Congrats thecrown!

[spiesr]

You're wrong. The points recorded at the start of the game is only to aid the monthly board in finding what points were at a certain time, it is not to say that your score will be calculated from that mark if you win the game. Points are calculated by whatever your score is at the time of winning each game. This is why you could effectively do this. Lose a shitton of games at the same time so that you have 0 points or almost. (so in this case, lose all of your losing games at the same time) Then start finishing all the won games and take 100 points off each of the poor bastards that you choose to win against first, then 90, then 80, then 70's and they get less as you go up, but you are taking massive points off people as you climb in the beginning.

I saw this and all I could do was laugh. It took some dedication from all involved to achieve this. It's still abuse, but

It is more about having a large streak of victories than the lower score at the start of it. Once you get back to where you were before you aren't scoring any more points per each subsequent victory than you would have otherwise. If the goal is to temporarily catapult to the top of the board then it could also work by taking all the wins before the loses, its just easier to speed up loses & slow wins than the reverse.

[skillfull]

This guy under consideration is the guy with quite big skills in cc, so for this guy on certain maps a liutenant/major/even colonel is not a heavy weight opponent to compete him in equal basis. So, this is FARMING of POINT SYSTEM. Or abuse of point system, it is how i see the matter to look like.

Oooops! Thanks god i hate 1vs1

To the point now, for me ,every conqueror has got what he deserves during the CC history. Some got huge reputation about their great gameplay but others got bad reputation and called cheaters!
So, every conqueror knows what did he get between these two !

PS. I am curious to see how this story ends

[D4 Damager]

You're wrong. The points recorded at the start of the game is only to aid the monthly board in finding what points were at a certain time, it is not to say that your score will be calculated from that mark if you win the game. Points are calculated by whatever your score is at the time of winning each game. This is why you could effectively do this. Lose a shitton of games at the same time so that you have 0 points or almost. (so in this case, lose all of your losing games at the same time) Then start finishing all the won games and take 100 points off each of the poor bastards that you choose to win against first, then 90, then 80, then 70's and they get less as you go up, but you are taking massive points off people as you climb in the beginning.

I saw this and all I could do was laugh. It took some dedication from all involved to achieve this. It's still abuse, but

It is more about having a large streak of victories than the lower score at the start of it. Once you get back to where you were before you aren't scoring any more points per each subsequent victory than you would have otherwise. If the goal is to temporarily catapult to the top of the board then it could also work by taking all the wins before the loses, its just easier to speed up loses & slow wins than the reverse.

This isn't true spiesr. There is a mathematical difference between losing all the games first or winning all the games first. Shannon is correct and the point is you DON'T get back to where you were before. Think about what TheCrown has done, he has ended up with a net gain after all games are complete. Intuitively, if you have less points against the same score opponent, you will lose less and gain more points for a loss or win respectively.

[spiesr]

show

This isn't true spiesr. There is a mathematical difference between losing all the games first or winning all the games first. Shannon is correct and the point is you DON'T get back to where you were before. Think about what TheCrown has done, he has ended up with a net gain after all games are complete. Intuitively, if you have less points against the same score opponent, you will lose less and gain more points for a loss or win respectively.

Yes, but since the point exchange is calculated using your score at the end of a game having fewer points gives you more points from any given win, but doesn't help you after that game. If your goal is to reach X000 points you will get there in fewer wins if you start at a higher score. TheCrown didn't benefit from losing a bunch of points first, he benefited from having a very large win streak. So in summary if you want to push your rank up and then try to hold it for any amount of time you take the loses then the wins. If you just want to get the highest score possible and don't care that you only have if for very short period then you take all the wins first. Had TheCrown managed that more difficult exploit he would have peaked higher but likely already lost the top place.

[Serbia]

the conqueror has become known as the "player best able to exploit loopholes in the rules and harvest" or simply "that dude from THOTA with all the multis"... i don't think it means much anymore... actually, i don't think the scoreboard means much anymore... kind of sad, but it is what it is... i wish they policed the cheaters/harvesters that actually are a negative for the site, as they do the people in the forums that speak their minds and are seen by less than 1% of all CC users. CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

I don't always agree with owen, but when it comes to punishing rule breakers on a gaming site more harshly than forum users on a gaming site, I always agree.

Bollocks.

[Tripitaka]

the conqueror has become known as the "player best able to exploit loopholes in the rules and harvest" or simply "that dude from THOTA with all the multis"... i don't think it means much anymore... actually, i don't think the scoreboard means much anymore... kind of sad, but it is what it is... i wish they policed the cheaters/harvesters that actually are a negative for the site, as they do the people in the forums that speak their minds and are seen by less than 1% of all CC users. CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

I don't always agree with owen, but when it comes to punishing rule breakers on a gaming site more harshly than forum users on a gaming site, I always agree.

