Conquer Club

Fog and Obscurity

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.

Re: Fog and Obscurity

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:06 pm

iAmCaffeine wrote:
Fruitcake wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:. For you to give use a script and refuse to share it with the community is poor sportsmanship, at the very least.


hear hear!


That's lame.


To be clear, I'm strongly against the implications of the bolded stance. It's the basic argument for people who dislike particular outcomes from competition and who more importantly do not respect property rights. It's LT's script, so he can do as he pleases with it.

If you don't like my stance, or if you consider LT's behavior to be unsportsmanlike, then consider a similar situation. Suppose player X is extremely good at a certain map, yet he refuses to share his awesome strategy with the entire community. Is player X being unsportsmanlike? No, it's his own knowledge. Shall we insist that he share it with everyone? No, he should be able to exert his control over his stuff. That's the building block of autonomy. We should respect his property.

User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Fog and Obscurity

Postby nagerous on Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:38 pm

loutil wrote:
Mr Changsha wrote:@loutil..

I never said it was not possible to have a tactical advantage. I even acknowledge as much in my response. What I said was that it was not enough of an advantage to create a 70% win rate against higher ranked/better opponents. Your 55% win rate against equal opposition clearly shows a statistical advantage. Not sure how I could make it any more clear?
Further, I never said wins against majors was irrelevant. I specifically mentioned captains AND LOWER with the bulk being lower. I will stand on my predicate that you CANNOT win at 70% playing sunny/basic maps against higher level competition. I have played against you twice on basic sunny maps. I have also followed a few of your games when we had the tactical discussions in chat. You bring solid tactics and read the board well. However, I have played against the top players (my opinion) in CC and I feel quite confident in saying that you would not have a tactical advantage over them. Play 10 sunny/basic games with someone like Josko and I will bet good money you cannot beat him at 70%....


Well I might, it isn't an impossibility but I would agree it is unlikely. But aren't you setting a very high bar for what could be considered 'reasonable opportunity for tactical advantage'? That I have to be able to consistantly defeat the very best players on CC (of which I am not one anyway..surely a key point) at a consistant rate of 70% for the style I play to be considered 'not 75% luck'...(quoting our current conqueror)

My God, when has my form of trips ever been written of before to be as luck-based as 1vs.1 on classic?

I specifically mentioned captains AND LOWER with the bulk being lower


That statement seems almost to be wilfully false. I couldn't have the eq rating (1.054) if it were true...considering I haven't dropped below, or even close to, sub 2000 since 2008 and spent much of the time hovering around the first page. Further my team are all majors..it just doesn't add up.

Anyone who cares to glance at my trips games will see that my opposition have been consistantly strong. Not ubiquitously of the general class, but then you seem to be most imaginatively suggesting that my form has to reach such heights! At least I have never heard it said before that a form of the game is irrelevent if you can't beat josko 70% of the time!

Though btw you are to a great extent proving my point for me. You demand such an incredible level of success before a form can be valid (when any reasonable neutral reading this will be able to see that my form is perfectly valid) and isn't that the entire point of this thread? If a form of the game can't take one over 4,000 points it is useless and 75% luck. If a form of the game can't guarantee an 85% shot at victory in a clan war it is a complete waste of time. This is the exact attitude that I am railing against in this thread!

I would just further point out that this attitude continues to be one of the main drivers for the ruination of this site. Five years ago we had 20 000+ members and the top, middle and bottom of this game was played on simple maps and settings. Now we can barely muster 12 000 members and the top of the game has become forms of it that are completely confusing and irrelevent to the average member who has come here 'for a game of Risk or something like it'. I know I have made this point before over the years and I accept that it will never be listened to upon high: that by catering for the hardcore 1000 or so on this site, the site has driven away half of its members as a result.


I feel I am being taken out of context again. My point was not to set some standard (winning at 70%) but rather to suggest that with the style you play luck and drop matter much more than the style I play. Therefor, in my opinion, you could not win at 70% (as you suggest you do) if playing equal to better competition. Certainly, by playing trips, you eliminate some of the luck/drop factor of playing 1 v 1.
Your eq rating is misleading as it takes into account your team members which are almost always lower rank than you. You suggest your team is all majors. But, you have played multiple games with players that are not majors like: Jordanthedude, m0nkeyb0y, spoongod, squishyg, happy2seeyou, nagerous, ect...
This is all off point however. I do not care whom you play against or the form you play. My point from the start is that I believe fog is harder and takes more skill than sunny. I believe complicated maps are harder and take more skill than simple maps.


Don't quote names without doing your research properly. Most of those names were clan members and clan games. Last time I played with Changsha I was at least major so was h2sy.
Image
User avatar
Captain nagerous
 
Posts: 7511
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:39 am

Re: Fog and Obscurity

Postby Mr Changsha on Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:03 pm

nagerous wrote:
loutil wrote:
Mr Changsha wrote:@loutil..

