TOP PLAYERS OVERRATED!!

THE ARMY · Post by **THE ARMY** » Sat May 24, 2008 10:59 am

MOST OF THE TOP RANKED PLAYERS ARE OVERRATED AND GLORIFIED. Come on have you seen the games these guys play. Most of them play the same thing, either large games, freestyle, unlimited fortifications, escalating cards or 2 player games with escalating, freestyle, and unlimited fortifications. The reason they look so good is because those are the only games they play. For the first 5 rounds of a large escalating game there is relatively no strategy. The only strategy comes in the 6th and 7th rounds. But even then does starting position and other players moves help with a victory. I play a lot of very tough conquerclubbers who are ranked majors or colonels and these guys are TOUGH they play with great strategy. If these guys at the top of the leaderboard are really good why don't they play more hardcore and diverse strategy games with no cards and limited fortifications. They have strategy and i bet are pretty good don't get me wrong, but I just want them to prove it by playing more of the tougher games to win. NOW WHO'S WITH ME!!!?!!?!!?!

wicked · Post by **wicked** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:01 am

So? They do one thing and do it well. No harm in that.

westsidekilla6 · Post by **westsidekilla6** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:03 am

THE ARMY wrote:MOST OF THE TOP RANKED PLAYERS ARE OVERRATED AND GLORIFIED. Come on have you seen the games these guys play. Most of them play the same thing, either large games, freestyle, unlimited fortifications, escalating cards or 2 player games with escalating, freestyle, and unlimited fortifications. The reason they look so good is because those are the only games they play. For the first 5 rounds of a large escalating game there is relatively no strategy. The only strategy comes in the 6th and 7th rounds. But even then does starting position and other players moves help with a victory. I play a lot of very tough conquerclubbers who are ranked majors or colonels and these guys are TOUGH they play with great strategy. If these guys at the top of the leaderboard are really good why don't they play more hardcore and diverse strategy games with no cards and limited fortifications. They have strategy and i bet are pretty good don't get me wrong, but I just want them to prove it by playing more of the tougher games to win. NOW WHO'S WITH ME!!!?!!?!!?!

Apparently your overrated Rashid and Scott

hulmey · Post by **hulmey** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:04 am

THE ARMY wrote:MOST OF THE TOP RANKED PLAYERS ARE OVERRATED AND GLORIFIED. Come on have you seen the games these guys play. Most of them play the same thing, either large games, freestyle, unlimited fortifications, escalating cards or 2 player games with escalating, freestyle, and unlimited fortifications. The reason they look so good is because those are the only games they play. For the first 5 rounds of a large escalating game there is relatively no strategy. The only strategy comes in the 6th and 7th rounds. But even then does starting position and other players moves help with a victory. I play a lot of very tough conquerclubbers who are ranked majors or colonels and these guys are TOUGH they play with great strategy. If these guys at the top of the leaderboard are really good why don't they play more hardcore and diverse strategy games with no cards and limited fortifications. They have strategy and i bet are pretty good don't get me wrong, but I just want them to prove it by playing more of the tougher games to win. NOW WHO'S WITH ME!!!?!!?!!?!

They play the same agains again and again coz they are good at them and dont want to lose many points! Im quite sure alot of them can and will handle themselves well on most gamesettings...

just for the record if i play 1 vs 1 and beat you i will probably gain 13 points but if i lose to you, I would lose 37 points. So now thats why they play the same games coz they are trying to reduce the amount of points they lose :shock:

Pedronicus · Post by **Pedronicus** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:09 am

The other reason they play two player games is because a player with over 3000 points in a public 6 player game will be a target.

Even I get some shitty remarks and one sided attacks because I'm a major in public games i play.

