Memoirs of TheCrown, site conqueror

[owenshooter]

The mods needed to give the crown a points reset and strip his right to the medal to demonstrate to the community that the behavior is not acceptable.

and maybe even take him off of Team CC, since he isn't really a great representative to hold up to the community...-el Jesus negro

[2dimes]

Uh, so? It's a title on here. It's not the hope diamond.

2dimes, what is sacred, if not our titles?!?!

!?

--Andy

I can't think of anything either.

I'm not against him being stripped of it. Even he is happy with that because we all know that is just. Higher punishment should be reserved for a more malicious crime than exposing an issue with the software.

Owen should probably go look for twill so they can hang out presuming they are not -el multi negro.

[owenshooter]

Uh, so? It's a title on here. It's not the hope diamond.

2dimes, what is sacred, if not our titles?!?!

!?

--Andy

I can't think of anything either.

I'm not against him being stripped of it. Even he is happy with that because we all know that is just. Higher punishment should be reserved for a more malicious crime than exposing an issue with the software.

Owen should probably go look for twill so they can hang out presuming they are not -el multi negro.

Yes, like posts in the forum!!!!-el Jesus Twill negro

[2dimes]

That's probably reasonable.

[rhp 1]

i sad I thought Crown was good guy... I'm still not sure what rule he broke to be reset.. can't take a hostage if someone goes willingly.. I think your explanation makes sense, and I don't have an issue with any of it... laughed some too which is always good...

[Fruitcake]

This would ruin the integrity of the scoreboard and does not show a players true skill level.

Hate to break this to you. The integrity of the scoreboard went south a long long time ago.

I have to say, I am unable to see how this player received a points reset whilst others did not.

Does it matter really?

[BigBallinStalin]

That's a great point, and I don't have much of an argument against it; however, it only justifies punishing the copy-cats of thecrown's strategy.

That, and there's this very vague line of legitimacy which most of us cross. Many of us play particularly complicated maps and settings in order to run circles around most of our opponents. This is collusion with other teammates in manipulating the scoreboard. Granted, the impact is much less--unless one plays many team games, I still don't see a difference between this 'legit' play and thecrown's tactics except in degree, but in kind both are equally illegitimate, in the sense that some call thecrown's strategy illegitmate while neglecting the cheapness of their own strategies. That's mainly why I find most opponents of thecrown to be hypocrites.

To this argument I would like to propose an analogy that I presented in the C&A thread:

This analogy I feel addresses the issue of "those people that do it all the time on a miniscule scale" and what TheCrown did.

Imagine driving with normal American laws.

It is not illegal to slam on the brakes or slam on the gas. While driving in a lane of traffic if someone slammed on the brakes or slammed on the gas once in a great while it would not be a big deal.

If someone was driving and slamming on the gas then slamming on the breaks for 500 miles straight on an expressway I would consider that to be cause for concern. It would also be something that I as an average minded citizen (CC user) would hope that the police (mods) would take care of the situation and show that this behavior is not condoned or appreciated. If they didn't show that the behavior was prohibited then people could start doing this all the time and what would that do for the community at large?

While what they are doing if viewed on a small scale isn't illegal, them doing it on a very large scale is not right and is not better for society as a whole. This is what constitutes his "gross abuse of the system". The mods needed to give the crown a points reset and strip his right to the medal to demonstrate to the community that the behavior is not acceptable.

So, it's okay to abuse the system--especially if most people think it's a legit tactic?
(e.g. teaming up against weaker opposition; playing only on a few complicated maps and settings, etc.)

[owenshooter]

This would ruin the integrity of the scoreboard and does not show a players true skill level.

Hate to break this to you. The integrity of the scoreboard went south a long long time ago.

I have to say, I am unable to see how this player received a points reset whilst others did not.

Does it matter really?

even more interesting... the point reset wasn't to zero, just to where they felt the abuse began.. preferential treatment for a member of Team CC? even if not, it sure does appear as such... this is just ridiculous... harsher penalties for forum violations than people that cheat in games and ruin the integrity of the site... keep up the good work!!!-el Jesus negro

[rhp 1]

That's a great point, and I don't have much of an argument against it; however, it only justifies punishing the copy-cats of thecrown's strategy.