++1

[Metsfanmax]

CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

So which is it -- have we declined, or has not much changed?

[demonfork]

CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

So which is it -- have we declined, or has not much changed?

You're taking this out of context...

The point is that very little attention is being given to the issues that have a negative impact on the site thus causing a decline whereas a lot of attention is given to aspects that have very little exposure to the majority of the cc population.

This focus of attention hasn't changed and it's what is causing the decline.

Are you sure that you are head thinker material?

[Metsfanmax]

CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

So which is it -- have we declined, or has not much changed?

You're taking this out of context...

The point is that very little attention is being given to the issues that have a negative impact on the site thus causing a decline whereas a lot of attention is given to aspects that have very little exposure to the majority of the cc population.

This focus of attention hasn't changed and it's what is causing the decline.

Any way you slice it, his statement doesn't add up. If this alleged incorrect focus is the cause of the decline, then we should have been "declining" since the site began, since he claims it has always been this way. If the site was popular for a while despite this focus and then started to decline, even though the Team CC focus did not change, then you cannot attribute the decline to the Team CC focus (since wouldn't it have prevented us from ever getting popular in the first place?).

Are you sure that you are head thinker material?

No.

[BoganGod]

the conqueror has become known as the "player best able to exploit loopholes in the rules and harvest" or simply "that dude from THOTA with all the multis"... i don't think it means much anymore... actually, i don't think the scoreboard means much anymore... kind of sad, but it is what it is... i wish they policed the cheaters/harvesters that actually are a negative for the site, as they do the people in the forums that speak their minds and are seen by less than 1% of all CC users. CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

I don't always agree with owen, but when it comes to punishing rule breakers on a gaming site more harshly than forum users on a gaming site, I always agree.

++1

+++1

Don't punish people for what they say, or for calling mods on inconsistencies. Punish people for breaking rules and cheating.......

[demonfork]

CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

So which is it -- have we declined, or has not much changed?

You're taking this out of context...

The point is that very little attention is being given to the issues that have a negative impact on the site thus causing a decline whereas a lot of attention is given to aspects that have very little exposure to the majority of the cc population.

This focus of attention hasn't changed and it's what is causing the decline.

Are you sure that you are head thinker material?

Any way you slice it, his statement doesn't add up. If this alleged incorrect focus is the cause of the decline, then we should have been "declining" since the site began, since he claims it has always been this way. If the site was popular for a while despite this focus and then started to decline, even though the Team CC focus did not change, then you cannot attribute the decline to the Team CC focus (since wouldn't it have prevented us from ever getting popular in the first place?).

Not really, his comment makes perfect sense.

Let's take me for an example. I've been here for 5 years, $125. I've hosted 2 tournaments each with premium membership prizes, $50. I've bought 4 players memberships over the last 5 years, $100. I've recommended the site to more people than I can count, at least 10 of which joined $250.

Im a pretty loyal customer but I'm one major infraction away from a permanent site ban because I called someone a "stupid cunt" in the forum and said "I hope you get aids" in a game chat.

cc wants to get rid of a loyal customer, who has brought in over $500, over a couple of comments that hardly anyone even knows about but will do nothing about issues that are driving 100's of customers away.

[Metsfanmax]

Not really, his comment makes perfect sense.

Let's take me for an example. I've been here for 5 years, $125. I've hosted 2 tournaments each with premium membership prizes, $50. I've bought 4 players memberships over the last 5 years, $100. I've recommended the site to more people than I can count, at least 10 of which joined $250.

Im a pretty loyal customer but I'm one major infraction away from a permanent site ban because I called someone a "stupid cunt" in the forum and said "I hope you get aids" in a game chat.

cc wants to get rid of a loyal customer, who has brought in over $500, over a couple of comments that hardly anyone even knows about but will do nothing about issues that are driving 100's of customers away.

This isn't really relevant to what owen said. If Team CC truly has not ever been focusing on the 'right' things that attract customers, then we never should have gotten popular. Clearly something was done right in the past, so a narrative as simple as "Team CC has always screwed things up" doesn't help much. We would need to understand what we were doing then that we aren't doing now in order for you or owen to be making a concrete recommendation.

Anyway, the developers and the people who deal with site rules infractions are totally different people on different teams. The focus of ka and the C&A team on ensuring that the site remains a pleasant environment is not mutually exclusive with the focus of the programming team on building cool new site features and enriching the gameplay experience. Again, a simple narrative fails.

