TOP PLAYERS OVERRATED!!

[King_Herpes]

Your Pee Wee Herman quotes won't fool anyone here besides an illiterate baboon with a hemorrhaged brain. Nobodies agreeing with a fraction of your moot points except your keyboard. Once again, you're all alone. Feel familiar?

Your diction is fair.
Your flames are bright
But to hear any logic
May take all night.

A poem for me? porkenbeans...how sweet of you. You didn't have to do that.
I might as well grade you on your humor. You get an F for FAIL

[FabledIntegral]

He isn't a noob farmer though, he plays tough games. I also said that not everyone is overrated. Now to your comment about me not being good enough to reach the top: Well...maybe you are in a higher position on the scoreboard because you've played 800+ MORE GAMES THAN ME!!!!! Duh!

Now about a month or two ago when i just got my premium my score was around 1800 and i played completed about 400 games and i remember Fabled-Integral saying that I would never reach the first scoreboard and that all ranks below Major sucked.

Well i told him just to give me time, i said give me about 2 or 3 months then see where i am. Well its been about 2 months and my score rose more than 500 points. So before you continue to state that i will never be at the top you might want to rethink your words. All i have to say about that is, give me time and i will surpass you, easy as that.

So M-D-M all i have to say to you is come back when I have the oppurtunity to play more games in about 2 months from now and i guarantee you that I will not only be on the first page AGAIN, but i will also be contending for the top half of the page as well.

You sucked major dick at that point. I tried to give you advice and instead you went and fucked me over in every single game I played with you. Your excuse was "I'm using my own strategy trying to figure it out." Go figure I wanted you out of my games. You failed to understand the simple concept of "everytime I attack someone else, it weakens the army count of myself and another person, thus unless I can somehow reclaim those armies or gain a significant position advantage, I should keep my army count loss to an absolute minimum." Instead you went and attacked armies you shouldn't have, and decided to leave 2's everywhere. Although I don't recall saying you'd never reach the front of the scoreboard, I wouldn't doubt it considering how you played at that point, aka a complete disregard for slamming other people's armies which was a virtual suicide (to which I returned the favor in everygame it happened... and you merely said I was the one that suicided, maybe you understand the concept of I was just taking you down with me now).

Second, not only is there massive point inflation so it's easier to get your score up, but so many of the previous good players that used to contend in the top games have generally stopped playing or somehow got involved in some massive block between half the playing community. Thus it's easier for the less talented to win the games - that's my view on what's happened at least. Not saying these new players are bad, but I don't think any of them have near the gamesense of the old players. Then again I thought Buizerd/Fantasianasian would never be a top players when I originally played with them and both ended up easily surpassing me, so I could be wrong. Merely my take on things however.

[FabledIntegral]

No shit Sherlock. What you dont grasp is, The same system that put you on top is the same system that says you lose more points than your opponent would. Also, I would like for you to show me any other game where you get to the top without beating the best players.

Keep digging Watson! How about instead of reiterating your autism you go sit on your thumb and spin. You're like the poster boy for map rank and are so buried in your idea of the word best that nobody could convince you that there isn't such a thing on this game. It's like you skip over the most imperative posts and instead search for things that you want to hear just to mull up another dumb reply.

This describes you, not me. Or should I translate to something that you may be able to understand better. "I KNOW YOU ARE, BUT WHAT AM I".
In my opinion, It is not that you are a poor player, It is that you try to prove it by beating up on poor players. And as for the MAP RANK, More and more players will be using it. So you better get used to it spilling over into these forums. It could not come at the worst time for you. But your a Farmer, so you, of all people should know that, "YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW".

Oddly enough, I've seen you use relative rank in your arguments. Well if you want to go by that, which is flawed in my opinion, King_Herpes still would have his average opponent as a colonel while your average opponent is a lieutenant. You still fail, you're not even playing ranking officers while colonel is still a respected position. Faillllllllll.

[lt.pie]

porkchop should be banned for bringing a negative attitude to a site dedicated to fun. The real world is full of people like this guy and this site is no place for negativity.

[Scott-Land]

Iono how to circumvent Prank's ordeal though.

