IS there Really "honor" (honour for you brits) in RTW or any TW games??

[BHCWarman88]

I been at the Front Line of this Debate against My Friends and Enemies ALike, is there Really "honor" in RTW or Any TW games?? Some people said No,along with me, and some said Yes, and some said they wasn't "sure"..

what you guys think??

I don't think so, it a game,meant to have fun,get angry at people at certain times, but there no Honor in a Game,sure,in real life,but that about it..

[x-dANGEr]

An honurable person would leave the impression of it in every deed, word or acceptance. So I vote for yes.

[BHCWarman88]

not really

if I do good deeds, I don't think I leave the "impression" of "honor" in it, rather I fight Rev (and beat him) in a Friendly Fight,X, or in a Rival Battle Against someone who Betray my Clan, Fame and Glory, but not honor..

[Tomisama]

Honour is that which preserves the dignity of the human spirit.

It’s how you treat people, that makes you an honourable person.

Not how many battles you win.

The glory of your victories will soon be forgotten.

But the kindness and respect you show for others, will not.

So is there really any honour in Total War games?

No.

But there is in some of it’s players…

:bow:

[AggonyDuck]

Yes, definately. It is a matter of behaviour towards other and being fair. Anyone who uses the argument that it is just a game fails to see that a game is an extension of the real life and that you're dealing with real persons here. There is no difference between game/real life when it comes to social contact. The biggest difference is that there is really nothing stopping you from behaving in any way you please, which really makes it admirable that some people actually are capable of being friendly and fair towards others.
This is what honour in essence is.

[NihilisticCow]

I would agree with Tomi. The only honour is in how people are and behave. Whether you win or lose is irrelevant towards that, so any game does not have honour in isolation.

[Orda Khan]

Honour, with regards to TW battles, is determined by the approach to the game. Hurling abuse, mocking opponents etc is simply bad behaviour and one could deem it dishonourable. Playing the game fairly and being courtious to an opponent is generally considered to be honourable. Tomi and Aggony Duck have explained the idea very well

.......Orda

[Wishazu]

I been at the Front Line of this Debate against My Friends and Enemies ALike, is there Really "honor" in RTW or Any TW games?? Some people said No,along with me, and some said Yes, and some said they wasn't "sure"..

what you guys think??

I don't think so, it a game,meant to have fun,get angry at people at certain times, but there no Honor in a Game,sure,in real life,but that about it..

If you dont believe in honour in the game then why did you sign the Total War CoH - Code of Honour? You even wear the Tag here.

I personally do believe in honour in game.

[Monarch]

not really

if I do good deeds, I don't think I leave the "impression" of "honor" in it, rather I fight Rev (and beat him) in a Friendly Fight,X, or in a Rival Battle Against someone who Betray my Clan, Fame and Glory, but not honor..

I am sorry? This is a moot point but as your challenging the idea of honour I shall I challenge this idea. But fame, if you win a total war battle, which you so passionatly define as just as game (something we agree on) then how is there fame? Do you really think your famous for winning a battle? :laugh4:

Also glory. I know we are not the best of friends warman so I wish to go about this little debate in a proper way. So I checked the definition of glory up on dictionary.com


Glory - Great honor, praise, or distinction accorded by common consent; renown.]

Now wait a minute, they define glory as great honour, but you said there's no honour, so how can there be glory? :P

Now onto the main topic, let's be honest, this idea of honour is very much overblown throughout the RTW community, it's a war game, so the link will always be there. And it's all in your interpretation of honour really, if you think of honour as something very great then no it's not particularly present, however if you view it as just upholding certain values and being civil etc then it is present.

[Tomisama]

(Looking at the question a different way.)

“is there Really "honor" in RTW or Any TW games?”

Rome and BI are currently crippled by the lack of main foyer communications.

It occurred to me that without that public forum, that some very important things are not taking place there.

For example:

The general hellos, and replies of recognition.

The open request for help with some problem.

And the replies of those who are willing to lend assistance.

The announcement of player needed openings, with encouraging welcomes.

The requests for passwords, replies of thanks (for including me).

