>>Decent players help pull cabals out of underdog status.
>>Excellent players find ways to keep things interesting once
>>this occurs. Guess we know where that puts you.
>
>I'm well aware of my strengths and weaknesses. I'm well
>aware of my caliber as a player. That was a cheap shot, in
>some ways patently untrue, and on this subject your opinion
>really doesn't mean anything to me. We can agree to
>disagree on this point.

Like your opinion means much to me? I'm just here trying to make the game fun for people. In some regards I success, in others I fail. Like I said, I won't line this with sugar in or out of the game. You claim to be an excellent player, I claim that from what I saw, I could only say "This guy can put up a good fight." In those regards you did have a good role and stuck to it, but it wasn't stellar. I'm going to have to tag that as decent. Next!

>>I really liked your role. Loved your no bs attitude and
>>really thought it to be the character. After reading this
>>post, lined with insults and flames, I'm beginning to
>>wonder.
>
>In truth, I was (and am) holding back. I stated, simply,
>that I've always hated you. An oversimplification. In a
>lot of ways I like you. As an authority figure, especially
>senior battle imm, I despise you. Simple statement of how I
>feel. I did flame Grogim, harshly. In that, I'm
>unrepentant. Though I did break out the napalm, it was a
>tiny portion of a large post. I don't think that qualifies
>as 'lined with insults and flames.'

As a person, I'm not sure where the 'hatred' comments are coming from. If it's coming from someone who can sit behind a screen and hate another person without meeting them that's bitter, shallow and immature. We'll consider it isn't just to give you the benefit of the doubt. We'll consider it's Thror you hate. Once more, you can hate him out of game just fine. As a BattleRager, you have to deal with him, his role, his attitude. Thror does not equal the person I am. Thror has always done what's best for battle. The funny thing is, I've not stepped in to monitor battle in quite awhile. The fact that the cabal was letting a breach of a pact occur and not doing a thing about it was pathetic. Yes, you were in a leadership position to have done something or even approached the gods. You did nothing.


>More than once I contemplated deleting rather than having to
>deal with Thror. I knew what to expect walking into this
>character, and knew that I'd spend at least some time
>regretting the investment of time. As I said somewhere
>else... as I was rolling him I 'knew better.'

Your contemplation was probably right on the money. If you want to do things your way and have no authority figures guiding a cabal, then you should probably avoid cabals completely. Based on your attitude via these past few posts and your character traits, I'd have to say the commonalities of you and your character aren't far off. By the way, you won't get very far with that.

>In all honesty... it wasn't as bad as I expected it to be.
>And there was some good to go with the bad. You have grown
>a lot, and you surprised me (pleasantly) on more tha one
>occassion. But you did have me contemplating flipping you
>the bird and deleting. More than once.

Why didn't you? Why endure whatever difficulties I threw at you? Which to my knowledge was one incident which you managed to defend yourself enough to remain in the village. I'm not going to stop monitoring battle, for you, or anyone. Battle needs this. Anyone on the other side of a deathblow gang-bang is going to want and expect retribution and unless one of us Battle Immortals steps in and makes sure those powers are being used correctly, that probably won't happen.

>>Kastellyn has such a way with words. It's part of the game.
>> I wish I could try to take the edge off of the bitterness
>>but I'm not really into trying to sugarcoat anything. You
>>learn to live with it and rise to each situation, defeat or
>>victory in hand.
>
>Because of my rampant snipping, the above paragraph is out
>of context. It refers to the prevalance of ganking.
>
>It is a part of the game. It has always been a part of the
>game. Once a month everyone on one side would log on, and
>run around in a massive group destroying all in their path.
>The majority of fights, however, were one on one or few on
>few. Single people, or small groups, would try to raid
>against equal numbers. People would try to defend their
>cabal if only slightly out numbered. Thera was a bit
>smaller, and it was actually possible to hunt down your
>enemies.. even if they teleported a round later.
>
>These days the situation is reversed. Almost no one will
>fight without an overwhelming advantage. Which I find
>disappointing.
>
>Yes, there was some bitterness there. Yes, a bit of the
>crotchety-old-man-reminicsing-about-the-golden-days coming
>out. That, too, was more a statement of my disappointment
>than a rant, rave, whine, etc.

Reminiscing won't help. These are different days, it's a different game and there are different players. The best you can do is set an example and hope people will follow it. You did well in that regard.

>"You learn to live with it and rise to each situation,
>defeat or victory in hand."
>Three points:
>1. Measuring the new hero range against the old against the
>Nep patented fun-stick... I don't think anyone(except those
>that can ONLY enjoy the rush of success in a part of an
>8-on-1) thinks that this is a positive change.

