Conquer Club

Greatwhite wrote: I will play with any rank providing they have a 100% attendance rating and decent feedback. Hell, I stand to get more points when playing with lower ranks on my team.

providing that they don't beat you also..

Timminz wrote:

lancehoch wrote:I do enjoy these threads. The top ranks get ragged on for only playing other top players. Then in another thread the top ranked people will get more abuse for only preying on new recruits. I am confused, which is it?

It's both, and nothing in between. Anyone with a rank over 2500 doesn't deserve it.

Hehehehe.

comic boy wrote:...To further assume that throwing baseless ( and unsupported ) insults at respected players is advantageous to ones argument argues a degree of senility that can only be pitied. The thing is that the likes of Scott,Poo and Joe will continue to play enjoyable ,hard fought games and other players will consider their level of expertise to be worth aiming for, this liberty oaf will however carry on doing little more than throwing dice all day and be of similar significance to the shit on the sole of ones shoe,

Respected? Perhaps respected by the 1% to 3% of the CC players any of them have ever defeated. Unknown and untested by the vast majority of CC players.

jpliberty wrote:

comic boy wrote:...To further assume that throwing baseless ( and unsupported ) insults at respected players is advantageous to ones argument argues a degree of senility that can only be pitied. The thing is that the likes of Scott,Poo and Joe will continue to play enjoyable ,hard fought games and other players will consider their level of expertise to be worth aiming for, this liberty oaf will however carry on doing little more than throwing dice all day and be of similar significance to the shit on the sole of ones shoe,

Respected? Perhaps respected by the 1% to 3% of the CC players any of them have ever defeated. Unknown and untested by the vast majority of CC players.

The vast majority never will play Tiger Woods either. He is surely better than the vast majority!

no surprise to all, but jpliberty refused my games

world 2.1 he says isnt a fair map...when obviously, its the most fair map... granted, on my settings...it wasnt fair to him

he prefers the little ones obviously, where only luck matters.... not surprised here

i obviously would have played on his maps too, but hey... not everyone has courage... though youd think with a name like liberty...

Tisha wrote:

Greatwhite wrote: I will play with any rank providing they have a 100% attendance rating and decent feedback. Hell, I stand to get more points when playing with lower ranks on my team.

providing that they don't beat you also..

jpliberty wrote:

AAFitz wrote:im sending you the game numbers to 5 games... good luck

For the record though.. your point is completely backwards... its much harder gaining points from the top players than the less ranked players. Joecoolfrog is one hard guy to beat. He plays few games against the best players on the site, surgically and strategically, while players like me take the majority of my points from lesser qualified players.

Youve actually proven the usefulness and reason for the scoring system most unwittingly Im sure

Oh, I'll do battle anytime. Answer me this: why now? Why is it that although I've defeated approximately 10% of the Conquer Club players, you, and your "exalted" buddies, "the best" never have joined one of my frequently posted games?

Answer: it would drop you in points.

That is the long and the short of it.

I recently sent out invites, specifically excluding anyone below the rank of Sgt. In the few days it took to complete those games I gained approx. 200pts. Lost em right back when I went back to open, public games.

Openness, public, are two words you are yours don't acknowledge. You are neither open nor public, except with your blind, stupid and assinine pomposity.

Now, I'll go look and see if you actually did send me any game numbers, then I'll kick your butt.

game numbers were sent... he said no

world map is too scary... so priceless.. you cant make this stuff up

as far as not joining your other games...and my so called buddies.. im in 73 games...ive played 3000 or so unique opponents...and I didnt know who you were, and why didnt you join the open games that Ive set up... most of mine are open...ive set up thousands?

heres an idea... if you want to make a point...

have a point.

jpliberty wrote:oh and Openness, public, are two words you are yours don't acknowledge. You are neither open nor public, except with your blind, stupid and assinine pomposity.

huh?

isnt making a thread insulting an entire group of people, an entire game system, and those who created it with ridiculous examples...kind of well pompous?

Im sorry Im not open or public though... whatever that means... Ill work on it.

heres the most of the reply.. he did offer me two hundred games on little maps where skill would not come into play though... thoughtful, but no thanks..

jpliberty wrote:Nope. I'll play a map which I understand.

I won't play into your system.

How about this, we choose from one or more of the 22 maps which I play, and we play 200 games, speed or casual makes no dif to me.

I WILL NOT play World because it is a scam built for scamsters to rip off others. It is a simple plot, very obvious

the reason I play world, is that its a big map... it is not as based on luck. While luck may indeed decide it, skill comes into play. There are absoulutely no tricks on it whatsoever, no secret bonuses, etc. Its just a big classic map, and it allows a good player some time to make a lot of good decisions to counter a bad roll or two.

One mistake can end it, and Ive lost to players with only a few games under their belt. There are many maps with tricks, and one of them is waterloo which would give me a much better chance of winning, but I prefer the straight forward map of world 2.1

How you think its confusing is beyond me, but then from this thread, I suppose my surprise is unjustified.

Bruceswar wrote:

Tisha wrote:

Greatwhite wrote: I will play with any rank providing they have a 100% attendance rating and decent feedback. Hell, I stand to get more points when playing with lower ranks on my team.

providing that they don't beat you also..

LOL...spot on Tisha!!!!

