Conquer Club

wicked wrote:Didn't know if you guys had seen this or not, as to why a separate scoring system was rejected:

lackattack wrote:Some game logs are missing so i can't go back and recalculate all scores. Resetting scores would be be less than ideal. I don't think it's a priority at this time. Them are the reasons.

I thought lack was doing something to recover lost game logs.

if something is lost then i think it really is lost. if lack could have recovered the game logs he probably would have done it by now. i might be wrong but thats wat i reckon. and a new score system could b gd but as lack said its not a priority

He was, and he had recovered most I think. I'm not sure if he's saying he can't recover them, or just not at this time, since he's busy with more important updates (don't ask what, you'll know when it's implemented).

Hmmm... every day that goes by would make a score reset have greater implications. As a high ranked player I'd have no objections to a score reset, but perhaps others would.

Can people see any other ways to resolve the doubles/singles problem?

Kugelblitz22 wrote:

wicked wrote: alleged "broken system"

C'mon which of the following scenarios is more likely?

1. The generals just all happen to be in all doubles and triples games. It's just a coincidence, thats what they like to play.

2. The scoring system favors doubles and triples games.

No wonder we can't get the scoring fixed we still have people running around saying there is no inherent bias in the system...

It is not so much that the scoring system favors team games...it is just a fact that team games give players the best chance of winning. All things being equal, your "BEST" odds in singles games would be 1:3 (you in a 3 person game).

Your "BEST" odds in a team game are 1:2 (Doubles game with 2 teams). Take into consideration that team play usually mitigates most of the oddball play that can occur with singles play.

You'll never have any control over the luck factor (placement, dice..etc)...but a team game gives you the best chance to earn points quickly....especially if you team with the right partner.

Where's Dug when you need him?

subjekt wrote:....in order for me to get back those points I realistically have to win 15 games.

-Sub-

Lemme know when you are ready babe...lol

Dug never presented a clear rational argument that I saw. Just bitched and moaned, that's why he was ignored.

wicked wrote:Dug never presented a clear rational argument that I saw. Just bitched and moaned, that's why he was ignored.

Well most people agreed with him, and most of what he said made sense, (if you could deceipher his rather angry language), but he never proposed an alternative model, so nothing was done. Also people ignored him because of his tone.

i think if you are good enough to control not only your own armies but your 500 point partner you desrve loads of points i couldnt do it i would be screwed first round, if you dont like the scoring system play for fun and ignore your score thats what i do

ConquererKing, I did recover much of the game logs but those that are still missing are gone for good

You need to adjust the point scalars to be different for team games and standard games. If your team has an average score 2000, losing 35 for being beat by a team of noobs is justified. You are expected to win that game. But in a 6 person standard game, it is expected that you will lose many, if not most of your games, regardless of how well you play or who against. Losing 35 points for that is too much punishment. The scale for what you lose should go up less quickly for singles.

I cannot propose a new system. Just not my expertise. I have nothing against the current system, but agree that it can be manipulated. It just seems that Lack does not want to replace the current system because it is impossible to recalculate. If I am wrong I apologise?

I dont think that a new points system has to be re-calculated. Could it not be possible to freeze the one we have and implement a new system to run side by side from now (or a time to be decided) with a precentage weighting for the existing points that drops over time. Blitz will still Nr 1 for now, but will have to adapt to the new system to maintain his position.

I dont think I have explained that very well?

b-b5 wrote:I dont think that a new points system has to be re-calculated. Could it not be possible to freeze the one we have and implement a new system to run side by side from now (or a time to be decided) with a precentage weighting for the existing points that drops over time. Blitz will still Nr 1 for now, but will have to adapt to the new system to maintain his position.

I dont think I have explained that very well?

I get what you're saying... I think.

Like right now the existing scores would be worth 100%

Then every day it could drop a percentage, so if you have 4000 now and 1000 on the new scoreboard:

in 10 days you'd have-

(4000/100 x 90 + 1000/100 X 10)
=(3600 + 100) = 3700

in 50 days you'd have
(4000/100 x 50 + 1000/100 x50)=
=(2000 + 500) = 2500

and in 100 days you'd simply have 1000


Essentially it's a way of wiping the scores, but doing it using over time, as game scores would be calculated off the new points (1000) for everyone.

Maybe that's not what you're saying though...

I have played on this site steadily for a while now and I have no problem with the system set in place.

I like it, I have fun here, and its worth my 20 to play.

exactly qeee (I was just a bit too drunk to do the maths bit last night)

subjekt wrote:How is it arrogant? ITS THE TRUTH....win ratios spam and everything...f*ck Alex I never said a thing but we lost 5/6 games with you as a VERY RECENT parnter becasue you play fucking terrible....you think I am happy about that? I was very cordial to you and said shit happens etc....now please do me a favour and go back to your clueless little hole and STFU....in order for me to get back those points I realistically have to win 15 games.

