Strongest Overall Player on CC?

[Mr Changsha]

It's so frustrating when purely sequential players start talking shit about speed freestyle but simply don't have a clue how it's played. Hi Changsha.

Hi!

Gotta say that it is nowhere near as annoying as freestyle players players claiming they can play sequential just as well as freestyle on the basis of...."Duh, well it is slower innit?"

[rhp 1]

It's so frustrating when purely sequential players start talking shit about speed freestyle but simply don't have a clue how it's played. Hi Changsha.

Hi!

Gotta say that it is nowhere near as annoying as freestyle players players claiming they can play sequential just as well as freestyle on the basis of...."Duh, well it is slower innit?"

your point is well taken... I've never made such a claim... though I will again remind all the players here here who are dismissing speed freestyle play out of hand due to ignorance of the setting that this thread was meant by the author to be "overall" best, and including people who don't play speed fs makes no sense..... and I don't mean ignorance here negatively.... just factually....

and yes... connection speed and computer is important, but as always, i make my points with the understanding that the players in these games are all top fs players with solid connections and good speed making this issue not relevant... I'd love to have some of the "non speed fs players" commenting here, borrow my comp and connection and play a game with... oh I don't know... KraphtOne, great-ollie, myself, gabriel19, NoSurvivors Mage, Slay, etc... at least you would have an informed opinion...

[Mr Changsha]

Killface


guy dominates on all maps and settings...

could easily be #1 with not a lot of effort if he really cared...

case closed....

Mc? lol... freestyle setting.... nough said

check the Subject line of the thread folks...



Honorable mention?

Great-Ollie

It seems that you have no idea of mc dominating in every map & setting possible to become conqueror for months, no farming watsoever included

It seems you have no idea how to read the subject line of a thread....

Strongest OVERALL player... so disregarding freestyle as some of you suggest? Start a different thread on best seq player... overall means ALL settings/maps/number of players/teams/solo...

Precisely why Killface is clearly there with Great-Ollie not far behind, and Herpes right on their heels...throw in Demonfork and Blitz if u care to...

This is a discussion so everyone has a right to an opinion even if you do not like it...
Many players would agree that freestyle does NOT belong in this conversation even if the word "overall" was in the original question. Mastering sequential games takes skill, tactics, and probability. Mastering freestyle seems more about being quick and willing to log in at all times of the day and night.

I should add: I have never played freestyle so my opinion may be off base...

No, you are completely correct. Glorifying 1vs1 speed freestyle/freestyle merchants is nothing more than a bad joke. Then attempting to claim such types have any real mastery of sequential (generally the record simply doesn't support it) because 'if you can play quickly then obviously you can play slowly' is the height of idiocy.

I mean let them prattle on about how many regions they can take in a second , but lets not pretend they are much more than frantic button-mashers.

So as I said, the strongest player will be a sequential one as freestyle records are effectively meaningless, as they are based on speed, farming and collusion and have shit all to do with actual strategic thought.

As a thought experiment, try to name one legit. freestyle conqueror. As in one who wasn't farming, or bending the rules, or playing ridiculous settings, or simply cheating. If you can then I would guess the chap might be able to play sequentially...

Spoken like someone who could no accel at speed fs regardless of their connection... to minimize strong fs players by calling them "button mashers" says more about you than the players u verbally attack... how do you explain top players such as Killface and Great-Ollie and King Herpes... and and and and....( the list goes on and on) who don't fit into ur extrememly closed minded view on the subject?

Oh I see..l YOUR narrow version of the abomination is absolutely fine, it is just the others that are a disgrace?

Casual 1vs1 freestyle..huge amounts of abuse
Large casual freestyle...huge amounts of abuse
Team casual freestyle..huge amounts of abuse
Speed 1vs1 freestyle...huge amounts of abuse

Ya see why I am not all that keen on freestyle?

