a bit of a low blow. =/ Nothing I can do about that, however.
And... well, this is tribal wars], bud, not tribal hugs. :P To get stronger, I have to take others out. From your village I'll be in a great position to take out that MANIC cluster you have right next to you. :3
And... well, this is tribal wars], bud, not tribal hugs. :P To get stronger, I have to take others out. From your village I'll be in a great position to take out that MANIC cluster you have right next to you. :3
6li7ch today at 17:59
Sigh.
Gn0me tried to point out the exact same thing, but I couldn't really see his side. One may as well name life 'survival' and insist that the only option available to us is to kill and dominate in order to achieve that end. Perhaps you've never played Bioshock, or read 'The Lord of the Flies'?
You see, we all make choices. What others expect our choices to be are besides the point. You are the one with the button in front of you. You chose to push it.
Just as I chose to join this world to make the option to push that button available, but refused to undergo that essential final action.
I do not hate you, and you have nothing to apologise for. I do not even pity you. Your choices are yours, and mine are mine, regardless of the name we give our game.
Gn0me tried to point out the exact same thing, but I couldn't really see his side. One may as well name life 'survival' and insist that the only option available to us is to kill and dominate in order to achieve that end. Perhaps you've never played Bioshock, or read 'The Lord of the Flies'?
You see, we all make choices. What others expect our choices to be are besides the point. You are the one with the button in front of you. You chose to push it.
Just as I chose to join this world to make the option to push that button available, but refused to undergo that essential final action.
I do not hate you, and you have nothing to apologise for. I do not even pity you. Your choices are yours, and mine are mine, regardless of the name we give our game.
High House Shadow today at 18:05
Oh, I love bioshock. However, this game only really has two options; kill or be killed. I suppose you could even last for a time on pure defense... but by chosing not to prepare for the eventual attack that will, you dig your own grave. =/
I am... not certain why you would mention not pitying me, for I am playing this game as it was meant to be played and no pity is due the victor.
...Still. You talk as if it were too late. It isn't, you know. You could still give me a run for my money, if you're good; but it would be difficult and in all likelihood would end the same. Still, nothing's impossible. I've seen much more unlikely scenarios.
I am... not certain why you would mention not pitying me, for I am playing this game as it was meant to be played and no pity is due the victor.
...Still. You talk as if it were too late. It isn't, you know. You could still give me a run for my money, if you're good; but it would be difficult and in all likelihood would end the same. Still, nothing's impossible. I've seen much more unlikely scenarios.
6li7ch today at 18:24
Bioshock has four options if you include yours: kill or be killed, and whether or not you save the Little Sisters. One reflects the goal of the game (staying alive & escaping Rapture) while the other reflects how you go about achieving that goal (co-operation or domination)
I would argue that the same exists for this game. If the players weren't so focused on the perception of the arena as one of bloodshed, co-operation could easily ensure no-one dies and the game is perpetuated eternally. Think of it as a figurative paradise which due to a technicality of human nature cannot reach fruition. In a balanced world attackers and defenders would be equally matched, and we would be trapped in a glorious place of eternal conflict - rather than eternal stagnation under total dominion or total co-operation.
You misunderstand my offer of pity, and why it was withheld. If anything were pitiable, it would be that you believe you are acting the way you are supposed to because someone else told you it is so, rather than finding your own reason to do so. I withhold my pity until you give me permission to do so because you may already be aware of this, and I cannot fully ascertain that your actions are that of a 'slave' (in the Bioshock sense) and not of one who has mastered himself.
Lastly; of course I will continue to defend myself as best I can. How else would we be able to continue our conversation?
I would argue that the same exists for this game. If the players weren't so focused on the perception of the arena as one of bloodshed, co-operation could easily ensure no-one dies and the game is perpetuated eternally. Think of it as a figurative paradise which due to a technicality of human nature cannot reach fruition. In a balanced world attackers and defenders would be equally matched, and we would be trapped in a glorious place of eternal conflict - rather than eternal stagnation under total dominion or total co-operation.
You misunderstand my offer of pity, and why it was withheld. If anything were pitiable, it would be that you believe you are acting the way you are supposed to because someone else told you it is so, rather than finding your own reason to do so. I withhold my pity until you give me permission to do so because you may already be aware of this, and I cannot fully ascertain that your actions are that of a 'slave' (in the Bioshock sense) and not of one who has mastered himself.
Lastly; of course I will continue to defend myself as best I can. How else would we be able to continue our conversation?
High House Shadow today at 18:51
Hhmm.. you have an interesting perception on the game. However, I must say that I do not agree. The ultimate objective of this game is, as a tribe, to dominate most of the world over the course of several years. As a player, it is to grow as much as you can and help your tribe in whatever way you can. I agree that it would be much more fun if all our battles were evenly matched, but this just is not the case. I actually like the risk, the possibility of absolute defeat, because it comes with the reward of absolute victory.
If you want my reason for attacking you? Well that's simple. In the short term, I want to gain one more village. Your village will put me up to #1 on the continent. :) Aside from that it will put me into a good position to cut into the manic cluster, and my tribe will war with them very soon if things continue the way they are. So I will be taking villages there as well. In the mid term, I am to be the dominant player in the continent... in the dominant tribe in the continent. And in the long term I hope to me a major contender in the wars to come; though I doubt I will ever make it to the end of world 56.