What are you going to do about it? Go to another mud? Experience the same thing? Honestly, all you can do is bitch about it and that's just a waste of time and bandwidth or you can prepare yourself to think like your opponent in the game and handle each situation with caution. Hey, it's your birthday, do what you like.

>2. Even as a rager(without hide, no less!) I lived with it,
>and rose to each situation, with a surprising number of
>victories in hand.

>*** WARNING *** #3 CONTAINS NAPALM!!! ***
>3. That was a damned pompous statement... with absolutely
>no grounding in reality. This forum is OOC. Drahk doesn't
>have to respect a powerful diety, and patron of his cabal
>here. You know damn well that you couldn't do even half as
>well.

Everyone wants to toot their own horn. Here's me tooting.

I've done twice as well and then some.

However, I've also had the maturity to avoid bringing other people down with my ignorant (yes, without knowledge) statements that hold no merit. If you think you have the facts, then you need to present them to argue your case. JoeBob and Billyboy saying Grogim isn't around when they are and that they need him to enjoy this game, does not equate to solid facts. Like I mentioned to Thralkoz. Battle has three very active immortals who check on the status of their villagers all of the time. We communicate when we think someone should go and when we think someone should stay. If we felt Grogim' wasn't doing his duty, based on the facts that are available to us
(yes more than you can hope to have, he would have been gone.

>*snip me flaming grogim*
>
>>This is an unfair cheap shot. I could sit here and say you
>>did nothing to strengthen/weaken cabal relationships but
>>that would be unfair, because I didn't watch you 24/7. The
>>same applies with you and Grogim. Just because your online
>>times differ and his perspectives and policies are different
>>than yours doesn't give you a right to bring him down with
>>your own deletion. I assume that's an easier thing to do
>>now that you've deleted and you are having your nae says,
>>but it's also cowardly, if that word could be applied
>>outside of the game. If you felt so strongly about this,
>>you should have handled it in game and done better yourself.
>> He who is without sin...first stone...yeah
>
>I did say it all in game. Thus it's neither cowardly, nor
>cheap. Drahk felt less strongly about it than I-the-player
>did, thus he pursued it less strongly. Ask Kastellyn if you
>doubt.

You brought none of this to our attention. You did nothing to back the rediculous and 'look at me' nonsense you have posted here. You did not challenge Grogim's position as leader nor did you perpetuate any form of mutiny within the village. To be as bold as to say you did something to change the situation is completely false.

>In many ways Grogim was an anchor around the neck of the
>village during the hard times, and some of his orders were
>just plain insane.
>
>I'm no pure-as-fresh-driven-snow virgin, but I do consider
>glass houses before throwing stones. I wouldn't have
>flamed-on if I didn't think it needed to be said, and I
>didn't feel perfectly secure in saying it.

You shouldn't. Your facts are off. You have nothing solid to stand on by saying Grogim isn't around. Around for who's perspective? Again, if you or other villagers need Grogim around to enjoy this game then I don't think he needs to be punished to fulfill your needs.

>I'm perfectly willing to go into a fact by fact and point by
>point rational of why I said what I said, and I wouldn't
>have said it if I didn't feel that my logic was solid. If
>you really want to we can spell this out, and you can try to
>defend him. If you really think what I said was
>wrong/unfair, and there's solid ground there to stand on?


E-mail me if you think you have solid facts regarding this situation or want to voice anymore concerns. Or, unless you want to go public again and try to clash egoes with me, again, it's your birthday.

thror@carrionfields.com

>>I'd like to say I really liked Drahk. His battles were
>>great and his attitude was perfect for battle.
>
>I liked Drahk. I built his role, and lived his attitude to
>be perfect for battle. I had a lot of fun, and am glad that
>I was successful. I should have deleted 100 hours ago,
>though.

Next time, you do that. Maybe we can avoid hearing your bitterness here. Again, you make the game fun for you. Expecting or asking anyone else to do otherwise is completely unrealistic.

>>At one point
>>I wanted to kick you from the cabal for something I forget
>>you did, but you managed to argue (defiance is good if you
>>know how to approach it) solidly your case. To be honest
>>however, your goodbye note managed to sour that impression
>>of you. Good luck in the future.
>
>As I said above, you had me contemplating a unique form of
>rage-deletion on more than one occassion.

Woot!

>On a positive note, I-the-player took positive glee in some
>of your 'rage-on' notes/orders. I chortled at a few of the
>'your life is our curteosy.. which we can withdraw'
>statements. I-the-player loved it when you ordered me to
>kill Farnsworth. Drahk-the-character was upset and
>irritated - he had better things to do than whack a priest.
>You soured that one for me when your 'rage-on!' went south
>with the birds. I was sitting at my computer wishing I had
>the balls to ask if you wanted him dead or not.

Must...restrain...from witty...comment.