What makes an honorable conqueror?

[jsnyder748]

Recently, a lot of discussion has been on the topic of conqueror. And why wouldn't there be? It is the highest rank; the "best" player; the dedicated strategist; the most controversial position. Noobs look up to them, veterans learn from their tricks, and everyone judges them .

What do you guys look for in a conqueror?

Also, I have been thinking a lot about how we would all benefit by making conqueror a harder position to hold when you reach it. I have read a few suggestion like; make them play a certain number of people to remain active on the scoreboard (i.e. play 12 unique opponents to remain active and on the scoreboard. 3 quads, 4 triples, twelve 1 v 1's, etc...), make sure they are in an active game at all times so they will not disappear from the scoreboard after 30 days, but they will instantly disappear when all their active games are over, let them have free premium for a year when they reach conqueror (if they are freemium) to encourage them to play more games to free up the conqueror position for others. Obviously we cant make it so hard to hold that it would be a new person every day, but it would give others a chance and help keep the current conqueror honest and respectable by playing more than 1 game at a time.

ill make a pole in a little bit

Grammar Nazis see here = viewtopic.php?f=6&t=188296 i voted for you

[Funkyterrance]

Great topic!
Anyway, a non-farmer would be nice. Ever since I started playing here the current conqueror has been involved in some form of shadiness or another that makes me say to myself "pffft", what a loser(with a couple close exeptions).
I would like for the conqueror position to be something immune to shady play and untainted. So far I've not been able to see that and I think that's pretty fekking sad.
I'd like to respect the conqueror as someone who was legitimately better than the rest, even for the shortest of times, not just another player willing to compromise their reputation for the sake of getting the highest score. It should be more like the kid's game of "King of the Mountain" and less like the kid who steals people's lunch money.

[codeblue1018]

FT, I've been fortunate to see many legit and great conquerors; pity you haven't, tho I do understand your frustration. The reality is that players whether conquerors or cooks have favorite maps and one will play those maps if they're good at them. What I respect is a conqueror that isn't afraid to play anyone and starts games for anyone to join. I remember when 8 player games started; the map of choice was of course classic, freestyle, escalating. You should of seen the competition in those games mate; It was truly unreal. Playing with guys in the top 10 of the scoreboard religiously was awesome and seeing how one player could consistently win with that tough of competition put the conqueror position into perspective for me. Players such as Scott-land, poo-maker to name a couple were undoubtedly legit and to win a game here and there against them was a bonus also, lol. I remember Scott-land playing on a lap-top without using a mouse in the days of clickies and still winning left and right. Those were the good ole days for sure. Today, with the invite system, you don't see the quality of games like you used to. I remember those 8 player games filled in minutes; one after another. I'm sure an 8 man speed game would take forever to fill anymore. Not sure why; perhaps the clan world of games our becoming more prevalent now a days? I don't know. Even setting up casual games take days to fill at times. All I know is that this site isn't what it used to be; don't get me wrong, there have been many great improvements but the quality of games, time it takes to fill games and of course the topic at hand; the conqueror are just not the same.

[Bruceswar]

A quick list of legit people..


As Code said...

Scott-land and Poomaker ... Poo was likely the most well rounded player to ever play CC.

I know some will not agree with me, but Herpes was great on City Mogul and made number 1 doing it.

Sjnap

KP

TheBest217

All these people I listed are legit.. I missed a few likely.


Rabbit is underrated since some of his past actions were less than favorable, but he is killer player.

I can only speak on those who I have played with or vs.

[Swimmerdude99]

do you consider ljex a legit conqueror?

[codeblue1018]

A quick list of legit people..


As Code said...

Scott-land and Poomaker ... Poo was likely the most well rounded player to ever play CC.

I know some will not agree with me, but Herpes was great on City Mogul and made number 1 doing it.

Sjnap

KP

TheBest217

All these people I listed are legit.. I missed a few likely.


Rabbit is underrated since some of his past actions were less than favorable, but he is killer player.

I can only speak on those who I have played with or vs.

I was just reading through some of the 8man game chat with all of us; a game where I won; it was hysterical.

[Bruceswar]

do you consider ljex a legit conqueror?

If Ljex had not foed people.. then he would be more legit, but... overall ljex was only good at one style. He was sub 2500 at most everything else. The other people I mentioned were not. They could play it all.

[Gabriel13]

A quick list of legit people..


As Code said...

Scott-land and Poomaker ... Poo was likely the most well rounded player to ever play CC.

I know some will not agree with me, but Herpes was great on City Mogul and made number 1 doing it.

Sjnap

KP

TheBest217

All these people I listed are legit.. I missed a few likely.