Blessing in disguise- as Prank wouldn't be a general if not for Max......and me of course.

[john9blue]

Pork seemed to like this suggestion of mine. I think it would solve the farming problem (and YES, it is a problem). Post any feedback in that thread, as I would really like to see it implemented.

[Zemljanin]

Wouldn't it be great if someone just organized a goddamn tournament and top, say, 15-25 players scoreboard joined. It could utilize a variety of game types and matches to rule out any chance factor, then whoever took the tournament could be the 'best' and everyone could stop throwing down over it? Could be a recurring tournament so one person couldn't sit on top permanently, but it sure would be fun to watch

An all stars tournament would be fantabulous! However, I doubt it will ever come into fruition. You could bet your rear end I'd be in it though.

I'll PM the big tourney makers and see if anyone would be interested in making it. As I don't have enough experience running them/with enough maps to govern what would be fair, I wouldn't be anywhere near the proper choice. If anyone knows someone who would fit these qualifications one should PM them with the idea. I know Blitz starts 10s of tourneys a month, but I'm not sure he'd be into running such a large tournament.

Imagine the freaking publicity such a tournament would get!

I like this idea very much also. I would add that the top MAP RANK stars were also invited.

According to NS it couldn't be run with tournament privileges because it's private. So, either we need to get the mods/admins to enstate a tournament or hold it old school style where we utilize a thread/PMs to do the whole thing on our own


Incan- perhaps a panel should be set. If anyone else wants in they can state their case

That tournament doesn't have to be private. It would be enough to organize an open qualifications tournament, so, let's say, four players can qualify to the final tourney. In final tournament would play all invited players plus four players from qualifications. That wouldn't lowered the level too much...

[Prankcall]

WTF does this mean.

Blessing in disguise- as Prank wouldn't be a general if not for Max......and me of course.

How in the hell have I benefited from Max or you?! As i recall,I was dominating FS before you even came around trying to play it.

[lgoasklucyl]

That tournament doesn't have to be private. It would be enough to organize an open qualifications tournament, so, let's say, four players can qualify to the final tourney. In final tournament would play all invited players plus four players from qualifications. That wouldn't lowered the level too much...

Problem lies in the fact that I don't see our upper ranks putting 80 points/round at bay if a bunch of lower ranks want in. Unless, of course, certain individuals were contacted before sign-ups and they simply asked first

Still leaves the problem of individuals like Prank who deserve a shot at it, yet wouldn't be able to play a bunch of players.

Another problem I see is properly incorporating game type. A lot (most) of the top players excel exceedingly in freestyle and gain a lot of points there. How would we incorporate free-speeds into said tournament though? I know a lot of them (ie: scott, dat, etc...) play eachother regularly, but tournament wise?

Seems like it would be a lot of work. Totally worth it, but a lot of work.

[The Chosen]

"Statistics are like a drunk with a lamp post: used more for support than illumination."
- Sir Winston Churchill

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli



Never believe them, never put your trust in them...

[Zemljanin]

That tournament doesn't have to be private. It would be enough to organize an open qualifications tournament, so, let's say, four players can qualify to the final tourney. In final tournament would play all invited players plus four players from qualifications. That wouldn't lowered the level too much...

Problem lies in the fact that I don't see our upper ranks putting 80 points/round at bay if a bunch of lower ranks want in. Unless, of course, certain individuals were contacted before sign-ups and they simply asked first

Not bunch, just a few. Let's say the final tourney could have - 12, 16 or more "lords" and only 4 "commons" (not to mention pretty reasonable assumption that those "commons" would also have decent scores).

Still leaves the problem of individuals like Prank who deserve a shot at it, yet wouldn't be able to play a bunch of players.

That's really a shame, but not a sufficient reason to automatically abandon the idea. And after all, maybe lack would even consider to suspend that limit for the tournament (not a decisive question, though)...

Another problem I see is properly incorporating game type. A lot (most) of the top players excel exceedingly in freestyle and gain a lot of points there. How would we incorporate free-speeds into said tournament though? I know a lot of them (ie: scott, dat, etc...) play eachother regularly, but tournament wise?