Salutes of “good game” and kudos of “well done” from warriors returning from a game.

The apologies for self assumed poor performance, and “no problem” condolences.


All of these things (and I am sure there are many more), make up the fabric of the tapestry of an honourable community. These simple amenities are the life blood of the camaraderie.

Without them, the sense of belonging to something larger than your self dwindles. And with no reference, the individuals sense accomplishment is lost.

So if you only play these latest silent-foyer games, I don’t blame you for thinking that there is no honour…

:shame:

[BHCWarman88]

Yeah,

you dealing with Real People here, but it a game,where you "kill men" on "battlefields" genetrated by the Computer..
so there can't be honor in Killing People, Real Life or in a Game..


say gg or good job

it a kind Act, but it not going to make the people say "oh my god,Warmna88 said gl hf!!"
cuz, I say GL HF 3 times every game, and GG 4 times,and I sure you guys do aslo, but it not going to make them say who is who said that,come on, People going to remember you of what you did and if you was a Flamer or not and if you was in a CWB/CWC Winning Clan or not, not if you honorable or not..

[Wishazu]

(Looking at the question a different way.)

“is there Really "honor" in RTW or Any TW games?”

Rome and BI are currently crippled by the lack of main foyer communications.

It occurred to me that without that public forum, that some very important things are not taking place there.

For example:

The general hellos, and replies of recognition.

The open request for help with some problem.

And the replies of those who are willing to lend assistance.

The announcement of player needed openings, with encouraging welcomes.

The requests for passwords, replies of thanks (for including me).

Salutes of “good game” and kudos of “well done” from warriors returning from a game.

The apologies for self assumed poor performance, and “no problem” condolences.


All of these things (and I am sure there are many more), make up the fabric of the tapestry of an honourable community. These simple amenities are the life blood of the camaraderie.

Without them, the sense of belonging to something larger than your self dwindles. And with no reference, the individuals sense accomplishment is lost.

So if you only play these latest silent-foyer games, I don’t blame you for thinking that there is no honour…

:shame:

Chat has been back up and running for a few weeks now

[BHCWarman88]

Chat been back for weeks now yo

[Tomisama]

Weeks now yo…

Ah, good.

Ok!

Now you can begin to study the interaction of individual players.

And over the next four years, how they mix and match, what drives them, how they organize, and how those organizations fail. But most important, why people play, why they ban together, and what is required to keep them together, and keep them playing.

Then maybe we’ll talk again. And then maybe you can tell me, better than I have been able to explain to you, the difference between glory and honour. Although they are almost impossible to completely separate.

I’ll give you a clue that may help to unravel some of the inter-weavings of these two words. Perhaps you can build on that.

Glory is almost always earned by achievement, and honour by sacrifice.

Cheers~:cheers:

[BHCWarman88]

lol

I played RTW for 1 year 3 months
I am played MTW for 8+ Months now
and I am starting to play STW online, I'm not a noob to TW MP Tomi..



"Now you can begin to study the interaction of individual players."

I already have, been doing it for little over 2 years

[Orda Khan]

~:rolleyes:

.......Orda

[Monarch]

lol

I played RTW for 1 year 3 months
I am played MTW for 8+ Months now
and I am starting to play STW online, I'm not a noob to TW MP Tomi..



"Now you can begin to study the interaction of individual players."

I already have, been doing it for little over 2 years

My friend has shoggy and rome, skipping mtw but he's been playing tw from the off. I meanwhile got rtw for chistmas (my first tw game) however in that short time I can kick his ass on BI with clear victory after clear victory meanwhile my knowledge of tw community is also greater than his. My point? Numbers count for jack.

It's like saying a 15 year old is automatically cleverer at maths than a 13 year old because he's been to school for longer, which in turn is of course bullshit.

You can't just real off numbers and expect to be hailed as somebody who knows it all.

[Puzz3D]

I played chess for many years. It's customary for the opponents to shake hands before they start the game as an indication that they are entering into the competition in a spirit of fair play. In other words, "may the best man win". Typing GL before starting a battle in Total War is equivalent to making that handshake. I stop short of typing HF because I'm there to beat my opponent, and, if I give him a sound thrashing, it's not going to be much fun for him.

