New Years Resolution: Newbie Farming is not Cool.

[FarangDemon]

also, who cares about points? if someone is that much obsessed with fake success, then let him/her have it... having fun and playing with my m8s is much more important in my book

I don't wish to take the fun out of the game. I just would like to take farming out of the game. It could easily be done. And rest assured that fun can be preserved under a scoring system that does not reward farming.

You sound happy with the system, and I respect your opinion. But if you stick around long enough and become competitive, you will start to gain some satisfaction in having attained a higher rank by consistently beating opponents. That is normal and healthy. Then after you get to a certain point, it will dawn on you that not skill, but willingness and persistence to continually apply harvesting techniques is the only way to get ahead. I haven't reached that point, but I can clearly see that it lies ahead. I want to get ahead without having to farm - namely, by playing and beating the best players.

Let's change the system where this is how you get ahead. If you don't care about your score, you don't care about your score - that has no bearing on any argument except that you don't care about your score. Anti-farming measures are not going to adversely affect you.

Many players that are adamant about allowing harvesting techniques is because they enjoy that aspect of the game. It is reassuring to know that you can always up your score by targeting cooks and cadets on map settings that they cannot win 1 in 60 games on.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=75435

Of course I understand where they are coming from and respect their opinions, but the reality is that the majority of the CC community actively wishes to scrap the scoring system that rewards harvesting techniques.

[prismsaber]

also, who cares about points? if someone is that much obsessed with fake success, then let him/her have it... having fun and playing with my m8s is much more important in my book

Words of a loser. Ever think that one could enjoy both success and playing with their m8's?

[Artimis]

Words of a loser. Ever think that one could enjoy both success and playing with their m8's?

Words of a ..... Actually I can't say that here, it's not Flame Wars.

Many players that are adamant about allowing harvesting techniques is because they enjoy that aspect of the game. It is reassuring to know that you can always up your score by targeting cooks and cadets on map settings that they cannot win 1 in 60 games on.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=75435

Fine, so look for ways to take farming out of the game, but that suggestion annoys me, because I don't want to be forced into minding my score just so as I can continue to play some of my favourite maps. Hmmmm, I've got a modification in mind, see you in the other forum.

[freakns]

I just would like to take farming out of the game. It could easily be done. And rest assured that fun can be preserved under a scoring system that does not reward farming.

You sound happy with the system, and I respect your opinion. But if you stick around long enough and become competitive, you will start to gain some satisfaction in having attained a higher rank by consistently beating opponents. That is normal and healthy. Then after you get to a certain point, it will dawn on you that not skill, but willingness and persistence to continually apply harvesting techniques is the only way to get ahead. I haven't reached that point, but I can clearly see that it lies ahead. I want to get ahead without having to farm - namely, by playing and beating the best players.

while i agree with most of what youve said, i really failing to see how can someone lose 60 games in a row.
and i think you can easily change game settings and prevent farming.
for example, any player with more then 1500 points can not gain or lose any point in games where at least one player has score lower then 1000. or 800. you count the right numbers... those people can play among each other, but cant win anything but satisfaction of playing a game... this way people who care only about their score wouldnt have a chance to gain score through farming... and thats just one idea...

also, who cares about points? if someone is that much obsessed with fake success, then let him/her have it... having fun and playing with my m8s is much more important in my book

Words of a loser. Ever think that one could enjoy both success and playing with their m8's?

ever think risk is a game of luck as much as a game of strategy?
and i have no intention to call out for you or your opinion... must be because im such a loser...
ps. i do enjoy winning. strangely...

[prismsaber]

also, who cares about points? if someone is that much obsessed with fake success, then let him/her have it... having fun and playing with my m8s is much more important in my book

ever think risk is a game of luck as much as a game of strategy?
and i have no intention to call out for you or your opinion... must be because im such a loser...
ps. i do enjoy winning. strangely...

I'm tired of low rank, mediocre players complaining about "fake success" and that if you care about actually being good then you're not enjoying the game. This is a logical fallacy. Yes there is obviously an element of luck and that's why the best players lose to even cooks once in a while but the cream always rises to the top as they say. I enjoy having a decent rank and playing this game with real life friends...it's the best of both worlds.

No matter how much someone tries to rationalize their low rank ("I'm just having fun!") the reason why they aren't ranked more highly is because A. They are not very good, B. They are simply inexperienced, or C. they play highly luck based game types for whatever reason. Regardless, if you just like to have "fun" then why post in the forums and belittle other people's accomplishments? Maybe you just enjoy conflict.

