What makes an honorable conqueror?

[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.

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.

I read it just fine mate; there was ONE block and I never said there weren't issues regarding players back then, just not as rampant as today.

"one or two seemed fairly legit. but others frankly shamed the site and all of them were far too narrow in their game selections"

One or two out of all the top players; that's it mate? Who shamed the site back then besides the likes of krusher, Warsteiner etc? They were multis and the other had people suicide for them to win 6 player games, not 8 man games. Not starting a bickering match, just want to know from you who were the one or two "legit" players and the ones that shamed the site.
This has nothing to do with my admiration of players; it has to do with what the op asked; these are what conquerors need to be like. Man bro, there were so many to pick from back then and the shenanigans were much, much lower that what we deal with today. Back then the biggest issue were multis in which we still have to this day and will continue to have for as long as this site is active. Things ran well back the; all I'm saying.

[jsnyder748]

no,no the bickering is good. I like seeing 2 sides.

Does no one else have any suggestions for some restrictions to conqueror? I am really liking the one about making them be in an active game or they are booted from the scoreboard.

[codeblue1018]

no,no the bickering is good. I like seeing 2 sides.

Does no one else have any suggestions for some restrictions to conqueror? I am really liking the one about making them be in an active game or they are booted from the scoreboard.

I don't like that players can be forced to join games they normally don't play and more often than not, they ll lose. Let them start standard team games on their choice whether dubs, trips, quads, whatever and simply allow anyone to join like all the big boys did back then and still won between 70-80% of there game religiously. Team games to me do not prove who the best players are. 8 man freestyle or standard on an easy map like classic would be a way to start. The skill is immense especially playing against top notch players tho I fear we won't see such stocked lineups nowadays unless the invite system is needed.

[jsnyder748]

no,no the bickering is good. I like seeing 2 sides.

Does no one else have any suggestions for some restrictions to conqueror? I am really liking the one about making them be in an active game or they are booted from the scoreboard.

I don't like that players can be forced to join games they normally don't play and more often than not, they ll lose. Let them start standard team games on their choice whether dubs, trips, quads, whatever and simply allow anyone to join like all the big boys did back then and still won between 70-80% of there game religiously. Team games to me do not prove who the best players are. 8 man freestyle or standard on an easy map like classic would be a way to start. The skill is immense especially playing against top notch players tho I fear we won't see such stocked lineups nowadays unless the invite system is needed.

They wouldn't be forced to create games. But if they aren't playing it won't take 30 days to get off the scoreboard.

Did you mean speed games or standard? I am quite good at standard (and speed if I am at my home computer) and I am sure we would have enough to do these games all over again, but the variety provided today make them not as easy to fill. I would honestly rather play das schloss 8 person freestyle vs good opponents than classic. Dont get me wrong. I have had a lot of fun plying 8 person speed games and 8 person freestyle, but to get a competative game going I would need to make it private with invites.

[Mr Changsha]

no,no the bickering is good. I like seeing 2 sides.

Does no one else have any suggestions for some restrictions to conqueror? I am really liking the one about making them be in an active game or they are booted from the scoreboard.

I think the site should have a re-think and get rid of the conqueror rank.

It corrupts good players, because in the attempt to achieve it they must employ one of many dastardly methods.

Would we have had the same issue if the top rank was Field Marshal?

[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.

I read it just fine mate; there was ONE block and I never said there weren't issues regarding players back then, just not as rampant as today.

"one or two seemed fairly legit. but others frankly shamed the site and all of them were far too narrow in their game selections"

One or two out of all the top players; that's it mate? Who shamed the site back then besides the likes of krusher, Warsteiner etc? They were multis and the other had people suicide for them to win 6 player games, not 8 man games. Not starting a bickering match, just want to know from you who were the one or two "legit" players and the ones that shamed the site.
This has nothing to do with my admiration of players; it has to do with what the op asked; these are what conquerors need to be like. Man bro, there were so many to pick from back then and the shenanigans were much, much lower that what we deal with today. Back then the biggest issue were multis in which we still have to this day and will continue to have for as long as this site is active. Things ran well back the; all I'm saying.

I started playing in early 2008..I am finding it hard to think of one conqueror who achieved his high score through legitimate games (and my definition of legitimate is fairly wide). A lot of them were good players, but unfortunately when they made their 5000+ scores they weren't playing solid opposition on decent settings.

The only ones in my time who I feel were reasonably legitimate are some of those you mentioned (poomaker, scottland, johnnyrockets, sjnap) but I think there are question marks over the 5000+ scores achieved on those classic 8 man speed freestyle games. And the question is: were games thrown to boost scores?

I think they were.

