porkenbeans wrote:Mr Changsha wrote:thegreekdog wrote:I am a relatively new player... love the game, etc. If I receive an email from someone asking me to play a game, I'll say yes, no matter who it is or where it is. I'm not really caring that they are better at this game than I am and that I have a 90% chance to lose. I can learn something from the game and I'm fairly sure I'll have fun.
With that being said, I didn't know what farmers were until a week ago, which happened to coincide with me getting a random message to join a game (I didn't join because it was 3 AM EST and I was a drunk). Anyway my point is that Newbie farmers are only "hurting" people who are not newbie farmers (i.e. the people posting here who think their low ranking comparatively to newbie farmers are because of newbie farming). I don't think newbie farmers are hurting newbies. I got drilled in my first few games, and I get destroyed anytime I change settings or maps to something unfamiliar to me. Yet, I'm still playing. In an effort to anger everyone, I will say that :
(1) People who try to win games against newbies just to increase their point total are hurting themselves because it cannot be fun to beat up on someone who has no clue what they're doing... that's like a 300 pound man beating up a 100 pound guy. Sure, the little guy is hurting, but the 300 pound guy should be ashamed of himself. But, to each their own.
(2) The supposed purpose of banning newbie farming is to get newbies to stay on the site. However, I think the people supporting the ban of newbie farming are not concerned with that so much as they are concerned about eliminating the newbie farmers from the game. The point is that the supports of the newbie farming ban are more concerned with their own advancement than whether or not newbies stay with the site. Newbies are going to stay on this site because playing is fun and distracting and because the maps are really well-done. They are not going to stay just because they win some games.
At any rate, that's the view from the bottom.
The second point is absolutely right. I've found few people in life who give a shit about the little guy, yet I have met many who pretend to when it fits in with an argument they are having. Considering most people in my generation are intolerably self-centred (I'm in my late twenties) and those in the next generation even worse, this idea of players here saying "think of the poor new player, think of his enjoyment!" has always been, in the main, utter tosh. "Think of MY ranking, think of MY points!" is a far more likely sentiment to come from Thatcher and Reagan's children. However, I would say that the number of people who have written about the 'poor player's enjoyment' while figuratively swigging back the champagne of a high rank can only have come from the Blair/Clinton/Bush era.
King_H cold attain ten thousand points in any way he so chooses and it wouldn't effect my sense of self-worth one little bit. I know I am a good player. I could be number 500, number 300 or number 1,000 and it wouldn't effect the fact that I know I'm a bastard to beat on a Risk board. I can imagine chaps like porkenbeans and farangdemon going through the leaderboard counting up those they consider farmers and saying to themselves "I would be in the top 250 (or whatever) if all these farmers weren't farming." That's pretty sad, but understandable. What's so infuriating is that they then pretend they write 'for the good of the site'. Highly unlikely. Like most people in our decadent Western societies, they write for their own good and their own interest always.
Change the rules by all means Lack, for it might well make the site better...and hence be in your self-interest to do so. I would hope you're not fooled by the bleating of a bunch of pampered little babies that are prime examples of the 'me, me, me!' generation, with a bit of champagne socialism thrown in just to be sadly fitting of the times we live in.
You are misrepresenting my views and motives. You know very well that I have championed the cause, for the integrity of the leaderboard, to make it fair to everyone. I admit and proclaim loudly that it is not fair to me or anyone else. Of course my motivation for going on this crusade, was because I felt it was not fair to me. And yes if it were not for the Newbie Farmers and multi-cheaters, I would be on page 1 right now. If your rank or your place on the leaderboard does not mean that much to you, that is fine with me. But, if it DOES mean something to others, you should let that be fine with YOU. Yours is NOT the only interest that counts. For the life of me I can not understand why anyone would waste so many hours on a gaming site that is not fair. What in the world is wrong with wanting to play a fair game, and eagerly trying to be the best ? After all, isn't that what a leaderboard is for ?
Might I gently suggest you stop trying to compare yourself to others who play an entirely different game style to the one you play? You're never going to have as high a rank as players involved in quads freestlye speed settings, unless you start playing that way yourself. Now YOU might well say they are farmers, but I think I've shown in other threads that these catergorisations are far too subjective to be valid. So accept that fact and expand your mind a little. I also know that I'll never achieve such a high score playing 8 man no cards games. However, within my own mind, I know that if I can achieve colonel rank playing those kinds of games then I am doing well at my chosen discipline. You don't find players much past 2,5oo points in the games I play. Are the top (large game) singles no cards players being cheated by the system? I would say not. I know who are the best players that play
my style of game and if I compare myself to anyone (and to be honest with you I really don't think about it that much), then I compare myself to those players. Do I compare myself by score? Again not really. Most of the best no cards singles players are captains, majors and the top few are colonels. Do I automatically assume that the colonel is better than the captain? Of course not.
The difference between us, to be perfectly frank about it porkenbeans, is that I play one of the most challenging styles of play you can find on CC, while you play 1vs1 sequential. I naturally therefore have far more confidence in my inherent abilities and so don't feel the need to define myself by score or rank, or criticise others about how they play the game. You quite obviously do.
You've just admitted the central point from my previous post - that you primarily care about your place on the leaderboard. If you re-read my last post you'll see that I felt such an spiration was a little sad (yes from my perspective) but
understandable . The second point is the key bit though...
What's so infuriating is that they then pretend they write 'for the good of the site'. Highly unlikely. Like most people in our decadent Western societies, they write for their own good and their own interest always.
That's the reason I make a point of criticising you in the threads you make. NOT because you want to be at the top of the leaderboard (my pal fruitcake has a similar ambition and I applaud his efforts), but rather because you claim the changes you want to make to CC are for the good of the site rather than being motivated by your own narrow self-interest.
I am well aware that I am in the minority on this issue, at least judged by the comments on this thread. As I am sure you are aware porkenbeans, I couldn't give less of a shit about being a minority on any issue.
Farming is 'not cool', true enough. However, neither is claiming one is 'working for the intersts of the common man on CC' (i.e the farmed) when in fact one's motivations are as clear, to me at least, as the blazing sun. To move up 100 or so places on a leaderboard. If that means the Cheating and Abuse Forum is going to be littered with accusations of cheating (farming) and a poisonous atmosphere is going to be created on CC then, I suppose, that is a small price to pay.
