Weeding out the STRONG... Good or Bad?

[waauw]

Not sure Owen but I think he was referring to wing commanders avatar

I was. I thought that would've been clear. I wonder whether he just feigned ingorance or some conditioned response triggered.

[BrutalBob]

It would add an interesting dynamic of trying to work out who which player is. It wouldn't solve all the problems with trying not to lose to a player but it would be quite fun, particularly for those who play one another a lot and could work it out from playing style (or even just settings chosen, order joined in or even just their chat style or lack thereof). There would be so many unintended consequences, but possible some interesting ones.

But do we really need more choices and options?
Would it be possible (maybe)? will it happen (not a chance)?

Unless a load of people played it it out of choice it wouldn't work anyway, you can't exactly put it on callouts or use the invite function for obvious reasons,

i am not busting your balls here... i literally have no idea what you are talking about... is this in response to a post? if so, i couldn't find the post that corresponded to this response... you took some time and effort with this post, i just really want to know what you are talking about.. "more choices and options?", where did that come from? "would it be possible?", what possible? i'm just lost... the black jesus is trying to figure out what you are talking about... WAIT!!! are you responding to the concept of not knowing who you are playing in a game with, until it is over?!! jeez... come on, man!!! quote what you are responding to!! this thread is all over the place!!!

now that i get it, i agree with your post.. it would be awesome, but more options/choices is not what we need right now... good post! glad i could figure it out! whew...-Bj

Err dont go back and edit your post when you figure it out. The step by step thought process is intriguing.

[owenshooter]

It would add an interesting dynamic of trying to work out who which player is. It wouldn't solve all the problems with trying not to lose to a player but it would be quite fun, particularly for those who play one another a lot and could work it out from playing style (or even just settings chosen, order joined in or even just their chat style or lack thereof). There would be so many unintended consequences, but possible some interesting ones.

But do we really need more choices and options?
Would it be possible (maybe)? will it happen (not a chance)?

Unless a load of people played it it out of choice it wouldn't work anyway, you can't exactly put it on callouts or use the invite function for obvious reasons,

i am not busting your balls here... i literally have no idea what you are talking about... is this in response to a post? if so, i couldn't find the post that corresponded to this response... you took some time and effort with this post, i just really want to know what you are talking about.. "more choices and options?", where did that come from? "would it be possible?", what possible? i'm just lost... the black jesus is trying to figure out what you are talking about... WAIT!!! are you responding to the concept of not knowing who you are playing in a game with, until it is over?!! jeez... come on, man!!! quote what you are responding to!! this thread is all over the place!!!

now that i get it, i agree with your post.. it would be awesome, but more options/choices is not what we need right now... good post! glad i could figure it out! whew...-Bj

i didn't go back and edit my post. that is how i posted it and that is how it stands. there is no "last edited" under the post. soooo, you literally have no idea what you are talking about. it is not my fault if you are not smart enough to know that you quote the post you are responding to.-Bj
Err dont go back and edit your post when you figure it out. The step by step thought process is intriguing.

[jdw35]

And another thread ruined by owenshooter

[FreeFalling123]

Tried to reach to every reply to keep this subject alive... couple of interesting things going on here

Tell you what I will play any of you 1vs1 or however you want, conquer club rank isn't real rank, and lots of you are loling right now, rank means nothing to me, how a person plays does, my respect may mean nothing to you,but its real.
Any takers?
Set up game and invite.

Not all scores reflect the player's skill,
BUT most scores will give you a hint at a player’s potential...
Play enough and you'll recognize who is overrated and who isn't

I like the idea of anonymous games - only revealing who is who at the end. It would go a long way to stop points suiciders. I'm currently in at least 2 tournaments where both myself and other lower ranked players do not stand a chance from the start - because after 30 or 50 rounds if a low ranked player is winning - others will suicide into him on the last round to make sure that a higher ranked player wins. When I'm told in game chat - "sorry I can't afford to lose 30 points" so they suicide into me so that a colonel wins and they only lost 15 points. That cost me around 150 points (also ruining the tournament) and instead of the colonel losing a few points he wins again. That's why he is a colonel - you don't have to be a good player - just play with a gang of suiciders. Of course I'll never be a colonel as long as people behave like that - unless someone accidentally kills my target in a BR assassin game.

imo, good players/teams will find a way around this "pitfall" of yours, FF. sounds to me like you guys got "too big, too fast", maybe try slowplaying it a bit more next time? but yeah, if a brig joined a terminator game i was in, OF COURSE i'd be gunning for him...

