Conquer Club

Relative Rank = (your opponents' score)/(your score)

If your score is 1800 and your opponents' score is 1200, then your relative rank is 1200/1800=0.666

ljex... been thinking. Should be easy if I can rip a lot of the maprank code. but first is there a real intrest in a script that gives the real CC champ? I am not going to spend 30 man hours on something that is only significant to me.

and If I do this, I will need help on the algorithm that I would use. Will have to find some mathematicians here ... You think that it would be ewasy but most of the people that log on to the forums are not really the math dudes I am guessing.

ill tinker on this tonight... see how hard it would be.

Totals Sergeant 1st Class107 1493 1328 from 2918(46%) 1261 (43) Serial Killer (50%)3167 Equalitarian (1.049)

so my relative rank is high so i would be on page 1 of the scoreboard?

kylegraves1 wrote:Totals Sergeant 1st Class107 1493 1328 from 2918(46%) 1261 (43) Serial Killer (50%)3167 Equalitarian (1.049)

so my relative rank is high so i would be on page 1 of the scoreboard?

Nope. The ranking wouldn't be based on someone's relative rank, it would be based on their current score adjusted by their relative rank. So you would still sit around 1500 points.

army of nobunaga wrote:The only way to ever stop point abuse would be to incorporate a penalty that slowly gets greater over time. Penalty would be based on the relative game map and settings repeated.

Lets be honest, most Conqurers *cough wimps* play a single map with the same settings over and over and over... A penalty for repeated game types that slowly increased would stop this. Erm city mogul 1vs1 and stacked quads matches against noobies anyone? lol and we label these wimps "conquerors"

Then you would see real champions step up. People that play 8 man maps to 1vs1 and a multitude of settings... then you would see the best overall risk player.

But this will never happen. You have proposed a bandaid in this thread. It will stop the bleeding for about 3 weeks.

gl

+1

All you have to do to get high score with relative rank factored in, is maintain a low score for a large number of games, then, go farm and get a high score, and you will artificially make it seem as though you were playing similar players all the time.

Its ridiculously easy to manipulate and I'm astonished more do not see that immediately.

always a loophole, and AAfitz was the only one to see it. some of you guys arent thinking here. That would mean if they were good and feel in points then they could hold steady for a while and blast through a bunch of games with players just a little ahead of them and crap they would be on page one in no time.

jgordon1111 wrote:always a loophole, and AAfitz was the only one to see it. some of you guys arent thinking here. That would mean if they were good and feel in points then they could hold steady for a while and blast through a bunch of games with players just a little ahead of them and crap they would be on page one in no time.

Not that your plan requires them to win most of these games against "players just a little ahead of them" or anything.

However, AA has it right. If you lose a lot to high ranks and then farm, this is all pointless. All this would do is provide an initial reset to show who actually should be ranked high, but after a few weeks the farmers would be back on top.

jgordon1111 wrote:always a loophole, and AAfitz was the only one to see it. some of you guys arent thinking here. That would mean if they were good and feel in points then they could hold steady for a while and blast through a bunch of games with players just a little ahead of them and crap they would be on page one in no time.

no most of us see it... there are just 10000 idiots in CC for every rational person. And a lot of the rational people do not post... just read.

This is simply going to cause a have and have not class division. There will be class of players like indian social classes...

No, we all know this is dumb dumb... DUMB.

But when does CC listen to the average smart, vested... player.

Never.


edit- the biggest problem with cc are that the admins and mods are ass lickers.. ass kissers and sycophants. I could name names.. but why? But in general the heirrchy are idiots. I have seen it through the years. Over and over and over.

That is why when-ever you see a "fix", well lol its really just a asskissers fest of change.

screw them, they will screw up the rankings more and more.. but capitalism will take over eventually and a real competitor that gets it right will force logical user driven change here.

Till then, just do like I... log in and laugh at the bumblers.

army of nobunaga wrote:

jgordon1111 wrote:always a loophole, and AAfitz was the only one to see it. some of you guys arent thinking here. That would mean if they were good and feel in points then they could hold steady for a while and blast through a bunch of games with players just a little ahead of them and crap they would be on page one in no time.

no most of us see it... there are just 10000 idiots in CC for every rational person. And a lot of the rational people do not post... just read.

