Conquer Club

Cookbombed - adj. When a cook joins a team game in which all the players that have already joined are of significantly higher rank - often prompting some on the same team to drop the game, and dissuading others from joining, so that the game eventually expires. Even worse is when the cook fills the last spot, denying everyone else the chance to drop the game.

Example usage "That game I started was looking good until it got cookbombed and half of Team 2 dropped out"

Cookbomber - n. Someone who cookbombs a game.

AladdinSane wrote:Cookbombed - adj. When a cook joins a team game in which all the players that have already joined are of significantly higher rank - often prompting some on the same team to drop the game, and dissuading others from joining, so that the game eventually expires. Even worse is when the cook fills the last spot, denying everyone else the chance to drop the game.

Example usage "That game I started was looking good until it got cookbombed and half of Team 2 dropped out"

Cookbomber - n. Someone who cookbombs a game.

Is there such a thing as singlestriperbombed?

Not at this point in time.

AladdinSane wrote:Not at this point in time.

Lol @ you...

What is ur definition of "significant". I dont think that word means the same thing to people where u come from... i think everyone below 2000 or so (with some exceptions) is basically the same player. Please... continue

I had in mind about lieutenant and above, but it wouldn't bother me if it cut in a rank or two higher. You look like you live in a trailer park. Do you?

Cookbomber is that a guy who encourges cooks to cookbomb? By promising them a seat in heaven...

AladdinSane wrote:I had in mind about lieutenant and above, but it wouldn't bother me if it cut in a rank or two higher. You look like you live in a trailer park. Do you?

how the hell did you know that you stud?!


you appear to have no clue how to play this silly game.... do you?

He probably doesn't.

You got a problem with that, son?!

JBlombier wrote:He probably doesn't.

You got a problem with that, son?!

do I? and son? lol.. you're adorable

AladdinSane wrote:Not at this point in time.

What's the difference between single striper bombed and cook bombed?

at one point, he was 12 points away from being a 2 stripper ok! he just wanted to share that he's too good for cooks.

betiko wrote:at one point, he was 12 points away from being a 2 stripper ok! he just wanted to share that he's too good for cooks.

Nope, that wasn't my intention at all. "Cookbombing" is just something I've noticed happening while looking for games to join. You see team games gradually filling up and then a cook joins a team and its recruitment stalls or goes backward as people drop out of that team. I'm simply commenting on a phenomenon that I have noticed. Anyone who reads more into my initial post than that, or who thinks this is in any way about me, needs to brush up on their reading comprehension skills.

Cookbombing is a thing. There are higher-ranked people here who will try to protect their precious rating by dropping out of teams which a cook has joined - and that is rational behaviour, if you take a moment to think about it. I haven't really noticed it nearly as much with privates, but then I didn't exactly make this a formal research project. Anyone with too much spare time on their hands (I'm looking at you, higher-ranked players) is welcome to give it a go and report back.

rhp 1 wrote:

AladdinSane wrote:I had in mind about lieutenant and above, but it wouldn't bother me if it cut in a rank or two higher. You look like you live in a trailer park. Do you?

how the hell did you know that you stud?!


you appear to have no clue how to play this silly game.... do you?

hahaha yet another keyboard hero zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Oh, two "O"s.

AladdinSane wrote:

rhp 1 wrote:

AladdinSane wrote:I had in mind about lieutenant and above, but it wouldn't bother me if it cut in a rank or two higher. You look like you live in a trailer park. Do you?

how the hell did you know that you stud?!


you appear to have no clue how to play this silly game.... do you?

hahaha yet another keyboard hero zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

haha..
says the noob that calls out other noobs... lmao... carry on little feller...

and funny thing what people will take the time to do when bored (speaking of myself here atm)
at first, when I saw your post, I looked at your wall... 54% win... I thought.. hmm... must be a decent player who just has a low score atm... today I actually clicked on your games.. do you realize, without bot games, your win % is like 4%? dude... just play the game.. no need to call out other players if you're not good yourself.. it looks silly...

rhp 1 wrote:and funny thing what people will take the time to do when bored (speaking of myself here atm)
at first, when I saw your post, I looked at your wall... 54% win... I thought.. hmm... must be a decent player who just has a low score atm... today I actually clicked on your games.. do you realize, without bot games, your win % is like 4%? dude... just play the game.. no need to call out other players if you're not good yourself.. it looks silly...

