Re: How to get a colonel in under 100 games
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:29 pm
JRH,
Non-escalating? Maybe you missed one or more thing.
Non-escalating? Maybe you missed one or more thing.
Conquer Club, a free online multiplayer variation of a popular world domination board game.
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=117940
Joodoo wrote:No offense, but this thread contradicts the ranking part of the instructions on the game. It clearly states that in order to become a colonel, you need to have a score of between (and including) 2500 and 2999 and FINISHED at least 100 GAMES. How would it then be possible to get to colonel UNDER 100 games?
Kalano Sanchin wrote:Joodoo wrote:No offense, but this thread contradicts the ranking part of the instructions on the game. It clearly states that in order to become a colonel, you need to have a score of between (and including) 2500 and 2999 and FINISHED at least 100 GAMES. How would it then be possible to get to colonel UNDER 100 games?
I could of completed 1000 games and then got to colonel in under 100 games once I reached 1000 games
Joodoo wrote:Kalano Sanchin wrote:Joodoo wrote:No offense, but this thread contradicts the ranking part of the instructions on the game. It clearly states that in order to become a colonel, you need to have a score of between (and including) 2500 and 2999 and FINISHED at least 100 GAMES. How would it then be possible to get to colonel UNDER 100 games?
I could of completed 1000 games and then got to colonel in under 100 games once I reached 1000 games
Sorry if I interpreted it wrong, I thought that he might have been directing this thread towards new players with little or no game experience and teach them how to increase their score at a rapid rate. I felt getting to colonel under 100 games would be misleading if that was the case.
ljex wrote:Joodoo wrote:Kalano Sanchin wrote:Joodoo wrote:No offense, but this thread contradicts the ranking part of the instructions on the game. It clearly states that in order to become a colonel, you need to have a score of between (and including) 2500 and 2999 and FINISHED at least 100 GAMES. How would it then be possible to get to colonel UNDER 100 games?
I could of completed 1000 games and then got to colonel in under 100 games once I reached 1000 games
Sorry if I interpreted it wrong, I thought that he might have been directing this thread towards new players with little or no game experience and teach them how to increase their score at a rapid rate. I felt getting to colonel under 100 games would be misleading if that was the case.
most people see getting to colonel as having a score of 2500 not having the icon next to your name
Bruceswar wrote:ljex wrote:Joodoo wrote:Kalano Sanchin wrote:Joodoo wrote:No offense, but this thread contradicts the ranking part of the instructions on the game. It clearly states that in order to become a colonel, you need to have a score of between (and including) 2500 and 2999 and FINISHED at least 100 GAMES. How would it then be possible to get to colonel UNDER 100 games?
I could of completed 1000 games and then got to colonel in under 100 games once I reached 1000 games
Sorry if I interpreted it wrong, I thought that he might have been directing this thread towards new players with little or no game experience and teach them how to increase their score at a rapid rate. I felt getting to colonel under 100 games would be misleading if that was the case.
most people see getting to colonel as having a score of 2500 not having the icon next to your name
Actually that is false. Try getting into 2500+ games with a lt logo. You will have an uphill fight every time.
Kiron wrote:great...way to spill the beans to my success
chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:great...way to spill the beans to my success
Farming?
Game 878316
I can't remember the last time I played a ?
I bet it was challenging and fun for you Enjoy your star.
nippersean wrote:chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:great...way to spill the beans to my success
Farming?
Game 878316
I can't remember the last time I played a ?
I bet it was challenging and fun for you Enjoy your star.
Well I think that's the point with a multiplayer, freestyle strategy using diplomacy as a main weapon.
Works really well against inexperienced players.
chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:great...way to spill the beans to my success
Farming?
Game 878316
I can't remember the last time I played a ?
I bet it was challenging and fun for you Enjoy your star.
Joodoo wrote:No offense, but this thread contradicts the ranking part of the instructions on the game. It clearly states that in order to become a colonel, you need to have a score of between (and including) 2500 and 2999 and FINISHED at least 100 GAMES. How would it then be possible to get to colonel UNDER 100 games?
Kiron wrote:chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:great...way to spill the beans to my success
Farming?
Game 878316
I can't remember the last time I played a ?
I bet it was challenging and fun for you Enjoy your star.
dude, that game was when I was about 1700-2000 points, not my fault those players haven't improved or stopped playing...
chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:great...way to spill the beans to my success
Farming?
Game 878316
I can't remember the last time I played a ?
I bet it was challenging and fun for you Enjoy your star.
dude, that game was when I was about 1700-2000 points, not my fault those players haven't improved or stopped playing...