I've done fine in terminator games, ranked anywhere from Major to General. Yes, you get people that gun for you if you are higher ranked, but you also get the people who would rather lose to you than the lower ranked person, so if although it hinders you early if you survive the early stages it quickly turns into an advantage having a higher rank.

It's rare to me that someone would consciously decide to give a game away to another player
-- with chatty players, more likely the game will be decided in chat

The game-winning-sweep in a terminator game is more valuable than the brigadier.
1. you don't lose points to a lower ranked
2. you lose less if the brig kills you in the end assuming he is the highest ranked player

What oftentimes happens in these games is everyone attacks the brig in the first round,
BUT the last one to strike gets the kill...

The best strategical player should never throw a game.
You do what it takes to win, no matter what the rankings of players are...

so avoiding the uninteresting discussions from the latest posts; FF you didn't play well. this was something you had to anticipate. there is a tough balance to find between not being left behind and not being everybody's target...

The other two teams forced us to decide who should win.
Easy… we picked the team with the most points
The team with less points should realize it's our best option before they agree to put us in this position.

Stop kiding yourselves, there are no good players on conquer club.

The higher up the rsnks I go the more stale the play becomes. Everyone plays conservatively and gets really confused by early aggressive play.

I am stopping playing games because there is no point. No one on this site knows how to play multiple ways.

i take great offense to that...-Bj

You and Demonfork were the only interesting players in that game. Neither claimed to know the map. Theres an elitist class here, and they suck at risk.

yes, they are called the high rank, don't want to lose points, fog, trench brigade...-Bj

Stop kiding yourselves, there are no good players on conquer club.

The higher up the rsnks I go the more stale the play becomes. Everyone plays conservatively and gets really confused by early aggressive play.

I am stopping playing games because there is no point. No one on this site knows how to play multiple ways.

Coming from a person who's barely played any games and who's maximum score seems to show 2065.
I'm sorry but you just don't have any credibility when you say 'the higher up the ranks I go'.

"Higher up the ranks I go" - I have consistently increased my score with no significant drops. Ergo, going up the ranks. Did I say I reached the top? nope.

Did I say that my opinion is the most important? nope.

Every comment you have ever made has left me with the opinion that you have zero credibility as a human being. Take that however you want.

The best players are playing the least risky variations...

Bonus monkeying is a strategy that I use in rare circumstance, but even then it can hurt you more than it helps you.

The less people in the game the more likely going for a bonus works..
4-5 player games you have 10 rounds before the cashes are high enough to get kills...
At 7-10 players you would be nuts to waste troops on a bonus when the sweep occurs round 7 and in most cases you set someone else up for a game winning sweep

It would add an interesting dynamic of trying to work out who which player is. It wouldn't solve all the problems with trying not to lose to a player but it would be quite fun, particularly for those who play one another a lot and could work it out from playing style (or even just settings chosen, order joined in or even just their chat style or lack thereof). There would be so many unintended consequences, but possible some interesting ones.

But do we really need more choices and options?
Would it be possible (maybe)? will it happen (not a chance)?

Unless a load of people played it it out of choice it wouldn't work anyway, you can't exactly put it on callouts or use the invite function for obvious reasons,

You could invite players… imagine the players joined and became anonymous at the beginning of the game… using the chatbox would be possible with colors non-congruently to the colors on the board.

The setting might under special features and possible uses in team games as well as non-team games would have to be refined…

Idk if this idea sucks or not but mayb they could make a points dont matter option so that higher ranked players can play andnot haveto care about who joins and subsequently gangs up on higher ranked players. Just a thought.
(Probably a lame one)

I’ve heard this suggestion… what purpose would people have in joining these games?