The only player I have played who got a huge score freestyle that I respect sequentially is Rabbiton (btw in answer to my freestyle conqueror who can play sequentially question)

[loutil]

Ok a few points here:

I am often amazed by what some players can do in speed freestyle. I also think that this depends a lot on the ping, as north americans dominate massively, the servers being in north america. I might press B like nuts or just leave it pressed on and some players have the time to drop and break my bonus. I think it s pretty funny to see how speed freestylers call sequential freestyle farming, as at least 80% of the games they play are with people who don t stand a chance with their settings. But yes, playing one of those games, you know these guys have skills. Very different kind of skills, but some interesting ones.
Those settings are part of CC, so I can understand both sides. Can a guy like MC not even be included in top overall because his conection doesn t allow him to even give it a shot?
Are we giving too much importance to speed freestyle in this thread? Probably.

Consider that said players could be using macros against you. If so, you would have no shot. If you have a good connection and they always seem to be faster then it is the likely answer. I suspect you would not have to look very hard to find information on cheat scripts used in freestyle.

[rhp 1]

Ok a few points here:

I am often amazed by what some players can do in speed freestyle. I also think that this depends a lot on the ping, as north americans dominate massively, the servers being in north america. I might press B like nuts or just leave it pressed on and some players have the time to drop and break my bonus. I think it s pretty funny to see how speed freestylers call sequential freestyle farming, as at least 80% of the games they play are with people who don t stand a chance with their settings. But yes, playing one of those games, you know these guys have skills. Very different kind of skills, but some interesting ones.
Those settings are part of CC, so I can understand both sides. Can a guy like MC not even be included in top overall because his conection doesn t allow him to even give it a shot?
Are we giving too much importance to speed freestyle in this thread? Probably.

I think this is a very well-reasoned argument here...
the fact that Mc is even in this discussion (which I don't personally believe he should be) speaks volumes about how good of a player he is... he simply lacks games played and games won on a setting that, like it or not, is a reasonable % of what should be considered when the term "overall" is used...

[rhp 1]

Ok a few points here:

I am often amazed by what some players can do in speed freestyle. I also think that this depends a lot on the ping, as north americans dominate massively, the servers being in north america. I might press B like nuts or just leave it pressed on and some players have the time to drop and break my bonus. I think it s pretty funny to see how speed freestylers call sequential freestyle farming, as at least 80% of the games they play are with people who don t stand a chance with their settings. But yes, playing one of those games, you know these guys have skills. Very different kind of skills, but some interesting ones.
Those settings are part of CC, so I can understand both sides. Can a guy like MC not even be included in top overall because his conection doesn t allow him to even give it a shot?
Are we giving too much importance to speed freestyle in this thread? Probably.

Consider that said players could be using macros against you. If so, you would have no shot. If you have a good connection and they always seem to be faster then it is the likely answer. I suspect you would not have to look very hard to find information on cheat scripts used in freestyle.

not sure, but I've never noticed this as an issue.... I think i'd notice, but maybe not... and I believe it misses the point here...

[Mr Changsha]

I'm being a little harsh on large standard speed freestyle...I know it is a legitimate game (if one in which factors other than pure strategic thought count).

The point I am making is that freestyle overall IS an abomination, I don't think CC should have the setting at all, and I have made this point numerous times over the years.

[rhp 1]

I'm being a little harsh on large standard speed freestyle...I know it is a legitimate game (if one in which factors other than pure strategic thought count).

The point I am making is that freestyle overall IS an abomination, I don't think CC should have the setting at all, and I have made this point numerous times over the years.

I would magnificently disagree with you.. but I'm an American, so I respect your right to disagree...

there are a huge variance of games that I could list played as speed freestyle that anyone who look at it objectively would agree it does not resemble abuse in the least.. though you are correct that abuse of the freestyle setting does occur... and I've never disputed that claim either....

[rhp 1]

I would also humbly disagree with your assertion that strategy plays no part in freestyle games... that is simply ludicrous...

[Mr Changsha]

I would also humbly disagree with your assertion that strategy plays no part in freestyle games... that is simply ludicrous...

Did I assert that?

All games have some strategic consideration.

[Bruceswar]

Few quick points for all you trying to score points on each other. I will not post anything but truths.

1. Poo-maker was the best overall player. Anybody who has ever played with or against him will tell you this. You can all turn blue in the face, but that does not change the point. No disrespect to other players.

2. Speed freestyle has lots of strategy involved. As someone who has played a ton of it, if you do not have strategy you will not win.