[freakns]

also, who cares about points? if someone is that much obsessed with fake success, then let him/her have it... having fun and playing with my m8s is much more important in my book

ever think risk is a game of luck as much as a game of strategy?
and i have no intention to call out for you or your opinion... must be because im such a loser...
ps. i do enjoy winning. strangely...

I'm tired of low rank, mediocre players complaining about "fake success" and that if you care about actually being good then you're not enjoying the game. This is a logical fallacy. Yes there is obviously an element of luck and that's why the best players lose to even cooks once in a while but the cream always rises to the top as they say. I enjoy having a decent rank and playing this game with real life friends...it's the best of both worlds.

No matter how much someone tries to rationalize their low rank ("I'm just having fun!") the reason why they aren't ranked more highly is because A. They are not very good, B. They are simply inexperienced, or C. they play highly luck based game types for whatever reason. Regardless, if you just like to have "fun" then why post in the forums and belittle other people's accomplishments? Maybe you just enjoy conflict.

are you suggesting im mediocre player who is complaining about others being successful? well, i might be, but im here for about a month, finished 17 games and won in 10 of them, so you cant say anything about how good i am...
actually, i was the one saying if someone wants fishing for cooks and playing that way, let him. i looked at some of the top players on the scoreboard, and the pattern is more then visible. mostly team games with same teammates. i understand they like playing that way, its fine by me. but do i want to play like that, and turn risk into a mechanic game where strategy is determine infront? no, thank you. and if someone measures my skills based on points score this way? fine by me, because as i said, im not playing this to be best, because there is only one best player and bunch of angry one chasing him. i dont know about you, but id rather chase something else and spend my time here trying to be better then my friends in every game we play... sometimes someone else will prevail and will rub my nose about it, but you know what? its also fun. yes, it is, trust me
and yeah, i dont rationalize my low rank, i just dont care about it. is that so hard to understand? im ready to congratulate you on your good ranking and if we meat on CC battlefield one day, im sure i will enjoy the challenge you can give me, and hopefully vise versa. because losing a game, as i said, can also be fun, on so many levels. after all, its just a game...

[FarangDemon]

while i agree with most of what youve said, i really failing to see how can someone lose 60 games in a row.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=75435

Check out the link I posted above. It explains in detail how in all 60 games containing a particular player on a particular map against teams consisting of at least one cook and nobody Lieutenant or above, the cook team lost every single one of the 60 games.

This shows that high ranked players that target teams containing cooks and no officers on Waterloo are exploiting a harvesting technique whereby they can win every game because their opponents can never win. Sure they would win eventually, given enough games, but they don't win enough to prevent technique from being profitable.

The implication is that harvesting of less skilled players may be possible on many different maps and map restrictions should be imposed to prevent players from exploiting this harvesting technique.

While Lack mentioned that the scoreboard was supposed to measure skill and not the use of harvesting techniques, he did not specifically define harvesting techniques. That is what my sug bug is attempting to do. Define harvesting techniques by looking at how often cook teams actually win against skilled, organized players.

[leolou2]

let em all cheat i'm in for the game and kill i like going thru the forum and reading all this @ its fun oflmao

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

while i agree with most of what youve said, i really failing to see how can someone lose 60 games in a row.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=75435

Check out the link I posted above. It explains in detail how in all 60 games containing a particular player on a particular map against teams consisting of at least one cook and nobody Lieutenant or above, the cook team lost every single one of the 60 games.

This shows that high ranked players that target teams containing cooks and no officers on Waterloo are exploiting a harvesting technique whereby they can win every game because their opponents can never win. Sure they would win eventually, given enough games, but they don't win enough to prevent technique from being profitable.

The implication is that harvesting of less skilled players may be possible on many different maps and map restrictions should be imposed to prevent players from exploiting this harvesting technique.

While Lack mentioned that the scoreboard was supposed to measure skill and not the use of harvesting techniques, he did not specifically define harvesting techniques. That is what my sug bug is attempting to do. Define harvesting techniques by looking at how often cook teams actually win against skilled, organized players.

GREAT!!!

With all this information about "Farming", others like myself can now move up the ladder of ranks. Slowly, but surely.

Just call me Farmer Stoneham, farmer of newbies and other morons. Mmmmmm, what's cooking? Cooks with a touch of cadet and newbie, Mmmmm

[Artimis]

GREAT!!!

