Conquer Club

qeee1 wrote:
Lowest

1. Torcav2 0.484
2. MOBAJOBG 0.514
3. SkyT 0.518
4. blitzaholic 0.560
5. KLOBBER 0.591
6. Thai Robert 0.597
7. JOHNNYROCKET24 0.606
8. sjnap 0.669
9. FabledIntegral 0.673
10. Scott-Land 0.694
11. RiskTycoon 0.708
12. poo-maker 0.713
13. Mike Doherty 0.727
14. Laddida 0.732
15. Warsteiner 0.740
16. Deliaselene 0.754
17. dcc1220 0.758
18. qeee1 0.778
19. rabbiton 0.790
20. bob3603 0.866
21. The Fuzzy Pengui 0.886
22. RashidJelzin 0.922
23. comic boy 0.951
24. Fruitcake 0.970


Highest

1. sexy_man 2.868
2. Deathseeker 2.543
3. stevebutabi 2.226
4. whcgonzo 2.149
5. freeke1976 1.858
6. Garner 1.809
7. Alangary 1.784
8. fireedud 1.540
9. Remix31 1.372
10. LB Ninja 1.212
11. Audax 1.196
12. Matroshka 1.180
13. lozzini 1.147
14. danodukebb 1.143
15. guylian 1.051

I suppose, ultimately, the idea is to not only be among the top players, but to have the best relative rank as well. This would make an interesting leader board.

KLOBBER wrote:All that number translates to is that my ACTUAL rank is higher than the average rank of my opponents.

All having above 1 translates to is that your actual rank is lower than that of the average of your opponents.

These numbers are pretty much meaningless, with no relation to actual game skill.

That's right Klobby, you just keep believing what you want to believe.

Fruitcake wrote:

KLOBBER wrote:All that number translates to is that my ACTUAL rank is higher than the average rank of my opponents.

All having above 1 translates to is that your actual rank is lower than that of the average of your opponents.

These numbers are pretty much meaningless, with no relation to actual game skill.

That's right Klobby, you just keep believing what you want to believe.

lol, and klobber's crap stat was a true relation..

I have to agree these figures are a little flawed, but they are still pretty useful relatively.

Fruitcake wrote:

KLOBBER wrote:All that number translates to is that my ACTUAL rank is higher than the average rank of my opponents.

All having above 1 translates to is that your actual rank is lower than that of the average of your opponents.

These numbers are pretty much meaningless, with no relation to actual game skill.

That's right Klobby, you just keep believing what you want to believe.

Belief is your specialty. I posted facts.

KLOBBER wrote:All that number translates to is that my ACTUAL rank is higher than the average rank of my opponents.

All having above 1 translates to is that your actual rank is lower than that of the average of your opponents.

These numbers are pretty much meaningless, with no relation to actual game skill.

Well if you have a very low relative rank it means you mostly play players with significantly lower points than you.

If you have a high points ranking it's expected you're gonna to have a lower relative rank, but how much lower is what's interesting.

qeee1 wrote:

KLOBBER wrote:All that number translates to is that my ACTUAL rank is higher than the average rank of my opponents.

All having above 1 translates to is that your actual rank is lower than that of the average of your opponents.

These numbers are pretty much meaningless, with no relation to actual game skill.

Well if you have a very low relative rank it means you mostly play players with significantly lower points than you.

If you have a high points ranking it's expected you're gonna to have a lower relative rank, but how much lower is what's interesting.

Quite true qeee.

Unfortunately, there are people in this world who construct their own version of reality because to face what is actually the truth would have too much of an impact on their delicate psyche.

I have a question. How adrift of a 'real' score would it be to multiply the score of a named person by their relative rank?

qeee1 wrote:12. poo-maker 0.713

Cool!

Thanks for the update, chip.

poo-maker wrote:

qeee1 wrote:12. poo-maker 0.713

Cool!

Thanks for the update, chip.

Thought you might like it!

Fruitcake wrote:Unfortunately, there are people in this world who construct their own version of reality because to face what is actually the truth would have too much of an impact on their delicate psyche.

I suppose you would be the expert on that subject, it being so significant to you personally.

I love Conquer Club -- it's really awesome! Most of the members here are very cool people!

KLOBBER wrote:

Fruitcake wrote:Unfortunately, there are people in this world who construct their own version of reality because to face what is actually the truth would have too much of an impact on their delicate psyche.

I suppose you would be the expert on that subject, it being so significant to you personally.

well your certainty aren't.

Fruitcake wrote:I have a question. How adrift of a 'real' score would it be to multiply the score of a named person by their relative rank?

That was probably partially in jest, but anyway:

It seems like doing that would doubly weight your opponents ranks. So that the formula for points gained per win would be something like:

(opponents score/your score)^2 x 20

Not 100% on that though.

EDIT: fixed the calculation

Mine is 0.630 - a little lower that I hoped, but whatever.

Anyhow, this stat needs to be tempered with a bit of common sense... you need to compare it to the score of the person and to their kill ratio, but you also need to take their longer term game style history into account.

torcav2 is at the top of the list because he(?) has most consistently played the freestyle 1v1 "game". MOBA is a bit lower down the list because he has a number of high ranking team games with which to pad his average opponent score... and rabbiton is even lower down the list because he has a long history of playing many game types against similar ranks before embarking on his recent incredible winning streak of noob farming.