That, and there's this very vague line of legitimacy which most of us cross. Many of us play particularly complicated maps and settings in order to run circles around most of our opponents. This is collusion with other teammates in manipulating the scoreboard. Granted, the impact is much less--unless one plays many team games, I still don't see a difference between this 'legit' play and thecrown's tactics except in degree, but in kind both are equally illegitimate, in the sense that some call thecrown's strategy illegitmate while neglecting the cheapness of their own strategies. That's mainly why I find most opponents of thecrown to be hypocrites.

To this argument I would like to propose an analogy that I presented in the C&A thread:

This analogy I feel addresses the issue of "those people that do it all the time on a miniscule scale" and what TheCrown did.

Imagine driving with normal American laws.

It is not illegal to slam on the brakes or slam on the gas. While driving in a lane of traffic if someone slammed on the brakes or slammed on the gas once in a great while it would not be a big deal.

If someone was driving and slamming on the gas then slamming on the breaks for 500 miles straight on an expressway I would consider that to be cause for concern. It would also be something that I as an average minded citizen (CC user) would hope that the police (mods) would take care of the situation and show that this behavior is not condoned or appreciated. If they didn't show that the behavior was prohibited then people could start doing this all the time and what would that do for the community at large?

While what they are doing if viewed on a small scale isn't illegal, them doing it on a very large scale is not right and is not better for society as a whole. This is what constitutes his "gross abuse of the system". The mods needed to give the crown a points reset and strip his right to the medal to demonstrate to the community that the behavior is not acceptable.

So, it's okay to abuse the system--especially if most people think it's a legit tactic?
(e.g. teaming up against weaker opposition; playing only on a few complicated maps and settings, etc.)

Unfortunately, yes... if it was truly "abuse" I would think there would rules and coding to prevent such tactics... the strong prey on the weak and if someone only plays "complicated" maps/settings so be it? We only have one way atm to determine the top players on CC... there are many suggestions to modify rankings and to more clearly/accurately quantify the best players but unfortunately (or fortunately or who cares) no tools exist @ present

[BigBallinStalin]

Given that the whole process is so arbitrary, why do some people get so uppity about this?

(I'm assuming nearly all of them use the 'legit' tactics that I've mentioned).

It's gotta be jealousy and that odd perception of unfairness when someone does something better than you. The only acceptable conquerors are unsurprisingly lauded by a majority which engages in similar cheap/abusive tactics. Can we get all the hypocrites in here to admit what they are?

[rhp 1]

Given that the whole process is so arbitrary, why do some people get so uppity about this?

(I'm assuming nearly all of them use the 'legit' tactics that I've mentioned).

It's gotta be jealousy and that odd perception of unfairness when someone does something better than you. The only acceptable conquerors are unsurprisingly lauded by a majority which engages in similar cheap/abusive tactics. Can we get all the hypocrites in here to admit what they are?

maybe I'm jaded, or projecting here? but as serious as some on here are about rank and "game ethics" (which I'm loling about atm) and the relentless attacking most top ranked players, it would shock me if those same players wouldn't employ the same tactics if given the opportunity... most lack many things.... time, patience, dedication, intelligence, skill, and any other number of pertinent attributes that former conquerers have/had.... not making a judgement here, just saying it's easy for someone to attack a conquerer for a number of things relating to how they got to the top... but at the same time it's sorta of laughable that the same players attacking those conquerers simply lack the tools in which to have similar results... if they did, many more would try (and most likely fail)... and whatever means are used by whatever conquerer to achieve that goal, like it or not, the vast majority had to works their asses off (whether by "community acceptable" means or not)... all conquerers are temporary, and most people know how "legit" they are (or are not) and if they don't know? they don't care because they're just on here to play a game for a bit and then live their lives... be as righteous as you all want to be, but these ethical diatribes are becoming as silly as they are inane...

[Gweeedo]

Who would want to live their life outside of CC?
WHY???

[BigBallinStalin]

Given that the whole process is so arbitrary, why do some people get so uppity about this?

(I'm assuming nearly all of them use the 'legit' tactics that I've mentioned).

