Conqueror Herpes is Better than YOU

[Stephan Wayne]

dont worry sjnap dosnt have the power of the farm

[Mr Changsha]

Hey fruitcup,

"Let's think about things for a second." Once again, my jealous, Herp-hating friend, you have sorrowfully misunderstood my arguments and sadly disparaged yourself with such foolishness.

But Fruit, we need people like you; we need people to judge other dumbasses against. You, my friend, are the extreme of the intelligence totem-pole, but sadly, you're not at the end you might think you're at.

You said it yourself.

QED the higher the relative rank, the higher score of player you take on.

Relative rank is based on averages, the more low ranked players one plays, the more high ranked players he/she would need to play to even things out. But, after looking at some of his games, you will see that he plays some mid-ranked players too, which also would raise his average (although by a lesser amount than higher ranked players). But obviously he plays more low-ranked players than high-ranked players as his relative rank (your beloved terms of rating a player) b/c his relative rank is lower than the average conqueror.

But the thing is, who really gives a shit? He is the conqueror, you're not. His means of doing so are obviously better than yours. He has the choice to play low-ranked players b/c he risks "A LOT" (your favorite words) of points going up against them. Who knows if he's matching up against a great, low-ranked player and LOSE; kinda like he did here:
Game 3803104
Yes, the guy that beat him is a serg., but that is still a relatively low rank. But still, the fact remains that his method of becoming conqueror is better than everyone else's as of now. Why does it bother you guys so much? Most of you people don't stand a chance of becoming conqueror, it's not like you were but are being "cheated" by him taking your place.

=D> Congrats KH GREAT JOB
A big bow for the King
I am pretty sure you will get the balloon back soon
You deserve it and you are one of the most sportiv person i met on this site

EVEN SJNAP CONGRATULATED HIM ON HIS ACCOMPLISHMENT!! If anyone has even a slight reason to be mad, it's sjnap. But as you see, sjnap feels Herp is a solid player who has become conqueror by legal means.

you proceed to, inadvertantly, denigrate the very person you champion.

Not quite. You seem to think I am agreeing with a few others that he's not a farmer. He is, he really is. But he does, and has proven, that he plays with the big boys now and again.

Sucks to feel like a complete idiot, doesn't it fruitcake?

Now hang on a second zsp. Fruitcake and King_Herpes are actually having a perfectly reasonable debate about whether these relative point scores do suggest one player is a better player than another. Both players are in the top 20 and are both therefore competing for the same thing. Fruitcake has laid his challenge down, it seems to me, and I would think he also has a good chance of breaking 5,000 points. If he can do it and keep that stat as high as it currently, then this debate of theirs will look far from foolish. To suggest either player 'is a complete idiot' says more about you than it does about either of them.

I come at this as a player who is well aware he won't get past the colonel rank. This is not because I choose my games with more integrity, don't farm, play freestyle or whatever. I just realise that I am not that good at this game. Both players are in the top 20 on merit. I would suspect that King_Herpes' points average has dropped in the pursuit of the crazily high score he now has, if he hadn't attempted to make conqueror I don't doubt is points average would be much better. Fruitcake is (I suspect) attempting to do the same thing and I would think HIS points average will also drop in the attempt. However, I could easily be wrong about that.

[demonfork]

Dear Fruitcake,

You're words are becoming less and less significant as I look into your game history. I've yet to see any of your accusations that I'm the worst player out of the top 25(because of numbers) proven. It's all just hearsay and matter of opinion. Very particular opinions at that. There's far more naivety then actual valid proof.

All of this map ranking and talk about figures has inspired me.
In games above 3 players standard sequential matches, Fruitboy has played 175 games. Out of these games he's won an admirable 35 games. And on what maps you say? Hold on to your seat everybody....The Classic Map! Wow! If you ask me that's, how Fruitcake likes to put it, "boringly predictable".That's nothing too exciting am I right? Certainly nothing boast worthy enough to put down another or point out a supposed lack of ability and skill. On top of this rather average statistic he has quite the lame career when considering all of the few game types his superb mind clings too. he played a mere 80 speed games and has claimed 41- 80( all sequential but surely nothing to sneeze @), 15 freestyle games and pulled off 4-15, A whopping 0 terminator games, as well as a not so surprising 0 assassin games. Also uninteresting as this may continue to be, he's only played 20 out of how many maps now? A Gazillion I think it is. Let me guess, you don't like change.... But keep working on it Fruit'ness at the rate your chugging along, I'm sure you'll get those last medals umm, maybe before you croak? You're a great team leader and strategist without a doubt, I atleast have enough character to admit the positive. But you are miles away from being as tried, versatile and capable as me in ALL styles of play. So hush your mouth!

