Conquer Club

Under the principles of inflation, I believe the median score of CC players rising. The premise is this: When a person joins CC, they are adding a potential of 1000 points to the system. Now most people don't lose 1000 points (unless you're simtom), so we can't say that 1000 points are up for grabs when somebody joins. However, there will be some point movement as a result of a new person playing. Likewise, a person who stops playing automatically takes whatever number of points they have out of the system. Now I don't actually know if the rate of people who join is more than the rate of people who quit, but I assume that it is. Given that it is, the problem arises that the ranking system could possibly be skewed towards the top. As of now, there are few generals, but if this "point inflation" is occuring, we may soon see many more people at the top. Even if the new recruit leaves soon after he/she joins, the majority probably lose a game or two, or even deadbeats. While the inflationary multiplier may be small, it is undeniably there.

Thanks, but we are way ahead of you already and we've been working on a fix for several months now. Stay tuned for updates in the future.

Man oh man the mods are ahead of me everywhere.

I like the scoring system just the way it is. Please don't change anything.

I like the point system too. I'm thinking that they are going to add more ranks and model them after a branch of the military. That way it will be tougher to attain a higher rank and what not.

If they change the ranks then everyone will know how bad I am!

hahaha. Same here. I can't even keep Sgt. for 2 days. I was all excited. I was like wooo I achieved my real life rank. Now, im just screwed!

JMody wrote:hahaha. Same here. I can't even keep Sgt. for 2 days. I was all excited. I was like wooo I achieved my real life rank. Now, im just screwed!

Look at people's profiles. Don't get sucked in the conspricy

safariguy5 wrote:Man oh man the mods are ahead of me everywhere.

Even the amount of times they've gotten laid are ahead of yours!

Actually, shouldn't point value remain roughly the same regardless of how many people join? You correctly observed that 1 000 points are added to the system every time a new player joins. What you failed the take into account was that roughly half of those players don't actually lose those points, instead they gain more from other people. The total number of points in circulation remains directly proportional to the number of members and therefore inflation does not take place.

However, it is likely that CC will see a growing number of higher ranks, as there is more points in circulation to be obtained by the better players. This is largely offset by the fact that those with higher scores will lose a great deal more to those with more average totals. Either way, the status quo should be maintained under the current situation due to the proportional nature of the game.

However, I suppose that most people who quit playing do so because they never win. Which means that they leave points in the system and remove themselves. I think that was also safariguys point.

chewyman wrote:Actually, shouldn't point value remain roughly the same regardless of how many people join? You correctly observed that 1 000 points are added to the system every time a new player joins. What you failed the take into account was that roughly half of those players don't actually lose those points, instead they gain more from other people. The total number of points in circulation remains directly proportional to the number of members and therefore inflation does not take place.

Your theory assumes that everyone joining brings in 1000 points and everyone leaving takes out 1000 points (average), this is where it falls down. more new recruits lose points than gain points, before deadbeating and losing interest in the site. So I would suggest that the average number of points per active member is a little above 1000 which would suggest inflation.

If you have a few hours to spare you can add up all points and divide by number of members to see for yourself.

Even so, it is still extremly tough getting to general. Once you get to a colonel, you have to win a high percentage of your games just to stay there let alone get another 1000 points

yorkiepeter wrote:Your theory assumes that everyone joining brings in 1000 points and everyone leaving takes out 1000 points (average), this is where it falls down. more new recruits lose points than gain points, before deadbeating and losing interest in the site. So I would suggest that the average number of points per active member is a little above 1000 which would suggest inflation.

If you have a few hours to spare you can add up all points and divide by number of members to see for yourself.

Even so, it is still extremly tough getting to general. Once you get to a colonel, you have to win a high percentage of your games just to stay there let alone get another 1000 points

Indeed so. You're quite right.

The only thing that would cause deflation I guess would be when the number of higher ranking player that quits for good outnumbers (or outscores really) the newbies etc. that quits.

It would be interesting to know how many non-active players there are not showing up in the score system (since you drop from the score board after one month inactivity). If knowing that number of players and their total score (or average whatever) would make it possible to calculate the current inflation in the system.

MeDeFe wrote:However, I suppose that most people who quit playing do so because they never win. Which means that they leave points in the system and remove themselves. I think that was also safariguys point.

yes, but that counterbalances the higher ranked players that quit - especially, I might point out, those that join, play their 4 games and win one standard and then don't bother going on, thus actually draining points from the system.

One of the examples of this is one of my previous doubles partners. He quit the site after 39 games, on 1525 points.