3. While speed plays a part in speed freestyle you do not have to be in America to win games. The best 1 vs 1 Speed freestyle player ever to play was from Europe. karelpietertje was tops ever. He would sometimes play 4 or 5 games at a time and win them all.

4. There is no such programs that exist to help people like loutil suggest. In the past people have used a weight on the B key to start a turn or some other BS, but nothing like he suggest. It does not exist, so do not try and see people use it.

5. Casual freestyle is not all about farming. If you play some strange map and have funky settings then it can be. If you play something like 8 or 12 man classic vs keen players then it is a damn good game. Game 13162953

6. Seq is a different game all together. I mean the same principles apply. Stack men, wait, wait, wait, kill all! The difference is that if a player 2 spots above you hang someone you cannot do anything about it. In freestyle you have a chance. Lets not get into throwing a block. Some people think blocking is a really cheap strategy and rarely turns a win in the players favor.

7. Casual freestyle team games. Those who set them up are asking to get farmed. Just saying team 1 rarely ever plays as one team. Team 2 many times will all get on together and take their turns together.

8. If you are talking overall player you have to include all settings. Speed freestyle, Freestyle Casual, Seq, etc etc etc

[Mr Changsha]

Actually, the best way to judge the strongest player is the quality of the opposition and the win rate achieved (based on the settings).

The issue with a lot of high ranked players (including numerous conquerors) is that the quality of their oppositon was low or even very low. Therefore, any player who posted their high score playing weak opposition (roughly captain and below average) can be immediately discounted.

Anyone disagree with that?

Now you might say 'a captain isn't a bad player'. And indeed he isn't, but the simple fact is that there are players out there averaging opposition around the colonel/brig. level and winning well. Therefore to even be considered the best player (at any given moment), that is the level we must be looking for.

So of the various best players mentioned, consider their oppostion. In my view it is unquestionably the most important factor.

Let me give you an example: Two players, one is a brig. generally playing stripers while the other is a major generally playing majors. Now who is the better player? Many would look at the shiny rank and say the brig. but actually the major is the better player, because he is defeating solid oppostion while the brig. simply isn't.

Players like demonfork and Herpes posted their high scores generally playing low ranked opposition and numerous others have done the same. Whether sequential or freestyle doesn't really matter, if you aren't continuously playing good opposition your record can be discounted.

I generally play opposition averaging around the major rank (I would guess an average of about 2300) and win reasonably well..that makes me a 'good player'. But there are players winning well against an average of around 2800..these are the best players.

So you see, it is extremely simple!

[Bruceswar]

OK so then you agree. Poo-maker would have rather played all Generals than cooks and stripers. Case over.

[Mr Changsha]

OK so then you agree. Poo-maker would have rather played all Generals than cooks and stripers. Case over.

Ha!

Once we have found say 10 players who unquestionably had/have extremely good win rates against excellent opposition, We THEN have to consider the relative value of their game.

At this point the conversation will continue to go around in circles.

What I am trying to add into the conversation is that any player who didn't/doesn't play top class opposition should be immediately discounted..which would remove quite a number of players mentioned in the last few pages.

[Bruceswar]

Actually, the best way to judge the strongest player is the quality of the opposition and the win rate achieved (based on the settings).

The issue with a lot of high ranked players (including numerous conquerors) is that the quality of their oppositon was low or even very low. Therefore, any player who posted their high score playing weak opposition (roughly captain and below average) can be immediately discounted.

Anyone disagree with that?

Now you might say 'a captain isn't a bad player'. And indeed he isn't, but the simple fact is that there are players out there averaging opposition around the colonel/brig. level and winning well. Therefore to even be considered the best player (at any given moment), that is the level we must be looking for.

So of the various best players mentioned, consider their oppostion. In my view it is unquestionably the most important factor.

Let me give you an example: Two players, one is a brig. generally playing stripers while the other is a major generally playing majors. Now who is the better player? Many would look at the shiny rank and say the brig. but actually the major is the better player, because he is defeating solid oppostion while the brig. simply isn't.

Players like demonfork and Herpes posted their high scores generally playing low ranked opposition and numerous others have done the same. Whether sequential or freestyle doesn't really matter, if you aren't continuously playing good opposition your record can be discounted.