Now don't get your panties in a bunch because I haven't forgotten that you probably want to see my capabilities as well. It would be unfair for me to just throw someone under the bus like you do without showing my games as well. Stay tuned....

Simple to do herps.

Here is the relative ranks table from just a couple of days ago:

First the player name, then their score, then the relative rank. As can be seen, you are better than SkyT with a relative rank of 0.494.

Thomas.Paine 4004 0.963 3856
Fruitcake 3556 0.888 3158
Seulessliathan 3971 0.834 3312
Gwaahjo 3583 0.806 2888
Hesoos 3680 0.805 2962
Velvecarrots 3661 0.788 2885
bridge2far 4046 0.778 3148
General Mojo 3821 0.778 2973
ballenus 3513 0.759 2666
Jeff Hardy 3666 0.751 2753
rabbiton 4490 0.746 3350
fantasianasian 3705 0.716 2653
karelpietertje 4266 0.697 2973
loes 3564 0.695 2477
M-D-MiNoRiTY 3478 0.681 2369
Scott-Land 4271 0.668 2853
dividedbyzero 3600 0.661 2380
lt.pie 3734 0.66 2464
Prankcall 3489 0.652 2275
sjnap 5584 0.622 3473
mhennigan 3792 0.597 2264
Thai Robert 3905 0.565 2206
maxatstuy 4874 0.509 2481
King_Herpes 5552 0.494 2743
SkyT 3658 0.487 1781

The relative rank number in meaningless unless viewed in context...

Thomas.Paine 4004 0.963 3856
sjnap 5584 0.622 3473
rabbiton 4490 0.746 3350
Seulessliathan 3971 0.834 3312
Fruitcake 3556 0.888 3158
bridge2far 4046 0.778 3148
karelpietertje 4266 0.697 2973
General Mojo 3821 0.778 2973
Hesoos 3680 0.805 2962
Gwaahjo 3583 0.806 2888
Velvecarrots 3661 0.788 2885
Scott-Land 4271 0.668 2853
Jeff Hardy 3666 0.751 2753
King_Herpes 5552 0.494 2743
ballenus 3513 0.759 2666
fantasianasian 3705 0.716 2653
maxatstuy 4874 0.509 2481
loes 3564 0.695 2477
lt.pie 3734 0.66 2464
dividedbyzero 3600 0.661 2380
M-D-MiNoRiTY 3478 0.681 2369
Prankcall 3489 0.652 2275
mhennigan 3792 0.597 2264
Thai Robert 3905 0.565 2206
SkyT 3658 0.487 1781

As you can see, when looked at in the proper terms "The King's" opponents average out to be Colonel, and puts him better than 11 other players that are on your little list.

When we compare your (Fruitcakes) numbers to The Kings, your average opponent is only 13% higher rank than that of The Kings and his RR is only 4% lower than that of one of the more recent Conquerors (Scott-Land)

Furthermore, the relative rank is somewhat of a misleading number, it is a non dynamic number that does not show what the rank of the 2 players were at the time that the game was played. It is very possible that The King could have played against a player that is now a Captain that was a Colonel when The King actually played the game, which of course by the current method of calculating the relative rank, would erroneously lower The Kings relative rank!

[King_Herpes]

Interesting. So in other words, it's a bunch of hooey. Just as I proclaimed. Man! it seems I'm not the only individual who can read things clearly without a pair of internet bi-focals and a handy dandy calculator. Although I'm sure we haven't heard the last of Einsteins "theories of relativity"....

[maxatstuy]

That complete bull shit and the person who made that list should be shot!

Relative rank means nothing because in order to have a rank that I would be proud of, it would mean that I have to play only cooks from now on, and I never play cooks, I play new recruits who have a score of 1000...my relative rank can only go down so far

I started out with a score of 1000, why should I be penalized because I had to play people my own rank as a newb?

