regarding winning points

[AslanTheKing]

i need some help here , and input from experienced players,

since the points u win depends of how many points has the other player, or how many u have right?

now as example, lets say i know that i will win game A for sure,
but i dont see any more chances on game B, C, and D

how can i extend the game A ( which i will win for sure) and get killed fast in
game B, C, D ( my points drop accordingly)

since then my points dropped ,( mostly around 20 each game or 45 points until 65 points approximately )
and after my loses of game B, C , D
i win game A

dont i get more points
( or lets say, didnt i save maybe around 15-20 points ? )
for me 20 points are alot, thats sometimes winning a 1vs1 game, or losing one ( which i can catch up that way )
confused?

or are the points rank related,
like it doesnt matter if someone has 1999 points or 1801 points?

[Jippd]

If you want to lose fast in games then attack neutrals.

If you extend games to the point where you are holding other players hostage that is against the rules.

Your analysis of losing B,C and D first before winning A is generally correct that you would come out better than winning A and then losing B,C and D.

For me its not worth the time and effort to figure that out though for a few points over lots of games. If the energy and time needed to figure that out is worth it for you then go nuts.

[SirSebstar]

i need some help here , and input from experienced players,

since the points u win depends of how many points has the other player, or how many u have right?

now as example, lets say i know that i will win game A for sure,
but i dont see any more chances on game B, C, and D

how can i extend the game A ( which i will win for sure) and get killed fast in
game B, C, D ( my points drop accordingly)

since then my points dropped ,( mostly around 20 each game or 45 points until 65 points approximately )
and after my loses of game B, C , D
i win game A

dont i get more points
( or lets say, didnt i save maybe around 15-20 points ? )
for me 20 points are alot, thats sometimes winning a 1vs1 game, or losing one ( which i can catch up that way )
confused?

or are the points rank related,
like it doesnt matter if someone has 1999 points or 1801 points?

assume the above with 1000 point players each. You, A,B,C,D are all new players.
you win game A and lose the other 3 after you win:, you lose 20, 20, 20 and gain 20 point (1000:1000x20) - (980:1000x20) - (960:1000x20) + (1000:940x20)= netto -40
you win game A and lose the other 3 before you win:you gain 20 points and lose 20, 20, 20= minus 40
basicly the same

[betiko]

No his strategy does work, but at the end of the day you can get 2-3 extra points max, not 20 like he is expecting. Sebstar s example is with almost no point difference between players. Say that you are facing the same opponent, the difference is rather big. It s always better to finish your losers first, but don t get too obsessed about it, it will just be pennies.
This is mostly interesting with games where you will win or lose big. Let s say you are about to win a 8 player game, finish all your losers fast mostly vs low ranked, you might end up with 10+ more points that if you do it the other way around.

[SirSebstar]

i am keeping it with aslans level so thats why i chose the point scale, but yes. if you are a good player just starting out, then there might be an advantage to holding wins and losing fast. this levels out once you reach the level of your competence...

But please be aware, holding hostages as in not ending the game when you can is against the rules too.!!!
mainly to prevent large scale abuse like mentioned by aslan.

[greenoaks]

it is just not worth the effort. those extra points you win by taking your turns quickly in losing games & slowly in the one you'll win are wiped out by your next lose.

unless the win is a Standard BR

[AslanTheKing]

it is just not worth the effort. those extra points you win by taking your turns quickly in losing games & slowly in the one you'll win are wiped out by your next lose.

unless the win is a Standard BR

i think everybody is right, in their way

but greenoak added the salt to the soup,
id doesnt matter if u lose fast the losersgames, and get more points
after winning a 8 playergame,

cause after the big points, u lose one speedgame against a cook ( for whatever reasons,
oh dont be polite ( because of the f+++++ dice , of course- no other reason i can think of)
and then u lose all those points anyhow

so, its peanuts, and want make u to a conquerour,
maybe to a monkey ( if u count peanuts)

[SirSebstar]

solved.
aslan, do you mind if i take this out of strategy and into Q&A. it looks like something other people could benefit from this knowledge and i keep hoping people use the search finder on the Q&A.

[betiko]

It s not holding hostage, I m not talking about playing a few extra turns, I mean let the timer run low and hope the losers finish by then. I usually don t bother unless it really makes a change (very big points games or tons of games vs the same opponent). One of my friends here told me he once did a huge battle of 200+ games vs the same opponent simultaneously. They roughly won 50/100 each. He finished all his winners first and went up to brig, then the other guy became a cook and got his winners. My friend went down to cook! Managing better his losses, he would ve ended where he started from, major.

[SirSebstar]

if its down to a few hours, then yes a little mindfullness can go a long way

[AslanTheKing]

i dont and never play against the rules,
so far i have always been agood sportman and honourable,

only once i was accused of holding someone hostage
( played the map first time, had lots of troops, but no idea how to get the objective...)

betiko stated it right,its not about holding somebody as hostage
its not about loading 24 troops to jakarta, and the poor guy gets 3 troops cant do anything about it,
for the next 1000 rounds
this would be imature, insecure and more than childish, holding someone hostage is stupid terrorist style
i dont need that, cc is not my life, i have only one, that life goes to family and friends and this world, not CC

move me where ever u want, cause i dont have the desire to be on the spotlight for entertainment
i only made a strategigal point, pointwise literally speaking

if someone wants to put efforts in this strategy ( a willing long playing member of cc, even if u save 5 points with this strategy)
and u play a lot of games, u could save at least 100 points per month

if i would have all this points i missed with this strategy ( since i dont count peanuts)
i would logically have more than my miserable 1900

thats the whole point about this thread

[SirSebstar]

good points aslan, it stays here then, in strategy. its very valid points, and if people understand the way points and rank work, and it is something they care about,they should find this helpfull to understand it

[greenoaks]

move me where ever u want, cause i dont have the desire to be on the spotlight for entertainment
i only made a strategigal point, pointwise literally speaking

if someone wants to put efforts in this strategy ( a willing long playing member of cc, even if u save 5 points with this strategy)
and u play a lot of games, u could save at least 100 points per month

if i would have all this points i missed with this strategy ( since i dont count peanuts)
i would logically have more than my miserable 1900

thats the whole point about this thread

but you won't have more points. you will have more points the first time you do this but then when you lose your next game(s) you'll lose more points because of your higher score.

it is a zero sum game.

[betiko]

move me where ever u want, cause i dont have the desire to be on the spotlight for entertainment
i only made a strategigal point, pointwise literally speaking

if someone wants to put efforts in this strategy ( a willing long playing member of cc, even if u save 5 points with this strategy)
and u play a lot of games, u could save at least 100 points per month

if i would have all this points i missed with this strategy ( since i dont count peanuts)
i would logically have more than my miserable 1900

thats the whole point about this thread

but you won't have more points. you will have more points the first time you do this but then when you lose your next game(s) you'll lose more points because of your higher score.

it is a zero sum game.

Nope, this is a very valid strategy multi gaming vs the same opponent(s) and Incoming multiplayer games victories (mostly 8 player games).
Say you have 3 losers that you finish first, then you finish the 8 player winner, you can win like 3x7=21 extra points (very rough example). The higher your score the more you will lose after that, but you would have cleared a few losers.

[greenoaks]

move me where ever u want, cause i dont have the desire to be on the spotlight for entertainment
i only made a strategigal point, pointwise literally speaking

if someone wants to put efforts in this strategy ( a willing long playing member of cc, even if u save 5 points with this strategy)
and u play a lot of games, u could save at least 100 points per month

if i would have all this points i missed with this strategy ( since i dont count peanuts)
i would logically have more than my miserable 1900

thats the whole point about this thread

but you won't have more points. you will have more points the first time you do this but then when you lose your next game(s) you'll lose more points because of your higher score.

it is a zero sum game.

Nope, this is a very valid strategy multi gaming vs the same opponent(s) and Incoming multiplayer games victories (mostly 8 player games).
Say you have 3 losers that you finish first, then you finish the 8 player winner, you can win like 3x7=21 extra points (very rough example). The higher your score the more you will lose after that, but you would have cleared a few losers.

but we don't play the same players over and over.

[SirSebstar]

but we don't play the same players over and over.

i dont understand,
even if you play different people, its the losses first to gain more points on wins. as match goes, it works (if the differences are big enough)
what does playing with the same players or not have to do with it, its your rank relative to theirs that matters

[Lord_Bremen]

No game is lost until you're eliminated. If you just keep fighting, you'll end up with a lot more points than trying to game win timing.

[agentcom]

Also consider that the problem that you and everybody else here is "solving" is how to maximize points at the end of X number of games. Every example listed here assumes some small number of games and the difference between:

LLWWW
WLWLW
WWWLL

But this is not really that useful of a problem to solve, though their analysis is most likely correct. You will play many, many more games after this little snapshot, so really you are deciding between ...

LLWWW ... XXXXXXX
WLWLWL ... XXXXXX
WWWLL ... XXXXXX

If you continue this strategy, you will simply be grouping your wins and losses, with the odd result scattered in

LLWWW...LLLWWWWLWLLLWWWLLWWLLLWWWLW (putting losses first)
WLWLW...LWLWLWWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLW (somewhat random)
WWWLL...WWWWLLLWLWWWLLLWWLLWWWLLLWL (putting wins first)

I doubt that you would gain much, if any, long term advantage over the course of those games, although I would like to see someone's analysis of the situation. (To tired to do it myself.) (Also, maybe should look at what happens when one additional loss is added to the end of each string AND SEPARATELY what happens when one addition win is added.)