After, a chess game the looser will often compliment the opponent on his play saying something like "that was a nice combination you played" or some other statement which indicates the looser recognizes the opponents skill. It can be hard to do that if you realy wanted to win that game. For instance, your opponent was a lower rated player or that loss knocked you out of a tournament you thought you might win. Typing GG after a Total War battle is recognizing your opponent's skill and an indication that you aren't a sore looser. Many times the winner will point out to the looser what it was he took advantage of to get the win, and point out where the loosers play was good

These aftergame courtesies won't occur if a player sees his opponent doing unsportsmanlike stuff during the game. For instance in a chess game, smirking at a move you make to undermine your confidence or trying to distract you while you're thinking. If you end up paired against that player again, there probably won't be any handshake before the game.

The thing is people need successes in their real world lives so that winning a game doesn't become overly important. If someone doesn't type GL before or GG after a battle, I don't hold it against them.

[BHCWarman88]

My friend has shoggy and rome, skipping mtw but he's been playing tw from the off. I meanwhile got rtw for chistmas (my first tw game) however in that short time I can kick his ass on BI with clear victory after clear victory meanwhile my knowledge of tw community is also greater than his. My point? Numbers count for jack.

It's like saying a 15 year old is automatically cleverer at maths than a 13 year old because he's been to school for longer, which in turn is of course bullshit.

You can't just real off numbers and expect to be hailed as somebody who knows it all.


and on the First 8 Games on RTW, my Third Major TW game (Major meaning new Title, Expasion packs are minior) I won 6 out of my first 8 games on RTW, and 5 out of 6 of my first games on MTW,and by the time you read this, I am already starting my STW legacy (legacy is the only good word I thought of)..

Number doesn't matter all the time, but it can sure in Heck Matter though

[Tomisama]

“If you end up paired against that player again, there probably won't be any handshake before the game.”

Or the worst case scenario (in Total War terms), they probably won’t play with you again. And when there have been enough rude encounters, people just leave the game. That’s what has been happening to our community for some time now. That’s why the Code of Honour came into being. It was a effort to stem the receding tide of players, by establishing a code for people who wanted to have a decent online environment.

Not that too much was expected of it (The Code), but it was worth a try. And to a certain extent it has been successful, with two hundred and fifty six players signed as of this weekend.

Now there is this thread, where a Code Signer is claiming that there is no honour. So is this true? Has personal self esteem and respect for others lost out? Is it now only about top dog, and winning at all cost? No comrades in arms who appreciate each others being there, so they have someone to play against?

:inquisitive:

[Orda Khan]

Now there is this thread, where a Code Signer is claiming that there is no honour. So is this true? Has personal self esteem and respect for others lost out? Is it now only about top dog, and winning at all cost? No comrades in arms who appreciate each others being there, so they have someone to play against?
What does that tell you about the sign of the times Tomi? I guess you could say we have always been taught this but it certainly seems to have more emphasis these days than when I was a youngster. Some youngsters these days even look up to Gangster Rappers. How can anyone be impressed by some guy with a record for gun crimes? Sometimes I despair

......Orda

[Puzz3D]

And when there have been enough rude encounters, people just leave the game.
That didn't stop me or my clan from playing. It was the gameplay that did that. When only 2 of the 4 tactical elements are effective, the game becomes uninteresting after a while. I must have played 5000 online battles in MTW + VI, and I'm tired of the cav/sword armies. Seems like a lot of players moved on to other games, and it wasn't RTW with it's inferior gameplay and bad foyer.

Even if you figure out some rules or make a mod that improves gameplay, it will never attract more than a percentage of the existing community of players. The basic unmodified game has to be good enough to attract a large number of people who are interested in playing the game for the sake of the gameplay. I think those kinds of players tend to be honorable because they don't want the gameplay degraded. That's not to say they won't play the game to its fullest extend and try their best to win, but they tend to respect their opponent and actually want them to put up the best fight possible. That's why you see experienced players helping less experienced players. It's all part of a community structure that I think has to have a well executed game as the foundation.