I generally play opposition averaging around the major rank (I would guess an average of about 2300) and win reasonably well..that makes me a 'good player'. But there are players winning well against an average of around 2800..these are the best players.

So you see, it is extremely simple!

total logic flaw. Just because someone chooses to play a public game vs a private game does not make them less of a player. Generally private games have higher ranked people in them vs a public game which does not always have the same level of rank. Rank does not equal skill. The sooner people learn this the better. All rank shows is that you can win at certain game types. Just because someone chooses to play a ton of ass doodle and cannot hold a rank over captain does not mean they are less of a player to someone is might be a colonel and never really "risk" any points like that.

If I beat an average of 2200 in my public games, and you beat an average of 2400 in your private game. That does not mean you are better than me. That just means you played people of a higher rank. If you were to join my public game and I was to join your private game, then the rolls would be reversed. The best players generally take on all comers in public and private games. What is more impressive. The player who only plays 2500+ games and holds a rank of about 2600 or the person who plays those games + many public seq std 6 man games on top of that and holds the same score. As we all know there is more risk in playing a cook vs playing someone close to you in rank. While a cook might not win they can surely wreck your game and have some Lt win it.

[Bruceswar]

OK so then you agree. Poo-maker would have rather played all Generals than cooks and stripers. Case over.

Ha!

Once we have found say 10 players who unquestionably had/have extremely good win rates against excellent opposition, We THEN have to consider the relative value of their game.

At this point the conversation will continue to go around in circles.

What I am trying to add into the conversation is that any player who didn't/doesn't play top class opposition should be immediately discounted..which would remove quite a number of players mentioned in the last few pages.

I dare you to find me one player who will not play any top comp. I am not saying they played vs top people all the time, but to get to the top you have to be damn good. Sure some people farmed, but many of them just played what the liked. Take King Herpes, for example. I played vs him many times. He was a very very solid player, despite his "farming" ways on City Mogul. Was he the best ever? No, but he could hold his own vs the top people. If people like sjnap were faster at freestyle, then he would be in the same group as poo.

The only 2 people who I ever saw avoiding top comp were glg and maxatstuy. Those 2 refused to play top op. Every other player would mix it up at times.

[Mr Changsha]

OK so then you agree. Poo-maker would have rather played all Generals than cooks and stripers. Case over.

Ha!

Once we have found say 10 players who unquestionably had/have extremely good win rates against excellent opposition, We THEN have to consider the relative value of their game.

At this point the conversation will continue to go around in circles.

What I am trying to add into the conversation is that any player who didn't/doesn't play top class opposition should be immediately discounted..which would remove quite a number of players mentioned in the last few pages.

I dare you to find me one player who will not play any top comp. I am not saying they played vs top people all the time, but to get to the top you have to be damn good. Sure some people farmed, but many of them just played what the liked. Take King Herpes, for example. I played vs him many times. He was a very very solid player, despite his "farming" ways on City Mogul. Was he the best ever? No, but he could hold his own vs the top people. If people like sjnap were faster at freestyle, then he would be in the same group as poo.

The only 2 people who I ever saw avoiding top comp were glg and maxatstuy. Those 2 refused to play top op. Every other player would mix it up at times.

A lot that is utter balls. Over the years a lot of players posted extremely high scores when 90%+ of the opposition was low ranked. That they played a small percentage of their games against decent oppostion is irrelevent frankly, as you base their ability on effectively the score posted by in most cases straight farming. If 90% of the record was farming and 10% not, I think it is clear what we should judge their ability on: the farmimg. That farmers can say win 50% of team games when playing solid oppositon means very little. To actually make a good a good score from ONLY playing solid opposition would need win percentages around 60-65%. A lot of players who farmed their way up then maintained score by winning 50% against solid opposition. I couldn't care less about that 'achievement'.

Further, stating that rank is not a good determimer of individual ability is unquestionably true. Both of us could have higher ranks than we do. However as an overall guide to see the quality of the oppositon rank works extremely well. I can search your latest page of games (I haven't btw) and see the overall quality of your oppositon. While the odd striper may be massively underranked, if you have a page of them then I can see what kind of oppostion you are playing. For all those who have boosted their scores through huge specialisation/general cheating, there will be those who are ranked under their skill. But it balances out...those ranks in the games give me an accurate overall picture of the quality of oppostion.