To me, sequential is THE game. But we don't have a reason to be skinflints - we can organize one sequential tourney, one freestyle and one mixed ...

Seems like it would be a lot of work. Totally worth it, but a lot of work.

Yes, totally worth it!

[porkenbeans]

No shit Sherlock. What you dont grasp is, The same system that put you on top is the same system that says you lose more points than your opponent would. Also, I would like for you to show me any other game where you get to the top without beating the best players.

Keep digging Watson! How about instead of reiterating your autism you go sit on your thumb and spin. You're like the poster boy for map rank and are so buried in your idea of the word best that nobody could convince you that there isn't such a thing on this game. It's like you skip over the most imperative posts and instead search for things that you want to hear just to mull up another dumb reply.

This describes you, not me. Or should I translate to something that you may be able to understand better. "I KNOW YOU ARE, BUT WHAT AM I".
In my opinion, It is not that you are a poor player, It is that you try to prove it by beating up on poor players. And as for the MAP RANK, More and more players will be using it. So you better get used to it spilling over into these forums. It could not come at the worst time for you. But your a Farmer, so you, of all people should know that, "YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW".

Oddly enough, I've seen you use relative rank in your arguments. Well if you want to go by that, which is flawed in my opinion, King_Herpes still would have his average opponent as a colonel while your average opponent is a lieutenant. You still fail, you're not even playing ranking officers while colonel is still a respected position. Faillllllllll.

Fab, You do NOT understand how to use MAP RANK. Kings average opponent is so low, that his average map rank is the lowest that anyone can achieve. It is NOOB FARMER. That is not just 1 or 2 maps. That is an average of all the maps he has ever played. I invite you to do some research on the top, so called leaders. There is, I think, only 2 or 3 in the top 10 that hold an EQ. rank. The rest are Noob Farmers, or Point Hoarders. And they are setting in someone else's chair.
As for me, I do play high rankers. In fact I look for those games. I challenge you to find a single time where I joined a noob game. My average map rank is just two ticks under brawler. Which means that I play on average higher ranks than myself. The opposite is true of the King. He looks for newbies to rape. It is all there for you and everyone else to see.
And oh by the way, The Map Rank is only a tool. It is NOT "flawed". All the stats are correct. You only need figure out how to us it. I see it only getting better in the future. In fact it is the single best improvement in this site, that I have seen in the past 16 months.
Poster boy ? I would be proud of that tag. But the credit goes to Lack and his crew.
Myself and others have been making a lot of noise, it is true. and some have just given up and quit CC. altogether. MAP RANK just may help, to turn some of that around. I can only hope that, this is the case.
Well, this is one member that is very appreciative of all the hard work that has gone in to creating MAP RANK.

[The Chosen]

Monday you have 6 meals in one day.

Tuesday you have no food at all.

Neither of these days has been good for you...

Statistics tell us that you have had an average of 3 square meals a day.

Please stop banging on about bloody statistics!

[Aradhus]

Fab, You do NOT understand how to use MAP RANK. Kings average opponent is so low, that his average map rank is the lowest that anyone can achieve. It is NOOB FARMER. That is not just 1 or 2 maps. That is an average of all the maps he has ever played. I invite you to do some research on the top, so called leaders. There is, I think, only 2 or 3 in the top 10 that hold an EQ. rank. The rest are Noob Farmers, or Point Hoarders. And they are setting in someone else's chair.
As for me, I do play high rankers. In fact I look for those games. I challenge you to find a single time where I joined a noob game. My average map rank is just two ticks under brawler. Which means that I play on average higher ranks than myself. The opposite is true of the King. He looks for newbies to rape. It is all there for you and everyone else to see.
And oh by the way, The Map Rank is only a tool. It is NOT "flawed". All the stats are correct. You only need figure out how to us it. I see it only getting better in the future. In fact it is the single best improvement in this site, that I have seen in the past 16 months.
Poster boy ? I would be proud of that tag. But the credit goes to Lack and his crew.
Myself and others have been making a lot of noise, it is true. and some have just given up and quit CC. altogether. MAP RANK just may help, to turn some of that around. I can only hope that, this is the case.
Well, this is one member that is very appreciative of all the hard work that has gone in to creating MAP RANK.