I could see a feature where the players in the game bet their points on other players!

Say the first move of the game everyone bets on a player to win… The points are rewarded based on the player you picked to win at the start… If deadbeats occur treat it like an Assassin game… that way I could pick the lowest ranked player and if I win I only lose 6 points to myself xD

I absolutely despise multi-team team games.
You have my sympathy.

Like all settings, it has it's own intricate strategy. But I avoid it for the same reason I largely avoid 8pl standard NS/FR games. The diplomacy/alliance part of the game doesn't really interest me.
I don't think you can ever become the best at standard games, or multi-team games without engaging in, and mastering the art of diplomacy/alliances etc.
Just my five cents though, I haven't engaged in such games in a long time.

There is a reason people are biased against these scenarios…

[jgordon1111]

That was one of a few rare posts here, you took each point step by step and carefully explained your position on each,cudos

[riskllama]

yes, nicely done, FF...

[WILLIAMS5232]

probably my first year here, i was really into the foggy 8 player no spoils world 2.1 and hive games. it was the diplomacy i really enjoyed. and i kept a 25% win rate. i understand how some don't like diplomacy, but i wouldn't have played without it.

i tried to stay around player no. 3 the whole game, and towards the end would try to instigate 1-2 to fight, sometimes when possible, i would secretly trim a stack from no.1 to make him think no.2 did it. like i would drop on the border and attack down to the exact no. i had before the drop and just end the turn. occasionally it worked.

i know, very sneaky right?

anyway, i recently tried to go back and play some like it, but it plays different now. not sure if it's me, or the other people. i know back when i first started there were about 50 regular players that played those settings. of course that was 6 years ago and i don't see them now, but i don't enjoy it like i did. plus i wasn't winning them anymore so i just stick to the poly and team games now.

i tried a multi team game i think, but it was kind of dumb if i remember.

[boberz]

You could invite players… imagine the players joined and became anonymous at the beginning of the game… using the chatbox would be possible with colors non-congruently to the colors on the board.

The setting might under special features and possible uses in team games as well as non-team games would have to be refined…

I think the games could lose their anonymity pretty easily, especially if you narrow the field of possible players down to those in the game. Although I think that would be kind of fun, like playing mafia in the forums.

I wonder if more options are desirable at the moment though.

[FreeFalling123]

That was one of a few rare posts here, you took each point step by step and carefully explained your position on each,cudos

yes, nicely done, FF...

Cheers! Some points not as clear as others...

I'm definitely game for updating the system as much as deems wise...

You could invite players… imagine the players joined and became anonymous at the beginning of the game… using the chatbox would be possible with colors non-congruently to the colors on the board.

The setting might [fall] under special features [in "create a game"]. Possible uses in team games as well as non-team games would have to be refined…

I think the games could lose their anonymity pretty easily, especially if you narrow the field of possible players down to those in the game. Although I think that would be kind of fun, like playing mafia in the forums.

I wonder if more options are desirable at the moment though.

Indeed... I'm always interested in updates. And I think like the 99 dragons riddle, there can never be 100% certainty unless someone sabotages himself in the game..

probably my first year here, i was really into the foggy 8 player no spoils world 2.1 and hive games. it was the diplomacy i really enjoyed. and i kept a 25% win rate. i understand how some don't like diplomacy, but i wouldn't have played without it.

i tried to stay around player no. 3 the whole game, and towards the end would try to instigate 1-2 to fight, sometimes when possible, i would secretly trim a stack from no.1 to make him think no.2 did it. like i would drop on the border and attack down to the exact no. i had before the drop and just end the turn. occasionally it worked.

i know, very sneaky right?

anyway, i recently tried to go back and play some like it, but it plays different now. not sure if it's me, or the other people. i know back when i first started there were about 50 regular players that played those settings. of course that was 6 years ago and i don't see them now, but i don't enjoy it like i did. plus i wasn't winning them anymore so i just stick to the poly and team games now.

i tried a multi team game i think, but it was kind of dumb if i remember.