[BHCWarman88]

I played 1000 or so games on MTW:VI, in the last four days, I played 2 VI games (been busy,so I wiggle some battles in) and 5000 or so on RTW aslo,Puzz

More Expericned Players helping the Less Expercined ones or Helping New Players,which we like to call noobs??

certainly I do, I fought this guy 3 times in a row, and he is in a clan named BRO now,and if it wasn't for me helping him, he may not be on now

though,most new people make me mad,so I dont help them

[Tomisama]

"certainly I do, I fought this guy 3 times in a row, and he is in a clan named BRO now,and if it wasn't for me helping him, he may not be on now"

So there is honour in Total War games, and it is you :smile:

:bow:

[x-dANGEr]

Warman, don't you get it? It isn't about numbers. Puzz3d used that expression only to clear that he's bored of the same 'general' tactics (At least I think he did :P ).

@Tomi: I don't know were you see that happen. I play regularly and still can't find so much hostality in the community, if it is a new player, he'd be polite, mature and will ask you for tips, and if he's not, then you just play. Their is only 1 person in my whole total war carrer, that ever disappointed me in his actions, that is that he said the rules and obeyed non of them, saying in the battle, that war has no rules.. What I'm wondering about is, are you a bit exaggerating their, or you do find it as you described?

[BHCWarman88]

War has No Rules,period
I aslo Hate these people that DEMAND me to play Flatland and 12.5K or at Least 15K or they will not join my game or they will leave, it like,dude, I play with No Art, how Bad can the Game be playing with No Art,Large Units,48-88K?? it like, if you going to be so "honorable", you should not BS about it like a baby..

I do get it, but I was just saying..

[Monarch]

War has No Rules,period
I aslo Hate these people that DEMAND me to play Flatland and 12.5K or at Least 15K or they will not join my game or they will leave, it like,dude, I play with No Art, how Bad can the Game be playing with No Art,Large Units,48-88K?? it like, if you going to be so "honorable", you should not BS about it like a baby..

I do get it, but I was just saying..

This is venturing off topic, but over 15k money is just rediculous. You can pick a good army with 12.5k, so with 15k all it is is upgrades. 88k? Dude, just why? That means it'll be a super army with full upgrades and no skill is required in the picking of the units (which is quite a hard thing to master).

Personally I always play flatlands because hills are rediculously one sided. Archers range suddenly increases loads as does of course roman pilliar for instance, me and my clan leader recently played on a hill map as it was just us two curing bordom for a bit of fun (I was WRE, Tib was Sassanids).

Whilst I was coming down of the hill Tib was already at the foot of it so I would get a hill advantage. I won archer duel to to better range, and then before tib's Sughdians had even thought about charging up the hill my plumbatrii had demolished his lines. Normally when we played 'competively' he'd come out with a close victory (usually good close games) but with that hill advantage I managed to come out with a clear (possibly heroic, cant remember) victory. Hill's make too much of an impact and give a person a huge advantage. Why do you think we see big tourneys such as TWPL using the FFG map?

And rules are also there to make it fairer and increase the fun we have whilst playing. I, and many others, would rather have a good close game that leant more on the side of gameplay than one where Sassanid elephants waltz over my lines and the battle was over in a few minutes...oh but the positive of that? A touch of realism...:|

[x-dANGEr]

I personally think that a unit of eles should be allowed in the battlefield. Those ERE Equite Clibs are quite too cheap for their cost and can crush Sass cav (Which's more expensive) easily, an ele unit would make it tougher for them, though. ;)

[BHCWarman88]

This is venturing off topic, but over 15k money is just rediculous. You can pick a good army with 12.5k, so with 15k all it is is upgrades. 88k? Dude, just why? That means it'll be a super army with full upgrades and no skill is required in the picking of the units (which is quite a hard thing to master).