What is map rank? And how do I find out my own?

[john9blue]

Seems like it would be a lot of work. Totally worth it, but a lot of work.

Yes, totally worth it!

This is why we need unranked games. There's no reason in the world not to have them.

Also, when I type my name into Map Rank, select a map, and click "Map Rank", I just get a blank tab. What's going on? This should probably be in S&BR, but I'll get a faster response here...

[porkenbeans]

Monday you have 6 meals in one day.

Tuesday you have no food at all.

Neither of these days has been good for you...

Statistics tell us that you have had an average of 3 square meals a day.

Please stop banging on about bloody statistics!

It is all about how well you read, or interpret if you will, the available data.
I would interpret the data from your example as, You should only eat 3 meals on Monday, because the stats tell you that, odds are you may not get a meal on Tuesday. So it will be wise to stock your refrigerator with 3 of the meals on Monday.
By knowing how to read the data, ...both days would be happy for me.

[porkenbeans]

Fab, You do NOT understand how to use MAP RANK. Kings average opponent is so low, that his average map rank is the lowest that anyone can achieve. It is NOOB FARMER. That is not just 1 or 2 maps. That is an average of all the maps he has ever played. I invite you to do some research on the top, so called leaders. There is, I think, only 2 or 3 in the top 10 that hold an EQ. rank. The rest are Noob Farmers, or Point Hoarders. And they are setting in someone else's chair.
As for me, I do play high rankers. In fact I look for those games. I challenge you to find a single time where I joined a noob game. My average map rank is just two ticks under brawler. Which means that I play on average higher ranks than myself. The opposite is true of the King. He looks for newbies to rape. It is all there for you and everyone else to see.
And oh by the way, The Map Rank is only a tool. It is NOT "flawed". All the stats are correct. You only need figure out how to us it. I see it only getting better in the future. In fact it is the single best improvement in this site, that I have seen in the past 16 months.
Poster boy ? I would be proud of that tag. But the credit goes to Lack and his crew.
Myself and others have been making a lot of noise, it is true. and some have just given up and quit CC. altogether. MAP RANK just may help, to turn some of that around. I can only hope that, this is the case.
Well, this is one member that is very appreciative of all the hard work that has gone in to creating MAP RANK.

What is map rank? And how do I find out my own?

Are you running Firefox ?
I had mine up and running in just minute. It was easy, and that's coming from someone that does not NOT know a lot about computers. Go here, it is fast and easy. viewtopic.php?f=59&t=64678&start=135#p1598951

[maxatstuy]

Map Rank For boston redd

Options:

Map Rank Points Win/Loss Unique Defeats Kill Ratio Relative Rank
Totals7 Cook690 -890 88 from 799(11%) 276 (21) Petty Thug (14%)125 Gladiator (2.917)

WOW...he pwns you porkandbeans, his score might be 84, but he has a Relative rank of 2.917...That guy deserves to be conqueror

[Geger]

Kings average opponent is so low, that his average map rank is the lowest that anyone can achieve.

Do you why? Because his points are too high.
Let's play a bit with statistic. You said before that a Conqueror must plays or wins against all players on CC. Fair, but too much. We make a limit, that King plays every top 1000 players once.
Agree??
Fine, now we calculate his relative rank....
...(copy+paste the 4 pages of scoreboards to my spreadsheet)
...(sum the points and divide with 1000)
...(divide the number with King's point and change format to %)

I get 43%. He is a Noobfarmer!!

What?? top 1000 is too much, the points from the 1000th player is too low.
OK. We limit to top 250....

I get 53%. He is still a Noobfarmer!!

Still not enough? We limit to top 100. (sorry King, hope 100 opponents are enough for you )
...

I get 61%. He is not a Noobfarmer anymore. But still a Pointhoarder!!

So, my suggestion : stop talk about statistic.

[Mr Changsha]

Kings average opponent is so low, that his average map rank is the lowest that anyone can achieve.

