Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
What is Integrity in SK?
I have heard it mentioned repeatedly in many threads and by multiple people. Hell even I believe I have displayed it yet had those actions called stupid or any other number of expletives. I am just wondering what exactly you all think it is as My Ideal of it seems to differ from quite a few Ive seen here. Also, is there any place for it here in SK or is it an outdated ideal that just doesnt work here. Rant on!
Comments
inˈteɡrədē/
noun
1. the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.
"he is known to be a man of integrity"
Integrity in SK is being able to respect any player - even if you disagree with their opinions or strategy.
In SK, the player demographics tell me that this is a universe of young minds, old like me an outliers to this data. The concept of this "moral principle" has not come yet at a young age and it is still developing. While the game play encourages friendship and war strategy, most players can take it personally.
In general, you should be able to agree to disagree with an alliance without name calling. You go to war, then whoever loses/win, both AL can shake each others hands (or congratulate each others efforts), to have a good war.
That's integrity, you fight for your principles, what you believe in right --- to the best of your ability, not necessarily what the universe think it should be.
~now, more cookies~
I have not been the greatest at scheming and conspiracy but at the very least when
I give my word i keep it regardless of its popularity. I cant say all that i have seen or dealt with have been that way..in fact very few..most keep their word til it is inconvenient and then discard it immediately or stab you in the back as soon as possible foisting the blame to others...basically snakes..id rather be stabbed in the front..thanks.
Those who are snakes know who they are the dont need to be named as people already know who keeps their word and who stabs in the back..Id rather deal with one who may be a dick, says so upfront and is consistent in their dickery than a smiling anus who craps out and on you first available chance.
sk would implode with it
or
the fully loaded Maple Cookies ( aka Obama cookies)
Get them while its hot!
1. There is no such thing. There's only interpretations and how far you're willing to go to inflict what you want on an alliance scale versus what the universe wants.
2. Therefore, if those two interests conflict, then it's far more important to remember that there can be only one winner, and that winner is the person who's willing to expand, exploit, explore and exterminate those who leave obstacles to that end goal.
3. The term is not mutually exclusive. You can still wheel and deal, and maintain the ability to be honest in your dealings. The most successful ALs in this game have always understood that balance. Some will try to sway you with words, if they don't have the guns. Some will try to sway you with guns, because they don't need to waste time with words. The best will know the difference between the two, and walk a fine line between both.
4. Backstabbing: No. If you're gonna screw someone, do it face to face. Don't be on some VBJ/Fepo shit. That said, when you're in this situation, remember that if it's not your sector, and if you can stack the deck in your favor, do it. No mercy. Be direct, though.
5. You can't always expect to create a fun alliance and a competitive alliance. The two aren't compatible. Winning wars is fun. Getting players into the top builders is fun. Spam can be fun too, but that doesn't eliminate your enemies or competitors.
Therefore, someone with overt "integrity" will logically be at a disadvantage against someone who has more tools in their arsenal. This method worked for Neal, Kestrel, Fepo, myself, Sci, etc, etc, etc, etc.
All my records got broken a long time ago, but the tenets of this game almost never change.
Anecdotal evidence: Guardia. Guardia was a hyper aggressive builder who believed in doing the right things all the time. Guardia was usually one of the first people to die every round. Guardia was also never that successful at creating an alliance wide legacy, while people with less talent and morals surpassed him because they were more flexible in issues they dealt with.
So broken down, while Guardia was a great player and fun to play with, you wouldn't call him a successful player either.
Nobody even said that they were bad, so at this point, you're adding implications where there aren't any.