With all this information about "Farming", others like myself can now move up the ladder of ranks. Slowly, but surely.

Just call me Farmer Stoneham, farmer of newbies and other morons. Mmmmmm, what's cooking? Cooks with a touch of cadet and newbie, Mmmmm

I believe the point of Farang bringing this to our attention is inform potential targets of farming so that they will be wary of the situations he has outlined, not encourage the proliferation of farming. I applaud his noble intentions, but I find some of his suggestions, somewhat hard to stomach at best.

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

GREAT!!!

With all this information about "Farming", others like myself can now move up the ladder of ranks. Slowly, but surely.

Just call me Farmer Stoneham, farmer of newbies and other morons. Mmmmmm, what's cooking? Cooks with a touch of cadet and newbie, Mmmmm

I believe the point of Farang bringing this to our attention is inform potential targets of farming so that they will be wary of the situations he has outlined, not encourage the proliferation of farming. I applaud his noble intentions, but I find some of his suggestions, somewhat hard to stomach at best.

Who's going to bring this to the attention to newbies or other targets, that you have mentioned? You? C.C.?

Too funny Atimis! Yes, I see people who want to join C.C. and being forced first to read warnings about predators at this site.

WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! Beware of predators here at this game site. You may be in danger of being attacked by high-ranking pedophiles, who prey on the tasty points of your low ranking.

Oh my! I better go to some other gaming site, or I may get victimized by King Herpes and his other cohorts!

[atlantic909]

I am a relatively new player... love the game, etc. If I receive an email from someone asking me to play a game, I'll say yes, no matter who it is or where it is. I'm not really caring that they are better at this game than I am and that I have a 90% chance to lose. I can learn something from the game and I'm fairly sure I'll have fun.

With that being said, I didn't know what farmers were until a week ago, which happened to coincide with me getting a random message to join a game (I didn't join because it was 3 AM EST and I was a drunk). Anyway my point is that Newbie farmers are only "hurting" people who are not newbie farmers (i.e. the people posting here who think their low ranking comparatively to newbie farmers are because of newbie farming). I don't think newbie farmers are hurting newbies. I got drilled in my first few games, and I get destroyed anytime I change settings or maps to something unfamiliar to me. Yet, I'm still playing. In an effort to anger everyone, I will say that :

(1) People who try to win games against newbies just to increase their point total are hurting themselves because it cannot be fun to beat up on someone who has no clue what they're doing... that's like a 300 pound man beating up a 100 pound guy. Sure, the little guy is hurting, but the 300 pound guy should be ashamed of himself. But, to each their own.
(2) The supposed purpose of banning newbie farming is to get newbies to stay on the site. However, I think the people supporting the ban of newbie farming are not concerned with that so much as they are concerned about eliminating the newbie farmers from the game. The point is that the supports of the newbie farming ban are more concerned with their own advancement than whether or not newbies stay with the site. Newbies are going to stay on this site because playing is fun and distracting and because the maps are really well-done. They are not going to stay just because they win some games.
At any rate, that's the view from the bottom.

The second point is absolutely right. I've found few people in life who give a shit about the little guy, yet I have met many who pretend to when it fits in with an argument they are having. Considering most people in my generation are intolerably self-centred (I'm in my late twenties) and those in the next generation even worse, this idea of players here saying "think of the poor new player, think of his enjoyment!" has always been, in the main, utter tosh. "Think of MY ranking, think of MY points!" is a far more likely sentiment to come from Thatcher and Reagan's children. However, I would say that the number of people who have written about the 'poor player's enjoyment' while figuratively swigging back the champagne of a high rank can only have come from the Blair/Clinton/Bush era.

King_H cold attain ten thousand points in any way he so chooses and it wouldn't effect my sense of self-worth one little bit. I know I am a good player. I could be number 500, number 300 or number 1,000 and it wouldn't effect the fact that I know I'm a bastard to beat on a Risk board. I can imagine chaps like porkenbeans and farangdemon going through the leaderboard counting up those they consider farmers and saying to themselves "I would be in the top 250 (or whatever) if all these farmers weren't farming." That's pretty sad, but understandable. What's so infuriating is that they then pretend they write 'for the good of the site'. Highly unlikely. Like most people in our decadent Western societies, they write for their own good and their own interest always.