Seems to me like the best games are the convenient ones that you don't have to work to get started. Someone should do a poll on the most popular games. I know for a fact polymorphic has become super popular for stronger players not wanting to deal with poor teammates, but for me... I learned the most when I was that poor teammate and that's what motivated me to get better. Nowadays, if you are struggling nobody is going to take you under their wing.

Do some research William... check out the last 50 games with the setting you want (within the last year of course -- that is a feature in game finder now) and invite all of those players to the game and I guarantee you get the exact game you want and miss.

If it's in the standard of play people bring into the picture, then maybe reevaluate your own standards xD I think the game has gotten stronger... more dedicated players have stayed over time. The survivors here are all the arrogant bastards who think they have it all figured out myself included xD

[Extreme Ways]

Seems to me like the best games are the convenient ones that you don't have to work to get started. Someone should do a poll on the most popular games. I know for a fact polymorphic has become super popular for stronger players not wanting to deal with poor teammates, but for me... I learned the most when I was that poor teammate and that's what motivated me to get better. Nowadays, if you are struggling nobody is going to take you under their wing.

Alright, take my words with a grain of salt because my (inflated) rank helps getting favors and sometimes make people respect you as a player.

I've been on both sides of this. I've asked Donelladan to play a game with me (France 2.1 trips fog/trench) with the purpose of gaining insight into the settings we're playing. This included me giving ideas, Don saying what what good/bad about it and the alternatives. Basically, every single move we did as a team accompanied a description of why it was a good move and sometimes what moves would seem good, but aren't. He also showed me what bonuses are easy to take and which ones to stay away from as guideline.

I've played Hive dubs fog/trench with Chris98 in the same way, but this was more of a just playing together than learning process, since I knew a little bit about those settings to begin with. I've also asked random21 the same, and he was happy to oblige. However, I asked him during a short hiatus and when he answered me I had my sights set on something else so this didn't happen. My own experience is, look up an experienced player on the settings you want to learn and ask them. Even in the pre-poly days, I can't imagine most players who know play poly 'allowing' randoms in their team.

On the other hand, I've had a few players ask me to play a game with them, Not any specific settings, just a game to I guess see how I play? Just like in the previous cases as long as I've got enough time to give the game the attention it deserves, I'll play them. "Strong" players won't mind a "weak" teammate IF the teammate knows how to play in a team. If he''s playing to learn, it essentially plays out like a poly in some ways.

Now I do know that if I were a private asking random21 to play a game with me, he would probably have declined. I also know random is an old clanmate of mine so while I don't remember much of my time in KoRT, it does help when asking questions like these. But really, if you ask nicely you'll get a positive response in most cases I think.

And on that point earlier, I'm probably one of those high ranked overrated players After winning some BRs to get to 4800 I've dropped over 1k points already (though I appear to be stabilizing a bit now). Rank is an indication of skill, but not a reflection of skill. There are probably a couple hundred players lower in rank which are more skilled players.

[owenshooter]

There are probably a couple hundred players lower in rank which are more skilled players.

the black jesus is blushing...-Jésus noir

[FreeFalling123]

Now I do know that if I were a private asking random21 to play a game with me, he would probably have declined. I also know random is an old clanmate of mine so while I don't remember much of my time in KoRT, it does help when asking questions like these. But really, if you ask nicely you'll get a positive response in most cases I think.

That's what I mean. What smart person is going to want to play with a player under 1,500 poiints team or not... in any game...

One of my most fortunate occurrences was a guy named Masil (something close tot that ... I'd recognize it if I saw it) let me partner up with him. And he was ranked 3x points higher than me at this time... and we played this hopeless game and he said something really simple like... well we gave it our best shot...
But that made me realize that it doesn't matter how good you are; some games you just aren't going to win... that was when I really started to believe I could beat anyone.

