It was 20 years ago, I admit. We used plotting charts. It gave good SA. We kept an up to date record of where we were and where we were going, and all the ATC clearances, with times for each. I once had an accusation from Canadian N.Atlantic ATC that I had not complied with an ATC climb instruction at Position XYZ. This came a few days after the flight. I recovered the flight envelope and the plotting chart. ATC claimed I was given a climb clearance at Time XY-z at Position ABC. From the plotting chart in the envelope I could prove that at Time XY-z I was 200nm away from Position ABC, therefore it could not have been me. Nothing more was heard.
Further, in todays magenta one a/c crews do not look at en-route charts. We know what SOP's say, and we know what crews do. The plotting chart gave much more SA than the ND/MAP. We plotted all the NAT's and our ETOPS circles from en-route ALTN's. With no airfield circles on ND/MAP and no outside visual references, especially at night, the plotting chart was very crucial in keeping us aware of where we were.
Total dependancy on FMC over the ocean is IMHO opinion not a professional good idea.
I admit I am not up to date on current procedures, but, as we have debated many times, too much magenta line addiction is not good when manure hits the air conditioning. Professional pilots need to be aware and not be taken by surprise.
And, it gives you something to do: monitor your flight. Those who oppose its use might just want to sleep or read the paper. And what will you do when the FMC fails en-rpute?