Breaking News!!

[DogAlmighty]

Pics or it didn't happen.

I find this extremely unlikely. I don't think Lack would want to ever rock the boat in this way to upset a system that currently functions well enough to keep the site afloat. The site logic seems to be "If it ain't seriously broke beyond repair, don't fix it" Especially not since this would reqiure a massive amount work and coding to implement.

It's a nice idea and wouldn't affect me much. Seeing the farmers drop off the front page would be worth a laugh at the least. Only to be replaced by more point junkies with updated tactics, of course.

[Squirly]

Rumor has it that behind the scenes....

The powers that be are working on implementing a new scoring system! This scoring system would not only take into account the total amount of points accumulated, but also include the "relative rank" of the opponents faced and therefore create a scoring system that accurately depicts the true quality of any given individual player.

The formula is simple: (Total points) multiplied by "relative rank" = Final Score

By this method.... "Squirly" is the current conqueror (4086 X .827 = 3379)

Stay tuned for further details......

I support this movement!

[greenoaks]

Anything that kills the farming and brings back some fucking integrity to the scoreboard is fine with me.

You already have rank segregation from those too overprotective to play any lower ranks, and that bullshit about risking points is bullshit Greenoaks, as the formula that pays out profit in the end has effectively nullified the risk over the game spread.

The excuse of " I'm risking 50 points when I'm farming Noobs" is accurate only in a game by game perspective. Over time and numerous farming games the risk diminishes to zilch and our current conqueror is living proof.

It's amazing how some people would rather parade around with an inflated rank from system that inaccurately keeps them there, than one that mathematically marks you on your proper skill level.

JRock

and it is amazing how you care so much about some internet points

our current scoring system takes into account the different rank of the players. it works fine. no need to change what isn't broke.

[AAFitz]

Making it relative, which is completely able to be manipulated would make the scores meaningless. Doing it retroactively after 6 years, even more so.

The score is the score. One can judge it as one sees fit. With map rank, one can view the stats of any player and decide their actual worth as a player, based on a near infinite set of variables.

There are certainly variables that make even me, the best player to ever grace CC's halls. They are relative, however, and as such, somewhat meaningless out of context.

[Ishihara]

I rather like the whole "strength of schedule" idea... if nothing else, posting the opposition "rank" along with a person's points would be a nice addition to the scoreboard...

[clapper011]

Rumor has it that behind the scenes....

The powers that be are working on implementing a new scoring system! This scoring system would not only take into account the total amount of points accumulated, but also include the "relative rank" of the opponents faced and therefore create a scoring system that accurately depicts the true quality of any given individual player.

The formula is simple: (Total points) multiplied by "relative rank" = Final Score

By this method.... "Squirly" is the current conqueror (4086 X .827 = 3379)

Stay tuned for further details......

hmmmm interesting..

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

if they would calculate years of service and medal total, I would be number 1 for the next 3 years.

[redhawk92]

how do i figure my relative rank?

[Leehar]

map rank
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 6&t=163117

[Gilligan]

if they would calculate years of service and medal total, I would be number 1 for the next 3 years.

Squeeze me? I joined 3 days after you, and have 28 more medals.

[mviola]

This will eventually penalize people who have held high ranks for a while.

Since I have been at major, my relative rank has went from about 1.02 to .985 playing about the same level of competition. So basically I'm losing points for staying in the same spot. I can only imagine what it's like for the much higher ranks.

[clapper011]

if they would calculate years of service and medal total, I would be number 1 for the next 3 years.

Squeeze me? I joined 3 days after you, and have 28 more medals.

I joned months before either of you!

[happy2seeyou]

if they would calculate years of service and medal total, I would be number 1 for the next 3 years.

Squeeze me? I joined 3 days after you, and have 28 more medals.

I joned months before either of you!

out of you three (who each have been here for a long time and are each well known) who is the most useful?

[clapper011]

if they would calculate years of service and medal total, I would be number 1 for the next 3 years.

Squeeze me? I joined 3 days after you, and have 28 more medals.

I joned months before either of you!

out of you three (who each have been here for a long time and are each well known) who is the most useful?

most useful to this site..would be a toss up between gills and i! lol as rockets isnt a mod...

[KoolBak]

What am I....chopped liver?!?!?!

[happy2seeyou]

if they would calculate years of service and medal total, I would be number 1 for the next 3 years.

Squeeze me? I joined 3 days after you, and have 28 more medals.

I joned months before either of you!

out of you three (who each have been here for a long time and are each well known) who is the most useful?

most useful to this site..would be a toss up between gills and i! lol as rockets isnt a mod...

technicality ...

[eddie2]

if they would calculate years of service and medal total, I would be number 1 for the next 3 years.

Squeeze me? I joined 3 days after you, and have 28 more medals.

I joned months before either of you!

out of you three (who each have been here for a long time and are each well known) who is the most useful?

most useful to this site..would be a toss up between gills and i! lol as rockets isnt a mod...

lol after everything that has been said of mods of late that would be a disadvantage

[Gilligan]

Let's not get into the whole "Every mod is the same", shall we?