There's some point gain, but that's usually sucked up by aspiting plaers who go on to have mega scores uber fast, which explains why I am only a sergeant after 270 odd games, and was a private after 250, and was a lieutenant around about 100 games and not sucking up the points. that andthe fact that I only found a great, reliable and premium doubles partner recently.)

I know there are a few statisticians out there so if anybody is interested I have the points of 32 players from 3 months ago.

Check out the British Isles tourney at the website below. You will find 32 players and the points they set out with 3 months ago.

AK_iceman wrote:Thanks, but we are way ahead of you already and we've been working on a fix for several months now. Stay tuned for updates in the future.

Or like wicked would have said:

wicked wrote:We have been working on that bug for months like stated in other threads. Do not create topics about things already in discussion. Read the guidelines before posting. I will lock this thread. Forum ban for you!

alstergren wrote:It would be interesting to know how many non-active players there are not showing up in the score system (since you drop from the score board after one month inactivity). If knowing that number of players and their total score (or average whatever) would make it possible to calculate the current inflation in the system.

Lack posted this back in December:

New Recruit -> 28326
Private -------> 7194
Sergeant ----> 2233
Lieutenant ---> 860
Captain ------> 386
Major ---------> 265
Colonel --------> 75
General ---------> 4

Obviously the numbers on all levels will be different now, but I would imagine the number of new recruits:number of scoreboard players is still relatively the same.

From the old numbers he posted, there were 2.5 times as many new recruits as anything else.

There are currently ~18,000 active members, so I would guess the number of new recruits is ~45,000.



Anyway, yes point inflation happens and has been happening since this site began. No, we haven't come up with a solution to stop it (though there are a few ways to curb its effects in the works). So if you can come up with a way to put an end to point inflation and still retain the current point structure, feel free to post your idea so it can be perfected. I think its an unfortunate side effect of the growth of this site and that it cannot be stopped completely.

I'm sorry for being thick; but why is it detrimental.

podge wrote:I'm sorry for being thick; but why is it detrimental.

I was thinking that too...

I guess the best explanation is so that new-recruits stand a chance to get to the top in a reasonable amount of time.

Think I've figured it : More new recruits=More points for the higher ranks=wider gulf between recruit and general=An unfair disadvantage to the recruit which will only continue to grow.

The problem with inflation is that it shifts the bell curve up. If the requirements for the ranks remain the same, after a while, I can see most players becoming better and better. The problem with this inflation is that it's probably statistically so small, that it kinda creeps up on you. Add in the time that it takes to make any noticeable change to your score, and I'm guessing most people don't think about it at all. It's detrimental because then the rankings eventually won't accurately reflect the skill of the player. Granted this may take years to occur, but most people take losing very hard, and as other have stated before, the popularity of this site will draw more people in. Just as how the inflation rate in the US is not static, I believe that the point inflation rate in CC will wax and wane with the popularity of the site.

There was a time at conquer club when there was no point inflation. The highest score ever attained was around 2700 and it looked like that was going to stay the high water mark for a long time.

This was all before people were awarded points for deadbeats. Soon after the rule was changed where deadbeats lost points, the inflation began. Within a month of the new rule we had the first person over 3000, and it's been continuing to inflate.

The reason as you all have pointed out is because new recruits will join the site, join some games, and many of them decide that the site isn't for them and just deadbeat out of those games, never to return to the site again. So now those points from the new recruits are put into our point pool, whereas with the old rule the points never made it into the pool since deadbeats didn't lose points.

Currently on the to do list is "no points awarded for new recruit deadbeats" which should fix the inflation problem once implemented. We can't have all players allowed to deadbeat without losing points since the experienced players could deadbeat out of a game if they don't like their starting position.

New recruits however, don't come to the site with this tactic in mind. Almost always, the reason they deadbeat is because they were just checking out the site and don't plan to return. So when they do deadbeat, if no points are awarded, there won't be any inflation. Simple enough right?

On the otherside of this when the rule was originally no points awarded for deadbeats but the problem for this was the rule meant if a person p[layed round 1 and 2 then quit they'ld win

max is gr8 wrote:On the otherside of this when the rule was originally no points awarded for deadbeats but the problem for this was the rule meant if a person p[layed round 1 and 2 then quit they'ld win

who'd win? i couldnt really follow that sentence.

What max meant to say is that if you played your turn on round 1, but then got eliminated or never took a second turn, it counted as deadbeating and you didnt lose points. That was the old, old way and not only was it effective for noobs that didnt come back, but also for high rankers that didnt like their starting setup. I'm just glad the site has evolved a lot since then.