Do you why? Because his points are too high.
Let's play a bit with statistic. You said before that a Conqueror must plays or wins against all players on CC. Fair, but too much. We make a limit, that King plays every top 1000 players once.
Agree??
Fine, now we calculate his relative rank....
...(copy+paste the 4 pages of scoreboards to my spreadsheet)
...(sum the points and divide with 1000)
...(divide the number with King's point and change format to %)

I get 43%. He is a Noobfarmer!!

What?? top 1000 is too much, the points from the 1000th player is too low.
OK. We limit to top 250....

I get 53%. He is still a Noobfarmer!!

Still not enough? We limit to top 100. (sorry King, hope 100 opponents are enough for you )
...

I get 61%. He is not a Noobfarmer anymore. But still a Pointhoarder!!

So, my suggestion : stop talk about statistic.

Very, very good post indeed. You made the point I wanted to make, but sadly I wouldn't trust my maths skills in a public forum!

[Geger]

Thanks...

I don't like the definition of Noobfarmer, that been taken from relative Rank.

If King plays against Porkenbeans, his relative rank will be 37%. He is a Noobfarmer. He farms a Noob, and who is the Noob??

Sorry porkenbeans, I don't mean to say that. If he plays against me, I'll be a Noob too.

Next Suggestion : Change the definition of Noobfarmer!!

[porkenbeans]

Map Rank For boston redd

Options:

Map Rank Points Win/Loss Unique Defeats Kill Ratio Relative Rank
Totals7 Cook690 -890 88 from 799(11%) 276 (21) Petty Thug (14%)125 Gladiator (2.917)

WOW...he pwns you porkandbeans, his score might be 84, but he has a Relative rank of 2.917...That guy deserves to be conqueror

OK, Yours is another example of, not knowing how to interpret the data.

You took the guy in dead last on the leaderboard.

He has 86 points.

He has played 800 games.

He likes to play 6-man games. Many of which are against top brass.

His map rank is Gladiator, the highest you can get.

He plays a wide variety of maps.

OK, If all this data tells you that he is a good player, You are NOT understanding how to use this tool.
All you see is the "Gladiator" tag on his map rank column. Then throw your hands in the air and yell BS.
This data is not flawed. It is the true data as recorded. The "Glad." tag is only showing you that he plays most, er all, of his games against higher ranked players. Which is exactly what I would expect from the guy at the bottom. This should also tell you that, If he were to play some lower ranked players he should be able to easily climb a little higher on the LB.
Think about this, What if, insted of a "glad." we found an "Eq." tag under his map rank column ? Well this would tell you, that this guy is most likely the worst player, to ever roll the dice at CC. He would be getting killed in, cooks only games.
The info. that can be learned from the map rank column, only tells you weather a player mostly plays against players above or below his own rank. It does NOT tell you that he is the best player at CC because he plays more above his rank than anyone else.
Oh, and by the way, there is more than just the "map rank" column to glean info. from at MAP RANK.

[FabledIntegral]

No shit Sherlock. What you dont grasp is, The same system that put you on top is the same system that says you lose more points than your opponent would. Also, I would like for you to show me any other game where you get to the top without beating the best players.

Keep digging Watson! How about instead of reiterating your autism you go sit on your thumb and spin. You're like the poster boy for map rank and are so buried in your idea of the word best that nobody could convince you that there isn't such a thing on this game. It's like you skip over the most imperative posts and instead search for things that you want to hear just to mull up another dumb reply.

This describes you, not me. Or should I translate to something that you may be able to understand better. "I KNOW YOU ARE, BUT WHAT AM I".
In my opinion, It is not that you are a poor player, It is that you try to prove it by beating up on poor players. And as for the MAP RANK, More and more players will be using it. So you better get used to it spilling over into these forums. It could not come at the worst time for you. But your a Farmer, so you, of all people should know that, "YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW".

Oddly enough, I've seen you use relative rank in your arguments. Well if you want to go by that, which is flawed in my opinion, King_Herpes still would have his average opponent as a colonel while your average opponent is a lieutenant. You still fail, you're not even playing ranking officers while colonel is still a respected position. Faillllllllll.

