Victorious Nations/Hall of Honor

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by archaeolept

Jim. As an experienced DomIII vet you subbed into an explicitly noob only game, taking over the leading position, and then prevailed against a bunch of staling nations. Sure, subbing in is fine, since they needed someone, but being a vet in a nub game would seem to disqualify this as any sort of real win.

If you look at the time in which I accepted the sub, I hardly see how I could be considered a vet. In fact, if you look at page 8 of this thread, the -first- game that I joined on this forum, did not come to a close until the week -after- I entered this game. Thus, 4 months ago when I joined Divine Might, I am quite certain that I met the criteria for the game itself.

Honestly this just feels like a vaguely hypocritical, personally biased observation on your part. Most of the real vets (people who have been here more than a year, that excludes me) say that this Hall of Fame and whatnot are just for fun, because the relative level of competition between games cannot be quantified. It's obvious that you are not on some sort of crusade to improve the veracity of the list, it's just that you don't like me.

Anyway, regardless of what point in time anyone would have started considering me a "vet" rather than a "newbie", I can't imagine that point was reached at any time before I joined this game, so please find something else to do. I'm quite sure that everyone else would rather that you and I didn't interact - something that I am most happy to oblige them with, if you can bring yourself to do the same (at least until such point as we regain some measure of respect for one another).

[archaeolept]

Excuse me, how exactly am I being hypocritical? That is a serious charge, and offensive. Are you saying that my wins were as a vet in games designed for newbies? - as that would be the only way what I said could be construed as hypocritical, as far as I can see.

All I did, following the comments of Lingchih and doncorazon, is that I checked the game and saw that you had subbed into a leading position in a game where the players were playing their second or third games, who then began staling, and never technically conceded; nor did you "technically win" a month ago as you claimed, as that would have involved the game notifying you that your pretender had ascended... At first, I thought you were counting this as a half a victory, as you played half the game and took over the already winning position, but I see from the winning games list that that is not the case.

I guess we just have different standards.

I have never even posted in this thread before this, so it would be rather difficult to claim that I take this ranking so seriously. I'm certainly on no such crusade; merely pointing out the obvious.

[archaeolept]

i have no objections.

[Lingchih]

Originally Posted by archaeolept

Jim. As an experienced DomIII vet you subbed into an explicitly noob only game, taking over the leading position, and then prevailed against a bunch of staling nations. Sure, subbing in is fine, since they needed someone, but being a vet in a nub game would seem to disqualify this as any sort of real win.

I also subbed into a noob game, by the request of the other players. I will probably win it (if it does not just peter out due to disinterest), but I'm not sure I will count it as a win here.

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by Lingchih

I also subbed into a noob game, by the request of the other players. I will probably win it (if it does not just peter out due to disinterest), but I'm not sure I will count it as a win here.

Well and like I said, the first game that I joined here was not even concluded until a week after my first post in the Divine_Might game thread, so even if I was walking the line between n00b and something greater, I fail to see how I could be a vet before even finishing a single game.

Certainly if I were to sub into such a game now, it would be only to avoid the entire game being ruined by a powerful nation (hardly dominant, they were large, but had 10k pop in the capital, NO research, and NO site searching done yet) being turned to AI. I'd basically just do fast, minimal turns, and not invade anyone - just to help out.

Anyway, I suppose I'd be willing to call it a half-win - obviously from my last post in the game thread, I was waffling a bit. But I did put a lot of effort into the position, and ultimately felt it was worth something. And yes, I can post the last turn of the game if anyone wishes, since there was a comment that the "game" didn't end naturally, nor did every existing player "technically concede". Most of the games I've ever been in ended without "a true god ascending" in game, and usually with just a few of the stronger nations conceding in thread, and the silence of the rest echoing a lack of overt objections in the game ending.....

God this whole thing seems silly.

[DonCorazon]

I usually look at game threads when people post wins because I like to check out endgame files when they are posted. Most games threads end with players voting and congratulating a winner. That is why your game thread seemed funny and prompted my joke about it being solitaire since you had a single post when you joined in Oct saying how your nation "seems really strong", then there was a single post by another player before the game seems to have ended in Nov with your unanswered post asking for the game to end and referencing someone with 18 stales etc. I didn't even think about you being a vet or whatever in a noob game. It was more a comment on the fact you joined and won in a total of 2 posts.

I did notice looking at the thread though that there were only 7 players, not 8 in that game. Well at the start. I don't know how many you actually had to defeat...

PS I don't really think its silly either though. As much as people may play it off like its not a big deal, I think it does matter. There are a lot of smart competitive people in MP and the HoF is one of the ways of demonstrating mastery of the game aka pwnage. You were quick to point out the 2.5 so I would guess it matters to you. I am writing this now so I guess I care about it a little bit too. As do probably most people who take the time to post their wins here.

[JimMorrison]

Well, I wish someone else had a second opinion. I am ignoring the other poster's provocations at this point, since he's sorely biased - so if anyone else thinks it is that out of the norm, I'll just rescind the whole thing and go back to plotting current and future conquests

I will say, I did just check, and I noted that Zhao refrained from posting the win for Chlorolera, as it ended up being a bit of a Premature Ascension (should see a doctor, Admiral! ), but I've seen a couple other games posted here that didn't seem like much to be proud of, so I'm just unclear on what is actually considered as justified to be posted as a victory, and what is questionable. Even more confusing is that I am this big bad vet, and I don't know these things yet, even though I watch this thread like a soap opera.

[rabelais]

Rabe won cbm_flapped on gamdalf's server as LA TC. Yay fewer games!

Oops didnt read the rules. only 3 players really (4 but one never logged in and was turned AI) random map obviously.

[Lingchih]

This is a sticky for Wins, right? Not a forum for discussion.

[Zeldor]

I should be quite high in HoF now for that Kingmaker victory