In my case I got to brigadier (colonel then) by making Waterloo 1v1 games that ANYBODY could join - and all types of ranks did.... I also had an experimental phase, like Blitz, of trying freestyle 1v1s, but this has netted only 99 pts (from 91% win rate with a relative rank of only 0.351!)... since then I have a whole slew of different games - especially a whole range of ranked opponents in tournaments.


Our scores are almost entirely dependant on relatively small number of our most recent results, but I have no idea what a reasonable average number to take into account would be.

Anyway - seems we all LOVE our stats - and this thread shows as well as any other how many different ways they can be interpreted! Good thing though is that CC will allow us all to do our own thing for as long as it's fun for each of us (and yes I do understand what torcav2 gets out of it... it's just KLOBBER that's still a mystery to me!)

BENJIKAT IS DEAD wrote:... it's just KLOBBER that's still a mystery to me!)

And to the rest of the sentient life forms on this planet old chap.

Somebody do me please.

And I'm sick of having to demand that!

sully800 wrote:Somebody do me please.

And I'm sick of having to demand that!

Wow Sully. Never heard you so desperate.

sully800 Equalitarian (0.872)

It's not as a bad as it appears really. For example... if you take in account our current scores, it would mean the average player I play is a major... Scott-lands/poo-makers average opponent is a brigadier, etc.

sully800 wrote:Somebody do me please.

And I'm sick of having to demand that!

.872

BENJIKAT IS DEAD wrote:Mine is 0.630 - a little lower that I hoped, but whatever.

Anyhow, this stat needs to be tempered with a bit of common sense... you need to compare it to the score of the person and to their kill ratio, but you also need to take their longer term game style history into account.

torcav2 is at the top of the list because he(?) has most consistently played the freestyle 1v1 "game". MOBA is a bit lower down the list because he has a number of high ranking team games with which to pad his average opponent score... and rabbiton is even lower down the list because he has a long history of playing many game types against similar ranks before embarking on his recent incredible winning streak of noob farming.

In my case I got to brigadier (colonel then) by making Waterloo 1v1 games that ANYBODY could join - and all types of ranks did.... I also had an experimental phase, like Blitz, of trying freestyle 1v1s, but this has netted only 99 pts (from 91% win rate with a relative rank of only 0.351!)... since then I have a whole slew of different games - especially a whole range of ranked opponents in tournaments.


Our scores are almost entirely dependant on relatively small number of our most recent results, but I have no idea what a reasonable average number to take into account would be.

Anyway - seems we all LOVE our stats - and this thread shows as well as any other how many different ways they can be interpreted! Good thing though is that CC will allow us all to do our own thing for as long as it's fun for each of us (and yes I do understand what torcav2 gets out of it... it's just KLOBBER that's still a mystery to me!)

I am "allowed" to do my own thing because I pay my premium and I stay within the rules, written and unwritten, at all times.

"Mystery" solved.

Isn't Conquer Club great? It's the best gaming website I've ever found on the internet!

KLOBBER wrote:

BENJIKAT IS DEAD wrote:Good thing though is that CC will allow us all to do our own thing for as long as it's fun for each of us (and yes I do understand what torcav2 gets out of it... it's just KLOBBER that's still a mystery to me!)

I am "allowed" to do my own thing because I pay my premium and I stay within the rules, written and unwritten, at all times.

"Mystery" solved.

You missed my point entirely. I completely agree that for as long as you remain within the site's rules you can do as you like... However, my point was that I cannot for the life of me see where the "fun" or "satisfaction" is for you!

FabledIntegral wrote:It's not as a bad as it appears really. For example... if you take in account our current scores, it would mean the average player I play is a major... Scott-lands/poo-makers average opponent is a brigadier, etc.

Excellent point! The average rank I play according to my current (unnatural) score is Sergeant First Class.

Taking into account the fact that I am just coming out of a slew of games with cheaters like Wicked and her ilk, and that my natural score is 3,000 or above (stay tuned -- I am going to snap right back to that level, guaranteed), the actual average rank that I play is Lieutenant -- a far cry indeed from the nasty lies that a small but very aggressive and babyish little group is constantly spouting about me.

The fact that I am higher ranked than the average opponent is not a fault or point for criticism -- it simply means that I am more skilled than the average opponent.

BENJIKAT IS DEAD wrote:

KLOBBER wrote:

BENJIKAT IS DEAD wrote:Good thing though is that CC will allow us all to do our own thing for as long as it's fun for each of us (and yes I do understand what torcav2 gets out of it... it's just KLOBBER that's still a mystery to me!)

I am "allowed" to do my own thing because I pay my premium and I stay within the rules, written and unwritten, at all times.

"Mystery" solved.

You missed my point entirely. I completely agree that for as long as you remain within the site's rules you can do as you like... However, my point was that I cannot for the life of me see where the "fun" or "satisfaction" is for you!

I don't know how this will make you feel, but I could not care less whether you can see where the fun or satisfaction is for me in this game. I'm not here to help you understand those things; I'm just here to enjoy fun and satisfaction directly.

Your understanding or misunderstanding of that process is completely irrelevant.

CC is an AWESOME website! I love it!

I'm at .953

poo-maker wrote:

qeee1 wrote:12. poo-maker 0.713

Cool!

Thanks for the update, chip.

Interesting that a lot of players shot up after the update- I'm a bit disappointed that I went from 617 to only 694.

Scott-Land wrote:

poo-maker wrote:

qeee1 wrote:12. poo-maker 0.713

Cool!

Thanks for the update, chip.

Interesting that a lot of players shot up after the update- I'm a bit disappointed that I went from 617 to only 694.

I still means the average player you play atm is a Brig, if looking at your current score.