I deserve to be last on that list and I denounce anything that says otherwise!

[porkenbeans]

Dear Fruitcake,

You're words are becoming less and less significant as I look into your game history. I've yet to see any of your accusations that I'm the worst player out of the top 25(because of numbers) proven. It's all just hearsay and matter of opinion. Very particular opinions at that. There's far more naivety then actual valid proof.

All of this map ranking and talk about figures has inspired me.
In games above 3 players standard sequential matches, Fruitboy has played 175 games. Out of these games he's won an admirable 35 games. And on what maps you say? Hold on to your seat everybody....The Classic Map! Wow! If you ask me that's, how Fruitcake likes to put it, "boringly predictable".That's nothing too exciting am I right? Certainly nothing boast worthy enough to put down another or point out a supposed lack of ability and skill. On top of this rather average statistic he has quite the lame career when considering all of the few game types his superb mind clings too. he played a mere 80 speed games and has claimed 41- 80( all sequential but surely nothing to sneeze @), 15 freestyle games and pulled off 4-15, A whopping 0 terminator games, as well as a not so surprising 0 assassin games. Also uninteresting as this may continue to be, he's only played 20 out of how many maps now? A Gazillion I think it is. Let me guess, you don't like change.... But keep working on it Fruit'ness at the rate your chugging along, I'm sure you'll get those last medals umm, maybe before you croak? You're a great team leader and strategist without a doubt, I atleast have enough character to admit the positive. But you are miles away from being as tried, versatile and capable as me in ALL styles of play. So hush your mouth!

Now don't get your panties in a bunch because I haven't forgotten that you probably want to see my capabilities as well. It would be unfair for me to just throw someone under the bus like you do without showing my games as well. Stay tuned....

Simple to do herps.

Here is the relative ranks table from just a couple of days ago:

First the player name, then their score, then the relative rank. As can be seen, you are better than SkyT with a relative rank of 0.494.

Thomas.Paine 4004 0.963 3856
Fruitcake 3556 0.888 3158
Seulessliathan 3971 0.834 3312
Gwaahjo 3583 0.806 2888
Hesoos 3680 0.805 2962
Velvecarrots 3661 0.788 2885
bridge2far 4046 0.778 3148
General Mojo 3821 0.778 2973
ballenus 3513 0.759 2666
Jeff Hardy 3666 0.751 2753
rabbiton 4490 0.746 3350
fantasianasian 3705 0.716 2653
karelpietertje 4266 0.697 2973
loes 3564 0.695 2477
M-D-MiNoRiTY 3478 0.681 2369
Scott-Land 4271 0.668 2853
dividedbyzero 3600 0.661 2380
lt.pie 3734 0.66 2464
Prankcall 3489 0.652 2275
sjnap 5584 0.622 3473
mhennigan 3792 0.597 2264
Thai Robert 3905 0.565 2206
maxatstuy 4874 0.509 2481
King_Herpes 5552 0.494 2743
SkyT 3658 0.487 1781

The relative rank number in meaningless unless viewed in context...

Thomas.Paine 4004 0.963 3856
sjnap 5584 0.622 3473
rabbiton 4490 0.746 3350
Seulessliathan 3971 0.834 3312
Fruitcake 3556 0.888 3158
bridge2far 4046 0.778 3148
karelpietertje 4266 0.697 2973
General Mojo 3821 0.778 2973
Hesoos 3680 0.805 2962
Gwaahjo 3583 0.806 2888
Velvecarrots 3661 0.788 2885
Scott-Land 4271 0.668 2853
Jeff Hardy 3666 0.751 2753
King_Herpes 5552 0.494 2743
ballenus 3513 0.759 2666
fantasianasian 3705 0.716 2653
maxatstuy 4874 0.509 2481
loes 3564 0.695 2477
lt.pie 3734 0.66 2464
dividedbyzero 3600 0.661 2380
M-D-MiNoRiTY 3478 0.681 2369
Prankcall 3489 0.652 2275
mhennigan 3792 0.597 2264
Thai Robert 3905 0.565 2206
SkyT 3658 0.487 1781

As you can see, when looked at in the proper terms "The King's" opponents average out to be Colonel, and puts him better than 11 other players that are on your little list.