Otherwise, I probably would have quit... shit I was at like 1,100 points and I thought I was never getting over 1,200 without a really hot streak haha... and hell there are some fantastic players at 1,300 points... they just don't believe in themselves, have no idea if they are on the right track and nobody gives them the time of day! I told Ander023 when he was at 1,300 points that he was playing like a Lieutenant and I wanted him on my team every chance I could get because his score was so low for his skill... Right now he's @ 1519... but notice he almost broke 2k... and this is his first year..
Ander023 Sergeant 1st Class Score:1519 (Range: 987-1924)

Honestly, most guys like this are multis or couldn't get into an old account, but who am I to say... I try to play with as many different people as I can and then swamp the chat with over-the-top notes and top-of-the-line plays.. and 90% of the time people don't care.. but every once in awhile it sparks something in someone... so if you played 100 games with 200 different partners and you had 25 people get hooked... I'm sure every one of them will show at least 1 buddy how cool CC is... I have had 8 different friends try out the site... they played an average of 40 games each and I think one of them even bought a month of premium and then got banned for creating 5 accounts and playing games against himself before he got pissed and left xD

All I'm saying is, there needs to be a place of compromise here. A place where the rank is compromised or scores become secondary... give players clan rank vs. standard rank so we know their real strength in a clan war... separate regular games from speed games so I don't keep getting my ass kicked while I'm walking my dog

[Extreme Ways]

Now I do know that if I were a private asking random21 to play a game with me, he would probably have declined. I also know random is an old clanmate of mine so while I don't remember much of my time in KoRT, it does help when asking questions like these. But really, if you ask nicely you'll get a positive response in most cases I think.

That's what I mean. What smart person is going to want to play with a player under 1,500 poiints team or not... in any game...

One of my most fortunate occurrences was a guy named Masil (something close tot that ... I'd recognize it if I saw it) let me partner up with him. And he was ranked 3x points higher than me at this time... and we played this hopeless game and he said something really simple like... well we gave it our best shot...
But that made me realize that it doesn't matter how good you are; some games you just aren't going to win... that was when I really started to believe I could beat anyone.

Otherwise, I probably would have quit... shit I was at like 1,100 points and I thought I was never getting over 1,200 without a really hot streak haha... and hell there are some fantastic players at 1,300 points... they just don't believe in themselves, have no idea if they are on the right track and nobody gives them the time of day! I told Ander023 when he was at 1,300 points that he was playing like a Lieutenant and I wanted him on my team every chance I could get because his score was so low for his skill... Right now he's @ 1519... but notice he almost broke 2k... and this is his first year..
Ander023 Sergeant 1st Class Score:1519 (Range: 987-1924)

Honestly, most guys like this are multis or couldn't get into an old account, but who am I to say... I try to play with as many different people as I can and then swamp the chat with over-the-top notes and top-of-the-line plays.. and 90% of the time people don't care.. but every once in awhile it sparks something in someone... so if you played 100 games with 200 different partners and you had 25 people get hooked... I'm sure every one of them will show at least 1 buddy how cool CC is... I have had 8 different friends try out the site... they played an average of 40 games each and I think one of them even bought a month of premium and then got banned for creating 5 accounts and playing games against himself before he got pissed and left xD

All I'm saying is, there needs to be a place of compromise here. A place where the rank is compromised or scores become secondary... give players clan rank vs. standard rank so we know their real strength in a clan war... separate regular games from speed games so I don't keep getting my ass kicked while I'm walking my dog

Game 16203245 (Private first class at the time)
Game 16068234 (Nymeria was ranked a lot lower at the time)

I admit, I won't invite such players on my own (or let a game fill without me inviting) without any communication beforehand, but I'm open to play them if they make the first move. I like to think more people are like that. A while ago filopo asked a bunch of high rankers to play with him, I assume. I dont know how many he PM'd, but looking at his games around 6 responded (assuming you also received a PM). He's not the worst player, but for many might be on the line between 'I'd try' and 'I wouldn't try'.

Another reason I prefer poly is because it's more of a showdown of individual skill and it's easier to get good games. I haven't played vs a 'team without teamplay' in a while, but I do think playing poly lessens the chance of playing versus a team of randoms.

[boberz]

I bet I am not the only low ranking player tempted to call you guys out and see if they will play doubles to teach me a few things. Any of you fancy it?