Change the rules by all means Lack, for it might well make the site better...and hence be in your self-interest to do so. I would hope you're not fooled by the bleating of a bunch of pampered little babies that are prime examples of the 'me, me, me!' generation, with a bit of champagne socialism thrown in just to be sadly fitting of the times we live in.

First of all let me apologise for bringing this post back up here and to all the comments , further discussion etc etc since this post was made.

For me, the comments posted by Mr Changsha are absoloutly spot on and ring so so true. In my opinion that was the topic summed up and underlined for me. It inspired to write my very first post on CC!

I am still relatively new to CC but do have Risk experience from the days when The MSN Gaming Zone was up and running a few years ago. I dont know how I missed this site for so long but was delighted to find the ad on Facebook.
I never thought I was being farmed ever. I put my defeats down to my own stupid mistakes and lack of map knowledge and general CC experience.

I think that most people who are genuine fans of the game, the ones who love it, will discover CC and will be like a kid in a sweet shop. I know I am.
CC will slowly get more and more popular over time. Its a case of as and when people find it.It took me long enough to find it and being farmed and other petty issues like that would never have put me off joining or have any effect on if I stayed or not.

For me personally I have no interest in the scoreboard. I have no idea what position I am in nor do I intend to have climbing the scoreboard as a pursuit. However, I do like rank as a reflection of achievement. I know for a fact the rank I have now has been hard fought for and earned. If I dont deserve it then I wont be up there very long. Anybody who has beaten up noobs to get a higher ranking dosent have the satisfaction of achievement and would get hammered against the better players. For me that is their problem and it is them that are missing out.

[FarangDemon]

If I dont deserve it then I wont be up there very long.

Not true. You can maintain a high score indefinitely by applying tried and true harvesting techniques.

You can even increase your score to Conqueror. Just assemble a disciplined team and target teams containing cooks and no one ranked Lieutenant or above on Waterloo. If you are good enough at Waterloo you can win risk-free points in 60 out of 60 games. Your point gain is limited only to the number of games you can play.

This harvesting technique could be easily prevented by limiting map settings and maps available to low skilled players.

I did previously assert that new recruits that get farmed are more likely to leave CC and Lack has backed this up with actual data and acted on the suggestions as everybody has read in this thread. That being said, my arguments about further restriction of map settings and maps to the lower ranks is not to actively protect them from the supposed ill effects of farming. Anyone that reads my posts will see that my arguments center on the effect that farming has on inflating the scores of the top ranked players, and how this stifles peer to peer competition. I never profess that the harvested deserve protection from losing. I profess that we deserve a scoring system that rewards skill instead of application of harvesting techniques. If such a system prevents imbalanced match-ups like a quads cooks team playing against the top ranked players of the site, games which the cooks historically lose 60 out of 60 times, then so be it.

This targeting has just got to go if you want a fair scoreboard that reflects skill instead of harvesting techniques.

[atlantic909]

I agree with what the above post is saying if the leaderboard is your motivation for playing. My point was on a much more personal level. I expect most people who play the game on a fair basis will find a sense of achievement when they reach officer rank. If me, as an individual isnt good enough to stay at officer level or it was just luck, fluke or whatever then Ive got stripes again soon.

[maniacmath17]

Any reason why the "no points for new recruit deadbeats" hasn't been implemented yet? It's been on the to do list for a couple years now.

[Jeff Hardy]

You can even increase your score to Conqueror. Just assemble a disciplined team and target teams containing cooks and no one ranked Lieutenant or above on Waterloo. If you are good enough at Waterloo you can win risk-free points in 60 out of 60 games. Your point gain is limited only to the number of games you can play.

thats what i did once, played dubs on waterloo...

the first noob was eliminated on round 3
2008-12-31 01:54:58 - Sun Tzup eliminated FarangDemon from the game

the other player put up more of a fight and did quite well but got eliminated round 5
2008-12-31 20:10:05 - Sun Tzup eliminated Americanpigdog from the game

for an easy win
2008-12-31 20:10:05 - Jeff Hardy, Sun Tzup won the game

and some easy points
2008-12-31 20:10:05 - FarangDemon loses 15 points
2008-12-31 20:10:05 - Americanpigdog loses 15 points
2008-12-31 20:10:05 - Jeff Hardy gains 15 points
2008-12-31 20:10:06 - Sun Tzup gains 15 points

[sailorseal]

Thanks for not locking the thread lack!