When we compare your (Fruitcakes) numbers to The Kings, your average opponent is only 13% higher rank than that of The Kings and his RR is only 4% lower than that of one of the more recent Conquerors (Scott-Land)

Furthermore, the relative rank is somewhat of a misleading number, it is a non dynamic number that does not show what the rank of the 2 players were at the time that the game was played. It is very possible that The King could have played against a player that is now a Captain that was a Colonel when The King actually played the game, which of course by the current method of calculating the relative rank, would erroneously lower The Kings relative rank!

The first thread that I ever authored on this site, was about this problem as I saw it. Would it be to hard for them to do something about this ? viewtopic.php?f=4&t=42746&p=1101590#p1101590

[Bruceswar]

Dear Fruitcake,

You're words are becoming less and less significant as I look into your game history. I've yet to see any of your accusations that I'm the worst player out of the top 25(because of numbers) proven. It's all just hearsay and matter of opinion. Very particular opinions at that. There's far more naivety then actual valid proof.

All of this map ranking and talk about figures has inspired me.
In games above 3 players standard sequential matches, Fruitboy has played 175 games. Out of these games he's won an admirable 35 games. And on what maps you say? Hold on to your seat everybody....The Classic Map! Wow! If you ask me that's, how Fruitcake likes to put it, "boringly predictable".That's nothing too exciting am I right? Certainly nothing boast worthy enough to put down another or point out a supposed lack of ability and skill. On top of this rather average statistic he has quite the lame career when considering all of the few game types his superb mind clings too. he played a mere 80 speed games and has claimed 41- 80( all sequential but surely nothing to sneeze @), 15 freestyle games and pulled off 4-15, A whopping 0 terminator games, as well as a not so surprising 0 assassin games. Also uninteresting as this may continue to be, he's only played 20 out of how many maps now? A Gazillion I think it is. Let me guess, you don't like change.... But keep working on it Fruit'ness at the rate your chugging along, I'm sure you'll get those last medals umm, maybe before you croak? You're a great team leader and strategist without a doubt, I atleast have enough character to admit the positive. But you are miles away from being as tried, versatile and capable as me in ALL styles of play. So hush your mouth!

Now don't get your panties in a bunch because I haven't forgotten that you probably want to see my capabilities as well. It would be unfair for me to just throw someone under the bus like you do without showing my games as well. Stay tuned....

Simple to do herps.

Here is the relative ranks table from just a couple of days ago:

First the player name, then their score, then the relative rank. As can be seen, you are better than SkyT with a relative rank of 0.494.

Thomas.Paine 4004 0.963 3856
Fruitcake 3556 0.888 3158
Seulessliathan 3971 0.834 3312
Gwaahjo 3583 0.806 2888
Hesoos 3680 0.805 2962
Velvecarrots 3661 0.788 2885
bridge2far 4046 0.778 3148
General Mojo 3821 0.778 2973
ballenus 3513 0.759 2666
Jeff Hardy 3666 0.751 2753
rabbiton 4490 0.746 3350
fantasianasian 3705 0.716 2653
karelpietertje 4266 0.697 2973
loes 3564 0.695 2477
M-D-MiNoRiTY 3478 0.681 2369
Scott-Land 4271 0.668 2853
dividedbyzero 3600 0.661 2380
lt.pie 3734 0.66 2464
Prankcall 3489 0.652 2275
sjnap 5584 0.622 3473
mhennigan 3792 0.597 2264
Thai Robert 3905 0.565 2206
maxatstuy 4874 0.509 2481
King_Herpes 5552 0.494 2743
SkyT 3658 0.487 1781

The relative rank number in meaningless unless viewed in context...