Rabbit is underrated since some of his past actions were less than favorable, but he is killer player.

I can only speak on those who I have played with or vs.

Herpes also made the highest score in CC history doing it. Now that's something!

[Funkyterrance]

Codeblue, Bruce, those sound like great times. You guys have obviously been around a lot longer than me and I've heard the stories but I'm glad you understand my position, not having actually witnessed it. It's good to hear that at one point there was a conqueror you could really respect though and I feel you veterans may hold the key to bringing to light the elements that made it possible, having seen both sides of the rainbow.
I'm not sure if the Ljex comment was directed at me but tbh I don't know all that much about him. I was friends with him when I first started playing CC and he invited me to a couple of Oasis games in which I learned a lot but I was really too new to be a judge of whether or not what we were doing was completely legit or not. I can say that he didn't tell me what to do and I botched a couple games in which he got pretty aggravated as a result.
As far as KH, I thought he was funny as hell but I'm not going to let that cloud my judgment. I'm fairly sure he was involved in some pretty questionable stuff. Perhaps not against the letter of the rules but not what I personally consider to be fitting of the conqueror title.

[Mr Changsha]

Ahunda would be a worthy conqueror. Looking at his last 100 games and his current score I can see a player who is truly, without question, superior to almost all of us.

As I said, a worthy conqueror.

There haven't been many. Those early freestyle 8 man standard conquerors had the whiff of game-throwing (controversial maybe but that is my view nonetheless), the 1vs1 freestyle conquerors preyed on the weak and while their performance could be respected -as few of us could do it - one knew that if you played them sequentially they weren't much better than 2500 level players, if at all. The 8 man casual freestyle conquerors were a mixed bunch; one or two seemed fairly legit. but others frankly shamed the site and all of them were far too narrow in their game selections. Again, you could place them on dubs, trips or quads and they would more than likely be nothing special.

There have been a few great conquerors...sadly most of them have ranged from tedious specialists on horribly skewed settings, to farmers, to secret diplomacists, to multis, to ranchers.

It is all very depressing.

[KraphtOne]

A quick list of legit people..


As Code said...

Scott-land and Poomaker ... Poo was likely the most well rounded player to ever play CC.

I know some will not agree with me, but Herpes was great on City Mogul and made number 1 doing it.

Sjnap

KP

TheBest217

All these people I listed are legit.. I missed a few likely.


Rabbit is underrated since some of his past actions were less than favorable, but he is killer player.

I can only speak on those who I have played with or vs.

Herpes also made the highest score in CC history doing it. Now that's something!

Nope

[codeblue1018]

Ahunda would be a worthy conqueror. Looking at his last 100 games and his current score I can see a player who is truly, without question, superior to almost all of us.

As I said, a worthy conqueror.

There haven't been many. Those early freestyle 8 man standard conquerors had the whiff of game-throwing (controversial maybe but that is my view nonetheless), the 1vs1 freestyle conquerors preyed on the weak and while their performance could be respected -as few of us could do it - one knew that if you played them sequentially they weren't much better than 2500 level players, if at all. The 8 man casual freestyle conquerors were a mixed bunch; one or two seemed fairly legit. but others frankly shamed the site and all of them were far too narrow in their game selections. Again, you could place them on dubs, trips or quads and they would more than likely be nothing special.

There have been a few great conquerors...sadly most of them have ranged from tedious specialists on horribly skewed settings, to farmers, to secret diplomacists, to multis, to ranchers.

It is all very depressing.

Lol, are you serious? All those names Bruce and I mentioned on the 8player games were without a doubt legit; there were no game throwing in any way shape or form; the game chat clearly proves this notion, lol not too mention, I was in many of those games. As far as putting those players in team games, whether dubs, trips; everyone of those guys were above and beyond the normal, casual team player. I have no idea if you played games with us back then Changsha, but if you did, you wouldn't have A. Made those comments and B. know that these players were elite in every facet while having zero controversy to their names.

[Funkyterrance]

Lol, are you serious? All those names Bruce and I mentioned on the 8player games were without a doubt legit; there were no game throwing in any way shape or form; the game chat clearly proves this notion, lol not too mention, I was in many of those games. As far as putting those players in team games, whether dubs, trips; everyone of those guys were above and beyond the normal, casual team player. I have no idea if you played games with us back then Changsha, but if you did, you wouldn't have A. Made those comments and B. know that these players were elite in every facet while having zero controversy to their names.

