Conquer Club

ZaBeast wrote:I get that not everybody can commit to the game load and lenght of those tournaments, but we already have the championships that do a similar job

Thanks for letting me know, I wasn't aware of that.

TrafalgarLaw01 wrote:I take personal offense that you excluded me from top 10 - I'm pretty sure I have been top 10 all month

Well don't, it's not like I have any personal reason to exclude you.
I just misread the ranking, wasn't being very attentive when checking.

Donelladan wrote:

TrafalgarLaw01 wrote:I take personal offense that you excluded me from top 10 - I'm pretty sure I have been top 10 all month

Well don't, it's not like I have any personal reason to exclude you.
I just misread the ranking, wasn't being very attentive when checking.

All good, I did supposed that happened

I, for one, would love to see a conquer club world championship wherein players play a wide range of maps and settings, and the winner is declared the new conqueror

I like the idea.
But not as a replacement for current Monthly best performers and biggest Score Movers board.
Keep Monthly Scoreboard for more rapid and dynamic competitions.
.
Yearly scoreboard should be based on different formulas & requirements
Not just based on year beginning score and year end score.
.
If incorporated things such as number of map crossed within the year (beat at least 5 opponents in x number of maps within given year)
in to the score formula , then players will have to work throughout the year to get in to top rather than caring at their scores at the start of the period and at last couple of days of the period.

Cold take: with the variety in settings and maps CC offers, a ranking system is almost by definition either flawed, or exploitable. Most strong players will recognise whether someone is a strong player regardless of their rank. First and foremost, the easiest way to play your way to a higher score is by playing teamgames with lower-ranked players and playing their turn live with them. Essentially you are then playing something close to poly, but with an adjusted dscore.

The best indicator of 'strongest player' is probably in the Championships.

Mad777 wrote:TG while we are gathering Community feedback, and in the event this comes live, I think we should pair it up with the suggestion of updating the Conqueror title requirement, there is good suggestion such a certain amount maps played (coding could use crossmap status level), and also a X amount of game played per month.

I do believe those 2 things are linked talking about top performer player(s).

I do value the Cross Map medal theory but why not align this with other Scoreboard rules?

Why not really shake it up?
https://www.conquerclub.com/public.php? ... scoreboard
*To Qualify for our Monthly Leaders and Most Improved Contests you need to complete a minimum of 20 scored games in the period and have a minimum score of 800 at the start of the period.

What if every month we simply have a vote on who the best player is?

PureStink wrote:What if every month we simply have a vote on who the best player is?

Then I would always win.

PureStink wrote:What if every month we simply have a vote on who the best player is?

Great idea.
We have around 5000 members and right now only 57 have bothered to vote.

None of these Polls really meet quorum.

Hooch wrote:Great idea.
We have around 5000 members and right now only 57 have bothered to vote.

None of these Polls really meet quorum.

And of those 57, 12 don't care so only 45 actual votes so far .. Not enough for me to approach admins.

We do know only a small portion read the forums, and of those it looks like a good percentage don't care about the scoreboards.

Another way to replace actual and upcoming scoreboard to be using a simple win count like 1 point per win, and a x minimum of map usages (20?) this will remove members attempted to play lower ranked and/or only playing their favorite map.

Each month member start at 0 and need to work the way up.

Mad777 wrote:Another way to replace actual and upcoming scoreboard to be using a simple win count like 1 point per win, and a x minimum of map usages (20?) this will remove members attempted to play lower ranked and/or only playing their favorite map.

Each month member start at 0 and need to work the way up.

That would be a terrible idea, or how multiplayer games would count, also freemiums would have no chance unless they stick to short games, and it would encourage playing vs low ranked players cause it would be even less risk more reward.

I don't really care about "monthly improved". Perhaps because im too new and still have to let "monthly improved importance" grow on me...

But Conqueror title that should be something to care about! And then it should be the best player annualy who holds that title. Not somebody who's hiding in the shadows for years and foes players that are better.

So annual scoreboard on the conqueror title please! ALSO the conqueror title should be a title that can be challenged like a world championship boxing title!

Because now it's a conqueror that can foe all the challengers???

#Foeing is NOT CONQUERING!

I do not know of a major sports championship awarded for "points only" such as most goals scored or most shots blocked. The Championship is decided by actual competition, and once in a while, the "best" team does not play its best and gets beaten by an "inferior" team.

The Title of Conqueror is viewed by many as a type of championship. It gets LOTS of attention and is listed at the top of the SCOREBOARD. I do not see where the winner of a "Championship Tournament" is listed on a regular basis and thus does not get the recognition or attention of the title Conqueror.

Chess comes close to a similarity to this game in some ways. They have a championship, about every 2years (now, apparently), conducted by FIDE (and likely disrupted by COVID). Now the guy with the highest score is USUALLY the guy who wins the Tournaments and, especially, the Championship TOURNAMENT. too. So, there is NO (major) controversy of who is called The Champion. He is indeed the World's Best Chess Player. You can look up the list of Champions (and yes, they have all been males, to the best of my knowledge).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Chess_Championship

Perhaps it is time to:

1) Change the title of Conqueror (as the Person with the Highest Score); OR

2) Change the way that the title of the Conqueror be awarded. I suggest that the title be earned by play in a tournament designated as THE "Championship Tournament."

3) Place on the Scoreboard page the winner of the "Tournament." I would go further and list ALL such winners for THE "Championship Tournament." (To create even more discussion, ask how far to go back and which Tournaments can be considered as worthy of being in the running for making that list?)

TBF, I will never become Conqueror here; I know that. When I first joined CC in 2013, I was amazed at how many REALLY good Risk players were here and how much better that they are than I am.

So, my apologies for not knowing the name(s) of the Championship Tournament(s). I would not last long in any such Tournaments. And yes, I could have put this in many other places and threads, but, at the moment, this seems to draw the most views and comments. And those who are serious about supporting this type of change seem to be reading this thread, too.

But the PASSIONS and arguments made about who is entitled to be CALLED The Conqueror suggests to me that CC needs to reconsider the ROLE and meaning (definition) of The Conqueror.

Does anyone want to guess how many clicks it took me to find this from the opening page?

https://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=championships

Scoring Ideas:
Right now we have all time stats. Which is great, but there's a big difference between people that play lots of maps/setups vs just 1. I'd say keep that because it's always been here, but what would be pretty cool is getting a player's map score....or setup type score. Maybe even game stats such as dice effect during the game.

Map stats irrelevent to players would be kindof fun as well. The most landed on squares in Monopoly are the orange squares. What % of troops are assaulted vs bombarded in Waterloo? Might be interesting for mapmakers. Are there map functions that, at the end of the day....really don't get utilized?

Another take could be enjoyment. While everyone likes to win, getting behind in a trench hive or pacman map really isn't much fun. Frankly, it's annoying to finish off the win as well. Those nice balanced games that go back and forth are the fun ones....at least for me they are.

Anyway, just my .02. Remember, you can't manage what you don't monitor.

I like the ideas put forth. Especially reforming the Conqueror title. Even with reforms, I doubt I would be good enough to take it. But as it sits now, I have no respect for the holder(s). I think that it should go to someone who plays a minimum of twenty different maps per quarter (on a three month rolling average) and at least 20 finished games per month. And no more that 10 of any qualifying victory points on any single map. Let the title belong to someone who can play and not someone who knows a couple of maps well.

Or maybe to someone who at least has a silver cross map medal.