If you want my reason for attacking you? Well that's simple. In the short term, I want to gain one more village. Your village will put me up to #1 on the continent. :) Aside from that it will put me into a good position to cut into the manic cluster, and my tribe will war with them very soon if things continue the way they are. So I will be taking villages there as well. In the mid term, I am to be the dominant player in the continent... in the dominant tribe in the continent. And in the long term I hope to me a major contender in the wars to come; though I doubt I will ever make it to the end of world 56.
High House Shadow today at 19:37
...Ouch. >.> I can't believe I forgot to send my mounted archers with that attack! Lol. Well congradulations, your friend is indeed going to put a nasty dent in my troops with that...
6li7ch today at 19:47
Ah, domination. Everybody craves control, and almost everybody loses.
Think about it this way. You yourself admit that the chances of 'winning' world 56 are low. Accepting that you have very little choice in the matter of succession, the only absolute control you have is over the small-scale actions you choose at the beginning of the game. 97% of the players will not reach their ultimate objective, and so mathematically speaking it makes sense to treat yourself as part of that majority when considering what actions you may perform.
To put it simply, we 'all' die, regardless of how we struggle, and so the true actions of worth we are left with are not those which lead towards absolute victory, but those which determine the fate of our 'Little Sisters'; those pure and innocent parts of ourselves we so readily sacrifice in the hopes of acquiring victory.
Nothing ends. When this world is unified under one tribe a new world will be populated with the forces that held together the old. There will be no 'Little Sisters' to tempt the morality of the players - only the strategic greed, loyalty and domination they have come to see as tools of survival. When Tribal Wars isn't enough for its players, what do you think happens to the 'nothing personal' attitude they have trained themselves to feel?
I am here merely to suggest that there is a different course of action. Regardless of any 'ultimate' objective, it is not the only objective. Understanding that you have a choice in the matter is all I ask.
You make a good point in your first paragraph where you say the possibility of absolute defeat makes a game more interesting. Thank you for doing so. It will give me something new to consider for a time.
Think about it this way. You yourself admit that the chances of 'winning' world 56 are low. Accepting that you have very little choice in the matter of succession, the only absolute control you have is over the small-scale actions you choose at the beginning of the game. 97% of the players will not reach their ultimate objective, and so mathematically speaking it makes sense to treat yourself as part of that majority when considering what actions you may perform.
To put it simply, we 'all' die, regardless of how we struggle, and so the true actions of worth we are left with are not those which lead towards absolute victory, but those which determine the fate of our 'Little Sisters'; those pure and innocent parts of ourselves we so readily sacrifice in the hopes of acquiring victory.
Nothing ends. When this world is unified under one tribe a new world will be populated with the forces that held together the old. There will be no 'Little Sisters' to tempt the morality of the players - only the strategic greed, loyalty and domination they have come to see as tools of survival. When Tribal Wars isn't enough for its players, what do you think happens to the 'nothing personal' attitude they have trained themselves to feel?
I am here merely to suggest that there is a different course of action. Regardless of any 'ultimate' objective, it is not the only objective. Understanding that you have a choice in the matter is all I ask.
You make a good point in your first paragraph where you say the possibility of absolute defeat makes a game more interesting. Thank you for doing so. It will give me something new to consider for a time.
High House Shadow today at 19:57
I suppose I'm not out to win. I'm out to do well and to have a good run. When I clicked the 'join world' button, it was with the knowledge and acceptance of the fact that, one day, I would lose. I would lose my villages, my weeks or months of hard work. Thus, when it actually happened, I wasn't disappointed. The only thing I was disappointed about was that I did poorly while I was still a contender. So you know what I did? I took the lessons I learned and restarted, to do better.
And regarding your third paragraph; most people have a good grasp of the difference between real life and a game. Just because somebody wins a game doesn't mean they feel no compassion towards people.
And regarding your third paragraph; most people have a good grasp of the difference between real life and a game. Just because somebody wins a game doesn't mean they feel no compassion towards people.
6li7ch today at 21:04
Yes, most people have a good grasp on reality, but with all due respect (and by this I mean I am sorry if I offend you for saying something highly insensitive) most people are idiots.
As you say, you have put weeks or months of hard work into dominating this game. Yet you deny that hard work has any effect on your real life. By this the game becomes meaningless - a passing amusement by which you learn nothing and surrender hours of your life to pointless inaction. Didn't you suggest a game is made fun when one includes the concept of absolute defeat? How then can you insist that separating the actual destruction of your empathic ability from its virtual destruction is as fun as my own fusion of a real world and a virtual one?
I insist to myself that my actions on world 56 matter because it means all the hard work I put into it is not lost - it goes towards fighting an 'absolute defeat' of my moral standing.
To do otherwise is to play half a game - to sense things without attaching an emotional value to them.
This is the true loss. All your hard work and the hours consumed by world 56, the late night build cues and the strategic plotting long hours into the night are worthless unless you accept they have an effect on reality.
As you say, you have put weeks or months of hard work into dominating this game. Yet you deny that hard work has any effect on your real life. By this the game becomes meaningless - a passing amusement by which you learn nothing and surrender hours of your life to pointless inaction. Didn't you suggest a game is made fun when one includes the concept of absolute defeat? How then can you insist that separating the actual destruction of your empathic ability from its virtual destruction is as fun as my own fusion of a real world and a virtual one?
I insist to myself that my actions on world 56 matter because it means all the hard work I put into it is not lost - it goes towards fighting an 'absolute defeat' of my moral standing.
To do otherwise is to play half a game - to sense things without attaching an emotional value to them.
This is the true loss. All your hard work and the hours consumed by world 56, the late night build cues and the strategic plotting long hours into the night are worthless unless you accept they have an effect on reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment