Conquer Club

I remember, it was january or some close, a new rule has been added, and farming started to be counted as a cheat and abuse. New rule has been useful but not complete. As a result, farming is keep going. Many times argued and discussed, it musnt be limitted with only ? new recruits but there should have been a rank difference thing. Defining such a rank difference thing would had brought new kinda problems too. It s true that best solution is one which your solution solves the problem nicely but doesnt create new problems.

The link below carries you into a cheat and abuse forum thread, you will see there is no farming based on rules. But whatever rules say, it is still farming.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=89757&p=2073738#p2073738

Here i would like to catch your attention to a question. Say me, what is faming and in what kind of games farming occasionally occurs ? I am not certain, but likely it is 1v1 games in which high rank player joins in any low rank player's game. Are we agreed here ? Of course, there are other kind of games those would be counted as farming as well. Say standard game, 5 - 6 player and a high ranker joins in as the last player or the one before last player. Here he believes and hopes game to be an easy win for him. The idea is same with conventional 1v1 faming.

At this point, definition of farming should be improved. Definition of farming CAN NOT be limitted with only if a player occasionally joins and FARMs ? players.

My suggestion is as follows.

Get a measure how much a player is deeply farming.....

• It is not very hard to catch the point here. Little use of maths will help you get this.
• Case 1: All standard and, assasin games except he has hosted and he has lost. Product 1 : Standard game ID XXXXX(or assasin game), fetch how many points player A grabbed. Product 2 : Divide Product 1 to number of players in game ID XXXXX. Then get a value from this avaraging. If this is less than 10-11 then there is a suspicion if player is farming.
• Case 2: All terminator games, except he has hosted. Product 1 : Total points he has grabbed from termination of Y players. Product 2 : Divide the total points he has grabbed from that game to the number of player he terminated. Then get a value from this avaraging similar to previous case.
• Case 3: All 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 games (team games) except he has hosted and he has lost. Easiest this is, record how many points he has got from the game.
• Exclude (dont count) any of tournament games.
• Finally, say a player has got 250 games matching with case 1 then you will have 250 values from case 1. Say 350 games matching with case 2 and 150 games matching with case 3. 250 + 350 + 150 = 750 games. You will have distinct avarage values for all those 750 games you previously calculated. Then simply add all avarages, have a grad total and then divide that grand total to 750 games. You now have an amazing display to speak of any player if s/he is a farmer or not. If the resulting number is less than 10 - 11 points then the player under question is doubtfully farmer. This will be a measure how much a player farms.
• At this point, i would like the above to get understood. Then i will add 1 more which will prevent short term farming as well. That will be based on scanning players last 300 games instead all games history.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• This will bring a true measure for farming. Will depitch who is farming and who is not in a very clear way.
• This will remove the B.S. of that if a player joins in ? new recruit's games then he is farming but if he systematically joins to the games of players who has not even completed 50 games then he is not farming.
• Also, display this avarage value in player's profile page to let other players see.

the farming rule needs to be enforced too. Not sure why we make threats with a new rule and dont execute the threat. We all know which players at the top are farming and yet we take no action.

HardAttack wrote:I remember, it was january or some close, a new rule has been added, and farming started to be counted as a cheat and abuse. New rule has been useful but not complete. As a result, farming is keep going. Many times argued and discussed, it musnt be limitted with only ? new recruits but there should have been a rank difference thing. Defining such a rank difference thing would had brought new kinda problems too. It s true that best solution is one which your solution solves the problem nicely but doesnt create new problems.

The link below carries you into a cheat and abuse forum thread, you will see there is no farming based on rules. But whatever rules say, it is still farming.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=89757&p=2073738#p2073738

Here i would like to catch your attention to a question. Say me, what is faming and in what kind of games farming occasionally occurs ? I am not certain, but likely it is 1v1 games in which high rank player joins in any low rank player's game. Are we agreed here ? Of course, there are other kind of games those would be counted as farming as well. Say standard game, 5 - 6 player and a high ranker joins in as the last player or the one before last player. Here he believes and hopes game to be an easy win for him. The idea is same with conventional 1v1 faming.

At this point, definition of farming should be improved. Definition of farming CAN NOT be limitted with only if a player occasionally joins and FARMs ? players.

My suggestion is as follows.

Get a measure how much a player is deeply farming.....