It's gotta be jealousy and that odd perception of unfairness when someone does something better than you. The only acceptable conquerors are unsurprisingly lauded by a majority which engages in similar cheap/abusive tactics. Can we get all the hypocrites in here to admit what they are?

maybe I'm jaded, or projecting here? but as serious as some on here are about rank and "game ethics" (which I'm loling about atm) and the relentless attacking most top ranked players, it would shock me if those same players wouldn't employ the same tactics if given the opportunity... most lack many things.... time, patience, dedication, intelligence, skill, and any other number of pertinent attributes that former conquerers have/had.... not making a judgement here, just saying it's easy for someone to attack a conquerer for a number of things relating to how they got to the top... but at the same time it's sorta of laughable that the same players attacking those conquerers simply lack the tools in which to have similar results... if they did, many more would try (and most likely fail)... and whatever means are used by whatever conquerer to achieve that goal, like it or not, the vast majority had to works their asses off (whether by "community acceptable" means or not)... all conquerers are temporary, and most people know how "legit" they are (or are not) and if they don't know? they don't care because they're just on here to play a game for a bit and then live their lives... be as righteous as you all want to be, but these ethical diatribes are becoming as silly as they are inane...

Yeah, I'm in full agreement with you.

The thing I'll keep hammering on is that thecrown dedicated the time to exploit a legal tactic, which was ex-post labeled as "gross abuse" (arbitrary as that may be). And then we've got all these people on here using similarly cheap tactics and whining about thecrown--when those same players would be indicted as 'cheaters' if they simply spent more time (and games) exploiting the 'legitimate' tactics which they currently use.

All of this annoys me because of that hypocrisy, ya know?

[rhp 1]

Given that the whole process is so arbitrary, why do some people get so uppity about this?

(I'm assuming nearly all of them use the 'legit' tactics that I've mentioned).

It's gotta be jealousy and that odd perception of unfairness when someone does something better than you. The only acceptable conquerors are unsurprisingly lauded by a majority which engages in similar cheap/abusive tactics. Can we get all the hypocrites in here to admit what they are?

maybe I'm jaded, or projecting here? but as serious as some on here are about rank and "game ethics" (which I'm loling about atm) and the relentless attacking most top ranked players, it would shock me if those same players wouldn't employ the same tactics if given the opportunity... most lack many things.... time, patience, dedication, intelligence, skill, and any other number of pertinent attributes that former conquerers have/had.... not making a judgement here, just saying it's easy for someone to attack a conquerer for a number of things relating to how they got to the top... but at the same time it's sorta of laughable that the same players attacking those conquerers simply lack the tools in which to have similar results... if they did, many more would try (and most likely fail)... and whatever means are used by whatever conquerer to achieve that goal, like it or not, the vast majority had to works their asses off (whether by "community acceptable" means or not)... all conquerers are temporary, and most people know how "legit" they are (or are not) and if they don't know? they don't care because they're just on here to play a game for a bit and then live their lives... be as righteous as you all want to be, but these ethical diatribes are becoming as silly as they are inane...

Yeah, I'm in full agreement with you.

The thing I'll keep hammering on is that thecrown dedicated the time to exploit a legal tactic, which was ex-post labeled as "gross abuse" (arbitrary as that may be). And then we've got all these people on here using similarly cheap tactics and whining about thecrown--when those same players would be indicted as 'cheaters' if they simply spent more time (and games) exploiting the 'legitimate' tactics which they currently use.

All of this annoys me because of that hypocrisy, ya know?

Couldn't agree more... I think any player who's ever been at or near 3000 points has used tactics that many of these moralists denegrate... some more egregiously than others... I know I have... that doesn't mean ur a poor player or a great player or anything in between... it just is... you can't legislate everything, and I don't think you should anyhow. But I agree, in short, its just jealously by the naysayers imo

[jiminski]

... I think any player who's ever been at or near 3000 points has used tactics that many of these moralists denegrate...

I am reluctant to comment upon anything else in this thread regarding thecrown issue (just for fun, in passing, without great care and very little moral judgement from my part, i think it's pretty clear what his goal was. It took a very impressive feat of orchestration, so his cover story, though sweet, was not quite persuasive.)