I don't care about points anymore. I'm playing for the enjoyment. Therefore my points are in free fall.

jiminski · Post by **jiminski** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:10 am

THE ARMY wrote:MOST OF THE TOP RANKED PLAYERS ARE OVERRATED AND GLORIFIED. Come on have you seen the games these guys play. Most of them play the same thing, either large games, freestyle, unlimited fortifications, escalating cards or 2 player games with escalating, freestyle, and unlimited fortifications. The reason they look so good is because those are the only games they play. For the first 5 rounds of a large escalating game there is relatively no strategy. The only strategy comes in the 6th and 7th rounds. But even then does starting position and other players moves help with a victory. I play a lot of very tough conquerclubbers who are ranked majors or colonels and these guys are TOUGH they play with great strategy. If these guys at the top of the leaderboard are really good why don't they play more hardcore and diverse strategy games with no cards and limited fortifications. They have strategy and i bet are pretty good don't get me wrong, but I just want them to prove it by playing more of the tougher games to win. NOW WHO'S WITH ME!!!?!!?!!?!

Agreed and that Tiger woods is a useless Jockey! Get the idiot on the back of a horse and we'll see how good he is!

THE ARMY · Post by **THE ARMY** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:10 am

I just think we should give more respect to the field officers who play DIVERSE games, are BRAVE and take RISKS, and WIN!!!!!!!!!!

jiminski · Post by **jiminski** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:14 am

THE ARMY wrote:I just think we should give more respect to the field officers who play DIVERSE games, are BRAVE and take RISKS, and WIN!!!!!!!!!!

hehe there are loads of players at the top who do that... although of course Hulmeys post regarding points is valid!

The guys who reach Conqueror do have to be very careful about their points but anyone who has been there will beat you (you in particular

) 9 out of 10 in almost any style..... oooooh could we set that up please!? who has the balls to Silence THE ARMY !?

Joop · Post by **Joop** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:26 am

Who cares about points and why?

jiminski · Post by **jiminski** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:36 am

Joop wrote:Who cares about points and why?

It's like anything mate, if points did not matter we would not have them.
Having played Risks with an absence of points, I know it works just fine! But i have been known to add a barely significant wager to the mix... for a little extra spice!

Points do the same as the small wager; adding another dimension to the victory and keeping us sucked into the game all the more.
Why do we score in football? Tennis? Gin-rummy with our Granny?
Why? because it adds something fundamental! it adds record and acknowledgement of our 'achievement'!

Well it is all very pathetic but so what! Life is made up of tiny little achievements, which add up to almost nothing in the grand scheme of things anyway!
The important part is to enjoy them.. that is the real achievement. (1 point to me!)

ParadiceCity9 · Post by **ParadiceCity9** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:49 am

Hey at least my 1 on 1 freestyle games are no cards...

Gozar · Post by **Gozar** » Sat May 24, 2008 11:52 am

Forget points and come play tournaments.

JBoy · Post by **JBoy** » Sat May 24, 2008 12:10 pm

sounds like peni, er, point envy to me.. Hey i only play escalating because i only like escalating. No cards is silly, flat rate turns into bickering and arguing over whom to attack, can last forever, escalating is great, no arguing, or not much, game ends in a reasonable amount of time, and actually more strategy than in the other games, at the higher levels it's played like chess, not like checkers...I would rather enjoy and play well 1 type of game...

RashidJelzin · Post by **RashidJelzin** » Sat May 24, 2008 12:16 pm

Micheal Jordan was so overrated-- he was only on top of his game 'cause he solely played Basketball. That glorified noob should have played Ping Pong. THEN I'd give him some reps.
F*cking idiots-- only play what the enjoy most.
Where can I sign your petition, THE ARMY?

ParadiceCity9 · Post by **ParadiceCity9** » Sat May 24, 2008 12:31 pm

RashidJelzin wrote:Micheal Jordan was so overrated-- he was only on top of his game 'cause he solely played Basketball. That glorified noob should have played Ping Pong. THEN I'd give him some reps.
F*cking idiots-- only play what the enjoy most.
Where can I sign your petition, THE ARMY?

RJ doesn't mess around.

oVo · Post by **oVo** » Sat May 24, 2008 12:40 pm

I am not a TOP PLAYER . . . but I am so totally overrated.

The statement about large games, freestyle, unlimited fortifications, escalating cards or 2 player games with escalating, freestyle, and unlimited fortifications seems like a contridiction. I play mostly large no card games regardless of what the forts are with whomever joins and they seem tough enough stuff and unlike Afitz I rarely play in the buff.

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Sat May 24, 2008 2:36 pm

I play all different kinds of games.
Terminator Sequential is what I do, but the rest of the options are wide open for me. Cards or not, Fog or not, fortifications or not, doesn't matter to me.