I'm guessing that Mr C, Iike myself, is just an ultra purist and the environment you are speaking of could possibly lead to collusion, etc. I don't think he's calling them all cheaters.
What would be cool would be if these games that decided the conqueror were more public, like a one a week occurrence speed game where everyone on cc could watch and make their own judgments. There could even be a thread dedicated to discussing the latest match.

[Agent 86]

Lol, are you serious? All those names Bruce and I mentioned on the 8player games were without a doubt legit; there were no game throwing in any way shape or form; the game chat clearly proves this notion, lol not too mention, I was in many of those games. As far as putting those players in team games, whether dubs, trips; everyone of those guys were above and beyond the normal, casual team player. I have no idea if you played games with us back then Changsha, but if you did, you wouldn't have A. Made those comments and B. know that these players were elite in every facet while having zero controversy to their names.

I wasn't around in circa 2007-2008 codeblue, think Mr C was but he probably was just learning the ropes and didn't really know what it took to be conqueror back then ( don't quote me on that, he may well have ). But since I've been around mostly what he says is true. Especially in recent times. To me the reason we have had so much controversy is because of the way the scoreboard operates. It leans itself to a player who only plays 1 or 2 particular maps with very strategic game play, so doesn't give a true picture of what a conqueror should be. The conqueror should be well rounded on many maps and settings. We all know of many players on this site who take on anyone anytime in a diverse range of maps and settings who hold down either General status and or Brig Status. They are the true conquerors of this site but can't quite get to the ultimate spot because of the way the scoreboard works.

I used to look at the scoreboard in my early days and admire some of the scores that conqueror's achieved, I still think KH, Scott-land, Poomaker were worthy of the title. Also I loved the way KH posted, was very humorous and with a touch of real class.

[NoSurvivors]

What would be cool would be if these games that decided the conqueror were more public, like a one a week occurrence speed game where everyone on cc could watch and make their own judgments. There could even be a thread dedicated to discussing the latest match.

Cool idea, but then it would be just a bunch of players helping the other member playing vs the conqueror.. however if it was manditory (if the conq wanted) for it to be foggy.. then yeah maybe

[Funkyterrance]

What would be cool would be if these games that decided the conqueror were more public, like a one a week occurrence speed game where everyone on cc could watch and make their own judgments. There could even be a thread dedicated to discussing the latest match.

Cool idea, but then it would be just a bunch of players helping the other member playing vs the conqueror.. however if it was manditory (if the conq wanted) for it to be foggy.. then yeah maybe

Hmm, could be a mini-tourney then of the top 10 in 1v1? Winner gets to play against conqueror? I realize drop/turn issues but that's the only way to prevent what you are talking about. If this whole "no attack first turn" suggestion goes through it would be even better.

[codeblue1018]

Lol, are you serious? All those names Bruce and I mentioned on the 8player games were without a doubt legit; there were no game throwing in any way shape or form; the game chat clearly proves this notion, lol not too mention, I was in many of those games. As far as putting those players in team games, whether dubs, trips; everyone of those guys were above and beyond the normal, casual team player. I have no idea if you played games with us back then Changsha, but if you did, you wouldn't have A. Made those comments and B. know that these players were elite in every facet while having zero controversy to their names.

I wasn't around in circa 2007-2008 codeblue, think Mr C was but he probably was just learning the ropes and didn't really know what it took to be conqueror back then ( don't quote me on that, he may well have ). But since I've been around mostly what he says is true. Especially in recent times. To me the reason we have had so much controversy is because of the way the scoreboard operates. It leans itself to a player who only plays 1 or 2 particular maps with very strategic game play, so doesn't give a true picture of what a conqueror should be. The conqueror should be well rounded on many maps and settings. We all know of many players on this site who take on anyone anytime in a diverse range of maps and settings who hold down either General status and or Brig Status. They are the true conquerors of this site but can't quite get to the ultimate spot because of the way the scoreboard works.

I used to look at the scoreboard in my early days and admire some of the scores that conqueror's achieved, I still think KH, Scott-land, Poomaker were worthy of the title. Also I loved the way KH posted, was very humorous and with a touch of real class.

I would agree mate especially in recent times. The only player that comes to mind without controversy and from what I've witnessed as a great player is MC; if I forgot someone, I apologize. I believe that the invite system has caused one of the major contributing factors to shenanigans; although it has its purpose. Back then, players created team games and hoped that the players that joined had at least some knowledge in team play. The only way around this was to constantly hit refresh to see who joined a particular players team; if it wasn't satisfactory, the player dropped the game. A player by the name "jork", a former conqueror and one hell of a team player received his points primarily on dubs and trips. He would create games and allow anyone to join, cooks, privates and the like and still win 80% of his games. Point in making is, I keep referring to "back then" but back then this site was much more enjoyable and really scandal free until the likes of Krusher and a few others; minor in comparison to today. To boot, there were more members as a whole and many, many players playing with and against each other serving more as a diverse group in general. I wish some more old timers would weigh in here; as FT pointed out, these were the players that started this site; ones that knew what worked and didn't work. It would for sure be an Interesting read.