Fab, You do NOT understand how to use MAP RANK. Kings average opponent is so low, that his average map rank is the lowest that anyone can achieve. It is NOOB FARMER. That is not just 1 or 2 maps. That is an average of all the maps he has ever played. I invite you to do some research on the top, so called leaders. There is, I think, only 2 or 3 in the top 10 that hold an EQ. rank. The rest are Noob Farmers, or Point Hoarders. And they are setting in someone else's chair.
As for me, I do play high rankers. In fact I look for those games. I challenge you to find a single time where I joined a noob game. My average map rank is just two ticks under brawler. Which means that I play on average higher ranks than myself. The opposite is true of the King. He looks for newbies to rape. It is all there for you and everyone else to see.
And oh by the way, The Map Rank is only a tool. It is NOT "flawed". All the stats are correct. You only need figure out how to us it. I see it only getting better in the future. In fact it is the single best improvement in this site, that I have seen in the past 16 months.
Poster boy ? I would be proud of that tag. But the credit goes to Lack and his crew.
Myself and others have been making a lot of noise, it is true. and some have just given up and quit CC. altogether. MAP RANK just may help, to turn some of that around. I can only hope that, this is the case.
Well, this is one member that is very appreciative of all the hard work that has gone in to creating MAP RANK.

You're still too DENSE to understand what I just said. Noob Farmer/Point Hoarder doesn't mean ANYTHING. What matters is the number. You can be an equalitarian and have 1000 points, and all it meant is that you played other people still at 1000. Thus it means jack - something you apparently can't comprehend because you didn't address my point.

Here's an example. Completely hypothetical.

King_Herpes permanent rank has always been 5000. Just for the sake of this situation let's say he started off at 5000. Let's say he will ONLY play people ranked at 2500. Let's say he always wins 4 games and loses 1 right after winning those 4. Thus his score would go up to 5040, then the loss would set him back to 5000. He is in a permanent equilibrium.

Now you have a rank of 2500 and only play other people ranked 2500. You win one game then always lose the game directly after, thus you gain 20 points and lose it right after. You are also in a perfect never ending equilibrium.

Now according to map rank, you are an equalitarian and he is a noob farmer. Your relative rank is 1.00 and his is .500. Who is the better player? Anyone with any brains could analyze the situation and figure out that the person that wins 4 games and loses 1 is superior to the person that plays the same skill level and wins 1 loses 1.

The reason I said map rank's relative rank was flawed, which it IS, is because it can't possibly process when your ascension in rank happened. It just gives out facts about your overall games. Thus if I started a new account, was at 1000 points, played 1000 games, lost EVERY single game to a brigadier and had 1 point total then realized "well even though I can't beat this brig, I'm better than sergeants and stuff." This player with 1 point begins to farm other people. He gets good at it, and wins 100% of his games, and on his way up most of the players still have 5x his score. So he continues farming, and eventually he gets so good at farming he reaches the score of 5000. What happens? Does his relative rank say noob farmer? NO. It shows him as playing people ranked like 2890390x his score. It shows him as having possibly the BEST relative rank on this site. Even if it only included wins, you could still apply the same concept of a person who played at equilibrium vs cadets when he was a cook by winning maybe 1/3 of his games, then somehow got good enough to farm.

Thus don't pull out random statistics like you are trying to claim your equalitarian actually means something, when it merely shows you STILL PLAY LESSER RANKS THAN KING_HERPES.

[Crazy Mexican]

To sum up this entire 20 page forum...

1. some people farm
2. some people farm without realizing it
3. some people are good at a certain game type/map
4. some people are just good

and most importantly

5. WE WILL NEVER KNOW IF RANK= SKILL



p.s If I see another stupid comment on this I laugh

[RiskTycoon]

it's obvious King_Herpes sucks ..... THOTA figured they would show him how bad

see, all you had to do was ask and we would have shown you .... it's fun taking his points to put our pal back in the number 1 spot ... and we'll keep doing it till he starts making them private and puts us all on ignore ... we'll keep you posted on that one ... so far it looks like that is what is happening .... even more obvious

too funny .... so there is your proof ..... all in black and white