So 'mixing it up at times' is simply not good enough. I consider every 'gimme' game on a record to be a stain. Those that farmed thousands upon thousands of games obviously, from my point of view, have a completely illegitimate record in totality. That you could even claim that players who farmed the majority of their games should be considered much of anything astounds me.

The best players overall are the ones who continuously face quality oppostiom, on fair overall settings, with a decent variety of maps and settings and win well. Franly there aren't that many of them. Players that posted ridiculous high scores farming or cheating should of course be ignored when considering 'CC's strongest overall player'. It is ridiculous to even think they should be mentioned.

Now I rememeber poomaker. He was indeed an excellent player and is one that should be considered. King_Herpes should not. I also played him a fair amount and while it is true that he is a good player sequentially, I have played better. I discount his freestyle record as gross farming...which of course he happily admitted at the time.

[Bruceswar]

I do not think anywhere I said King Herpes was the best player on CC. Is he good? Ofc, but not the best overall by far.

If I was going to pick a top 5 overall best players...

Poo-maker
Mhennigan
Scott-land
RashidJelzin
sjnap

[BigBallinStalin]

4. There is no such programs that exist to help people like loutil suggest. In the past people have used a weight on the B key to start a turn or some other BS, but nothing like he suggest. It does not exist, so do not try and see people use it.

Why?

[codierose]

1. Poo-maker was the best overall player. Anybody who has ever played with or against him will tell you this. You can all turn blue in the face, but that does not change the point. No disrespect to other players

sorry to disagree bruce but i cant see any player with low stats like these 1283 completed, 651 (51%) won makes them the best overall player on CC and with such low medals.
To be the Strongest Overall Player on CC surely they have to be the best on all settings, in all teams and all maps without farming.
what about JOHNNYROCKET24 does he not deserve a mention has some impressive stats 21454 completed, 14535 (68%) won Medals: 120.
alstergren another 13516 completed, 10145 (75%) won, Medals: 123
Ninja Champion another 12460 completed, 8220 (66%) won, Medals: 99

[Mr Changsha]

I do not think anywhere I said King Herpes was the best player on CC. Is he good? Ofc, but not the best overall by far.

If I was going to pick a top 5 overall best players...

Poo-maker
Mhennigan
Scott-land
RashidJelzin
sjnap

I think that is a good selection from 'the old days'. Like you I find it hard not to focus on the 2007-2009 period.

However IF a large percentage of their record (and thus the high score that build the record was due to farming) then I would disqualify them.

Also, I think your list is (possibly unsurprisingly) rather focused on the freestyle games you were playing back in the day. However, as you could certainly claim that this style was the 'best' style - though I would disagree - then that is fair enough.

In the end we can only write about what we have seen.

Possibly surprising, but the best sequential player I have come across was Rabbiton..who taught me an incredible amount in two games and completely changed how I thought about team games. I believe his trips record, for instance, was top notch. However, the rank farming must be taken into account (which is how he made his score) and so I would disqualify him on that basis.

[Mr Changsha]

1. Poo-maker was the best overall player. Anybody who has ever played with or against him will tell you this. You can all turn blue in the face, but that does not change the point. No disrespect to other players

sorry to disagree bruce but i cant see any player with low stats like these 1283 completed, 651 (51%) won makes them the best overall player on CC and with such low medals.
To be the Strongest Overall Player on CC surely they have to be the best on all settings, in all teams and all maps without farming.
what about JOHNNYROCKET24 does he not deserve a mention has some impressive stats 21454 completed, 14535 (68%) won Medals: 120.
alstergren another 13516 completed, 10145 (75%) won, Medals: 123
Ninja Champion another 12460 completed, 8220 (66%) won, Medals: 99

The basic problem with medals is that they are a measure of quantity not quality..lots of players have got gold medals at forms of the game they are basically shit at. Medals were introduced to encourage players to play huge amounts of games and stay addicted to the site..always giving the obsessive something to aim for. I basically discount medals when considering the quality of the player.