You have 325 completed games...230 of those (70%) had at least one player with less than 1100 points (had not yet reached the first rank increase from ?). Most of them had several players in them that were ?s and cooks. Also, anyone who is interested can simply Map Rank you. You've played less than 30 of the maps on CC and most of them you have a "point hoarder" rating. This is not the CC experience and no one should take advice from you.
Oh, and I do not consider what you are doing punishable farming. You create games on difficult maps that like a light piece of shit, eventually float to the top of the game finder list and are joined by low ranked players, or other experienced players looking to get a risk free farming experience (I think punishable farming should be limited to higher ranked players inviting low ranked players to games). However, these games can't be fun or challenging for you and it is clear that rank is the only thing that matters. Hopefully no new players read this and buy in to your strategy.
Arama86n wrote:still a bad example chemefreak as Kiron *created* that game, he can hardly be blamed for lowranking people joining? (unless ofc he invited them in which case...)
Now, he says it was long before he was general so the below is a moot point but, if he had created that game this week, I'd applaude him for playing random people from that rank, not ridicule him for it.
chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:chemefreak wrote:Kiron wrote:great...way to spill the beans to my success
Farming?
Game 878316
I can't remember the last time I played a ?
I bet it was challenging and fun for you Enjoy your star.
dude, that game was when I was about 1700-2000 points, not my fault those players haven't improved or stopped playing...
You have 325 completed games...230 of those (70%) had at least one player with less than 1100 points (had not yet reached the first rank increase from ?). Most of them had several players in them that were ?s and cooks. Also, anyone who is interested can simply Map Rank you. You've played less than 30 of the maps on CC and most of them you have a "point hoarder" rating. This is not the CC experience and no one should take advice from you.
Oh, and I do not consider what you are doing punishable farming. You create games on difficult maps that like a light piece of shit, eventually float to the top of the game finder list and are joined by low ranked players, or other experienced players looking to get a risk free farming experience (I think punishable farming should be limited to higher ranked players inviting low ranked players to games). However, these games can't be fun or challenging for you and it is clear that rank is the only thing that matters. Hopefully no new players read this and buy in to your strategy.
chemefreak wrote:
You have 325 completed games...230 of those (70%) had at least one player with less than 1100 points (had not yet reached the first rank increase from ?). Most of them had several players in them that were ?s and cooks. Also, anyone who is interested can simply Map Rank you. You've played less than 30 of the maps on CC and most of them you have a "point hoarder" rating. This is not the CC experience and no one should take advice from you.
Oh, and I do not consider what you are doing punishable farming. You create games on difficult maps that like a light piece of shit, eventually float to the top of the game finder list and are joined by low ranked players, or other experienced players looking to get a risk free farming experience (I think punishable farming should be limited to higher ranked players inviting low ranked players to games). However, these games can't be fun or challenging for you and it is clear that rank is the only thing that matters. Hopefully no new players read this and buy in to your strategy.
mc05025 wrote:I think the most importand is to play 8 players freestyle. It does not matter if you play flat rate or escalating. The importand thing is to know how to use your computer. Of course when you play freestyle you have to be online maaaany hours.
For example:
In escalating games you should know how to steal a kill (begin turn, deploy and assault very quickly) or begin to play immediately when you can (without spending all your day pressing refresh map).
In flat rate when you choose a map like "third crusade" with a mission when you are strong enough you should be the last one to play in the round, take the object and then start immediately the next round before the one who started the round attacks you. (you know that trick, I have seen you and Kiron do it). In the other hand you should know how to start a round, deploy and make 3-4 attacks within 3-4 seconds!! Nobody can start before your attacks.
I do not know if people think that these are cheap tactics but they are very useful and the all generals who play freestyle games are expert at these.
In addition it helps a lot playing a game with a friend even if you do not cheat by using secret diplomacy. (you can make a truce with him very easily, you know how he is going to play and the most important thing, you have an extra reason to support him during the game)
xiangwang wrote:6. Think of your armies as bargaining tools[/b]
Please don't waste your first cash-in on suicidal attacks, think of your armies as bargaining tools in a world of diplomacy to co-hoerce, threaten, etc. Aka, you got a region you want to keep, but has too many borders? Take the 3rd crusade map for example. Spain can be defending by placing all your troops on Castile (need min 15+ to be effective deterrent) and leaving 1s everywhere else. By leaving 1s on your opponent's borders but with a large army behind it, most players won't bother breaking your bonus because they are not threatened by 1s nor will they want to see 15+ troops potentially crashing into their bonuses. This strategy we'll call the arrow because you are threatening anyone who comes in range (aka breaks your bonus).