[willedtowin1]

I read the title and was thinking this was a way more progressive thread than it is =/
my bad.......................

[riskllama]

I bet I am not the only low ranking player tempted to call you guys out and see if they will play doubles to teach me a few things. Any of you fancy it?

well bobz, i'd say your first mistake would be "calling them out", instead, why not ask them nicely via pm instead. you'll catch more flies w/honey and all that...

[FreeFalling123]

Game 16203245 (Private first class at the time)
Game 16068234 (Nymeria was ranked a lot lower at the time)

I admit, I won't invite such players on my own (or let a game fill without me inviting) without any communication beforehand, but I'm open to play them if they make the first move. I like to think more people are like that. A while ago filopo asked a bunch of high rankers to play with him, I assume. I dont know how many he PM'd, but looking at his games around 6 responded (assuming you also received a PM). He's not the worst player, but for many might be on the line between 'I'd try' and 'I wouldn't try'.

I played a few with filipo, but the language barrier was frustrating. I don't think there is a difference from joining with a noob, and having a noob join you. Being open to play with anyone is great, but I still wouldn't trust anyone under 1,500 to make moves without my consent... it's mostly my dictating and hoping they listen, so it's good to have a lower ranked person blowing up the chat with suggestions or ideas.

I bet I am not the only low ranking player tempted to call you guys out and see if they will play doubles to teach me a few things. Any of you fancy it?

well bobz, i'd say your first mistake would be "calling them out", instead, why not ask them nicely via pm instead. you'll catch more flies w/honey and all that...

Right, gotta make it personal bub... I don't consider myself one of the "you's guys" who is an asshole to low-rankers

I read the title and was thinking this was a way more progressive thread than it is =/
my bad.......................

I'm interested in what Hawaiin marijuana has to do with progressive thinking? "Weeding" out the STRONG huh

[boberz]

I bet I am not the only low ranking player tempted to call you guys out and see if they will play doubles to teach me a few things. Any of you fancy it?

well bobz, i'd say your first mistake would be "calling them out", instead, why not ask them nicely via pm instead. you'll catch more flies w/honey and all that...

Right, gotta make it personal bub... I don't consider myself one of the "you's guys" who is an asshole to low-rankers

Certainly not going to accuse you of being an asshole. I may well ask some higher ranked players at some point, don't have the space right now though.

[iAmCaffeine]

I bet I am not the only low ranking player tempted to call you guys out and see if they will play doubles to teach me a few things. Any of you fancy it?

I will. PM me.

[Extreme Ways]

I bet I am not the only low ranking player tempted to call you guys out and see if they will play doubles to teach me a few things. Any of you fancy it?

PM me settings? I'd like to be capable of actually teaching.

[willedtowin1]

I read the title and was thinking this was a way more progressive thread than it is =/
my bad.......................

I'm interested in what Hawaiin marijuana has to do with progressive thinking? "Weeding" out the STRONG huh

pro·gres·sive
prəˈɡresiv/
adjective
adjective: progressive

1.
happening or developing gradually or in stages; proceeding step by step.
"a progressive decline in popularity"
synonyms: continuing, continuous, increasing, growing, developing, ongoing, accelerating, escalating; More
gradual, step-by-step, cumulative
"progressive deterioration"
(of a disease or ailment) increasing in severity or extent.
"progressive liver failure"
(of taxation or a tax) increasing as a proportion of the sum taxed as that sum increases.
"steeply progressive income taxes"
(of a card game or dance) involving a series of sections for which participants successively change place or relative position.
archaic
engaging in or constituting forward motion.
2.
(of a group, person, or idea) favoring or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas.

[FreeFalling123]

(of a group, person, or idea) favoring or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas.[/b]

Undurrstood chief...

What would make this conversation more progressive?

[Extreme Ways]

Game 16584364 join us with your favorite low-ranker

Or just with a friend. We just want to have fun.

[willedtowin1]

I read the title and was thinking this was a way more progressive thread than it is =/
my bad.......................

Was ^ as in Past Tense =/