[King_Herpes]

Thanks for changing the title of the thread lack. Amen brother!

[a.sub]

just taking a leaf out of KH's book nice title lmao

[Mr Changsha]

while i agree with most of what youve said, i really failing to see how can someone lose 60 games in a row.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=75435

Check out the link I posted above. It explains in detail how in all 60 games containing a particular player on a particular map against teams consisting of at least one cook and nobody Lieutenant or above, the cook team lost every single one of the 60 games.

This shows that high ranked players that target teams containing cooks and no officers on Waterloo are exploiting a harvesting technique whereby they can win every game because their opponents can never win. Sure they would win eventually, given enough games, but they don't win enough to prevent technique from being profitable.

The implication is that harvesting of less skilled players may be possible on many different maps and map restrictions should be imposed to prevent players from exploiting this harvesting technique.

While Lack mentioned that the scoreboard was supposed to measure skill and not the use of harvesting techniques, he did not specifically define harvesting techniques. That is what my sug bug is attempting to do. Define harvesting techniques by looking at how often cook teams actually win against skilled, organized players.

Farangdemon's ideas remind me a lot of New Labour's social policies. Just as the poor (in New Labour's world) cannot be trusted to buy their own council house, or find their own job, or choose where their children go to school, or which hospital they want to be treated in; so our own poor (cooks) cannot be trusted to make their own gaming decisions here on CC. They need to be protected from their own incompetence, protected from the maxatstuy's and King H's of our world for their own good. Heaven forbid we ask our poor to stand on their own two feet! Luckily, Lack obviously has more sense with regards to the lower classes in his world. Here they have every right to get absolutely raped( ) time and time again by some unscrupulous high-ranker if they so desire. Just as the poor man in our societies has the right to throw his benefit check away in a casino week after week after week, so our cooks have the right to throw their points away (the horror!) in game after game on formats they don't slightly understand, or even want to understand. This is the nature of liberty, farangdemon. The liberty to completely waste your life without being sent to re-education camps (cook school), the right to idiotically hand over your wage to bookies because you can't be bothered to think about how to use the money more productively (point inflation), the liberty to quit job after job and therefore sink to the lowest socio-economic status (deadbeat).

Of course, you are merely following the path I said you would. Your social-engineering sort will never be content. You will continue to attempt to corrupt the liberties and freedoms of the people in your endless quest to remake a society in your own image. It is rank egoism. Once farming had been declared 'against the good of society' - which in your mind seems to roughly equate to the landlords exploiting the peasants - we now move on to cooks. But remember that once the landlords were liquidated in China (and I use the term correctly) it was replaced by collectivisation, mass poverty and starvation.

The trouble with the farangdemon's of this world has always been that on the surface they seem so virtuous, honest and good. They want equality, fairness and, most of all, order. Yet one must never be fooled. For every social-engineer is as selfish as any rank capitalist as well as being markedly less honest. He will demand equality in an effort to raise himself beyond the masses, preach fairness as he rigs the system as thoroughly as any fat cat CEO.

[FarangDemon]

I don't really see what these political labels have to do with fixing the scoring system to eliminate farming.

You can rant about politics all you want, but in the end everybody knows that you favor a system where the only way to get to the top is by using harvesting techniques. Why don't you stick to the topic and address this?

Many of you guys keep posting saying the same old arguments:

1. Low skilled players deserve to lose points.

Rebuttal: Nobody says they don't. Rather, the whole community prefers a system where you cannot get to the top by farming. If certain lower skilled players are unable to get farmed as a result of keeping with this community goal, then so be it. Their protection is NOT the reason for the anti-farming countermeasures, but is a by-product of a competitive scoring system that does not allow one to farm their way to the top.

2. Cooks should be able to play any map they want.

Rebuttal: Yes they should. Just make sure that points are not exchanged if historical data show that the map settings and players' skill levels correspond to point harvesting.

3. It is impossible to prevent farming of low skilled players

Rebuttal: Just extend the initial countermeasures that Lack has instituted to prevent farming of Newbies to cover all proven harvesting techniques. Let the data decide.

4. Farangdemon is a whiner for wanting a scoring system where you cannot farm your way to the top.

[Mr Changsha]

I don't really see what these political labels have to do with fixing the scoring system to eliminate farming.

You can rant about politics all you want, but in the end everybody knows that you favor a system where the only way to get to the top is by using harvesting techniques. Why don't you stick to the topic and address this?

