Editorial: Armies Need Villains

Throughout time, there have been many antagonists in the community who have risen and fall. I believe that Club Penguin Armies cannot survive if serval armies are not willing to fill that role.

Designed by Koloway

good versus evil

I’ve seen Rebel Penguin Federation (RPF) become one of the most hated armies ever, with full blown conspiracy theories about their leadership. Army of Club Penguin (ACP) was a villain as they had complete dominance over armies. I was in the Light Troops as they became the bad guy of the community who everyone wanted to take down. I read up on the early years of armies, where Compwiz500 and Pink Mafias were known as hackers who led the Underground Mafias Army (UMA). And I led UMA as UMA became known in the Club Penguin Rewritten era as one of the most edgy and vulgar armies of the time. 

Summer 2017

The army community is a very unique community. Many times, one of the only things each member has in common is why they are here: they played Club Penguin, got recruited, and then stuck around. The other thing is the army they’re in. Oftentimes, personalities will clash within the army. Leaders will fight as they have different goals. Regular troops as well as moderators become jealous as one receives a promotion over another. Very rarely is everyone in an army entirely on the same page. You have to have something that will unify the army. Sometimes, that is a tournament, as we’ve seen recently. Other times, its preparation for a war or an actual war. To get the community as a whole united against something or someone takes a genuine effort. In my opinion, this is where the antagonistic army comes in. 

In the old days, the antagonists of the community could be considered an army or leader that went directly against what Club Penguin was, going against Disney’s/New Horizons’ vision. Under this definition, Pink Mafias was an antagonist. Known for his cheats and hacks for Club Penguin, and using those to build the UMA Empire, he was fought by the far more “noble” Oagalthorp and the Army of Club Penguin.

Later, come 2009 through 2013, antagonists were those that would directly challenge the pecking order of the community. For years, ACP was considered the gold standard. Any army that stepped up and challenged that position would be branded an antagonist by ACP and their allies, and a hero by those who wanted ACP to fall (unless you were hated by them too). I recall being in Light Troops as a ten year old, and remember thinking “These guys have the same goal as us, take down ACP. Why are they mad at us?”

July 2014: Raid of Migrator

the modern “early” days

In the private server era, community morals are the driving factor of who is branded an antagonist. Edgy armies that go too far, leaders who challenge everything that armies were and are, alliances built on hatred of a common enemy. This was commonplace, especially in the early Rewritten days.

The major wars of 2017, early 2018 (excluding the Tubas versus RPF conflict) were a result of differences in culture and morality. UMA was recreated as a result of the Mafias refusing to solidify their status as an army. And you can argue we were the bad guys, trying to force what we wanted on someone who clearly didn’t share that vision. Romans declared war on Dark Knight Empire for Color50’s dictatorial actions. UMA joined the war because the cold war with Romans finally reached a point where cold wasn’t enough when Games was removed from Romans and returned back to UMA. UMA was never the good guy in this war, we joined the war just because we didn’t like the Romans. And ironically, we’d be on the opposite end of this in a month. UMA was on the opposite end of a declaration because of my running of UMA. Then there is the civil war (an extension of the War Against Dillon) which, again, was my UMA being the bad guy. Because if the other side got their way, UMA would’ve been free from my control after the war. 


If you notice, as I list these conflicts, I can tell you exactly why my UMA was the bad guy. I don’t hide from it. I embraced it. It’s an attitude I have held since I first talked to some of the UMA legends after becoming leader. There’s no point running from the truth or trying to seem more noble than we really were. We were an army that would do stuff that would be frowned on by everyone else just because we could. We fought dirty, we would play mind games, and we’d do stuff that we knew would get under the skin of others. It’s an attitude lost to time, as armies are led by older individuals who have a functioning moral compass and have (mostly) grown out of the edginess that sprouted from the original community and early years of the private server era.

Just a little fun

In the earliest days of private server armies, there were two official armies: UMA and RPF. RPF was family friendly, a “baby’s first army” type. RPF was also run by older, more seasoned veterans. Strict with rules, quick to get rid of people who broke the rules.

changing culture

UMA was the opposite. Fresh blood leadership with fewer rules, and the rules were more lax than RPF’s. This boded well for us. I would spend many mornings in RPF’s xat at this time, and would openly talk about UMA. As people from RPF got tired of RPF’s rules, they would come over to UMA. Just off the top of my head, Felix Raycher, Fluo, and Smurf, all came over at varying points and became valuable members of UMA. I truly believe that if armies gave people more options that suit multiple types of people, we would be better at keeping recruits. Maybe a recruit really likes armies, but the culture of their current army doesn’t suit them. There’s nowhere for them to go because pretty much every army is run the exact same way nowadays. There’s no longer strong individual army cultures, rather, there is a very strong league culture that every army more or less follows. The disappearance of true individuality means there’s no longer many different armies with their own culture, which means if you don’t like the culture in the first army you join, there’s not a lot of room for you in the community. 

As much as I used to despise Elite Guardians, I have to credit them. They are the only army that to this day carries that torch. In a way, despite knowing my actions and views on the community didn’t influence their decision to be this way, I’m happy about it. This community is overwhelmingly politically correct and wants to look the best to recruits. In my opinion, you don’t get truly great recruits if you can’t be yourself and your army is never at war. You get conformists and people who can’t take conflict. This community will never again see a generation of leaders like the army leaders of 2010 through 2014, who were hungry and came from a generation of armies that were driven by conflict: both internal and external. Of course, if an army of “bad guys” wins a war, that means that more people want the “good guys” to win. In this way, armies are similar to professional wrestling.

Water Vikings’ statement during Holiday Crusade


It’s well known that in 2017, 2018, and parts of 2019 (pre-Club Penguin Online) and ESPECIALLY in the original era that you would’ve been bullied relentlessly for suggesting we penalize armies for the actions of members in their chats. The fact that there is now a marriage of community and game to a point where the community has members put in a position of power that can directly decide if armies or army leaders are banned (for things not even done in game) is something that was unheard of until the Club Penguin Online era.

Club Penguin Army Central had it right. Penalize people for cheating but let each army decide what flies in their chat. The modern marriage of game and moderation by the community is an arrangement that quite frankly should’ve never become reality.

Club Penguin Armies (its community) is incredibly, incredibly stale. The army meta never changes and we are paying the price for it. Now more than ever, we need armies that have people from the top down embracing being a villain. Who do you think is the modern day villain?

More Information

Filed under: Editorials & Opinion | Tagged: , , , ,

3 Responses

  1. clademonument April 24, 2024 (12:51 pm)

    because they want to cater to the weak

  2. Felix Raycher May 12, 2024 (9:16 pm)

    Now, that’s a well crafted article. Kudos!
    I’ve always considered armies as role-playing community back in 2015 when I first joined RPF. The memories of Nachos being our “greatest” (i think so, maybe wrong) enemy are so fun to think about right now. And surely the community was lively thanks to the differences in armies’ people.
    I’ve been on retirement for quite a long time, that’ll be 3,5 years now, so can’t say how it looks today (that’s the price for not following the news, my bad) but when it comes to early 2018 UMA, maybe thanks to smaller size and my relationship breakdown with RPF, it was a way different army than it’s reactivated version around year later – and their appeal wasn’t my kind of spirit, but that’s another topic and I can see myself accepting that shift, I guess.
    Greetings and thanks for honorable(?) mention!

  3. […] strategy, he currently works for Club Penguin Armies where he posts well-written editorials. Click here and here to read two of them. Despite lasting only roughly four days, the War of Roman […]

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

We'll never share your email with anyone else.