Thomas.Paine 4004 0.963 3856
sjnap 5584 0.622 3473
rabbiton 4490 0.746 3350
Seulessliathan 3971 0.834 3312
Fruitcake 3556 0.888 3158
bridge2far 4046 0.778 3148
karelpietertje 4266 0.697 2973
General Mojo 3821 0.778 2973
Hesoos 3680 0.805 2962
Gwaahjo 3583 0.806 2888
Velvecarrots 3661 0.788 2885
Scott-Land 4271 0.668 2853
Jeff Hardy 3666 0.751 2753
King_Herpes 5552 0.494 2743
ballenus 3513 0.759 2666
fantasianasian 3705 0.716 2653
maxatstuy 4874 0.509 2481
loes 3564 0.695 2477
lt.pie 3734 0.66 2464
dividedbyzero 3600 0.661 2380
M-D-MiNoRiTY 3478 0.681 2369
Prankcall 3489 0.652 2275
mhennigan 3792 0.597 2264
Thai Robert 3905 0.565 2206
SkyT 3658 0.487 1781

As you can see, when looked at in the proper terms "The King's" opponents average out to be Colonel, and puts him better than 11 other players that are on your little list.

When we compare your (Fruitcakes) numbers to The Kings, your average opponent is only 13% higher rank than that of The Kings and his RR is only 4% lower than that of one of the more recent Conquerors (Scott-Land)

Furthermore, the relative rank is somewhat of a misleading number, it is a non dynamic number that does not show what the rank of the 2 players were at the time that the game was played. It is very possible that The King could have played against a player that is now a Captain that was a Colonel when The King actually played the game, which of course by the current method of calculating the relative rank, would erroneously lower The Kings relative rank!

Not that I have a dog in this fight, but I must point something out. Relative rank is only good for the end of game right at the end. Meaning if Fruitcake, or King Herpes played a SGT when either of them were a SGT themselves it will show up as 1.00 and that will be factored in. All relative rank proves is ones relativity to a person when the game ended. If either were a SGT when they played a Major (2500) when that would have happened and SGT was 1400.. then it would read like 1.8 which would also factor in. Then if they were not to play map X again that 1.8 would stick. So we all know that nobody has a score 1.8 times higher than Herpes, which would make that 9,000 using 5500 as a number. Just something to mull over.

[King_Herpes]

Ouch! I'm starting to feel bad for the Fruit'ster. Would you guys just leave him alone already? Maybe he just didn't do his morning Sodoku and lost his brilliant train of thought which made him carry this relative rank mess into play. He was much better off just pacing back and forth through the thread shaking his computers mouse at congratulatory posts. Then he went and drove the nails in his own coffin with his hum drum statistics and calculated garble. It's sad really.

[hulmey]

fruit is just that a fruit!! He plays trips against cooks and cadets and then has ago at herpes for farming

[Fruitcake]

Ouch! I'm starting to feel bad for the Fruit'ster. Would you guys just leave him alone already? Maybe he just didn't do his morning Sodoku and lost his brilliant train of thought which made him carry this relative rank mess into play. He was much better off just pacing back and forth through the thread shaking his computers mouse at congratulatory posts. Then he went and drove the nails in his own coffin with his hum drum statistics and calculated garble. It's sad really.

Don't you go worrying about me herps. You and your sweet little acolytes just keep running around squealing like the stuck piglets you are.

You are a cheat herps. You are also a player who has deliberately taken on far lower ranks than your self. You are a self obsessed individual who has the respect of the aformentioned little piglets running around you and little else. I am confident you will ultimately come unstuck, your type always do.

I am now bored of you, your ilk and this arguement, you have slowly and inexorably descended into farce, as was forecast to me at the start and I agreed with.

Predictable? Yes I am afraid you and those around are very predictable. Fortunately, you are not a true reflection of what a real player is, you are but a cardbord cutout.

I shall not bother to wish you well, because unlike yourself, I do truly despise your kind of person and those around you.

Now please respond with your usual quips and retorts while you attempt to divert attention, once more, away from the reality.

[yeti_c]

The relative rank number in meaningless unless viewed in context...

<snip>

Actually you are wrong...

The Relative Rank does take into account the rank of the players at the time...

It generates the Relative Rank by working out the points awarded at the time of the game.

There is a flaw however that you haven't taken into account...

Say A Major (2000) was playing 4 Majors (all on 2000) and 1 Cook... (1000)

The Cook wins - they lose a lot of points - but their relative Rank goes down. (Because they were defeated by a Cook - It doesn't take into account that there were 4 other Majors in the group. (0.5)

Therefore they receive the same loss for the Major at 2000 with 5 cooks (all on 1000) in it. (0.5)

However if they win those 2 games then for the first they would receive
a) 0.9 (1+1+1+1+0.5/5)
b) 0.5 (0.5+0.5+0.5+0.5+0.5/5)

C.