Many of you guys keep posting saying the same old arguments:

1. Low skilled players deserve to lose points.

Rebuttal: Nobody says they don't. Rather, the whole community prefers a system where you cannot get to the top by farming. If certain lower skilled players are unable to get farmed as a result of keeping with this community goal, then so be it. Their protection is NOT the reason for the anti-farming countermeasures, but is a by-product of a competitive scoring system that does not allow one to farm their way to the top.

2. Cooks should be able to play any map they want.

Rebuttal: Yes they should. Just make sure that points are not exchanged if historical data show that the map settings and players' skill levels correspond to point harvesting.

3. It is impossible to prevent farming of low skilled players

Rebuttal: Just extend the initial countermeasures that Lack has instituted to prevent farming of Newbies to cover all proven harvesting techniques. Let the data decide.

4. Farangdemon is a whiner for wanting a scoring system where you cannot farm your way to the top.

Let's consider the defence...

Many of you guys keep posting saying the same old arguments:

No, that would be you. My arguments have been continuously inventive, original and, dare I say it, obviously completely over your head - judging by your last response.

You can rant about politics all you want, but in the end everybody knows that you favor a system where the only way to get to the top is by using harvesting techniques

Have you even read anything I have written on this topic? I sometimes wonder. You know I couldn't care less who is at the top of the table or, for that matter, how they got there. You also know that what concerns me are efforts to limit the kinds of games players can play. That is my real concern. I also believe that your efforts are entirely self-centred. I don't for one minute think you care a fig about the low-ranking players on CC. You care absolutely about your own progression up the leaderboard. That's your concern and you're welcome to it. What truly, absolutely and completely bothers me is that you would be happy to limit other player's enjoyment of the game in your pursuit of, what, the top 50?

Now I am a much more reliable and trustworthy scribe. For one, I have already achieved my objective: to be a large singles games player at the major rank. Unlike you, I can be completely objective about the whole thing for I have no personal interest in being in the top 250. If I could make colonel eventually that would be great, but such an ambition is entirely unrelated to what you, or anyone else, is doing on CC. Secondly, I play low-ranking players all the time as the majority of my games are large, public, singles games. I play everyone and anyone. On that basis, I am well-qualifed to consider whether cooks, cadets or privates (because you can't just stop at cooks once you start down your path) should be playing in my games.

So...

2. Cooks should be able to play any map they want.

Rebuttal: Yes they should. Just make sure that points are not exchanged if historical data show that the map settings and players' skill levels correspond to point harvesting

Glad you agree lower ranks should be able to play maps they like playing. Maybe there is hope for you yet! How about being able to play WHO they want to play? Not sure from your answer, but I'm guessing that's ok too. But they can't lose points? Ah, the poor little deluded lambs. Better get Big Brother to look after them, huh? Let me let you into a secret. I play 2.1 large singles games with no cards. The cooks never win. Not once. The cadets, privates and even corporals are going to be pushed to win 1 in 16, even 1 in 24 on that map and that setting. You wouldn't consider it farming, but it may as well be from the cooks perspective. They always lose. Should they give up their points? If a cook plays 1 on 1 with King H on any map freestyle they'll lose. You know it, he knows it and I know it. They'll just as surely lose if they join an 8 man no card seq. on 2.1. The cook is sure to lose in both, but I'm guessing I would get to keep his points under your system but King_H would not. For the life of me I can't see what the difference is from the cook's perspective. But then I suspect we differ in that I consider this issue from both perspectives. You seem to only think about it in relation to how it will influence the top of the scoreboard.

So, if the cook plays 1 on 1 freestyle he's stuffed. If he plays 8 man no cards or escalating he is just as stuffed, just quicker. If 3 cooks play your triples team then, you guessed it, they're stuffed. Want me to go on?

But they should have the right to jump into a top 8 man escalating game (and I've always respected those boys for keeping them public) and they should take the consequece (5 points) if they lose. They should be able to join King_H, get beat and lose those points too. It is their decision to join the game and THEY MUST take the consequence of doing so. Otherwise, what's the point of them playing at all?

[FarangDemon]

The majority of the community (this includes people of all ranks) prefers a system where you cannot get to the top by farming. If certain lower skilled players are unable to get farmed as a result of keeping with this community goal, then so be it. Their protection is NOT the reason for the anti-farming countermeasures, but is a by-product of a competitive scoring system that does not allow one to farm their way to the top.