I do however feel compelled to take issue with your point above. Many individuals play the game with neither gimmick nor manipulation and reach up to around 3,000. i concede that you have to be something quite special to stay above 3k for long without employing some partially cynical method, but that has also been done in quite a few cases i could name too. I know many exceptional players who fluctuate between 2.5k to just over 3k ...
moreover, my knowledge is outdated by about 3 years so i imagine, with point inflation, that 3k is even more achievable for fine players with nought but conventional methods.

ahh "conventional methods" I see the next cognitive ethical quandary before us!

[rhp 1]

... I think any player who's ever been at or near 3000 points has used tactics that many of these moralists denegrate...

I am reluctant to comment upon anything else in this thread regarding thecrown issue (just for fun, in passing, without great care and very little moral judgement from my part, i think it's pretty clear what his goal was. It took a very impressive feat of orchestration, so his cover story, though sweet, was not quite persuasive.)

I do however feel compelled to take issue with your point above. Many individuals play the game with neither gimmick nor manipulation and reach up to around 3,000. i concede that you have to be something quite special to stay above 3k for long without employing some partially cynical method, but that has also been done in quite a few cases i could name too. I know many exceptional players who fluctuate between 2.5k to just over 3k ...
moreover, my knowledge is outdated by about 3 years so i imagine, with point inflation, that 3k is even more achievable for fine players with nought but conventional methods.

ahh "conventional methods" I see the next cognitive ethical quandary before us!

i don't really dispute anything you said here.. and I don't remember saying staying above 3K is impossible playing "whatever" maps and settings and such.. of course it is... but you actually agreed with me when you say " you have to be something quite special to stay above 3k for long without employing some partially cynical method "
that's my point... great players are great players. but to be, and more importantly stay, @ the top... you have to control a lot factors (@ least the vast majority of players on here have to).. its a simple fact... i would argue that staying above 2500 for long periods of time, most have to employ some sort of tactic(s) to stay there... doesn't mean I think it's wrong to do so, in fact, I'm totally fine with it... but the point structure is one that requires certain tactics to stay at a high level for a long period of time.. there's really no way to dispute that...
and besides all of this, "tactics" is not an objective thing... what you call "exceptional" players who don't use a "gimmick" or "manipulation" is your OPINION (no offense meant, your opinion may be awesome for all I know)... fact is, your judgement here would not and could not be objective (as opposed to subjective)... someone may see the list of "legit" players you list, and find what they deem to be questionable methods... which is BBS's point all along I think... something as subjective as how someone gets their points, and how legit they are is a difficult thing to come to a consensus on... hell, CC brass can't even agree, and their opinion, like it or not, is really all that matters.. so why the uproar? lol

[jiminski]

i don't really dispute anything you said here.. and I don't remember saying staying above 3K is impossible playing "whatever" maps and settings and such.. of course it is... but you actually agreed with me when you say " you have to be something quite special to stay above 3k for long without employing some partially cynical method "
that's my point... great players are great players. but to be, and more importantly stay, @ the top... you have to control a lot factors (@ least the vast majority of players on here have to).. its a simple fact... i would argue that staying above 2500 for long periods of time, most have to employ some sort of tactic(s) to stay there... doesn't mean I think it's wrong to do so, in fact, I'm totally fine with it... but the point structure is one that requires certain tactics to stay at a high level for a long period of time.. there's really no way to dispute that...
and besides all of this, "tactics" is not an objective thing... what you call "exceptional" players who don't use a "gimmick" or "manipulation" is your OPINION (no offense meant, your opinion may be awesome for all I know)... fact is, your judgement here would not and could not be objective (as opposed to subjective)... someone may see the list of "legit" players you list, and find what they deem to be questionable methods... which is BBS's point all along I think... something as subjective as how someone gets their points, and how legit they are is a difficult thing to come to a consensus on... hell, CC brass can't even agree, and their opinion, like it or not, is really all that matters.. so why the uproar? lol

heheh exactly... cognitive ethics... i just knew it! "Morality can only be objective if God created morality.. therefore an atheist can not defend the concept of objective morality as, by their own definition, morality is purely an evolutionary bi-product and can only be subjective...."
What we need is PLAYER here so we can really have a meaningless, circular argument

But anyway, you didn't quiiiite say in the first instance what you purport to have said in this.. you said something like .. and forgive me for paraphrasing .. you said something like "..any player who's been at or near to 3k has employed tactics which could be questioned by the self-proclaimed, chattering, moral, cc classes.."
I refute the specific tenet of this motion but probably not the spirit which you intended. I think you got carried away and went too far in order to make your point.

