Conquer Club

clangfield wrote:You do know that you can edit your post so that the "out" bit is the last sentence, don't you?

That's typical of ConfederateSS. He keeps talking after he drops the mic.

jmyork82 wrote:

clangfield wrote:You do know that you can edit your post so that the "out" bit is the last sentence, don't you?

That's typical of ConfederateSS. He keeps talking after he drops the mic.

Does anyone actually read his posts?

iAmCaffeine wrote:

jmyork82 wrote:

clangfield wrote:You do know that you can edit your post so that the "out" bit is the last sentence, don't you?

That's typical of ConfederateSS. He keeps talking after he drops the mic.

Does anyone actually read his posts?

I loosely skim them just to see if he said anything entertaining.

jmyork82 wrote:

clangfield wrote:You do know that you can edit your post so that the "out" bit is the last sentence, don't you?

That's typical of ConfederateSS. He keeps talking after he drops the mic.

-----I used to write...P.S. , THEN I THOUGHT...I'M AMERICAN..."F" it... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

Man, I've run tourneys since I came on here 7-8 years ago, but it's getting harder and harder to fill out even basic events. Oh for the glory days

------WELL, GOOD NEWS
------FOR ALL THE "IS C.C. DECLINING" THREAD HATERS...The last few pages have had other things,rather than numbers...A few numbers,but still... IT LOOKS LIKE CONQUER CLUB'S DECLINE has reached it's ground floor...A ROUNDED OFF 8,000 ACTIVE MEMBERS(might be a few 1,000 more in other areas on the site)... C.C. has stayed around 8,000 for a month and some change... I guess C.C. now knows where C.C. stands...Although,so did Custer.
------I still think C.C. should sell ads on territories and /or bonuses...ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)... ...PLEASE, DON'T POKE ANYMORE HOLES IN THE BOTTOM OF THE BOAT!!!

ConfederateSS wrote:------WELL, GOOD NEWS
------FOR ALL THE "IS C.C. DECLINING" THREAD HATERS...The last few pages have had other things,rather than numbers...A few numbers,but still... IT LOOKS LIKE CONQUER CLUB'S DECLINE has reached it's ground floor...A ROUNDED OFF 8,000 ACTIVE MEMBERS(might be a few 1,000 more in other areas on the site)... C.C. has stayed around 8,000 for a month and some change... I guess C.C. now knows where C.C. stands...Although,so did Custer.
------I still think C.C. should sell ads on territories and /or bonuses...ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)... ...PLEASE, DON'T POKE ANYMORE HOLES IN THE BOTTOM OF THE BOAT!!!

So, you're saying the lack of a zombie spoils medal is what ruined this site? There shouldn't be a zombie spoils medal, so that its easier to throw that option to the wolves.

7808

Bollocks in 2015.

Finally fell below 7800

The decline will continue unless shit improves. I mean, I have been timing out and getting error messages like crazy recently. I put up with it because I really enjoy playing games here and I have faith that it'll get better, but maybe my faith is ill-placed. If that doesn't change soon, I'll be going back to freemium again because I can't even play speed games with confidence anymore. This is the worst thing about it all.

Also, the dice continue to be bullshit. To deny this is just turning a blind eye.

Just look at the top 25 Most Improved list (I chose this list because I believe you need a minimum number of played games this month to be on that list, and I figured people who have already played a lot in September are more likely to have played a lot throughout their career. I know, not very scientific, but I'm lazy. Maybe I'll put some work in later and do an extensive analysis of this.)

From the dice stats :
15/25 times the attacker rolled 2 the most, 10/25 times the opponent of the attacker rolled 2 the most. If you throw me into the mix (I was curious about my own stats), it become 15/26 and 11/26. That mean 26/52 of the data sets I checked showed 2 to be rolled the most. That looks a little fishy.

I remember a while back Twill posted something about how they had mathematicians and statisticians and data analyst run some test to analyze the dice, and the results showed that the dice were random. Must have been shitty mathematicians, statisticians, and data analysts or must have been a shitty test or must have been some serious ass-covering going on, because I have checked up on the dice several times in my history here and every time I take a sample 2's are the most rolled by a wide margin. Of course, this is not a very compelling argument, but if I ever feel motivated I'll do some more formal work. And yes, I have a degree in mathematics. Not that it much matters, this is not complicated stuff; we're not proving Urysohn's lemme here.


Anyways that's the end of my rant. Maybe I'm just really butt hurt b/c I haven't been able to really enjoy CC the past week due to terrible lagginess and ridiculous dice and I just needed to vent in the CC doomsday thread, which seems as appropriate a place to do so as any.\

And of course, there are a bunch of other updates that need to happen, which many have mentioned.

TL;DR

CC needs to be revamped, even in the most fundamental of ways, or else the end is upon us.

Paddy The Cat wrote:
I remember a while back Twill posted something about how they had mathematicians and statisticians and data analyst run some test to analyze the dice, and the results showed that the dice were random. Must have been shitty mathematicians, statisticians, and data analysts or must have been a shitty test or must have been some serious ass-covering going on, because I have checked up on the dice several times in my history here and every time I take a sample 2's are the most rolled by a wide margin. Of course, this is not a very compelling argument, but if I ever feel motivated I'll do some more formal work. And yes, I have a degree in mathematics. Not that it much matters, this is not complicated stuff; we're not proving Urysohn's lemme here.

I think the dice a changed a number of times since that original post.


