An came to me..Just wondered if all you elite players are agreement. You have a coreboard for the best single players but how many players play in these games and what is the easier game ; 2,3,4,5 or 6???
Also what about the settings escalating, flat and fortifications.
I think alot depends on how many players are playing in the game. I find 5 player games easier to play myself!
juventino wrote:3 people or 6 people escalating are the easiest by far...
1v1 is kinda easy to but it depends to much on luck on that type of game
juve is one of the few 3 person players in here....I actually dont think there's anyone better
and if you can think through the 6 player escalating, they are by far the easiest way to the top....assuming you are really good...you only have to win 2 out of 6 every time to win huge...which is great...but its easier said than done..well for me
Im still far more comfortable in no cards and team games myself
mmm, Robinette, when would I qualify?
102 games played with 14 teamgames.
8 teamgames won for a total of 118 points
6 teamgames lost for a total of 119 points meaning no net gain of more then 1.
14 teamgames out of 102 total games is 13.7% or 86,3% single games.
My score is 2072 right now. Whereabout would that place me?
_________________
539 SirSebstar 1730 62 Major 25-0 NL (29-05-2007)
418 SirSebstar 1809 68 31 (46%) Lieutenant 27-0 NL (30-05-2007)
Highest place and highest score ever
206 SirSebstar 2072 102 52 (51%) Captain 32-0 NL (30 july 2007)
Not even sure I'm doing the math correctly, and I really shouldn't even care - but if you subtract the 4 team games I've played, ever, for a total of 112 points gained, from my current score (as of this moment) of 2427, you are left with 2315, which should place me in the top 10...
Blitzaholic wrote:are all these stats transferred now?
i understand you new list of top 12, makes sense, easier to keep track
Yes... pretty much so... bummer for a few though who are great at singles but don't play enough 5-6 player games as they will have over 40% win rates... But it would be good to keep this thread alive with the 10 OVERALL highest singles scores... so here it is (high water mark for players under 40%):
Blitzaholic wrote:are all these stats transferred now?
i understand you new list of top 12, makes sense, easier to keep track
Yes... pretty much so... bummer for a few though who are great at singles but don't play enough 5-6 player games as they will have over 40% win rates... But it would be good to keep this thread alive with the 10 OVERALL highest singles scores... so here it is (high water mark for players under 40%):
Blitzaholic wrote:are all these stats transferred now?
i understand you new list of top 12, makes sense, easier to keep track
The under 40 list was easy, but was flawed for several reasons... therefore, I am revamping this list with a twist...
Read on...
Robinette wrote:DiM, Scott land, Neogien....
I hear what you are saying... and to get this right there would need to be 2 scoreboards, one for our team scores and one for our singles scores.
This latest "under 40%" list made it easy, but I have to agree that it has just too many shortcomings... and the 1st method was simply no good due to the effort required and the restrictions as to who was eligible.
Sooooo.... here's what I've come up with... A Top 10 List that doesn't exclude anybody no matter how many team games they choose to play, and gives a reasonable representation of their standings in the singles world...
It works like this... Simply deduct 3 points from your current score for every team game you have ever played. And there is your "Singles Score"... SIMPLE and FAIR, in a lame sort of way... Pretty lame that we have to do it this way... hopefully technology will be applied to CC scoring BEFORE we become the laughing stock of internet gaming sites...
Last edited by Robinette on Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:50 am, edited 2 times in total.
A NEW way to list the Top 10 Highest Singles Players Scores (without team points*) *What has changed is that ALL players are eligible... Any WIN %, Any SINGLES %, Any TEAM %... Just take your current score and deduct 3 points for every team game...
If you still have over 2000 then post it here with the details...
Here is what I've got so far:
....................... current score ...... current ....... highest ..... current....... .......................... adjusted ............ score........... score ....... overall...... ...................... for team games .......................... ever ........ ranking.....
A NEW way to list the Top 10 Highest Singles Players Scores (without team points*) *What has changed is that ALL players are eligible... Any WIN %, Any SINGLES %, Any TEAM %... Just take your current score and deduct 3 points for every team game... If you still have over 2000 then post it here with the details...
Here is what I've got so far:
....................... current score ...... current ....... highest ..... current....... .......................... adjusted ............ score........... score ....... overall...... ...................... for team games .......................... ever ........ ranking.....
Robinette wrote:Just take your current score and deduct 3 points for every team game...
why deduct 3 points for every team game?
here are my scores:
points with team games in all finished games: 2208 points with team games including active terminator games (where i made some kills): 2239 points without team games in all finished games: 2184 points without team games including active terminator games (where i made some kills): 2215 highest with team games: 2297 highest without team games: 2273
the funny thing is that i have lost 90 points in doubs and gained 114 in trips so overall my team games only got me 24 points. yeah i'm lousy at team games
Sorry DiM... my bad, this should posted in the Top 10 Singles Scores without Team Points... This thread should remain for the under 40% crowd...