And rules are also there to make it fairer and increase the fun we have whilst playing. I, and many others, would rather have a good close game that leant more on the side of gameplay than one where Sassanid elephants waltz over my lines and the battle was over in a few minutes...oh but the positive of that? A touch of realism...:|

No, Rules are Useless. No Offense, but Rules are the Easy Way out of Actually picking a Good army with 88K.. Flatland 12.5K only shows you only can play 12.5K and not extactly good with everything else..

oh Sure Monarch, I played 12.5K MANY of times, and I'm not too bad, it seems kinda fun, but too little Money. My Clan Mates Aslo Hate 12.5K and these 6 Max Cav Rules I make them play with occsionally

88K, you can PUT your money where you want it, and there is SKill, NO matter what money you use, and Flatland?? haha, there is NO Skill in that. it flat,no forest, no rivers, no nothing, just flat

but my one Clan Mate told me

"Warman, I hate that stuff too, but there is always SOME sort of Stagtey in ALL types of Map, and people need to understand that"

[Tomisama]

What I'm wondering about is, are you a bit exaggerating their, or you do find it as you described?

You have to understand that my view is over the long haul. I waited 2 years for the release of the original Shogun, from when I first read about it in Next Generation magazine. And I bought that game preordered, months before it actually came out. And have been an avidly addicted to Total War games, and supporting the community ever since. So I have seen all of the rises and falls, ins and outs, good times and bad, as they have rolled out over the years.

In the Winter of 2002 I started work on the Clan Wars Competition. Our first Contest only had 3 Clans competing, but that grew to over 50 before the release of Rome. After that release, and the resulting loss of many Clans, we started over. From then to now there have been 73 Clans signed or resigned to date.

The CWC currently has four contests running simultaneously. As you can imagine this takes the majority of my free time, and I rarely get a chance to play much any more. But I do watch the progress and regresses of the community carefully for trends, so I can know how best to structure future competitions.

Please trust me, with little time to spare, I would have not started up the Code of Honour, if I didn’t believe that it was needed. And I don’t think that 256 Code Signers would have bothered to take the pledge if there was not some need for it. There are probably many reasons for people to sign, but I would feel safe to say that at least 200 of them saw the same thing I did.

Since the beginning of The Code, I have received over 300 emails from people wanting to sign, and/or wanting to talk about and the concept. The majority had some word of praise for the idea in addition to their pledge. And out of all of those, only one said that there was no honour, and that it was all about who beats who. That letter was anonymous by the way.

The first discussions on what The Code should be, started a little less that a year ago, as a result of threads complaining about behavior in the RTW foyer. The foyer situation got so out of hand that the powers that be, closed it down. That was predictable for my point of view, thinking at that time “Well what did you expect to happen?”.

Now it is impossible to tell just how much The Code has affected the community over all. I am certain that there has been some result in the behavior of the Signers, and maybe even in the that of those who have just read The Code and not signed. But it is not unreasonable to assume that The Code coupled with the foyer closure have changed things. And that quite possibly, the atmosphere you have been enjoying, is a direct result of an elevation in awareness brought about by these two things.

Go With Honour – Keep The Code

[BHCWarman88]

You have to understand that my view is over the long haul. I waited 2 years for the release of the original Shogun, from when I first read about it in Next Generation magazine. And I bought that game preordered, months before it actually came out. And have been an avidly addicted to Total War games, and supporting the community ever since. So I have seen all of the rises and falls, ins and outs, good times and bad, as they have rolled out over the years.

Go With Honour – Keep The Code


Same with me. I brought STW when it first was Realeased

I been Loyal and Addicted to T gmaes ever since. I refuse to play games lik Imperial Glory or Legino Arena, and if I do, I refuse to become addcited to them.. and everthing else I can say, Tomi said it for me, as he took the words out of my mouth,ty

[Monarch]

No, Rules are Useless. No Offense, but Rules are the Easy Way out of Actually picking a Good army with 88K.. Flatland 12.5K only shows you only can play 12.5K and not extactly good with everything else..

oh Sure Monarch, I played 12.5K MANY of times, and I'm not too bad, it seems kinda fun, but too little Money. My Clan Mates Aslo Hate 12.5K and these 6 Max Cav Rules I make them play with occsionally

88K, you can PUT your money where you want it, and there is SKill, NO matter what money you use, and Flatland?? haha, there is NO Skill in that. it flat,no forest, no rivers, no nothing, just flat

but my one Clan Mate told me

"Warman, I hate that stuff too, but there is always SOME sort of Stagtey in ALL types of Map, and people need to understand that"

Actually, if you can play with little money, then pretty obviously more money just makes it easier, but if you play with too much money then the step down to less money is much more difficult.