I never said it was not possible to have a tactical advantage. I even acknowledge as much in my response. What I said was that it was not enough of an advantage to create a 70% win rate against higher ranked/better opponents. Your 55% win rate against equal opposition clearly shows a statistical advantage. Not sure how I could make it any more clear?
Further, I never said wins against majors was irrelevant. I specifically mentioned captains AND LOWER with the bulk being lower. I will stand on my predicate that you CANNOT win at 70% playing sunny/basic maps against higher level competition. I have played against you twice on basic sunny maps. I have also followed a few of your games when we had the tactical discussions in chat. You bring solid tactics and read the board well. However, I have played against the top players (my opinion) in CC and I feel quite confident in saying that you would not have a tactical advantage over them. Play 10 sunny/basic games with someone like Josko and I will bet good money you cannot beat him at 70%....


Well I might, it isn't an impossibility but I would agree it is unlikely. But aren't you setting a very high bar for what could be considered 'reasonable opportunity for tactical advantage'? That I have to be able to consistantly defeat the very best players on CC (of which I am not one anyway..surely a key point) at a consistant rate of 70% for the style I play to be considered 'not 75% luck'...(quoting our current conqueror)

My God, when has my form of trips ever been written of before to be as luck-based as 1vs.1 on classic?

I specifically mentioned captains AND LOWER with the bulk being lower


That statement seems almost to be wilfully false. I couldn't have the eq rating (1.054) if it were true...considering I haven't dropped below, or even close to, sub 2000 since 2008 and spent much of the time hovering around the first page. Further my team are all majors..it just doesn't add up.

Anyone who cares to glance at my trips games will see that my opposition have been consistantly strong. Not ubiquitously of the general class, but then you seem to be most imaginatively suggesting that my form has to reach such heights! At least I have never heard it said before that a form of the game is irrelevent if you can't beat josko 70% of the time!

Though btw you are to a great extent proving my point for me. You demand such an incredible level of success before a form can be valid (when any reasonable neutral reading this will be able to see that my form is perfectly valid) and isn't that the entire point of this thread? If a form of the game can't take one over 4,000 points it is useless and 75% luck. If a form of the game can't guarantee an 85% shot at victory in a clan war it is a complete waste of time. This is the exact attitude that I am railing against in this thread!

I would just further point out that this attitude continues to be one of the main drivers for the ruination of this site. Five years ago we had 20 000+ members and the top, middle and bottom of this game was played on simple maps and settings. Now we can barely muster 12 000 members and the top of the game has become forms of it that are completely confusing and irrelevent to the average member who has come here 'for a game of Risk or something like it'. I know I have made this point before over the years and I accept that it will never be listened to upon high: that by catering for the hardcore 1000 or so on this site, the site has driven away half of its members as a result.


I feel I am being taken out of context again. My point was not to set some standard (winning at 70%) but rather to suggest that with the style you play luck and drop matter much more than the style I play. Therefor, in my opinion, you could not win at 70% (as you suggest you do) if playing equal to better competition. Certainly, by playing trips, you eliminate some of the luck/drop factor of playing 1 v 1.
Your eq rating is misleading as it takes into account your team members which are almost always lower rank than you. You suggest your team is all majors. But, you have played multiple games with players that are not majors like: Jordanthedude, m0nkeyb0y, spoongod, squishyg, happy2seeyou, nagerous, ect...
This is all off point however. I do not care whom you play against or the form you play. My point from the start is that I believe fog is harder and takes more skill than sunny. I believe complicated maps are harder and take more skill than simple maps.


Don't quote names without doing your research properly. Most of those names were clan members and clan games. Last time I played with Changsha I was at least major so was h2sy.


Yes and squishy too bless her! Spoongod was indeed a regular in my teams and played at the captain rank then (for shame!!) while the other two are friends of mine from China and played a grand total of six games.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Mr Changsha
 
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:42 am

Re: Fog and Obscurity

Postby Fruitcake on Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:04 pm

This is a philosophical argument. You cannot mix skill with what is in effect and invention of something that already existed but hadn't been created by a human. But then I am a strong supporter and member of the Open Source community which would confirm to you where my beliefs lay, and also why I think the reward for such creations of MS have been far too great.

BigBallinStalin wrote:
iAmCaffeine wrote:
Fruitcake wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:. For you to give use a script and refuse to share it with the community is poor sportsmanship, at the very least.


hear hear!


That's lame.


To be clear, I'm strongly against the implications of the bolded stance. It's the basic argument for people who dislike particular outcomes from competition and who more importantly do not respect property rights. It's LT's script, so he can do as he pleases with it.

If you don't like my stance, or if you consider LT's behavior to be unsportsmanlike, then consider a similar situation. Suppose player X is extremely good at a certain map, yet he refuses to share his awesome strategy with the entire community. Is player X being unsportsmanlike? No, it's his own knowledge. Shall we insist that he share it with everyone? No, he should be able to exert his control over his stuff. That's the building block of autonomy. We should respect his property.

Image

Due to current economic conditions the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off
User avatar
Colonel Fruitcake
 
Posts: 2193
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:38 am

Re: Fog and Obscurity

Postby happy2seeyou on Thu Apr 03, 2014 9:52 pm

Damnit I really hate when I come back every now and then to see whats up, read my name and have no clue as to why I am being mentioned. :? I do not have the time nor the wine to get through all that

Oh and Hey.
User avatar
Captain happy2seeyou
 
Posts: 4019
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:59 pm
Location: A state that is in the shape of a mitten!

Previous

Return to Conquer Club Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron