Conquer Club

Funkyterrance wrote:

betiko wrote:
I call that self improvement. You've reached X score as your max and you just want to beat your high score. Or isn't there something called high score in any video game? Isn't waht we all try to do when we play a game? improve our best score?

This is risk, not donkey kong.

the point being? We happen to all have a score by playing CC. I think you should open a thread to abolish scores. It makes sad people feel good about themselves.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/278020

okay, okay, simma down now everyone. This isn't the place to talk about people's game choices, etc.

betiko wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

jsnyder748 wrote:I think this is a good idea, but the lowest score is sort of dumb. I was around 850 one time when I started. Am I anywhere near that skill level now? no. So how would that help people know what type of player I am?

How does highest score help people know what type of player I am?

My point is that "highest score" is a statistically meaningless number. Let's say I want to know how populated cities in the United States are. I get a result of 10 000 000 for NYC. Does that help me figure out the population of Des Moines, Buffalo or even Los Angeles?

Likewise, if I want an idea of how good a player is, do I need their score after they won a Battle Royale? Does that indicate to me that I have just defeated a fierce rival? No.

This stat isn't about "helping people know what type of player I am". If it were, it wouldn't be highest score you would be reporting, it would be a mean or median, or some quantiles. This is about, and only about, making people feel better about themself. Not that that is a bad thing. But let's call a spade a spade, shall we?

I call that self improvement. You've reached X score as your max and you just want to beat your high score. Or isn't there something called high score in any video game? Isn't waht we all try to do when we play a game? improve our best score?
I don't mind including median score as well though, seems like a good idea.

You do have a point here that the context of gaming it makes more sense. And when you go to the arcade it does list the top 10 scores for the games. What it doesn't tell you is that it took 850 tries to get there, and that's a lot of quarters.

@jsnyder: I do care about points. I care about variety more than points admittedly, but that isn't my point (no pun intended).

My point is: why should "highest score" be the value we are trying to improve? Why not median score? or score averaged over time, or some value that is statistically relevant?

Even better would be random score. It takes one archived score from your entire lists of scores (remember that the database only updates every hour, so discrete values are possible) and presents that.

However, you must still answer the fundamental question. If it doesn't make you feel better about yourself, and you claim it lets people know what kind of player you are, in what way does it do this?

If your highest is 3500, current is 2500 or highest is 2700, current is 2500 what does this mean?How am I to interpret this information? We need to make a guide tabulating Current, High and Median scores and then assign categories.

My point is that risk is a strategy game and based considerably on luck. Games where you are shooting for a "high score" are entirely different and more or less rely on reflexes/knowledge of the specific details of the game.
Manipulating your games to cause yourself to have a high score for a period of time is not what risk is all about and yes, the scoring system has perverted the game to some extent here on CC in this respect. This suggestion will only make this worse.

Funkyterrance wrote:My point is that risk is a strategy game and based considerably on luck. Games where you are shooting for a "high score" are entirely different and more or less rely on reflexes/knowledge of the specific details of the game.
Manipulating your games to cause yourself to have a high score for a period of time is not what risk is all about and yes, the scoring system has perverted the game to some extent here on CC in this respect. This suggestion will only make this worse.

i couldn't agree more.

changing win % to something that factors in number of players/teams in a game would be a much better update to our profile page. having a 45% win rate if you only play 1v1 or 4 player dubs shows your ability is far different to someone who plays only 5 or 7 player games.

greenoaks wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:My point is that risk is a strategy game and based considerably on luck. Games where you are shooting for a "high score" are entirely different and more or less rely on reflexes/knowledge of the specific details of the game.
Manipulating your games to cause yourself to have a high score for a period of time is not what risk is all about and yes, the scoring system has perverted the game to some extent here on CC in this respect. This suggestion will only make this worse.

i couldn't agree more.

changing win % to something that factors in number of players/teams in a game would be a much better update to our profile page. having a 45% win rate if you only play 1v1 or 4 player dubs shows your ability is far different to someone who plays only 5 or 7 player games.

I couldn't agree more on the win % that makes absolutely no sense the way it's presented, and I would like it to be broken down into 50% games (1vs1 2vs2, 3vs3, 4vs4), 33,3% games (1v1v1; 2v2v2), 25% games (1v1v1v1; 2v2v2v2), 20% games (5 players singles), 16,7% (6 players singles), 14,3% (7 players singles), 12,5% (players singles). All these being coeficiently weighted based on the amount of games on each/total games played, then recalibrated on a 100 index. (but if you agree with this, based on your logic people would "care" about their % and only think about farming...)

Regarding high scores I don't. Having a line on your profile that mentions your high score is not going to change the way people play. Worse case it will make everyone more competitive and I don't see the problem. As you can already see on CC for many years, tons of players are aware of their high score.

Showing highest attain rank is just a way to show an achievement (ie. I was once a Colonel, General). Xbox and PS3 both have a way of showing achievements/trophys. Think of athletes that once won a gold medal. They may not be able to repeat the accomplishment but are proud to have done it once.

Grifter wrote:Showing highest attain rank is just a way to show an achievement (ie. I was once a Colonel, General). Xbox and PS3 both have a way of showing achievements/trophys. Think of athletes that once won a gold medal. They may not be able to repeat the accomplishment but are proud to have done it once.

well yeah let's take an athlete. I guess that if you do a profile page about him and he runs the 100 meter dash, you would give his best result (9'68s or whatever) even if he now runs in 10'11s

betiko wrote:

Grifter wrote:Showing highest attain rank is just a way to show an achievement (ie. I was once a Colonel, General). Xbox and PS3 both have a way of showing achievements/trophys. Think of athletes that once won a gold medal. They may not be able to repeat the accomplishment but are proud to have done it once.

well yeah let's take an athlete. I guess that if you do a profile page about him and he runs the 100 meter dash, you would give his best result (9'68s or whatever) even if he now runs in 10'11s

This may be true. I'm not arguing that highest score is a commonly used metric. I am not denying that your highest score is a type of achievement. I am merely arguing that highest score does not, in any case "let other players know what kind of player I am".

If you were going to bet on a horse (I am sure 100m dash runners are the same) you get the entire race history, not just the highest score.

DoomYoshi wrote:

betiko wrote:

Grifter wrote:Showing highest attain rank is just a way to show an achievement (ie. I was once a Colonel, General). Xbox and PS3 both have a way of showing achievements/trophys. Think of athletes that once won a gold medal. They may not be able to repeat the accomplishment but are proud to have done it once.

well yeah let's take an athlete. I guess that if you do a profile page about him and he runs the 100 meter dash, you would give his best result (9'68s or whatever) even if he now runs in 10'11s

This may be true. I'm not arguing that highest score is a commonly used metric. I am not denying that your highest score is a type of achievement. I am merely arguing that highest score does not, in any case "let other players know what kind of player I am".

If you were going to bet on a horse (I am sure 100m dash runners are the same) you get the entire race history, not just the highest score.

But I bet they'll highlight the horse's best race

http://www.equibase.com/samples/eqbfullpp.pdf

Here's a sample. Scroll down for a bit. In the top right of a horse are numbers

2011: x
2012: y
Life: x or y

Those are the Meyer scores. That is the only thing they actually highlight "best of". The thing is to make an informed decision you need statistically valid information.

However, that is neither here nor there.

While I don't approve this suggestion as a means to get to know players, as an achievement I can support it. It doesn't make sense for me to support most medal suggestions but not support this measure of achievement.

nicestash wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:

betiko wrote:

Grifter wrote:Showing highest attain rank is just a way to show an achievement (ie. I was once a Colonel, General). Xbox and PS3 both have a way of showing achievements/trophys. Think of athletes that once won a gold medal. They may not be able to repeat the accomplishment but are proud to have done it once.

well yeah let's take an athlete. I guess that if you do a profile page about him and he runs the 100 meter dash, you would give his best result (9'68s or whatever) even if he now runs in 10'11s

This may be true. I'm not arguing that highest score is a commonly used metric. I am not denying that your highest score is a type of achievement. I am merely arguing that highest score does not, in any case "let other players know what kind of player I am".

If you were going to bet on a horse (I am sure 100m dash runners are the same) you get the entire race history, not just the highest score.

But I bet they'll highlight the horse's best race

they'd highlight the horse's current status (actual score) and best results (high score)

I really think Funky has gone.... well... Funky. Whats wrong with this? It doesn't HARM anyone. If you don't care about it and think people who do care are frivolous or just stupid... thats your opinion. Oh well. But it really doesn't HARM you. For people like myself or Betiko for that fact. we sometimes like to just play any game type, against any opponents for the hell of it. But its also nice to know where you did peak at. For me I really want to hit brig once, because I know that I am capable... I just like playing too many luckbased games as well that give me a thrill. But those games aren't really indicative of my skill level or what I'm capable. And some people just love stats. I don't think its really fair to shoot down someone else's party just cause you wouldn't enjoy it.

I don't like ice cream cake. But I won't say nobody should have that for their birthday.

High Score in Profile

Currently, users themselves put "High score" in Interests line, as there is no automated High Score system. We all go up and down, so automated system which would remember your highest score would be perfect for motivation to get even higher score.



So if possible, just one line below Interests, there would be "High score" and it would write in points how many did you got... EVER...

dakky21 wrote:High Score in Profile

Currently, users themselves put "High score" in Interests line, as there is no automated High Score system. We all go up and down, so automated system which would remember your highest score would be perfect for motivation to get even higher score.



So if possible, just one line below Interests, there would be "High score" and it would write in points how many did you got... EVER...

MERGED to the main thread.

swimmerdude99 wrote:I really think Funky has gone.... well... Funky. Whats wrong with this? It doesn't HARM anyone. If you don't care about it and think people who do care are frivolous or just stupid... thats your opinion. Oh well. But it really doesn't HARM you. For people like myself or Betiko for that fact. we sometimes like to just play any game type, against any opponents for the hell of it. But its also nice to know where you did peak at. For me I really want to hit brig once, because I know that I am capable... I just like playing too many luckbased games as well that give me a thrill. But those games aren't really indicative of my skill level or what I'm capable. And some people just love stats. I don't think its really fair to shoot down someone else's party just cause you wouldn't enjoy it.

I don't like ice cream cake. But I won't say nobody should have that for their birthday.

lol nicely said swimmer!

the other qwert likes this too

swimmerdude99 wrote:I really think Funky has gone.... well... Funky. Whats wrong with this? It doesn't HARM anyone. If you don't care about it and think people who do care are frivolous or just stupid... thats your opinion. Oh well. But it really doesn't HARM you. For people like myself or Betiko for that fact. we sometimes like to just play any game type, against any opponents for the hell of it. But its also nice to know where you did peak at. For me I really want to hit brig once, because I know that I am capable... I just like playing too many luckbased games as well that give me a thrill. But those games aren't really indicative of my skill level or what I'm capable. And some people just love stats. I don't think its really fair to shoot down someone else's party just cause you wouldn't enjoy it.

I don't like ice cream cake. But I won't say nobody should have that for their birthday.

Imho It's an unnecessary use of resources for reasons I've already stated. I'm not sure why you are targeting me personally and not simply countering my arguments but oh well...
I don't think this suggestion is worth implementing when there are many other suggestions that would actually add to the game in a significant way. To me, this is enough reason to not enact this suggestion. A lot of suggestions that are rejected don't HARM anyone, they just don't get enough support or are too trifling, etc.. I'm giving my reasons why I think it should get the chop and it sounds like you are trying to silence me or something. I've not got the right to give my opinion regarding this suggestion?

Also, the very significant issue of a player winning Battle Royales and sending their score into orbit still hasn't been addressed.

Another problem with this suggestion is in regard to stalling.
For example: Player X starts 50 games and finishes the games in which he/she is going to win and stalls those games which he/she is going to lose, thus creating an artificial and relatively temporary rise in rank. Another reason why when I see "highest rank" in someone's profile I take it with a grain of salt. I see certain players flip from private first class to major within a day or so and I realize that these people may just have a high game load and of course every once in a while probability will give them a high rank.

funky these sugestion are related on user statistic, nothing more and nothing less. When i give these suggestion,i never think that these could be use for other player check, its pure statistic ,and same like Total Post-Most active forum--mosta active topic user statistic.
I realy dont see how these could be use like strategical informacion?

qwert wrote:funky these sugestion are related on user statistic, nothing more and nothing less. When i give these suggestion,i never think that these could be use for other player check, its pure statistic ,and same like Total Post-Most active forum--mosta active topic user statistic.
I realy dont see how these could be use like strategical informacion?

Pure statistics are renowned for telling us exactly nothing though, qwert.
That's basically my point here.

and we have to deal with your continous negativity/paranoia which is a useless use of mods ressources FT.

betiko wrote:and we have to deal with your continous negativity/paranoia which is a useless use of mods ressources FT.

And we've got to deal with your irrelevant, baseless ad hominem attacks betiko. I'm not being negative, this is just not a very useful or meaningful thing to enact.
For the record I support a lot of suggestions so there goes your whole negativity theory. It's evident that you don't like me but that doesn't make your arguments any more sound. If you would keep your emotions out of your posts a little more you might notice reason filling in the gaps in your logic.

my logic is that tons of players write down their high scores on their page, that in most games you have your high score tracked somewhere but not here. Regarding battle royale winners be it. when you join a battle royale you have almost no chance of winning, and it does require a part of luck but also good strategy and timing, not anyone could win a battle royale, I know I suck at it.

This shouldn't be very complicated to implement nor take tons of programmer ressources.

betiko wrote:This shouldn't be very complicated to implement nor take tons of programmer ressources.

Well if it's a mere flick of the wrist as far as programming goes I don't suppose I would strongly object. I'm still not in favor of it though, for reasons already stated.