This is simply going to cause a have and have not class division. There will be class of players like indian social classes...

No, we all know this is dumb dumb... DUMB.

But when does CC listen to the average smart, vested... player.

Never.


edit- the biggest problem with cc are that the admins and mods are ass lickers.. ass kissers and sycophants. I could name names.. but why? But in general the heirrchy are idiots. I have seen it through the years. Over and over and over.

That is why when-ever you see a "fix", well lol its really just a asskissers fest of change.

screw them, they will screw up the rankings more and more.. but capitalism will take over eventually and a real competitor that gets it right will force logical user driven change here.

Till then, just do like I... log in and laugh at the bumblers.

So, I was fine until a month ago when I became a mod?

chapcrap wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:

jgordon1111 wrote:always a loophole, and AAfitz was the only one to see it. some of you guys arent thinking here. That would mean if they were good and feel in points then they could hold steady for a while and blast through a bunch of games with players just a little ahead of them and crap they would be on page one in no time.

no most of us see it... there are just 10000 idiots in CC for every rational person. And a lot of the rational people do not post... just read.

This is simply going to cause a have and have not class division. There will be class of players like indian social classes...

No, we all know this is dumb dumb... DUMB.

But when does CC listen to the average smart, vested... player.

Never.


edit- the biggest problem with cc are that the admins and mods are ass lickers.. ass kissers and sycophants. I could name names.. but why? But in general the heirrchy are idiots. I have seen it through the years. Over and over and over.

That is why when-ever you see a "fix", well lol its really just a asskissers fest of change.

screw them, they will screw up the rankings more and more.. but capitalism will take over eventually and a real competitor that gets it right will force logical user driven change here.

Till then, just do like I... log in and laugh at the bumblers.

So, I was fine until a month ago when I became a mod?

Take it how you want it.. I sling the truth that 90% of the people that read the forums want to say.

army of nobunaga wrote:Take it how you want it.. I sling the truth that 90% of the people that read the forums want to say.

Well, it was question. If you're slinging truth, why didn't you answer it? And I'd like the see the poll you took that says 90% of the people want to say what you say.

army of nobunaga wrote:

ljex wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:The only way to ever stop point abuse would be to incorporate a penalty that slowly gets greater over time. Penalty would be based on the relative game map and settings repeated.

Lets be honest, most Conqurers *cough wimps* play a single map with the same settings over and over and over... A penalty for repeated game types that slowly increased would stop this. Erm city mogul 1vs1 and stacked quads matches against noobies anyone? lol and we label these wimps "conquerors"

Then you would see real champions step up. People that play 8 man maps to 1vs1 and a multitude of settings... then you would see the best overall risk player.

But this will never happen. You have proposed a bandaid in this thread. It will stop the bleeding for about 3 weeks.

gl

Who would you think is the best overall player on the site? seriously i want to hear your opinion on the matter.

wth, do you think I actually look through games and see who plays what? I couldnt tell you who in the hell the current conqueror or top 10 are... I simply do not care. I do know this.. The current conqueror has one map he or she plays over and over against noobs.. I KNOW THIS and I have not even looked. Tell me I am wrong.

As far as who the best in the game is? I do not know. I know there are a handful of guys and girls out there that I see in every sort of match available. Would they shake out numbers wise to be the real champ? Who knows.

Maybe someday Ill take up GM as a hobbie again and try to make a "Nobus poor mans champion rank" add-on that puts in the penalty. But as of right now, I barely have enough interest in this game to even click "look at this post" to see what you guys that are foed are typing.


edit. and yeah you would be up there.. i am guessing.. if that is what you were looking for.

No, no one has the time to look through every player and determine which is the best, i was asking for your opinion based on the information you do have currently who you think the best player is. The thing is no cc scoreboard will ever measure the best player on conquer club. We have so many different settings on over 200 maps that its ridiculous to look for a scoreboard that highlights the best overall player on all of those aspects. Certintally someone who stays in their comfort zone of a select few maps/settings that they know they are best at will get higher on any scoreboard that is not as complex as nuclear physics. The point was that your opinion whoever it is is probably different than mine, and is most certainly different from other people on the site. In this a system can never be devised to account for these perceptions.