• It is not very hard to catch the point here. Little use of maths will help you get this.
• Case 1: All standard and, assasin games except he has hosted and he has lost. Product 1 : Standard game ID XXXXX(or assasin game), fetch how many points player A grabbed. Product 2 : Divide Product 1 to number of players in game ID XXXXX. Then get a value from this avaraging. If this is less than 10-11 then there is a suspicion if player is farming.
• Case 2: All terminator games, except he has hosted. Product 1 : Total points he has grabbed from termination of Y players. Product 2 : Divide the total points he has grabbed from that game to the number of player he terminated. Then get a value from this avaraging similar to previous case.
• Case 3: All 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 games (team games) except he has hosted and he has lost. Easiest this is, record how many points he has got from the game.
• Exclude (dont count) any of tournament games.
• Finally, say a player has got 250 games matching with case 1 then you will have 250 values from case 1. Say 350 games matching with case 2 and 150 games matching with case 3. 250 + 350 + 150 = 750 games. You will have distinct avarage values for all those 750 games you previously calculated. Then simply add all avarages, have a grad total and then divide that grand total to 750 games. You now have an amazing display to speak of any player if s/he is a farmer or not. If the resulting number is less than 10 - 11 points then the player under question is doubtfully farmer. This will be a measure how much a player farms.
• At this point, i would like the above to get understood. Then i will add 1 more which will prevent short term farming as well. That will be based on scanning players last 300 games instead all games history.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• This will bring a true measure for farming. Will depitch who is farming and who is not in a very clear way.
• This will remove the B.S. of that if a player joins in ? new recruit's games then he is farming but if he systematically joins to the games of players who has not even completed 50 games then he is not farming.
• Also, display this avarage value in player's profile page to let other players see.

or we could just get over the fact that some are better than others

is it wrong for a big fish to eat a little one. this happens every second all around the world.

there is no way to enforce this

kylegraves1 wrote:

HardAttack wrote:I remember, it was january or some close, a new rule has been added, and farming started to be counted as a cheat and abuse. New rule has been useful but not complete. As a result, farming is keep going. Many times argued and discussed, it musnt be limitted with only ? new recruits but there should have been a rank difference thing. Defining such a rank difference thing would had brought new kinda problems too. It s true that best solution is one which your solution solves the problem nicely but doesnt create new problems.

The link below carries you into a cheat and abuse forum thread, you will see there is no farming based on rules. But whatever rules say, it is still farming.
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=89757&p=2073738#p2073738

Here i would like to catch your attention to a question. Say me, what is faming and in what kind of games farming occasionally occurs ? I am not certain, but likely it is 1v1 games in which high rank player joins in any low rank player's game. Are we agreed here ? Of course, there are other kind of games those would be counted as farming as well. Say standard game, 5 - 6 player and a high ranker joins in as the last player or the one before last player. Here he believes and hopes game to be an easy win for him. The idea is same with conventional 1v1 faming.

At this point, definition of farming should be improved. Definition of farming CAN NOT be limitted with only if a player occasionally joins and FARMs ? players.

My suggestion is as follows.

Get a measure how much a player is deeply farming.....

• It is not very hard to catch the point here. Little use of maths will help you get this.
• Case 1: All standard and, assasin games except he has hosted and he has lost. Product 1 : Standard game ID XXXXX(or assasin game), fetch how many points player A grabbed. Product 2 : Divide Product 1 to number of players in game ID XXXXX. Then get a value from this avaraging. If this is less than 10-11 then there is a suspicion if player is farming.
• Case 2: All terminator games, except he has hosted. Product 1 : Total points he has grabbed from termination of Y players. Product 2 : Divide the total points he has grabbed from that game to the number of player he terminated. Then get a value from this avaraging similar to previous case.
• Case 3: All 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 games (team games) except he has hosted and he has lost. Easiest this is, record how many points he has got from the game.
• Exclude (dont count) any of tournament games.
• Finally, say a player has got 250 games matching with case 1 then you will have 250 values from case 1. Say 350 games matching with case 2 and 150 games matching with case 3. 250 + 350 + 150 = 750 games. You will have distinct avarage values for all those 750 games you previously calculated. Then simply add all avarages, have a grad total and then divide that grand total to 750 games. You now have an amazing display to speak of any player if s/he is a farmer or not. If the resulting number is less than 10 - 11 points then the player under question is doubtfully farmer. This will be a measure how much a player farms.
• At this point, i would like the above to get understood. Then i will add 1 more which will prevent short term farming as well. That will be based on scanning players last 300 games instead all games history.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• This will bring a true measure for farming. Will depitch who is farming and who is not in a very clear way.
• This will remove the B.S. of that if a player joins in ? new recruit's games then he is farming but if he systematically joins to the games of players who has not even completed 50 games then he is not farming.
• Also, display this avarage value in player's profile page to let other players see.

or we could just get over the fact that some are better than others

is it wrong for a big fish to eat a little one. this happens every second all around the world.

there is no way to enforce this

give me access and Ill show you how to enforce this

kylegraves1 wrote:or we could just get over the fact that some are better than others

All of us accept that.

kylegraves1 wrote:is it wrong for a big fish to eat a little one. this happens every second all around the world.