But quite right rhp, I really don't give a toss about what happened and, to a degree, doff my cap to the determination it took ..
Now i am really not feeling serious about this but I think the position of conqueror leads to a strange rush to glory ... a slightly ridiculous search for stardom. Like winning a TV talent show often parodies the broader art form it represents, conqueror has become separated from the purists view of the art.. I think this in fact is Objective.. I think that everyone instinctively knows when they are breaking the code of ethics which is prevalent within any subculture, you intimated as much yourself. Again paraphrasing "I did some dodgy stuff myself to get to 3k..." well by definition your admission that it was dodgy leads me to infer that there is an accepted, unwritten moral code which prevails here.

Does it actually matter? of course it does ... but by an equal measure it does not. (just not to the people who waste so much of their time here and strive to shape the integrity of the site crowning accolade. Sad but true )

bahh, i'm just fuckin with ya rh.. good luck to em all i say!

[Shannon Apple]

Now everyone with a high score is using cheap tactics? lol. Come on, seriously. You only have to play with or against some of them and you realise just how good they are. Some of them put a lot of time into each move, which most of us just don't have the time to do every single day. I choose to be more careful about important games rather than every game I play.

There are some farmers in the upper ranks and those ones are pretty obvious. They play one map, invite random players who don't know that map and each of them claim to have invited the top 100 or so, when in reality, they've map ranked all of us and chosen people who have no wins on a map and ignore people who have a good chance of beating them. We don't need names, but I have had invites from two such players recently. I wouldn't say they're cheating, but their tactics are cheap and I have no respect for them at all. I was highly tempted to foe both people, who are both not all that great of players.

Above all, in my opinion, what The Crown did was hilarious. I actually laughed. It was cheap tactics, but he succeeded in doing something that no one else thought of trying on a grand scale. Did he deserve the point reset? Yes. Did he deserve more punishment? No.

What he did probably forces team CC to look more closely at their rules and the current prize system. That can't be a bad thing. You can't have people manipulating the scoreboard at will, it'd be the end of CC. I don't see why people are against the point reset here. I also don't see why others wanted him more harshly punished.

Let it go. lol.

[BigBallinStalin]

Now everyone with a high score is using cheap tactics? lol. Come on, seriously. You only have to play with or against some of them and you realise just how good they are. Some of them put a lot of time into each move, which most of us just don't have the time to do every single day. I choose to be more careful about important games rather than every game I play.

There are some farmers in the upper ranks and those ones are pretty obvious. They play one map, invite random players who don't know that map and each of them claim to have invited the top 100 or so, when in reality, they've map ranked all of us and chosen people who have no wins on a map and ignore people who have a good chance of beating them. We don't need names, but I have had invites from two such players recently. I wouldn't say they're cheating, but their tactics are cheap and I have no respect for them at all. I was highly tempted to foe both people, who are both not all that great of players.

Above all, in my opinion, what The Crown did was hilarious. I actually laughed. It was cheap tactics, but he succeeded in doing something that no one else thought of trying on a grand scale. Did he deserve the point reset? Yes. Did he deserve more punishment? No.

What he did probably forces team CC to look more closely at their rules and the current prize system. That can't be a bad thing. You can't have people manipulating the scoreboard at will, it'd be the end of CC. I don't see why people are against the point reset here. I also don't see why others wanted him more harshly punished.

Let it go. lol.

I think you're missing the more nuanced point here. Almost everyone dips into that gray area between legit and illegit play--e.g. only specializing in particular maps with particularly difficult settings and then pitting their excellent teams against the unorganized teams. Of course, such teams are very good and can stand their own against organized teams, but you're overlooking the fact that nearly everyone has and still does engage in such tactics. This undermines the position of the 'holier than thou' group which hates players like thecrown.

For example, the call for a point reset underscores the ridiculousness of the hypocrites. Nearly everyone manipulates the scoreboard--but not to such a high degree (how noble of them). Many consciously speed up their inevitable loss when they're close to ranking up; many have no qualms against hosting team games and crushing any disorganized newb team which voluntarily agrees to join (much like thecrown and his comrades voluntarily agreeing to hostage situations).