AAFitz wrote:no surprise to all, but jpliberty refused my games

world 2.1 he says isnt a fair map...when obviously, its the most fair map... granted, on my settings...it wasnt fair to him

he prefers the little ones obviously, where only luck matters.... not surprised here

i obviously would have played on his maps too, but hey... not everyone has courage... though youd think with a name like liberty...

I offered to play you on any of more than 20 maps. I didn't back out on anything.

oh really... join those games, and send me five of your favorite ones to match.

I dont mind a few mindless maps where skill matters little, but im not about to only play those

Ill resend the games...

send yours

good luck.

the other 5 are still there too, if youd rather make it 10.. just let me know your game numbers...should be fun

AAFitz wrote:oh really... join those games, and send me five of your favorite ones to match.

I dont mind a few mindless maps where skill matters little, but im not about to only play those

Ill resend the games...

send yours

good luck.

the other 5 are still there too, if youd rather make it 10.. just let me know your game numbers...should be fun

Thank you. Good compromise. I'll get around to it sometime today. You can spend the interim getting your affairs in order

Ill prepare my score for the upcoming increase indeed.

I do apologize... playing 5 of your maps was implied in my offer, i just didnt mention it, ive done many similar challenges...

AAFitz wrote:Ill prepare my score for the upcoming increase indeed.

I do apologize... playing 5 of your maps was implied in my offer, i just didnt mention it, ive done many similar challenges...

But this time your diplomats have messed with the wrong people

Youre assuming I care if I win or lose.

AAFitz wrote:Youre assuming I care if I win or lose.

I assume nothing. I only try to win and try not to care.

Well send the games then.

skimming the Top 10 Players With Most Unique Oponents, thread...

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 77&start=0

shocking how many of the top ten are not officers... i mean, it pretty much
proves curly's point!! oh wait, i got that backwards...-0

Fruitcake wrote:Put a team together Libby old chap, pm me with the names, I will put a team together that matches on points gained/lost and will gladly play you best of 3/5/7/9 games....standard triples, no cards, classic map, chained forts. In my opinion, for what it is worth, this shows the least 'luck' and the most strategic skill. I already have open games of this nature up on the board, but for you I am happy to go 'private'.

Not seeming to be a bore about this Libs old boy, but you talk the talk, I have offered you a straight chance to walk the walk, yet you seem to be avoiding the chance.

Fruitcake wrote:

Fruitcake wrote:Put a team together Libby old chap, pm me with the names, I will put a team together that matches on points gained/lost and will gladly play you best of 3/5/7/9 games....standard triples, no cards, classic map, chained forts. In my opinion, for what it is worth, this shows the least 'luck' and the most strategic skill. I already have open games of this nature up on the board, but for you I am happy to go 'private'.

Not seeming to be a bore about this Libs old boy, but you talk the talk, I have offered you a straight chance to walk the walk, yet you seem to be avoiding the chance.

I'd be up for same games of similar nature Fruit- shooter me a pm. Just to play of course....not trying to prove anything.

He is not going to be happy with those games

I cant wait for the next 20 after this set...lol

of course by the end of them...hes going to be a pro

Fruitcake wrote:

Fruitcake wrote:Put a team together Libby old chap, pm me with the names, I will put a team together that matches on points gained/lost and will gladly play you best of 3/5/7/9 games....standard triples, no cards, classic map, chained forts. In my opinion, for what it is worth, this shows the least 'luck' and the most strategic skill. I already have open games of this nature up on the board, but for you I am happy to go 'private'.

Not seeming to be a bore about this Libs old boy, but you talk the talk, I have offered you a straight chance to walk the walk, yet you seem to be avoiding the chance.

I guess one could try to interpret your previous post as meaning you were challenging me...I assumed you were addressing someone known as Libby, since all your comments seemed directed to others rather than to the OP.

I'll try to get around to it, I've already got some games going with the estimable AAFritz whose challenge to me was plainly worded---remember, I am a low scorer, you must keep things simple so that I can follow.

If you check you'll learn that we've played exactly one game, back in 2007, which was a 4 way singles. I stomped you then, without any mercy. From the meager number of points I received for giving you that whupping, I would guess that was way back when you were what, some lowly corporal...not that there is anything wrong with that

When I get some time I'll pore over your fairly obtusely worded "challenge" and let you know.

jpliberty wrote:When I get some time I'll pore over your fairly obtusely worded "challenge" and let you know.

fruitcake... if you write anything above a 6th grade level, you can't expect a political consultant to understand it, you should know better!!! and curly, you shouldn't rip on people for being eloquent with their words. it is a lost art, as many can see by the level of "wordsmith" in this thread...-0

p.s.-can you guys post the game numbers so we can check in? thanks!!

His challenge seems pretty clear, except perhaps for the libby. But speaking of obtuse and unclear, could you translate this little gem for me:

jpliberty wrote:Openness, public, are two words you are yours don't acknowledge. You are neither open nor public, except with your blind, stupid and assinine pomposity.

Maybe its the colonels hat restricting blood flow to my brain, but I just dont get it.

AAFitz wrote:His challenge seems pretty clear, except perhaps for the libby. But speaking of obtuse and unclear, could you translate this little gem for me:

jpliberty wrote:Openness, public, are two words you are yours don't acknowledge. You are neither open nor public, except with your blind, stupid and assinine pomposity.

Maybe its the colonels hat restricting blood flow to my brain, but I just dont get it.

Well, take that hat off then; it's not worth anything, unless of course you are styling

Now how did this digress to a callout thread. lol