[demonfork]

The relative rank number in meaningless unless viewed in context...

<snip>

Actually you are wrong...

The Relative Rank does take into account the rank of the players at the time...

It generates the Relative Rank by working out the points awarded at the time of the game.

There is a flaw however that you haven't taken into account...

Say A Major (2000) was playing 4 Majors (all on 2000) and 1 Cook... (1000)

The Cook wins - they lose a lot of points - but their relative Rank goes down. (Because they were defeated by a Cook - It doesn't take into account that there were 4 other Majors in the group. (0.5)

Therefore they receive the same loss for the Major at 2000 with 5 cooks (all on 1000) in it. (0.5)

However if they win those 2 games then for the first they would receive
a) 0.9 (1+1+1+1+0.5/5)
b) 0.5 (0.5+0.5+0.5+0.5+0.5/5)

C.

I may be wrong about how the number is calculated, but that still does not change the fact that the number is meaningless unless you use that number to see the bigger picture, which is the number that is the result of multiplying RR against ones score.

Again when you do that King_Herpes average opponent is a COLONEL!!!

[Bruceswar]

I may be wrong about how the number is calculated, but that still does not change the fact that the number is meaningless unless you use that number to see the bigger picture, which is the number that is the result of multiplying RR against ones score.

Again when you do that King_Herpes average opponent is a COLONEL!!!

You are missing the point here. If King H was a SGT at the time and played a SGT on map X it factors in at 1.00 It took him time to get where he is so along the way he played many people with a rank close to his, but that does not always tell the full story. Just because someone is a colonel, does not mean they are good on all settings. Some only play team games, while others play only standard games. Rarely do you find a player who plays it all with regularity.

[yeti_c]

I may be wrong about how the number is calculated, but that still does not change the fact that the number is meaningless unless you use that number to see the bigger picture, which is the number that is the result of multiplying RR against ones score.

Again when you do that King_Herpes average opponent is a COLONEL!!!

No you're wrong... because the average is a trend - it is not NOW...

It says that the average people he has played since he began was 0.5 of his score.

So - On average - when he was a private - he played 500 point Cooks.
When he was a Major - he played Privates...
When he was a Colonel - he played Corporals...
When he was a Brig - he played Sargeants...
When he was a Field Marshall - he played Majors...
Now he has 5000 points - he (on average) plays Colonels...

So to raise his relative rank - he needs to play Brigs/Gens/Field Marshalls...
To lower his relative rank - anything below Colonel...

It will be quite telling to see which way his relative rank goes from now...

Of course - being Conqueror - you cannot play anyone which will get you a 1.00 relative rank...

C.

[Queen_Gonorrhea]

All Hail KING_HERPES, Hip Hip Hooray!!

you go get 'em tiger!!

[King_Herpes]

Ouch! I'm starting to feel bad for the Fruit'ster. Would you guys just leave him alone already? Maybe he just didn't do his morning Sodoku and lost his brilliant train of thought which made him carry this relative rank mess into play. He was much better off just pacing back and forth through the thread shaking his computers mouse at congratulatory posts. Then he went and drove the nails in his own coffin with his hum drum statistics and calculated garble. It's sad really.

Don't you go worrying about me herps. You and your sweet little acolytes just keep running around squealing like the stuck piglets you are.

You are a cheat herps. You are also a player who has deliberately taken on far lower ranks than your self. You are a self obsessed individual who has the respect of the aformentioned little piglets running around you and little else. I am confident you will ultimately come unstuck, your type always do.

I am now bored of you, your ilk and this arguement, you have slowly and inexorably descended into farce, as was forecast to me at the start and I agreed with.

Predictable? Yes I am afraid you and those around are very predictable. Fortunately, you are not a true reflection of what a real player is, you are but a cardbord cutout.

I shall not bother to wish you well, because unlike yourself, I do truly despise your kind of person and those around you.

Now please respond with your usual quips and retorts while you attempt to divert attention, once more, away from the reality.