The main point is that many opposed to thecrown are hypocrites because they engage in similar tactics and in similarly 'illegitimate' forms of competition--just to not such a high degree that warrants too much attention. When more people realize how arbitrary and debased they really are, then I'd expect them to 'let it go'.

[codeblue1018]

Now everyone with a high score is using cheap tactics? lol. Come on, seriously. You only have to play with or against some of them and you realise just how good they are. Some of them put a lot of time into each move, which most of us just don't have the time to do every single day. I choose to be more careful about important games rather than every game I play.

There are some farmers in the upper ranks and those ones are pretty obvious. They play one map, invite random players who don't know that map and each of them claim to have invited the top 100 or so, when in reality, they've map ranked all of us and chosen people who have no wins on a map and ignore people who have a good chance of beating them. We don't need names, but I have had invites from two such players recently. I wouldn't say they're cheating, but their tactics are cheap and I have no respect for them at all. I was highly tempted to foe both people, who are both not all that great of players.

Above all, in my opinion, what The Crown did was hilarious. I actually laughed. It was cheap tactics, but he succeeded in doing something that no one else thought of trying on a grand scale. Did he deserve the point reset? Yes. Did he deserve more punishment? No.

What he did probably forces team CC to look more closely at their rules and the current prize system. That can't be a bad thing. You can't have people manipulating the scoreboard at will, it'd be the end of CC. I don't see why people are against the point reset here. I also don't see why others wanted him more harshly punished.

Let it go. lol.

Why did TheCrown deserve a point reset? Did the players that played him throw games to him? No, or we would have had further punishments across the board. Did TheCrown farm low ranked players? No, he played people that had ranks up to colonel who should know whether or not they were being taken advantage of. Did he play his games legitimately, yes he did. As I've said all along, if there was one thing that he did that was against the rules, perhaps it was hostage taking - then again, the people involved didn't care or mind. See Shannon, we all do what TheCrown did only to a much less degree yet everyone gets so bent based on his apparent success. We shouldn't throw stones as glass houses. He didn't deserve anything more than a warning. Btw, well said BBS.

[Shannon Apple]

I really don't think I missed any point. I stand by what I said in my post.
I posted my reasons why you should let it go and move on. I wasn't actually intending to get into a roundabout debate. Sorry guys.

[Kingm]

... I think any player who's ever been at or near 3000 points has used tactics that many of these moralists denegrate...

I am reluctant to comment upon anything else in this thread regarding thecrown issue (just for fun, in passing, without great care and very little moral judgement from my part, i think it's pretty clear what his goal was. It took a very impressive feat of orchestration, so his cover story, though sweet, was not quite persuasive.)

I do however feel compelled to take issue with your point above. Many individuals play the game with neither gimmick nor manipulation and reach up to around 3,000. i concede that you have to be something quite special to stay above 3k for long without employing some partially cynical method, but that has also been done in quite a few cases i could name too. I know many exceptional players who fluctuate between 2.5k to just over 3k ...
moreover, my knowledge is outdated by about 3 years so i imagine, with point inflation, that 3k is even more achievable for fine players with nought but conventional methods.

ahh "conventional methods" I see the next cognitive ethical quandary before us!

hmm, I agree with you, jiminski, on almost everything above, except that you have to be something quite special to stay above 3k without cynical methods, I have been at 3k + for something like 20 months I think, and played about 2500 games in that periode, even had 100 active games of all kind at a period, I have also played in probably 150 tourneys with all kinds of rank.
I even reached 4350 point at some point, but that was I had a couple of weeks where my dice was red hot..
If you had said 4000 instead of 3000 then I would realy agree with everything you said..

just my 2 cents

[Kingm]

I would also like to challenge you rhp1, or anyone else, to find any "questionable methods" I have been using, just for the fun of it
The only thing I would think of would be that last year I played lots of 8man private feudal epics and antarctica games against high ranked players, but it was far from farming since I would estimate that 95% of them had played atleast 20-30 similar games

[betiko]

Didn t bother to read all comments, but i think what the crown did deserved kudos and a point reset was bs. Who was harmed there?

The monthly progression thing on the scoreboard highly encourages this. He exploited the system, nothing else.