Sure the current system is flawed, but it is only flawed for a select few players. People go around posting arguments that sure may make the conqueror ever so slightly more representative of the best player on cc...but shortly there after people will find a way to manipulate that scoreboard and again we will have the same complaints. The beauty of the current scoreboard is that it is reasonably accurate for the vast majority of players on CC as a representation of our skill level at the games we play and that most know it is flawed for those select few. We can all look at my conquer medal and say that i got it "farming" but under a new more complicated system such as this it may be complicated and require a bit more digging than looking at my games and seeing i did it with quads oasis manual where i played mostly noobs. For example under this system one could simply deflate their score by playing games they are awful at, get their score down low and increase their relative rank only to come out and play semi "farming" games later while still having a high relative rank to get there. While it is obvious to anyone who looks at the stretch of games i played to get to conqueror...it may take more digging to see how people are manipulating any new and more complex system that is introduced to CC. I understand why people want to see a change but im afraid that every suggestion i have ever seen for a new one is just as flawed as the current one while being more complicated...which lets be honest helps nothing.

ljex wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:

ljex wrote:

army of nobunaga wrote:The only way to ever stop point abuse would be to incorporate a penalty that slowly gets greater over time. Penalty would be based on the relative game map and settings repeated.

Lets be honest, most Conqurers *cough wimps* play a single map with the same settings over and over and over... A penalty for repeated game types that slowly increased would stop this. Erm city mogul 1vs1 and stacked quads matches against noobies anyone? lol and we label these wimps "conquerors"

Then you would see real champions step up. People that play 8 man maps to 1vs1 and a multitude of settings... then you would see the best overall risk player.

But this will never happen. You have proposed a bandaid in this thread. It will stop the bleeding for about 3 weeks.

gl

Who would you think is the best overall player on the site? seriously i want to hear your opinion on the matter.

wth, do you think I actually look through games and see who plays what? I couldnt tell you who in the hell the current conqueror or top 10 are... I simply do not care. I do know this.. The current conqueror has one map he or she plays over and over against noobs.. I KNOW THIS and I have not even looked. Tell me I am wrong.

As far as who the best in the game is? I do not know. I know there are a handful of guys and girls out there that I see in every sort of match available. Would they shake out numbers wise to be the real champ? Who knows.

Maybe someday Ill take up GM as a hobbie again and try to make a "Nobus poor mans champion rank" add-on that puts in the penalty. But as of right now, I barely have enough interest in this game to even click "look at this post" to see what you guys that are foed are typing.


edit. and yeah you would be up there.. i am guessing.. if that is what you were looking for.

No, no one has the time to look through every player and determine which is the best, i was asking for your opinion based on the information you do have currently who you think the best player is. The thing is no cc scoreboard will ever measure the best player on conquer club. We have so many different settings on over 200 maps that its ridiculous to look for a scoreboard that highlights the best overall player on all of those aspects. Certintally someone who stays in their comfort zone of a select few maps/settings that they know they are best at will get higher on any scoreboard that is not as complex as nuclear physics. The point was that your opinion whoever it is is probably different than mine, and is most certainly different from other people on the site. In this a system can never be devised to account for these perceptions.

Sure the current system is flawed, but it is only flawed for a select few players. People go around posting arguments that sure may make the conqueror ever so slightly more representative of the best player on cc...but shortly there after people will find a way to manipulate that scoreboard and again we will have the same complaints. The beauty of the current scoreboard is that it is reasonably accurate for the vast majority of players on CC as a representation of our skill level at the games we play and that most know it is flawed for those select few. We can all look at my conquer medal and say that i got it "farming" but under a new more complicated system such as this it may be complicated and require a bit more digging than looking at my games and seeing i did it with quads oasis manual where i played mostly noobs. For example under this system one could simply deflate their score by playing games they are awful at, get their score down low and increase their relative rank only to come out and play semi "farming" games later while still having a high relative rank to get there. While it is obvious to anyone who looks at the stretch of games i played to get to conqueror...it may take more digging to see how people are manipulating any new and more complex system that is introduced to CC. I understand why people want to see a change but im afraid that every suggestion i have ever seen for a new one is just as flawed as the current one while being more complicated...which lets be honest helps nothing.