[Gweeedo]

Nice thread.

[D4 Damager]

show

Yes, but since the point exchange is calculated using your score at the end of a game having fewer points gives you more points from any given win, but doesn't help you after that game. If your goal is to reach X000 points you will get there in fewer wins if you start at a higher score. TheCrown didn't benefit from losing a bunch of points first, he benefited from having a very large win streak. So in summary if you want to push your rank up and then try to hold it for any amount of time you take the loses then the wins. If you just want to get the highest score possible and don't care that you only have if for very short period then you take all the wins first. Had TheCrown managed that more difficult exploit he would have peaked higher but likely already lost the top place.

Agreed, given that your definition of "benefit" is "obtaining the highest possible score from a sequence of games" rather than "ending up with the highest score after completing all games in the sequence".

I thought your original post was making the point that it didn't matter whether you won all the games first or last because you always get back to the same score, which is definitely incorrect Sorry to have misunderstood.

[Fruitcake]

Not really, his comment makes perfect sense.

Let's take me for an example. I've been here for 5 years, $125. I've hosted 2 tournaments each with premium membership prizes, $50. I've bought 4 players memberships over the last 5 years, $100. I've recommended the site to more people than I can count, at least 10 of which joined $250.

Im a pretty loyal customer but I'm one major infraction away from a permanent site ban because I called someone a "stupid cunt" in the forum and said "I hope you get aids" in a game chat.

cc wants to get rid of a loyal customer, who has brought in over $500, over a couple of comments that hardly anyone even knows about but will do nothing about issues that are driving 100's of customers away.

This isn't really relevant to what owen said. If Team CC truly has not ever been focusing on the 'right' things that attract customers, then we never should have gotten popular. Clearly something was done right in the past, so a narrative as simple as "Team CC has always screwed things up" doesn't help much. We would need to understand what we were doing then that we aren't doing now in order for you or owen to be making a concrete recommendation.

Anyway, the developers and the people who deal with site rules infractions are totally different people on different teams. The focus of ka and the C&A team on ensuring that the site remains a pleasant environment is not mutually exclusive with the focus of the programming team on building cool new site features and enriching the gameplay experience. Again, a simple narrative fails.

I am amazed you continue to use this argument of 'what worked then hasn't changed so it isn't us who are wrong'

You say: We would need to understand what we were doing then that we aren't doing now in order for you or owen to be making a concrete recommendation. Well here's a thought, you don't do now what you did then. Take a look around you and see, if you cannot see how the environment of cc has changed over the years then, to be frank, you are very short sighted and not too clever. How you can say you would need to understand what you were doing then that you aren't doing now defies logic in the basest form. One can only deduce from your words that you do not have the simplest recollection, or available records to refer to.

Having said all this, the inexorable institutionalisation of cc is no different to many examples in the real world. The key to unlocking the real success of taking something that has grown and constantly improving and furthering growth is to adapt correctly, something that has patently failed to occur, sadly.

[ISN2]

Not really, his comment makes perfect sense.

Let's take me for an example. I've been here for 5 years, $125. I've hosted 2 tournaments each with premium membership prizes, $50. I've bought 4 players memberships over the last 5 years, $100. I've recommended the site to more people than I can count, at least 10 of which joined $250.

Im a pretty loyal customer but I'm one major infraction away from a permanent site ban because I called someone a "stupid cunt" in the forum and said "I hope you get aids" in a game chat.

cc wants to get rid of a loyal customer, who has brought in over $500, over a couple of comments that hardly anyone even knows about but will do nothing about issues that are driving 100's of customers away.

This isn't really relevant to what owen said. If Team CC truly has not ever been focusing on the 'right' things that attract customers, then we never should have gotten popular. Clearly something was done right in the past, so a narrative as simple as "Team CC has always screwed things up" doesn't help much. We would need to understand what we were doing then that we aren't doing now in order for you or owen to be making a concrete recommendation.

Anyway, the developers and the people who deal with site rules infractions are totally different people on different teams. The focus of ka and the C&A team on ensuring that the site remains a pleasant environment is not mutually exclusive with the focus of the programming team on building cool new site features and enriching the gameplay experience. Again, a simple narrative fails.

I am amazed you continue to use this argument of 'what worked then hasn't changed so it isn't us who are wrong'

You say: We would need to understand what we were doing then that we aren't doing now in order for you or owen to be making a concrete recommendation. Well here's a thought, you don't do now what you did then. Take a look around you and see, if you cannot see how the environment of cc has changed over the years then, to be frank, you are very short sighted and not too clever. How you can say you would need to understand what you were doing then that you aren't doing now defies logic in the basest form. One can only deduce from your words that you do not have the simplest recollection, or available records to refer to.