But on the maps, you misunderstood me. I didn't say there was less strategy on hilly maps, they're just not as fair. You can deny alot, but in no way can you deny a hill gives the person on the hill a large advantage.

[x-dANGEr]

And usually, on hill maps, players would find theirselves a hill each and camp on it. Not much of a game, heh! It's boring..

[Orda Khan]

It depends which way you look at it. I almost always hosted hilly maps in STW and chose to attack every time. When you triumph against the odds it is anything but boring

........Orda

[x-dANGEr]

But in RTW/BI, the chance of winning uphill is quite low.. Espiecially with the pillas those plumps have.. Imagine 10 volleys of 10 AP damage javs coming in at you at archers' range.. (Their range is already long, and on a hill, it will be like archers'..)

[Puzz3D]

It was easier to attack in STW than it was in MI and later MTW/VI. This is why I say that:

The hilly maps were bowl shaped, and in many cases you could minimize the height disadvantage by moving along the edge of the map. In addition, you could go into the red zone if you were moving, but not if you were stationary. Units in the red zone could not be targetted by ranged weapons. That meant edge or corner campers could be flanked by an attacker who was moving. The maps were smaller so that fatigue wasn't a big disadvantage for the attacker. Trees provided better cover from ranged weapons, and the attacker could often choose rain or fog in which to attack. Even if the attacker went from the starting position straight at a defender on high ground, there was considerable chance of success because defenders were usually defending because they weren't as skilled at maneuver or didn't grasp the morale system as well. Attackers usually understood that getting a single unit behind the enemy line would win by chain routing the enemy army. The battle system was designed by LongJohn so that the player who had the first unit rout would usually loose. In team games, you could attack massive hills and win most of the time.

In MI, the effectiveness of guns was greatly increased, muskets could fire in rain and the range of their back kills was greatly reduced which means the guns do not have to be exposed and can receive close support by anti-cav infantry. Infantry was also slowed down, and archers have absolutely no chance to significantly weaken a musket unit. This makes frontal assualts impossible. You can still try for the flanking tactic, but the slow infantry makes that more difficult and the infantry incurs more fatigue. Also, MI is played at double the koku over STW. That means morale is higher, and therefore it's harder to rout the enemy line with a single flanker.

In MTW/VI, the maps are bigger but the fatigue rates were not changed from STW making fatigue more of a disadvantage for the attacker. You can take a slow approach to attacking to compensate, but that means the defender has plenty of time to react to any attacking maneuvers. Movement in the red zone is no longer possible. Trees are half the density reducing the protection they provide. The weather is random, and most games are played in arid to minimize the non-optimal fatigue rate. The RPS is weaker. Also, MTW/VI is played at even higher morale than MI meaning flanking in force is required leaving fewer units available for the main battleline. Since the battles are more attrition based, direct frontal assault can't win despite the relatively weak ranged units. Team games are more popular than 1v1 because the attacker needs more power at the point of attack or a large flanking force. In addition, having learned by playing STW, there was a larger pool of skilled players in MTW/VI so that defenders were often just as skilled at maneuver as the attackers.

[TosaInu]

And when there have been enough rude encounters, people just leave the game.

True.

[BHCWarman88]

MTW/VI did have Better Contorls


that why I still play it

Go Swiss!! go 2_5_2_ Castle!!

lol

[KrooK]

In vi there is
In RTW BI - no
there is only victory and enemy's body

[BHCWarman88]

lol

[Just A Girl]

Play STW...
Honour is a must.

:bow:

[BHCWarman88]

hey Girl, 1 more psot away from 1,400,lol

STW is where Most Clans started at,alongwith most people ,but only a few people and very few clans fro mSTW are still alive,sadly..