Competition is based on fairness. This should be a site built for competition. Farming is not competitive in the slightest.

kylegraves1 wrote:there is no way to enforce this

You are very mistaken on that.

Woodruff wrote:

kylegraves1 wrote:or we could just get over the fact that some are better than others

All of us accept that.

kylegraves1 wrote:is it wrong for a big fish to eat a little one. this happens every second all around the world.

Competition is based on fairness. This should be a site built for competition. Farming is not competitive in the slightest.

kylegraves1 wrote:there is no way to enforce this

You are very mistaken on that.

Excellent points made. But there have been numerous thoughtful efforts over the past years to make CC scoring more competitive. How many have been implemented? Just the one that restricts farming of new recruits, which was a step in the right direction at least. All other suggestions just get flamed, blocked or ignored.

The mods unofficial policy is to avoid defining what a harvesting technique is, because once they officially admit that harvesting techniques exist, they would be bound by scripture (aka Lack's New Year's anti-farming address) to prevent players from gaining rank by harvesting techniques. This is something they want to avoid doing because lots of people will whine about where the line is drawn. Sure, people will whine, but I prefer that to letting the corpse of a scoring system continue to rot, the stench of farmers permeating the eager air.

One way to curb farming is to limit points exchange for high ranked who play extremely low ranked in quads (aka farm). In this thread I find that doing a search on all games from a particular player playing a particular map on quads against a particular low rank of opponent, that in 60 out of 60 games, the cook/cadet team lose. I argue that it's a harvesting technique. None of the mods wanted to touch it with a 10 foot pole even though it is an obvious harvesting technique.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=75435&p=1804760#p1804760

Actually, Hardattack, you commented on this anti-farming suggestion and stated that if everybody disagrees with me then I should take off my "one-way looking glasses". But I'm happy to see now in this thread that you do actually share the goal of making CC scoring more competitive. So good luck to you.

Six months ago, Scully and some other mods promised me they were in round table discussions to implement a technique to reduce inflation and harvesting in one simple step - reduce by 1 the number of points gained by each victory. I wonder what ever happened to that.

The only way to get CC to eliminate farming is if a significant number of players start leaving CC because of farming. That won't happen because most players are not that competitive. So you just need to find another site that offers a Risk-like game with good maps and game settings where you can only get to #1 by playing players remotely close to your score.

I think it's funny how social darwinism still manifests itself among the lame-brained. "cooks deserve to lose points against generals because they are not as good - survival of the fittest"
These people forget that conquer club is supposed to serve us by providing the greatest enjoyment, not to mirror biological processes that have an effect of making the game uncompetitive.

It all comes down to the hearts and minds of the CC community. What do they prefer? Survival of the fittest or more peer competition? I think lack has reckoned that the average CC player is not competitive and that the community does not want to see more peer competition, otherwise he would have changed the scoring system to prevent the top 90% from gaining points against the bottom 10% or something like that.

kylegraves1 wrote:or we could just get over the fact that some are better than others

is it wrong for a big fish to eat a little one. this happens every second all around the world.

there is no way to enforce this

Should an olympic athlete be able to earn world rank points my competing with little league teams? I mean, what is wrong with a big fish eating a little one. It happens every second around this world!

Litterally it does, yeah, but metaphorically: No!
In the real world, competitors are divided into levels of skill, so that "farming" DOESN'T occur. And I bet you'd get laughed at hard, if you suggested, that we just all compete against each other - no leagues! Because when put in perspective, even the the most selfish little brat can see, that going after players who are obviously worse players than yourself, just so you can get an easy win, is... SELFISH!!!! It is AGAINST sportsmanship, and even using a microscope, I can't for the life of ME spot the point of targeting players, you know you can beat; What's the fun in that? Then when the big man is done beating little girls, he can go shop for a trophy, that he didn't earn - put in on his night stand and then sit with a shallow, hollow smile, looking at it, knowing, that he's a pathetic excuse for a human being!

Ahh... That should be enough puke from me for one day.

FarangDemon wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

kylegraves1 wrote:or we could just get over the fact that some are better than others

All of us accept that.

kylegraves1 wrote:is it wrong for a big fish to eat a little one. this happens every second all around the world.

Competition is based on fairness. This should be a site built for competition. Farming is not competitive in the slightest.

kylegraves1 wrote:there is no way to enforce this

You are very mistaken on that.

