Conquer Club

Here is one for Blitzaholic to ponder upon.. Like-wise any-one else from the old-school.

If you are old enough to remember, and are currently still active please feel free to add to my statistical poll.
In my Conquer club memories some of the best flamers that existed only achieved a certain rank, and once they got there, they stayed there.

Four that spring to mind straight-away are..

Norse = Corporal
The Lion = Sergeant
Dancing Mustard = Corporal
Chaosfactor = Sergeant
B.K Barunt = Sergeant

There are many more, and of course they may have highs of colonel like I have. But at the end of the day the one vision that you see dem stripes next to the nickname, will always create a lasting impression.

I am working on a therory that has been mentioned in by-gone days that true-flamers were not worth teaming up with because their average rank distilled into a for-get-me-not forgone conclusion. Albeit we were more into the ska of a literal battle, than we were in the sense of knocking each others lights out on the digit battle-field that you guys so love and cherish.

Your mom called chaos. She says you have to go home now.

Back By popular demand KH...

Oh Shit did I forget to mention you Herpes, sorry mate. You are a good player, but you are not a flamer.

So next time you come over try not to eat all of the blue Play Doh.

really why do we hold on to them so long?? really who cares??

King_Herpes wrote:So next time you come over blue Play Doh.

Doh Ray So May me -ree?

Isn't that a classical blues scale Herpes? Or am I in the wrong court....

King_Herpes wrote:So next time you come over try not to eat all of the blue Play Doh.

Does the blue color taste better????

Flamers do tend to suck, though prowler's always played off of a good rank (and to follow chaos's theory always at a colonel).

'Gentle mockers' (King_H, myself, Khazalid, owen, jiminski, fruitcake...) tend to play off of the officer rank..what does this mean??

Almost certainly nothing.

However, I have a feeling this thread will die a death..I can't see the flaming chaps (otherwise known as the left-footers) being too interested in recording their rank, while Blitz and his kin will turn their noses up at a list of the proles.

Quite right too.

Back to the drawing board, Chaos.

I just hear a word back from the grave, and it was this..


Suggs = Corporal


For those of you noobing lovers, Suggs had the biggest input count on all the forums beating Dancing Mustard to the game (just), but unfortunately as a risk player he also wound up in the same "flame" bracket as I am trying to re-create upon you.

What am I trying to say>?? Hey Andy Duff, all the best flamers never made the halo grounds of wearing a surf-board shack banana-welding helmet that you did dude.

I

why is it i have never understood a single post of chaos's?

chaosfactor wrote:In my Conquer club memories some of the best flamers that existed only achieved a certain rank, and once they got there, they stayed there.

are you suggesting we separate the scoreboard based on sexuality?-0

owenshooter wrote:

chaosfactor wrote:In my Conquer club memories some of the best flamers that existed only achieved a certain rank, and once they got there, they stayed there.

are you suggesting we separate the scoreboard based on sexuality?-0

Careful. Colton is going to call all these guys idiots when he gets back in a week.

owenshooter wrote:

chaosfactor wrote:In my Conquer club memories some of the best flamers that existed only achieved a certain rank, and once they got there, they stayed there.

are you suggesting we separate the scoreboard based on sexuality?-0

I guess "homosexuals aren't good at risk" seems to be his point. I always thought B.K. was a homophobe though, seeing as the many times I have seen him state so.

Where is Prowler? Surely he flamed a good few ....

Prowler never fell into the bracket as a flamer..

The Prowler (TheFonz) was a troll.

The only people who put Prowler in the bracket of a flamer were not present during the flaming days..

Mr Changsha wrote:'Gentle mockers' (King_H, myself, Khazalid, owen, jiminski, fruitcake...)

Right Chang, mockers not flamers, no-one you mentioned there were flamers, they were all by-standing witness's in flame war.

What about DaGip(The guy with a cowboy photo)? I think that was his name also Delia?

Da gip rocked, but i forget his rank..

Delia-selene (wow) history unfolds, tell me who hasn't got a Delia story?

If you haven't, you have not done R&R CC, even lack did cyber with D!