[DoomYoshi]

Whoever has been banned the most.
Whoever has the most rules created in response to their behavior.
Emmdizzle.

That's my short list.

[NoSurvivors]

Whoever has been banned the most.
Whoever has the most rules created in response to their behavior.
Emmdizzle.

That's my short list.

So GLG, GLG.. and Emdizzle? lol

[Shannon Apple]

Honestly, I look at what they have medals wise. A conquerer with only 2 or 3 medals is not a good all round player and probably would be fleeced of his points by any one of us outside of his comfort settings.

We could all perfect one map, one set of settings and race to the top score, but where's the fun in that?

That's why I think the conquerer position should come with a minimum medals requirement. It would force them to play more maps, more settings and become a better player on their way to the top.

[jsnyder748]

Honestly, I look at what they have medals wise. A conquerer with only 2 or 3 medals is not a good all round player and probably would be fleeced of his points by any one of us outside of his comfort settings.

We could all perfect one map, one set of settings and race to the top score, but where's the fun in that?

That's why I think the conquerer position should come with a minimum medals requirement. It would force them to play more maps, more settings and become a better player on their way to the top.

normally I would agree with that statement, but mc05025 is one exception. He has played a wide variety of games, doesn't have many medals and has exceeded at all forms of strategy. How fast he was able to pick up each setting amazes me. At first I thought he was a multi, but knowing him now I would never accuse him of this.

[Mr Changsha]

Ahunda would be a worthy conqueror. Looking at his last 100 games and his current score I can see a player who is truly, without question, superior to almost all of us.

As I said, a worthy conqueror.

There haven't been many. Those early freestyle 8 man standard conquerors had the whiff of game-throwing (controversial maybe but that is my view nonetheless), the 1vs1 freestyle conquerors preyed on the weak and while their performance could be respected -as few of us could do it - one knew that if you played them sequentially they weren't much better than 2500 level players, if at all. The 8 man casual freestyle conquerors were a mixed bunch; one or two seemed fairly legit. but others frankly shamed the site and all of them were far too narrow in their game selections. Again, you could place them on dubs, trips or quads and they would more than likely be nothing special.

There have been a few great conquerors...sadly most of them have ranged from tedious specialists on horribly skewed settings, to farmers, to secret diplomacists, to multis, to ranchers.

It is all very depressing.

Lol, are you serious? All those names Bruce and I mentioned on the 8player games were without a doubt legit; there were no game throwing in any way shape or form; the game chat clearly proves this notion, lol not too mention, I was in many of those games. As far as putting those players in team games, whether dubs, trips; everyone of those guys were above and beyond the normal, casual team player. I have no idea if you played games with us back then Changsha, but if you did, you wouldn't have A. Made those comments and B. know that these players were elite in every facet while having zero controversy to their names.

Two points:

1. It is simply inaccurate to say there was zero controversy. There were blocks...

2. You mis-read what I wrote (and I wrote it deliberately carefully) regarding the competence of the players you admire. I didn't say those players couldn't play dubs, trips or quads well. Most of them could play very well indeed. It was other kinds of conqueror who I claimed were far too narrow to be worth much.

[Funkyterrance]

That's why I think the conquerer position should come with a minimum medals requirement. It would force them to play more maps, more settings and become a better player on their way to the top.

I think that this is another good idea for a qualification for conqueror though. A player should have to "make his/her bones" before getting that particular medal(conqueror). I know I wouldn't qualify.

[DoomYoshi]

Whoever has been banned the most.
Whoever has the most rules created in response to their behavior.
Emmdizzle.

That's my short list.

So GLG, GLG.. and Emdizzle? lol

GLG, Blitz, Kiron, Emmdizzle.

If the weak minded of the site get their panties in a bunch over it, then I am for it.

Basically, I think anyone who can figure out an exploit before there is a rule against it and exploit it so that a rule is created for it, this is exactly what life, and CC, is about. Anything less is just bullshit. Anyone who thinks playing SoC settings is a valid measure of greatness shouldn't be allowed to play.

[Funkyterrance]

Basically, I think anyone who can figure out an exploit before there is a rule against it and exploit it so that a rule is created for it, this is exactly what life, and CC, is about.

Interesting... tell me more about what life is about for you Yoshi.