[text deleted - why bother feeding trolls?]

May all your team games be cookbombed.

AladdinSane wrote:

betiko wrote:at one point, he was 12 points away from being a 2 stripper ok! he just wanted to share that he's too good for cooks.

Nope, that wasn't my intention at all. "Cookbombing" is just something I've noticed happening while looking for games to join. You see team games gradually filling up and then a cook joins a team and its recruitment stalls or goes backward as people drop out of that team. I'm simply commenting on a phenomenon that I have noticed. Anyone who reads more into my initial post than that, or who thinks this is in any way about me, needs to brush up on their reading comprehension skills.

Cookbombing is a thing. There are higher-ranked people here who will try to protect their precious rating by dropping out of teams which a cook has joined - and that is rational behaviour, if you take a moment to think about it. I haven't really noticed it nearly as much with privates, but then I didn't exactly make this a formal research project. Anyone with too much spare time on their hands (I'm looking at you, higher-ranked players) is welcome to give it a go and report back.

It might not be so much about rank. Why take the high chance of playing with a non-cooperative and weak teammate?

AladdinSane wrote:

rhp 1 wrote:and funny thing what people will take the time to do when bored (speaking of myself here atm)
at first, when I saw your post, I looked at your wall... 54% win... I thought.. hmm... must be a decent player who just has a low score atm... today I actually clicked on your games.. do you realize, without bot games, your win % is like 4%? dude... just play the game.. no need to call out other players if you're not good yourself.. it looks silly...

[text deleted - why bother feeding trolls?]

May all your team games be cookbombed.

wasn't really trolling... if you noticed you were the one calling other players out.. I was commenting on your sillyness

rhp 1 wrote:wasn't really trolling... if you noticed you were the one calling other players out.. I was commenting on your sillyness

You're either trolling or thick. Either way you go into threads looking for confrontation. Just read my quoted post in BigBallinStalin's post above yours. If you still don't get it, just...i don't know...FOAD.

Troll.

Incidentally, my win % without bot games was about 29%. Not flash, but way better than your math skills.

BigBallinStalin wrote:Why take the high chance of playing with a non-cooperative and weak teammate?

Exactimundo! Like I say, it's rational for high-ranked players to drop out of teams which include potentially weak players, and a cook is definitely a potentially weak player - as the lowest rank, they stand out. If you're going up against a team of generals, you don't really need a cook in your side. You probably don't want a private either, but I made the point with cooks precisely because they are the very lowest rank.

In fact, the detailed ranks, medals, turns taken, and other stats are provided partly so we can make decisions on who we want to be in teams with.

I don't find it surprising in the least that higher ranks drop out of teams that include cooks.

For the benefit of a certain troll intent on starting a fight in this thread, I have nothing against cooks - everyone has to start somewhere. That said, if you are a high rank you still might not want one on your team.

Would have been much better if you called it "cookblocked."

AladdinSane wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:Why take the high chance of playing with a non-cooperative and weak teammate?

Exactimundo! Like I say, it's rational for high-ranked players to drop out of teams which include potentially weak players, and a cook is definitely a potentially weak player - as the lowest rank, they stand out. If you're going up against a team of generals, you don't really need a cook in your side. You probably don't want a private either, but I made the point with cooks precisely because they are the very lowest rank.

In fact, the detailed ranks, medals, turns taken, and other stats are provided partly so we can make decisions on who we want to be in teams with.

I don't find it surprising in the least that higher ranks drop out of teams that include cooks.

For the benefit of a certain troll intent on starting a fight in this thread, I have nothing against cooks - everyone has to start somewhere. That said, if you are a high rank you still might not want one on your team.

Actually if you team with a cook/private or whatever intentionally because you agreed with the guy to communicate and follow your lead you get the best points possible in case of a win and you don t lose that much if you lose the game.
If you see some cook with 80% attendance join your team, definitely run for your life.

Metsfanmax wrote:Would have been much better if you called it "cookblocked."

LOL yes! I wish I had thought of that!