Having said all this, the inexorable institutionalisation of cc is no different to many examples in the real world. The key to unlocking the real success of taking something that has grown and constantly improving and furthering growth is to adapt correctly, something that has patently failed to occur, sadly.

I agree with this ...

- - - - -

Also note that if at 2007-2010 this site was growing it doesn't always mean that the CC Team was focusing on right things, it may mean that the problems that are here today are created by those focusing points and by things that didn't get focus on ...

The overall idea of CC (An online RISK game) was and still is an excellent idea, but keeping the environment enjoyable for players always been bad, and I really mean it ...

Keeping environment enjoyable isn't just about adding new features and keeping the game updated (Which this thing was also lacking for a long time until a few weeks ago), keeping environment enjoyable is also about the way that rules are set, the way leaders are thinking and acting and the feeling that at the end is being made in a player.

[Gilligan]

At least he's off the monthly scoreboards, now.

[owenshooter]

CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

So which is it -- have we declined, or has not much changed?

i'll tell you which/what it is... the written word still escapes you... you took something out of context and obviously did not understand what you had read. here you go, let me put the full statement here for you:

i wish they policed the cheaters/harvesters that actually are a negative for the site, as they do the people in the forums that speak their minds and are seen by less than 1% of all CC users. CC has always gotten it backwards in this regard and it is good to see not much has changed since i started playing on here... the decline is sad...-el Jesus negro

that is what we call SARCASM. i am sorry that the nuances of the written word seem to have escaped you on this one, but it is clearly a sarcastic comment on team CC's continued harsh punishment of forum goers (1% of CC) vs. GAME CHEATS. i hope this resolves the issue for you. if you have any other problems deciphering written words in the forums, just fire me a PM to avoid future embarrassments like the one which just occurred...-el Jesus negro

[frankiebee]

At least he's off the monthly scoreboards, now.

Getting him off the monthly scoreboard can only mean they think his points we're not legitimate. In that case he should get a point reset to get him from the full scoreboard to.

[Metsfanmax]

You say: We would need to understand what we were doing then that we aren't doing now in order for you or owen to be making a concrete recommendation. Well here's a thought, you don't do now what you did then. Take a look around you and see, if you cannot see how the environment of cc has changed over the years then, to be frank, you are very short sighted and not too clever. How you can say you would need to understand what you were doing then that you aren't doing now defies logic in the basest form. One can only deduce from your words that you do not have the simplest recollection, or available records to refer to.

I don't recall reading a single post like this that actually provides a concrete example of something that we did back then, and are no longer doing, that we should still be doing. I can't read all of your minds on what you think has declined in quality (at least, when it comes to site development; I'm aware of the criticisms related to forum moderation). If you have such specific suggestions that are actionable, please tell me what they are (or, better yet, add support for them in the Suggestions Forum).

[spiesr]

At least he's off the monthly scoreboards, now.

Getting him off the monthly scoreboard can only mean they think his points we're not legitimate. In that case he should get a point reset to get him from the full scoreboard to.

No, he is off the top of the monthly board because he won the majority of his games in November and the boards reset for December.

[ISN2]

At least he's off the monthly scoreboards, now.

Getting him off the monthly scoreboard can only mean they think his points we're not legitimate. In that case he should get a point reset to get him from the full scoreboard to.

No, he is off the top of the monthly board because he won the majority of his games in November and the boards reset for December.

He's off the November board too ...

[The Voice]

This case speaks to a larger issue: it is much too easy for players to become moderators. While CC's number of active users has dwindled, the number of mods seems to have risen. Moderators should be a more selective fraternity, a tight ship. These are people who are devoted to CC and pursue the site's betterment rather than find ways to manipulate it.

We can, and probably should, give The Crown the benefit of the doubt and assume he was driven by curiosity and not maliciousness. Nonetheless, his actions are nefarious in part because he is a mod, and they undermine all of the positive work mods like Mets do. Public perception of moderators often affect public perception of CC in general.

TL;DR We have too many mods.

[iAmCaffeine]

Give him the benefit of the doubt due to his curiosity? Really?

Curiosity would be on a small scale basis, this is clear abuse of the scoreboard. Sure, there are flaws with the point system, but it will never be perfect. I don't see the point in making a new system when people will always find a way to manipulate it, just like there will be other infractions like rating and game chat abuse.

As several people have already said, gross abuse of the game is against the rules. What more needs to be said? I don't think that it's any worse because he's a moderator.