-Sub-

lol... the same reason why he made my ignore list. he has no idea what he is doing. And like I already stated, these are the players that cause trouble and hit you with spam, negative feedback, and RESPOND TO MY POSTS. Learn how to play and than you can join my games.

i never spammed u or gave u neg feedback, the other team targeted you in the one game i plated with you, and you were eliminated and tried to blame me coz i took one of your armies. you made me ignore list for being such an arrogant arse that takes it wayyy to seriously. and so what if im not that great? i havent yet played the odd thousand games that you have, i still have 800 games to learn so i can be as good as you.

edit : scrap that i have over 2000 games to complete before ive played as many as you. im sure thats about enough time to get good even for someone as thick as me.

dont forget to add that you cant follow instructions. you asked for the armies I had in africa. I gave them to you with a note saying dont use them against your own team... thinking you may not be a complete idiot. Of course I was wrong. You attacked me with the same troops because you were more worried about holding a continent rather than using them against the other team and trying to actualy win the game. This poor play, your ability not to follow simple instructions, and lack of knowledge of the game, directly explains your piss poor rank.

ummm, i used those armies and held africa, which by the way i never wasted armies as i held it till next go, u ''held'' SA, they then attacked through NA and eliminated you, ur SINGLE ARMY on north africa would have saved u would it? you would have gone from there to win the game?

alex_white101 wrote:ummm, i used those armies and held africa, which by the way i never wasted armies as i held it till next go, u ''held'' SA, they then attacked through NA and eliminated you, ur SINGLE ARMY on north africa would have saved u would it? you would have gone from there to win the game?

all I know is this...youve played less than 200 games....ive played over 1200 of them, and have played many doubles and trips....but I still follow JR's instructions in the games unless the board has changed dramatically since he left them...its not a matter of pride...he just knows how to play, and has played more than any single player on the site.....you chose not to listen...so now the other 4000 players that would partner with him will play with him, but no you simple as that....

at his score, one mistake means winning 7 more games....for you you just have to win one against a higher rank....defer to the better player...its how its done...and how they are won

Johnny didn't sound arrogant to me. Quit fuckin' complaining about the points system and win your games. It's a pretty simple concept, win games get points.. And if you think we only lose 30 points to noobs try again. I don't complain when my pard and I lose 58 points apiece, And would have won 9 each had we won. If anything is broken it's how many we lose. And I'm not saying it is broken.

SKETRS wrote:Johnny didn't sound arrogant to me. Quit fuckin' complaining about the points system and win your games. It's a pretty simple concept, win games get points.. And if you think we only lose 30 points to noobs try again. I don't complain when my pard and I lose 58 points apiece, And would have won 9 each had we won. If anything is broken it's how many we lose. And I'm not saying it is broken.

So you're saying it's not biased in favour of team games?

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:dont forget to add that you cant follow instructions. you asked for the armies I had in africa. I gave them to you with a note saying dont use them against your own team... thinking you may not be a complete idiot. Of course I was wrong. You attacked me with the same troops because you were more worried about holding a continent rather than using them against the other team and trying to actualy win the game. This poor play, your ability not to follow simple instructions, and lack of knowledge of the game, directly explains your piss poor rank.

AMEN I left very excplicit instructions for the guy as it was obvious that werent going to be getting anywhere quick if I left the game to him...Wouldnt follow a single thing !! He communicated well but wouldnt listen to a thing ! We did play a few solid teams however should have been able to at least get a split as in one of the boards we were given a CONTINENT... I am still dumbfounded as to how we lost... Waste of skin ! Guess after our games are over I can go back and rebuild.

-Sub-

subjekt wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:dont forget to add that you cant follow instructions. you asked for the armies I had in africa. I gave them to you with a note saying dont use them against your own team... thinking you may not be a complete idiot. Of course I was wrong. You attacked me with the same troops because you were more worried about holding a continent rather than using them against the other team and trying to actualy win the game. This poor play, your ability not to follow simple instructions, and lack of knowledge of the game, directly explains your piss poor rank.

AMEN I left very excplicit instructions for the guy as it was obvious that werent going to be getting anywhere quick if I left the game to him...Wouldnt follow a single thing !! He communicated well but wouldnt listen to a thing ! We did play a few solid teams however should have been able to at least get a split as in one of the boards we were given a CONTINENT... I am still dumbfounded as to how we lost... Waste of skin ! Guess after our games are over I can go back and rebuild.

-Sub-

i dont leave instructions in games for my teamates to follow when it comes to attacking other players. I let them play what they want and pass them armies when needed or if I feel I dont need them at that location. At times I recommend ideas if I feel it will cause a major break in the game. In this case, I told him he could have the armies if he dint use them against his own team. Needless to say, I was attacked by Alex and than eliminated the following round. That was his one shot to show me what he could do. Which was nothing.

qeee1 wrote:

SKETRS wrote:Johnny didn't sound arrogant to me. Quit fuckin' complaining about the points system and win your games. It's a pretty simple concept, win games get points.. And if you think we only lose 30 points to noobs try again. I don't complain when my pard and I lose 58 points apiece, And would have won 9 each had we won. If anything is broken it's how many we lose. And I'm not saying it is broken.

So you're saying it's not biased in favour of team games?

play a few dozen team games qeee1 if you are that worried about it, there are several super singles players who have lost points over all in teams, there rank has gone down from team play, zaw and andrewo are some and there are a few others like robinette as well, and others, so they dont seem to do well at teams and there rank gets hurt from it, and they are all awesome players, but lose points and rank when they play team games, so, depends on the player, there is skill at both and luck at both, do what is best for you, i lost over or around 900 in teams in last month, not good, and won 150 or so in singles. depends on the players, all skills and strat are different for players, it's individualized.

gl in your journey and I thought you said your were done here? I invited you to play some games, but you said you were leaving, yet you posted 20 to 30 times in here last few days, and not playing any games? why? you are a super player qeee1 and should play a little more bro, peace.