--Andy

Is there another Risk type site that is stealing players?

xroads wrote:Is there another Risk type site that is stealing players?

There's a few other risk sites but most aren't as good in my biased opinion. There was one that a member from CC created but I can't remember what it's called.

iAmCaffeine wrote:

xroads wrote:Is there another Risk type site that is stealing players?

There's a few other risk sites but most aren't as good in my biased opinion. There was one that a member from CC created but I can't remember what it's called.

if you want to know, PM me... i have a lifetime membership there...-Jésus noir

owenshooter wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:

xroads wrote:Is there another Risk type site that is stealing players?

There's a few other risk sites but most aren't as good in my biased opinion. There was one that a member from CC created but I can't remember what it's called.

if you want to know, PM me... i have a lifetime membership there...-Jésus noir

You say that and then PM me, haha. I remember now yeah, it sucks but he makes a lot of pretty promises. I checked it out a couple of times, never played a game.

xroads wrote:Is there another Risk type site that is stealing players?

No, not most of the time. There are other Risk-type sites, but usually they have a brief rise and then go into decline also.

I'm not afraid to say the names. Major Command was started by some of CC's best and brightest mapmakers that left CC in 2009 or 2010. However, it never got as big as CC and is now in decline also. The original founder got sick of trying to keep it alive and sold it in 2013. The new owner tried his best but also seems to have gotten worn down. The last entry in his blog is dated May 8th. I've never played on the site, but I've talked to people who have and complaints about server crashes and bugs are rampant. Current users are 1560, less than 20% of CC's.

Incidentally, Major Command did try the "back to basics" nonsense that is frequently touted here. After having a large number of maps, they trimmed it down to just the 20 most popular. Sure enough, the user base went down, not up. Restricting variety is not the magic ticket out of the doldrums.

The other one that's frequently cited is Landgrab. Landgrab has some really nice features that a lot of us want here on CC, like some pre-set options on the Start Game page, and user ratings for maps. However, that has not translated into huge commercial success. They don't publish stats on current users, but they currently have 2500 active games going, so if you go by the stats on CC and MajCom where active games are approximately 1.25 per active user, that means they are probably in the neighbourhood of 2000 active users, or about 25% of CC's.

Landgrab allows anyone to upload a custom map or edit an existing map, so in theory they have an infinite number of maps. Apparently infinite choice is not a magic ticket out of the doldrums, either.

Bottom line is, all Risk-like games are suffering. CC is still doing better than most.

AndyDufresne wrote:I think the dice a changed a number of times since that original post.


--Andy

That's good information Andy. I must ask - why have the dice changed if they were shown to be truly random in that study? Financial purposes?

Whatever the case, the dice certainly have at some point been bad.


Also, I agree with others that say that a highly practical and functional mobile interface would be beneficial. I don't think it will happen, though.

Just a side note guys...not scientific, or even close.

I have been a Major for a year, maybe 2. I would rather play higher ranks for all the obvious reasons. I find when I start (or join) a game and it doesn't matter if it is teams or singles, I will check it in a few days and have all sorts of ranks. NOT what I wanted, but that IS how I got to be a Major.

The simple point I am making is i have noticed an awful lot of very angry low ranks when they get steamrolled. A lot of words exchanged etc.

I have also noticed a Major (or above occasionally) get in a 12 player game with a lot of lower ranks. Again, a lot of.....chatter (I have NO idea why a higher rank would join a game like that...you can't always win and would lose a TON of points).

All I am saying is I think some higher ranks run off some players, don't know or care of the %. Just making a statement. I would like to see that you had to be a certain rank to join some games. I think it would help the noobs AND give them something to shoot for. ONCE you have passed that thresh hold you could only go back under the line once (that is to keep the guys that just get past and then lose and fall back). After that, you HAVE to play with the big boys....lol, I am so tired of putting up a game, inviting some ranked players and all of a suned we have 4 privites in there.

Sorry, just a thought.

First of all, major is not a high rank. Secondly, you can't allocate that sort of behaviour to only high ranking players; there are more things to consider.

• lower ranks are spiteful because they believe they're better or dislike high ranking behaviour (whatever that may be)
• lower ranks play terribly, don't realise or can't accept it and look for scapegoats
• higher ranks sometimes just play games for fun, regardless of who else joins (not everyone is as obsessive over their rank as it seems you are)
• higher ranks may be trying to farm "easy" points
• higher ranks get frustrated with poor strategy or bad luck; or use them as excuses

GrudgeBringer_ wrote:I have been a Major for a year, maybe 2.

stop right there... yeah, we ahve all been there... Major is not a high rank. you are not even really considered a high rank until you are a colonel... sorry, but you aren't a high rank...-Jésus noir

but, but, I thought major was a high rank

Realistically a Major is a mid rank IMO. Some Majors are great players that play a lot of different type of games (assassin, speed, freestyle, terminator). Some are ok players that stick to one type of game.

I consider a major a high rank.

Only the top 15% of the active CC population is major or higher.

7824

owenshooter wrote:

GrudgeBringer_ wrote:I have been a Major for a year, maybe 2.

stop right there... yeah, we ahve all been there... Major is not a high rank. you are not even really considered a high rank until you are a colonel... sorry, but you aren't a high rank...-Jésus noir

What I find fascinating is that he says he's been a Major for two years. How low is his game load? I usually bounce from Major to Sargeant and back again at least once a month or maybe once every second month. To keep the same rank, any rank, for two years has got to mean a really low game count.