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Robinette wrote:Just take your current score and deduct 3 points for every team game...
why deduct 3 points for every team game?
To understand WHY you must really look at the history of trying to make a list without team points...
1st we simply deducted or added points from team games (read through this thread and you'll see several reasons why this doesn't work)
2nd we made under 40% win rate (again, this really doesn't work)
3rd (present day) we now deduct 3 points for each team game (perfect, NO it's not... it's plenty screwed up... but because ConquerClub does not care to have a scoring system that allows the singles players to see this kind of info, it's all we got) Once again, to really understand how flawed the 1st & 2nd systems were, just read through this thread.
*** and you did make the list, a little below 10th... although that has dropped since the addition of rabbiton... you and i both should prepare to drop a few more spots as we discover more high quality singles players hidden out there***
A NEW way to list the Top 10 Highest Singles Players Scores (without team points*) *What has changed is that ALL players are eligible... Any WIN %, Any SINGLES %, Any TEAM %... Just take your current score and deduct 3 points for every team game...
If you still have over 2000 then post it here with the details...
Here is what I've got so far:
....................... current score ...... current ....... highest ..... current....... .......................... adjusted ............ score........... score ....... overall...... ...................... for team games .......................... ever ........ ranking.....
Robinette wrote:Just take your current score and deduct 3 points for every team game...
why deduct 3 points for every team game?
3rd (present day) we now deduct 3 points for each team game (perfect, NO it's not... it's plenty screwed up... but because ConquerClub does not care to have a scoring system that allows the singles players to see this kind of info, it's all we got) Once again, to really understand how flawed the 1st & 2nd systems were, just read through this thread.
could you at least point the page range cause 20 pages take a lot to check.
the reason i don't understand why you need to deduct 3 points from each game is because for example i played 31 doubles games and had a net loss of 90 points. so not only i lost 90 points but now i get another 93 deducted.
the point is if a guy plays 95 singles games and reaches a score of 2000 and then he plays 5 team games loses all of them for a total of 100 points. he gets a net score of 1900.
so his score would be 2000 singles only and 1900 mixed.
by your calculations it won't be 2000 for singles in fact it would be 1885 which is totally wrong.
i keep an updated xml sheet of my score for all types of games for number of players and so on. overall from team games i have a profit of just 24 points. i agree that for example the points gained 50 games ago in a team game affect my points gained now in a singles game. but since they affect both the loss and the gain i don't see it as a problem especially since my net profit was just 24 points. so that would make absolutely no difference or at least a minor difference of a few points up or down.
“In the beginning God said, the four-dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric, second rank tensor equals zero, and there was light, and it was good. And on the seventh day he rested.”- Michio Kaku
Robinette wrote:Just take your current score and deduct 3 points for every team game...
why deduct 3 points for every team game?
3rd (present day) we now deduct 3 points for each team game (perfect, NO it's not... it's plenty screwed up... but because ConquerClub does not care to have a scoring system that allows the singles players to see this kind of info, it's all we got) Once again, to really understand how flawed the 1st & 2nd systems were, just read through this thread.
could you at least point the page range cause 20 pages take a lot to check.
the reason i don't understand why you need to deduct 3 points from each game is because for example i played 31 doubles games and had a net loss of 90 points. so not only i lost 90 points but now i get another 93 deducted.
the point is if a guy plays 95 singles games and reaches a score of 2000 and then he plays 5 team games loses all of them for a total of 100 points. he gets a net score of 1900. so his score would be 2000 singles only and 1900 mixed. by your calculations it won't be 2000 for singles in fact it would be 1885 which is totally wrong.
i keep an updated xml sheet of my score for all types of games for number of players and so on. overall from team games i have a profit of just 24 points. i agree that for example the points gained 50 games ago in a team game affect my points gained now in a singles game. but since they affect both the loss and the gain i don't see it as a problem especially since my net profit was just 24 points. so that would make absolutely no difference or at least a minor difference of a few points up or down.
What you describe is the way we 1st started this list in the beginning... There really were some major flaws and i am too tired right now to do the searching for you... But let me just say that if you have a better way that does not require tons of effort then i am all for it...
PS- in the example above you would have 1985 points, not 1885.
im sad and emabarrassed to say especially in the forum that ive added all my team games excluding the 3 that i am in now and that total is +3 points. i have to say though that Tisha and I have done well along with SlickCrisDruler/ Chessplaya ( think weve played like 10 times total and undefeated).......... but all the other 40 partners ive had we suck !
believe it or not i thought i had loss points in team games............lol
came to me..Just wondered if all you elite players are agreement. You have a coreboard for the best single players but how many players play in these games and what is the easier game ; 2,3,4,5 or 6???
in a syllogistic logic sort of way
. My highest score was 2700 +/- 50 Thought for sure i'd be somewhere in there 