CC is a numbers game. It is math. Math does not have to be flawed. You have an owner that is terrified of changing a flawed system and running off paying customers.. and you have his posse of sycophants that bumble around making un-intelligent changes like this one.

That is the truth. Spin it how you want... but at least I have the balls to type it.




The owner is scared to change a flawed system and andy and his posse are idiots. Math guys (hell intelligent people) know it can be perfect.

Im out on this one.



edit to expound because i am not coming back here to this topic because you will see it is a waste of time.. the idiots will bumble and do their thing..
But ill take just one and the first example I can think ok.
NFL QB rating... it is designed that if a guy dinked and dunked in the west coast offense all day, we would be ranked behind a guy that did all the things that made a champion QB.

Math things do NOT have to be flawed... CC IS PURE MATH!!!!!!!! you are taking a defeatist attitude because you have been here years listening to andy and his idiots.

There can be a perfect champion.

Things are not changed on this site because it is a business, and the top 50 ranked people pay each year... lol


it will change someday though.. I see other games coming up.

lol edit 2- World of warcraft, ... baseball pitching ERA... most online games I play... all have GREAT RANKING SYSTEMS... only in CC do we settle for a po'dunk ass system because are fed it. EVERY MATH GAME IN THE WORLD RANKS BETTER

My thing is, we can be fed it... but lets all at least know its utter bullshit because the owner is a coward and the admins are idiots.

We award a "conqueror" because he beats 110000000000 cooks on city mogul... and you people eat it up... and take these band aid ass fixes like this one.

Bones2484 wrote:

jgordon1111 wrote:always a loophole, and AAfitz was the only one to see it. some of you guys arent thinking here. That would mean if they were good and feel in points then they could hold steady for a while and blast through a bunch of games with players just a little ahead of them and crap they would be on page one in no time.

Not that your plan requires them to win most of these games against "players just a little ahead of them" or anything.

However, AA has it right. If you lose a lot to high ranks and then farm, this is all pointless. All this would do is provide an initial reset to show who actually should be ranked high, but after a few weeks the farmers would be back on top.

And more so, because its much harder to farm to the top right now, than artificially maintain a lower rank for an increased period of time. It doesn't even have to happen on purpose. Simple game choice will essentially choose your score, and it will affect all relative statistics simply based on that.

For example, I have over 10000 points won on World 2.1. If I always maintained a very high score, that point number would be much lower, so essentially by losing more, I have improved my relative rank in one area, which is why all scores, especially relative ranks, must be viewed in context. If I play only team games, my point score will rise dramatically. If I play only doodle assassin games, or various other games, my score will plummet, regardless of my skill level, and regardless of my effort. All I have to do to change my score is change my game type, and over time, my average opponent will be ranked higher, or lower than me, simply based on my game choice, and completely separate from any actual skill difference or experience level.

My relative rank is actually a pointless number, because I have spent quite a bit of time with a high score playing against much lower ranked players, and have spent quite a bit of time, with a much lower score after such game making my relative rank higher.

In reality, the relative rank is relatively useless, because its fully able to be manipulated by the user, and it ignores all the other factors involved. Some games against low ranked players are the easiest to win points at, and some remain the absolute toughest to win points at and there is no possible way for the relative rank to score that any better than our current system.

I think perhaps many hope to see this change because they falsely believe they are skilled enough to attain the conqueror position, but I think the vast majority, would find doing so, is actually more complicated than they assume.

It seems many think this would favor the player that plays few games all against the best on the site and still maintains a high rank, as possibly it should, but in actuality, it would favor most the one who simply has a low score for years, and then decides to make a run for the top.

All this system would do, is reward players for playing with a lower score, which improves relative rank, with no effort.

The score could reward based on the average score of the players played, regardless of score at the time of playing. This at least will reward those that play against higher ranked players, who presumably could be better players, and probably are on average, but it still is open to manipulation, and will very much result in instant segregation in that high ranks will only want to play with high ranks, which has more or less been the one thing CC has been fully against upon inception.