The keys are (and I have thought about this subject quite deeply):
1. Quality of the opposition
2. Win percentage (based on style)
3. Variety of play (here is where I fall down a bit)..styles and maps
4. Fairplay (perhaps I am silly but the best player should also be a classy one)

[Bruceswar]

I do not think anywhere I said King Herpes was the best player on CC. Is he good? Ofc, but not the best overall by far.

If I was going to pick a top 5 overall best players...

Poo-maker
Mhennigan
Scott-land
RashidJelzin
sjnap

I think that is a good selection from 'the old days'. Like you I find it hard not to focus on the 2007-2009 period.

However IF a large percentage of their record (and thus the high score that build the record was due to farming) then I would disqualify them.

Also, I think your list is (possibly unsurprisingly) rather focused on the freestyle games you were playing back in the day. However, as you could certainly claim that this style was the 'best' style - though I would disagree - then that is fair enough.

In the end we can only write about what we have seen.

Possibly surprising, but the best sequential player I have come across was Rabbiton..who taught me an incredible amount in two games and completely changed how I thought about team games. I believe his trips record, for instance, was top notch. However, the rank farming must be taken into account (which is how he made his score) and so I would disqualify him on that basis.

Your logic is fail. While rabbit is a very good seq player, I would not say he is super keen at freestyle. Sure he did farm some noobs, but he would not hold up vs the best. The speed would kill him is my guess. Putting his farming aside, Rabbit is a damn good player and one of the games best. My list would include someone from today if there was a well rounded player from today. MC comes the closest to my list. Most of the top players specialize in a certain area and do not cross all mediums. Per say Josko. He could very well be the best team game player to ever play CC, and he can hold his own in a seq std game, but you take him into a multiplayer freestyle game and his edge is gone. I think Josko is a brilliant player but he is just not as well rounded as some.

[Bruceswar]

1. Poo-maker was the best overall player. Anybody who has ever played with or against him will tell you this. You can all turn blue in the face, but that does not change the point. No disrespect to other players

sorry to disagree bruce but i cant see any player with low stats like these 1283 completed, 651 (51%) won makes them the best overall player on CC and with such low medals.
To be the Strongest Overall Player on CC surely they have to be the best on all settings, in all teams and all maps without farming.
what about JOHNNYROCKET24 does he not deserve a mention has some impressive stats 21454 completed, 14535 (68%) won Medals: 120.
alstergren another 13516 completed, 10145 (75%) won, Medals: 123
Ninja Champion another 12460 completed, 8220 (66%) won, Medals: 99

The basic problem with medals is that they are a measure of quantity not quality..lots of players have got gold medals at forms of the game they are basically shit at. Medals were introduced to encourage players to play huge amounts of games and stay addicted to the site..always giving the obsessive something to aim for. I basically discount medals when considering the quality of the player.

The keys are (and I have thought about this subject quite deeply):
1. Quality of the opposition
2. Win percentage (based on style)
3. Variety of play (here is where I fall down a bit)..styles and maps
4. Fairplay (perhaps I am silly but the best player should also be a classy one)

This!

Johnnyrocket24 farmed the hell out of people with the now gone 1 vs 1 loophole.

51% is a damn good win percentage given the number of 8 man and 6 man games poo played and I am not talking about team games.

Alster has been caught up in too many farming cases to be considered for this spot.

Ninja is a fairly solid player, but I do not think he is on the same level as a scot-land or poo maker.

[betiko]

I just wanted to say I strongly disagree with mr changsha.
Unless you judge the quality of the oposition by something else than the rank! You have tons of solid players that can be captains or major; the fact of daring facing them rather than a top player is a great positive point, not negative.
If you're a general and you face a very good major, you will earn very little and lose a lot potentially. You know that the skill difference is not worth the potential loss/gain compared to the one you get from someone ranked similarly. This is a luck based game, and if you manage to be at the top facing other stuff than top tier colonels and above you are damn good.

Other thing: I'm sure speed freestylers are pretty good at sequential too, I don't see why it shouldn't be the case. If you analyze that fast everything going on in a speed freestyle, you surely can find your ways in sequential. Might work better working on your patience though, but basically i'm sure that if they try hard enough they can be very good. The other way around doesn't work.