Well it sounds like somebodies bitter. Proving once again that you are a sore loser and a bad sport. I don't want your respect Fruitcake. I would've preferred it if you minded your own business from the get go. Even if I was on the juice and this were baseball then I would still get a good game and a handshake after I cracked three homers out of the away teams park. My records would still be valid in black and white until the day I pissed dirty. As for the supposed cheating - "I did not inhale".

[e_i_pi]

There's a firesale on full body condoms down at the local if anyone wants to shield themselves from all the fluids flying about

[ManBungalow]

There's a firesale on full body condoms down at the local if anyone wants to shield themselves from all the fluids flying about

Good : how many would you suggest buying in these circumstances ??

[Jeff Hardy]

i think you guys are missing the point that the system punishes those that play lower ranks so when KH plays stripers he is risking a large amount of points to gain very little

[prismsaber]

i think you guys are missing the point that the system punishes those that play lower ranks so when KH plays stripers he is risking a large amount of points to gain very little

That would be true if the games were sequential. A striper almost never beats a high ranker in a freestyle game. It's how a number of players amassed a fantastical amount of of points when 8 man freestyle's were more popular. Get 5 or 6 stripers to act as point fodder and the 2-3 good players in those games share the wins, pushing their scores to then unheard of heights.

[FabledIntegral]

i think you guys are missing the point that the system punishes those that play lower ranks so when KH plays stripers he is risking a large amount of points to gain very little

No - you're oblivious if you think that. The entire premise they are arguing against is that the system does NOT adequately punish those that play lower ranks. He is "risking," very little, otherwise he wouldn't be participating in such games... it's secure points.

I'm not questioning Herpes' skill, rather your logic in this.

[Jeff Hardy]

i think you guys are missing the point that the system punishes those that play lower ranks so when KH plays stripers he is risking a large amount of points to gain very little

That would be true if the games were sequential. A striper almost never beats a high ranker in a freestyle game. It's how a number of players amassed a fantastical amount of of points when 8 man freestyle's were more popular. Get 5 or 6 stripers to act as point fodder and the 2-3 good players in those games share the wins, pushing their scores to then unheard of heights.

if the striper understands the map (a lot of stripers have played over 1000 games so would understand a lot of maps) and have great dice then they can win

thats 25 of KHs wins gone for every loss

[Jeff Hardy]

i think you guys are missing the point that the system punishes those that play lower ranks so when KH plays stripers he is risking a large amount of points to gain very little

No - you're oblivious if you think that. The entire premise they are arguing against is that the system does NOT adequately punish those that play lower ranks. He is "risking," very little, otherwise he wouldn't be participating in such games... it's secure points.

I'm not questioning Herpes' skill, rather your logic in this.

stripers arent always terrible players

im sure a lot of them would be able to win 1vs1 against any player if they got great dice

[FabledIntegral]

i think you guys are missing the point that the system punishes those that play lower ranks so when KH plays stripers he is risking a large amount of points to gain very little

No - you're oblivious if you think that. The entire premise they are arguing against is that the system does NOT adequately punish those that play lower ranks. He is "risking," very little, otherwise he wouldn't be participating in such games... it's secure points.

I'm not questioning Herpes' skill, rather your logic in this.

stripers arent always terrible players

im sure a lot of them would be able to win 1vs1 against any player if they got great dice

That has absolutely no relevance. If it's not profitable - he wouldn't do it. Simple. I don't care how "risky" you portray it to be, it generally has consistent, non-risky results. Hence the fact it's even carried out. You say it's 25 wins out the window; well Herpes most likely maintains 25+ streaks vs stripers then so that in the overall gist, he benefits. There's nothing more to it really.

[Jeff Hardy]

That has absolutely no relevance. If it's not profitable - he wouldn't do it. Simple. I don't care how "risky" you portray it to be, it generally has consistent, non-risky results. Hence the fact it's even carried out. You say it's 25 wins out the window; well Herpes most likely maintains 25+ streaks vs stripers then so that in the overall gist, he benefits. There's nothing more to it really.

a lot of players play games that are profitable to their scores but its not all considered farming or easy points or whatever else people call it, why should this be any different?
the fact that he can maintain 25+ streaks makes him worthy of conquerer