Anarchist Dream always hovered around a corporal / sergeant mark.

Do you have a point other than the fact that flamers suck?

So is the "left footers" label related to the non-conforming goofy foot
or am I confusing them with blue footed birds?

prismsaber wrote:Do you have a point other than the fact that flamers suck?

This is my point...

Did you not get it??

Actually, the real problem here, is the subjective nature of defining a good "flamer"

there were many high ranking players that have been flamers, and have posted in flame wars. Dugcarr himself was probably one of the most outspoken flamers, and was beyond what even some of the worst have posted, and he had 3000 points.

Prowler, while you could argue his skill at flaming either way, certainly spent enough time in there to be considered a flamer, and his score was high, as is his skill

Khazalid also spent plenty of time in flame wars, and his skill and score are very high

I myself spent plenty of time in flame wars....albeit it was more of an anit-flamer approach, and I didnt happen to use what you might define as a "flame" ie: lots of swearing and vulgarity, but of course that was my goal, and ive broken 3000 many times.

Xtratabasco could easily be considered a "flamer" to some degree, though he mostly argued about worldly issues, but never spared the vulgarity, and he was near the top of the scoreboard quite often.

There are many more. I think what is possible here, if you are looking for some kind of reasoning for why some of the most prolific flamers had low scores, is that its possible they simply didnt understand the game, and therefore only could have fun playing, or more likely, simply didnt care about the game, and spent all their time in flame wars, which is exactly the reason most with high scores were not flaming as much, because they were simply more interested in the game. It is also a reasonable guess, that someone who spent all their time fighting with all of the people on CC, probably did not play in team games as easily, and therefore their score would have suffered right there.

What is obvious, is that ability to flame, and ability to play are not cause and effect, and that it was more a result of all of the factors working together. And as I said, it greatly depends upon ones definition of a good "flamer". There have been many that have claimed that throne, and continue to do so, but that does not mean they actually owned that throne in reality...so this is an exercise in biased conjecture, from the very beginning.

AAFitz wrote:Actually, the real problem here, is the subjective nature of defining a good "flamer"

there were many high ranking players that have been flamers, and have posted in flame wars. Dugcarr himself was probably one of the most outspoken flamers, and was beyond what even some of the worst have posted, and he had 3000 points.

Prowler, while you could argue his skill at flaming either way, certainly spent enough time in there to be considered a flamer, and his score was high, as is his skill

Khazalid also spent plenty of time in flame wars, and his skill and score are very high

I myself spent plenty of time in flame wars....albeit it was more of an anit-flamer approach, and I didnt happen to use what you might define as a "flame" ie: lots of swearing and vulgarity, but of course that was my goal, and ive broken 3000 many times.

Xtratabasco could easily be considered a "flamer" to some degree, though he mostly argued about worldly issues, but never spared the vulgarity, and he was near the top of the scoreboard quite often.

There are many more. I think what is possible here, if you are looking for some kind of reasoning for why some of the most prolific flamers had low scores, is that its possible they simply didnt understand the game, and therefore only could have fun playing, or more likely, simply didnt care about the game, and spent all their time in flame wars, which is exactly the reason most with high scores were not flaming as much, because they were simply more interested in the game. It is also a reasonable guess, that someone who spent all their time fighting with all of the people on CC, probably did not play in team games as easily, and therefore their score would have suffered right there.

What is obvious, is that ability to flame, and ability to play are not cause and effect, and that it was more a result of all of the factors working together. And as I said, it greatly depends upon ones definition of a good "flamer". There have been many that have claimed that throne, and continue to do so, but that does not mean they actually owned that throne in reality...so this is an exercise in biased conjecture, from the very beginning.

Fitz is so hot I could just mount him at times like this.

Burn on Fitz...

Dugcarr1 may have been one of the grandfathers of flaming and trolling on Conquer Club, indeed. The "Alliance" was probably the first invasion, but they were rather uncoordinated. However, the Stachewhackers probably had one of the longer sustained periods of activity early on in Conquer Club, and were probably one of the more amusing groups.


--Andy