Excellent points made. But there have been numerous thoughtful efforts over the past years to make CC scoring more competitive. How many have been implemented? Just the one that restricts farming of new recruits, which was a step in the right direction at least. All other suggestions just get flamed, blocked or ignored.

The mods unofficial policy is to avoid defining what a harvesting technique is, because once they officially admit that harvesting techniques exist, they would be bound by scripture (aka Lack's New Year's anti-farming address) to prevent players from gaining rank by harvesting techniques. This is something they want to avoid doing because lots of people will whine about where the line is drawn. Sure, people will whine, but I prefer that to letting the corpse of a scoring system continue to rot, the stench of farmers permeating the eager air.

One way to curb farming is to limit points exchange for high ranked who play extremely low ranked in quads (aka farm). In this thread I find that doing a search on all games from a particular player playing a particular map on quads against a particular low rank of opponent, that in 60 out of 60 games, the cook/cadet team lose. I argue that it's a harvesting technique. None of the mods wanted to touch it with a 10 foot pole even though it is an obvious harvesting technique.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=75435&p=1804760#p1804760

Actually, Hardattack, you commented on this anti-farming suggestion and stated that if everybody disagrees with me then I should take off my "one-way looking glasses". But I'm happy to see now in this thread that you do actually share the goal of making CC scoring more competitive. So good luck to you.

Six months ago, Scully and some other mods promised me they were in round table discussions to implement a technique to reduce inflation and harvesting in one simple step - reduce by 1 the number of points gained by each victory. I wonder what ever happened to that.

The only way to get CC to eliminate farming is if a significant number of players start leaving CC because of farming. That won't happen because most players are not that competitive. So you just need to find another site that offers a Risk-like game with good maps and game settings where you can only get to #1 by playing players remotely close to your score.

I think it's funny how social darwinism still manifests itself among the lame-brained. "cooks deserve to lose points against generals because they are not as good - survival of the fittest"
These people forget that conquer club is supposed to serve us by providing the greatest enjoyment, not to mirror biological processes that have an effect of making the game uncompetitive.

It all comes down to the hearts and minds of the CC community. What do they prefer? Survival of the fittest or more peer competition? I think lack has reckoned that the average CC player is not competitive and that the community does not want to see more peer competition, otherwise he would have changed the scoring system to prevent the top 90% from gaining points against the bottom 10% or something like that.

Thanks mate. I must state that i have no conflict with what i have said previously in the thread you had created and given the link above. As i say, whatever others say, i dont count a game to be farming aimed game as soon as you are hosting it. Simply you can not control who is joining in. (One exception : That is when a high ranker creates game and massively PMs and invites low rankers to play against and milk him)

Mr.Brix wrote:

kylegraves1 wrote:or we could just get over the fact that some are better than others

is it wrong for a big fish to eat a little one. this happens every second all around the world.

there is no way to enforce this

Should an olympic athlete be able to earn world rank points my competing with little league teams? I mean, what is wrong with a big fish eating a little one. It happens every second around this world!

Litterally it does, yeah, but metaphorically: No!
In the real world, competitors are divided into levels of skill, so that "farming" DOESN'T occur. And I bet you'd get laughed at hard, if you suggested, that we just all compete against each other - no leagues! Because when put in perspective, even the the most selfish little brat can see, that going after players who are obviously worse players than yourself, just so you can get an easy win, is... SELFISH!!!! It is AGAINST sportsmanship, and even using a microscope, I can't for the life of ME spot the point of targeting players, you know you can beat; What's the fun in that? Then when the big man is done beating little girls, he can go shop for a trophy, that he didn't earn - put in on his night stand and then sit with a shallow, hollow smile, looking at it, knowing, that he's a pathetic excuse for a human being!

Ahh... That should be enough puke from me for one day.

Some ppl likes having sex with any girl in town, some others like to have it with always the hottest girl in the town. I think this is the answer. The first one is farmer, the seond one is elitist.
I totally agree with that idea buddy. I have suggested, some ppl did so, we asked for a minimum rank defineable games but the game still will be public game. It is simple, just let me have my game to be public but only majors or above, maybe captains or above will be able to join due to what min rank i assign to my game. Guess what. I received the most amazing answers ever, the ones i always love ))) That s this : This has been suggested and rejected many times. I love this answer a lot which is common in use. That looks like a way to say shut the f. up officially
Look ppl, it is not cristopher columbus who claimed that world wasnt flat first, but he is first who didnt f with whatever others said then found a way and had shown yes it is not flat. Believe me, he was told same, namely, 'hey cristopher this has been suggested many and rejected many times'. Such a way to approach to problems is a way to prevent progress to go further.