[Paddy The Cat]

i have an idea... why dont we just set up some kind of event where everyone on CC will play everyone else on every map and setting possible? We'll run through this 1000 times to make sure things like dice, opponents, and cards dont skew the results. Then, whoever performs the best will be Conquerer! Then everyone on CC can finally sleep easy knowing that the truly 'best' player can by synonomous with 'conquerer'!

[happy2seeyou]

i have an idea... why dont we just set up some kind of event where everyone on CC will play everyone else on every map and setting possible? We'll run through this 1000 times to make sure things like dice, opponents, and cards dont skew the results. Then, whoever performs the best will be Conquerer! Then everyone on CC can finally sleep easy knowing that the truly 'best' player can by synonomous with 'conquerer'!

There are a few players on this site that even after losing will say they are still the best and that the sun was shining on their face which caused their loss or or or or or then in the end he will post a list of all his firsts

[army of nobunaga]

The only way to ever stop point abuse would be to incorporate a penalty that slowly gets greater over time. Penalty would be based on the relative game map and settings repeated.

Lets be honest, most Conqurers *cough wimps* play a single map with the same settings over and over and over... A penalty for repeated game types that slowly increased would stop this. Erm city mogul 1vs1 and stacked quads matches against noobies anyone? lol and we label these wimps "conquerors"

Then you would see real champions step up. People that play 8 man maps to 1vs1 and a multitude of settings... then you would see the best overall risk player.

But this will never happen. You have proposed a bandaid in this thread. It will stop the bleeding for about 3 weeks.

gl

[lynch5762]

This will eventually penalize people who have held high ranks for a while.

Since I have been at major, my relative rank has went from about 1.02 to .985 playing about the same level of competition. So basically I'm losing points for staying in the same spot. I can only imagine what it's like for the much higher ranks.

This is not true... everyone would be adjusted therefore you are on even keel. You would actually move up the ladder because you would only lose 30 points. The average relative rank is probably somewhere around 75 - 80 so you are above average.

The point of this system is just to be fair and to have a scoring system that is harder to manipulate and quite frankly a more accurate depiction of one's skills. In reality, there wouldn't be a ton of change because everyone would be adjusted along the same lines...

The difference between a relative rank of .95 vs . 75 with 3000 points is 600 points. That may seem like a lot but it really isn't in perspective and there is a huge difference between a .95RR and a .75RR (most players with a very high score also carry a pretty high relative rank... most not all)

Also, rank segregation already exists because of the current scoring system unless someone is ranching so that is pretty much a moot point. (I know that wasn't you who said that mviola, just addressing another subject)

[ljex]

The only way to ever stop point abuse would be to incorporate a penalty that slowly gets greater over time. Penalty would be based on the relative game map and settings repeated.

Lets be honest, most Conqurers *cough wimps* play a single map with the same settings over and over and over... A penalty for repeated game types that slowly increased would stop this. Erm city mogul 1vs1 and stacked quads matches against noobies anyone? lol and we label these wimps "conquerors"

Then you would see real champions step up. People that play 8 man maps to 1vs1 and a multitude of settings... then you would see the best overall risk player.

But this will never happen. You have proposed a bandaid in this thread. It will stop the bleeding for about 3 weeks.

gl

Who would you think is the best overall player on the site? seriously i want to hear your opinion on the matter.

[army of nobunaga]

The only way to ever stop point abuse would be to incorporate a penalty that slowly gets greater over time. Penalty would be based on the relative game map and settings repeated.

Lets be honest, most Conqurers *cough wimps* play a single map with the same settings over and over and over... A penalty for repeated game types that slowly increased would stop this. Erm city mogul 1vs1 and stacked quads matches against noobies anyone? lol and we label these wimps "conquerors"

Then you would see real champions step up. People that play 8 man maps to 1vs1 and a multitude of settings... then you would see the best overall risk player.

But this will never happen. You have proposed a bandaid in this thread. It will stop the bleeding for about 3 weeks.

gl

Who would you think is the best overall player on the site? seriously i want to hear your opinion on the matter.

wth, do you think I actually look through games and see who plays what? I couldnt tell you who in the hell the current conqueror or top 10 are... I simply do not care. I do know this.. The current conqueror has one map he or she plays over and over against noobs.. I KNOW THIS and I have not even looked. Tell me I am wrong.

As far as who the best in the game is? I do not know. I know there are a handful of guys and girls out there that I see in every sort of match available. Would they shake out numbers wise to be the real champ? Who knows.

Maybe someday Ill take up GM as a hobbie again and try to make a "Nobus poor mans champion rank" add-on that puts in the penalty. But as of right now, I barely have enough interest in this game to even click "look at this post" to see what you guys that are foed are typing.


edit. and yeah you would be up there.. i am guessing.. if that is what you were looking for.

[gannable]

what is relative rank???
where can I see it?