I think the most important thing all should understand about the score, is that for the most part, it only indicates possible skill level. Inside of a week, I myself have gone from 3000 points to 1200 points and repeated no less than three times. I laugh as people assume my skill level has changed as that icon changes. More importantly, I become a better player going from 3000 points on my way to 1200, than on the way up, because it typically means, Im learning different maps and different types of games, though honestly, quite often, its a direct result of playing stupid ones.

The score always has been, and always is relative, but basing it on relative rank, will make it far more than relatively useless.

army of nobunga wrote:That is the truth. Spin it how you want... but at least I have the balls to type it.

Correct it takes major balls to post what you think and express your opinion on an internet forum.

Crazyirishman wrote:

army of nobunga wrote:That is the truth. Spin it how you want... but at least I have the balls to type it.

Correct it takes major balls to post what you think and express your opinion on an internet forum.

Dude, that was a really ballsy thing to say.

Master Fenrir wrote:

Crazyirishman wrote:

army of nobunga wrote:That is the truth. Spin it how you want... but at least I have the balls to type it.

Correct it takes major balls to post what you think and express your opinion on an internet forum.

Dude, that was a really ballsy thing to say.

Balls to the wall.

In other news:

[spoiler=Stoopid Monkey][/spoiler]

AAFitz wrote:The score always has been, and always is relative, but basing it on relative rank, will make it far more than relatively useless.

This was a pretty crafty line. Thumbs up for thinking it up.


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:

AAFitz wrote:The score always has been, and always is relative, but basing it on relative rank, will make it far more than relatively useless.

This was a pretty crafty line. Thumbs up for thinking it up.


--Andy

Zinged by a monkey!

AAFitz: 0 The Monkey: 1

DogAlmighty wrote:

AndyDufresne wrote:

AAFitz wrote:The score always has been, and always is relative, but basing it on relative rank, will make it far more than relatively useless.

This was a pretty crafty line. Thumbs up for thinking it up.


--Andy

Zinged by a monkey!

AAFitz: 0 The Monkey: 1

Where's the zing...?

So I just hit my high score of 3889, and my relative rank is 0.873. So by your formula I would have been higher than Squirly, only for about 8 minutes though

happy2seeyou wrote:

Paddy The Cat wrote:i have an idea... why dont we just set up some kind of event where everyone on CC will play everyone else on every map and setting possible? We'll run through this 1000 times to make sure things like dice, opponents, and cards dont skew the results. Then, whoever performs the best will be Conquerer! Then everyone on CC can finally sleep easy knowing that the truly 'best' player can by synonomous with 'conquerer'!

There are a few players on this site that even after losing will say they are still the best and that the sun was shining on their face which caused their loss or or or or or then in the end he will post a list of all his firsts

too true, but i cannot blame them because there is nothing more rewarding than being the conquerer of conquer club! and btw h2sy, its been quite some time since ive encountered you on CC, nice little surprise!

sdh wrote:So I just hit my high score of 3889, and my relative rank is 0.873. So by your formula I would have been higher than Squirly, only for about 8 minutes though

Yep.. why not you are worthy of the score

AAFitz wrote:All you have to do to get high score with relative rank factored in, is maintain a low score for a large number of games, then, go farm and get a high score, and you will artificially make it seem as though you were playing similar players all the time.

Its ridiculously easy to manipulate and I'm astonished more do not see that immediately.

I am sorry but this is a ridiculous argument to keep the status quo... if you do the actual math this would not work. You further mention that you could maintain at a level and then "blast through" a few higher ranks at the right time to go to page 1... well first of all, I don't know how many high ranked players are willing to let you blast through them unless you know something that I don't.

And secondly, are we to assume then that "blasting through" high ranked players is just as easy as taking advantage of cooks? I am thoroughly confused by this argument

1 - Create new account.
2 - Lose games until you are a cook. Go as low as you possibly can.
3 - Join every public 1v1 game that has colonels (or higher) opponents. Don't worry, you don't have to win (in fact, losing is better). All you need is to play enough games that you'll develop a naturally high "relative rank" (I'm talking 3.0+) that will take long to be brought back to a reasonable level.
4 - Start winning.
5 - Enjoy your 5-digit score on the new system.