You acknowledge the flaws in the scoring system that promote harvesting techniques. But because you have achieved your own limited, personal score goal, you turn around and demand that everybody else be content with the scoring system, simply because you lack the ambition, confidence or skill to excel further against your peers.

You want players to be able to farm their way to the top. That's why you crap on any suggestion that would curtail farming. Either that, or you have a personal crusade against FarangDemon's posts. Maybe that is why you derive so much pleasure from writing article-length rants about world politics and other unrelated topics in an attempt to demonize the demon instead of addressing your own reasons for defending farming.

[Mr Changsha]

This site currently has 22159 active players and 89 pages of scores. While many seem to consider that page 1 has more importance than say page 30, I don't. There are paying members throughout the scoreboard who should be treated equally by CC and so, therefore, should have the right to play any game they want and win and lose points in any game as well.

Any measures to limit lower ranks gaming options is wrong on this basis.

With regards to my own motivations you can be sure I am not short on gaming confidence, or ability at what I do. One of the great differences between us is simply due to the kinds of games we play. My games are positively enhanced by a mix of abilities, while trips and quads are surely better played when the teams have a roughly comparable level of ability.

I have written before that the ideal solution would be for players to be divided into seperate leagues based on game style. If the majority of your games are trips, you would sit on the teams scoreboard. Maybe it could be divided between freestyle teams and sequential teams as well. Singles players could be divided into large singles players (5 and up) and small sinlges players (2, 3 and 4). However, all ranks must still have the ability to join (and learn!) from any game they so choose. To give you an example, say I asked KingH to teach me 1 on 1 freestyle over 30 games on his 5 best maps. He would probably win almost all of them. Some would say I was point dropping, others would say simply cheating to artifically inflate my pal King H's score. They might well be right. But MAYBE I really just wanted to learn how to play 1 on 1 freestyle from a top player?

So to conclude:

1. Yes, the scorebord is a joke. We all know this. However, suggestions should not be implemented that limit players enjoyment to try and tweak a scoreboard that, by its very conception, is junk.

2. Therefore, the scoreboard should be divided. Why this hasn't been done already is beyond me.

3. I have been known to write with an eye to the style of writing. However, there is usually a serious point in there somewhere and sometimes it is even CC related!

4. I'm picking on you because you write well and sensibly, farangdemon. I can't be bothered to debate with idiots.

[Sun Tzup]

I think I see the arguments here.

Farangdemon: we should have a rating system that has the most skilled players moving up to the top as opposed to the players who most carefully join only games they know they will win based upon their opponents being bad, unskilled, disorganized or ignorant. Right now our system rates people in such a way as to reward a technique of playing a whole bunch of low skill players and beating them more than it rewards playing highly skilled players and beating them. If one wants to be king they must play team games against n00bs or they will make enough points to stay high in the rankings.

solution proffered: outlaw the practice of farming.

My suggestion to accomplish the end goal of farangdemons would be to have a rating difference cap on speed games or something where a guy can only play people within a range of say 1000 points. This would keep players of relatively the same skill level playing each other. Obviously this would be met with outrage and not really work well because it would be a nightmare to hunt down players of the same ranking as you to play against. as we all want to play that would suck with such a small CC community.

I dont have a solution but I agree that it sucks that to be at the top you need to play less games and the games you play become the strategy to the top. specialization and the exclusion of learning new maps or playing sequential games or multiplayer games etc as well as farming are the only way to stay brig and go up. It even becomes pointless to play in tournaments. so many of our "best players" refuse to play in tourneys unless its a colonel and above only tourney or something like that. It would be nice to be able to play everyone without then having the excuse of "your rating is too low" imo.

The argument against:

Look this is a place where we come to play risk. regulations will just result in a morass of bull which will end up causing more problems than it solves. Farming is part of the way this site is set up and played. deal with it or go home.

My .02 is that although this might be generally true a real problem is being pointed out and should be addressed. Dont attack the messenger just address the issue he brings up. How can we make it so that rank becomes a better measure of strategic acumen and all around skill as opposed to who can most effectively farm n00bs and cherry pick their games and rely on their strengths? I dont think a rule against farming is the answer as its too arbitrary to judge and when you start grey lining people will go apeshit. There might be perhaps that you dont gain any points from someone who is more than 1000 points below you or something like that. That would change everything. maybe 2000? to be safe. that would change eeeeverything. farming wouldnt exist anymore. just an idea.