I almost always play public games, unless I'm invited to a private one. I'll join speed games with cooks and cadets in them, but my score is still high.

If you take big risks and still are near the top of the scoreboard, thats the highest mark of a champion. Proving that you can play anyone and still keep the high score is the best you can do.

bob72 · Post by **bob72** » Sat May 24, 2008 4:20 pm

Pedronicus wrote:The other reason they play two player games is because a player with over 3000 points in a public 6 player game will be a target.

Even I get some shitty remarks and one sided attacks because I'm a major in public games i play.

I don't care about points anymore. I'm playing for the enjoyment. Therefore my points are in free fall.

I didn't believe this myself but I've stuck to terminator games and played the odds to get where I am.

Now if I join a public game I'll get either ? or cooks attacking me. I then usually have to get a few quick points before I lose 30 thus I've started playing players at my rank. Soon as I go down I'll be playing public again though.

JOHNNYROCKET24 · Post by **JOHNNYROCKET24** » Sat May 24, 2008 4:35 pm

THE ARMY wrote:MOST OF THE TOP RANKED PLAYERS ARE OVERRATED AND GLORIFIED. Come on have you seen the games these guys play. Most of them play the same thing, either large games, freestyle, unlimited fortifications, escalating cards or 2 player games with escalating, freestyle, and unlimited fortifications. The reason they look so good is because those are the only games they play. For the first 5 rounds of a large escalating game there is relatively no strategy. The only strategy comes in the 6th and 7th rounds. But even then does starting position and other players moves help with a victory. I play a lot of very tough conquerclubbers who are ranked majors or colonels and these guys are TOUGH they play with great strategy. If these guys at the top of the leaderboard are really good why don't they play more hardcore and diverse strategy games with no cards and limited fortifications. They have strategy and i bet are pretty good don't get me wrong, but I just want them to prove it by playing more of the tougher games to win. NOW WHO'S WITH ME!!!?!!?!!?!

another low rank crying about what he cant achieve.

suggs · Post by **suggs** » Sat May 24, 2008 5:36 pm

Respect to Johnny Rocket.
He used to be a top player.

owenshooter · Post by **owenshooter** » Sat May 24, 2008 5:55 pm

suggs wrote:Respect to Johnny Rocket.
He used to be a top player.

*afraid to speak because i don't want to end up on JR's list*

JOHNNYROCKET24 · Post by **JOHNNYROCKET24** » Sat May 24, 2008 9:24 pm

owenshooter wrote:
suggs wrote:Respect to Johnny Rocket.
He used to be a top player.

*afraid to speak because i don't want to end up on JR's list*

too late....by about 2 months. and its not for speaking, its for abusing account babysitting. Who is going to believe that you needed to make a move for another player because she had to clean throw up for 24 hours. :roll:

ParadiceCity9 · Post by **ParadiceCity9** » Sat May 24, 2008 9:30 pm

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:
owenshooter wrote:
suggs wrote:Respect to Johnny Rocket.
He used to be a top player.

*afraid to speak because i don't want to end up on JR's list*
too late....by about 2 months. and its not for speaking, its for abusing account babysitting. Who is going to believe that you needed to make a move for another player because she had to clean throw up for 24 hours.

Maybe she's a janitor, full-time.

owenshooter · Post by **owenshooter** » Sat May 24, 2008 9:31 pm

did JR respond to me yet? anxiously waiting...-0

JOHNNYROCKET24 · Post by **JOHNNYROCKET24** » Sat May 24, 2008 9:33 pm

ParadiceCity9 wrote:
JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:
owenshooter wrote:
suggs wrote:Respect to Johnny Rocket.
He used to be a top player.

*afraid to speak because i don't want to end up on JR's list*
too late....by about 2 months. and its not for speaking, its for abusing account babysitting. Who is going to believe that you needed to make a move for another player because she had to clean throw up for 24 hours.

Maybe she's a janitor, full-time.

good point...but he said his friend or friends wife had to clean up their kids throw up. How in the world that took 24 hours that he needed to make the move for her is rediculous in my opinion. now you know why he is pro-players making moves for each other.