Since then, the rank has hardly been held by anyone who could be considered a great player. There ARE lots of great players on this site but they tend to max at 3500-4000 playing legitimate games and, as 86 said, they are the best players. Those that went over 5000 corrupted their own games to do so, certainly didn't play quality opposition and, in my view, brought the site into disrepute.

You know I believe you to be an honest player who wants a proper challenge in their gaming. I am the same. I don't think there is any reason for us to argue on this. Would you disagree with my point that no one has achieved a 5000+ score playing properly competitive games to get there? I suppose you will continue to maintain the innocence of the set you played with in 2007-2008 and the conquerors they produced. I get that...but I saw the statistics on how many points bruceswar lost to certain people and he is no mug-gamer. Of course he is now part of the establishment here, and supposedly above criticism, but I will continue to maintain he was up to his neck in bad practice then.

[codeblue1018]

We can agree to disagree on the thrown game idea; there were way too many high ranked players in those games that had a great competive persona and all players did was want to win. Anyway, I do agree that the scoreboard is a lot lower than the earlier days and this is because the margin of winning is a whole lot less in that of 8 player points to that of team points. Another reason for this is probably like me, I couldn't careless about maintaining rank anymore and I know players like JR24 and sjnap who put up 6K+ mostly on trips and dubs doesn't either. I found that playing at major level, aside from having my bird is much more fun as nowadays I only play clan games or games with my clan mates. The site has evolved and these older players left or play like I am today. Could there have been game throwing back then? Perhaps, but if there was, the rate of this type of play was extremely low and rare in my opinion. Trust me Changsha, I'd report a cheat in a minute if I suspected such play and I only did one time and that player was Krusher as it was blatantly obvious.

[PonyGal]

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.

DoomYoshi brilliant insight, I couldn't have said it any better than that! Anyone can get their strategy tips from the SoC & forums, have the thinking done for you by others - but would this make you a master strategist? The top players have thought outside of the box in some way, out thought the creators of the site (and this isn't anything that was not available for any other player on cc to use to their advantage also), if you're good enough that the entire site needs to be changed then you are truly an ultimate gamer & original thinker (any nay sayers who think these methods are somehow dishonourable or 'cheating' i would question how it can be so if there were no rules against these strategies until after it was successfully incorporated?) Some of these guys strategies are so clever that rules need to in hindsight be created to protect those of us, myself included who would never stand a chance against them .. anyone can follow instructions laid out for them by someone else (SoC & forum tips), but he who creates his own path makes an honourable conqueror.. well stated DoomYoshi!

[Funkyterrance]

It corrupts good players, because in the attempt to achieve it they must employ one of many dastardly methods.

Would we have had the same issue if the top rank was Field Marshal?

This is really a good point upon consideration. There isn't a conqueror rank in the military, probably because historically speaking the pursuit and achievement of the position does more or less the same thing that it does in this game, namely the development of corruption, megalomania, irrationality, amorality, etc..

[pickleofdoom]

The strategy tips from SoC are for the basics on a certain type of setting. To really get to grips with those settings requires a lot more than just following the tips. I think within the standard settings there is a lot of room for originality and strategy. Some of the more specialist things that people use to get very high points may also have a lot of strategy to them, but all to often I fear that they are just cheap tricks. Inviting cooks to play on opposing teams for example, is not original thinking. anyone can think of it, but most of us are not shameless enough to do it.

[krusher]

We can agree to disagree on the thrown game idea; there were way too many high ranked players in those games that had a great competive persona and all players did was want to win. Anyway, I do agree that the scoreboard is a lot lower than the earlier days and this is because the margin of winning is a whole lot less in that of 8 player points to that of team points. Another reason for this is probably like me, I couldn't careless about maintaining rank anymore and I know players like JR24 and sjnap who put up 6K+ mostly on trips and dubs doesn't either. I found that playing at major level, aside from having my bird is much more fun as nowadays I only play clan games or games with my clan mates. The site has evolved and these older players left or play like I am today. Could there have been game throwing back then? Perhaps, but if there was, the rate of this type of play was extremely low and rare in my opinion. Trust me Changsha, I'd report a cheat in a minute if I suspected such play and I only did one time and that player was Krusher as it was blatantly obvious.

No one likes a snitch, you prick.

[comic boy]

Mr Changsha
JR who you list as a 'fair' conqueror farmed a great deal using 1 v 1 freestyle , he openly admits as much . I on the other hand never used any dubious tactics yet you tar me with the same brush as the ' cheats '

[Mr Changsha]

Mr Changsha
JR who you list as a 'fair' conqueror farmed a great deal using 1 v 1 freestyle , he openly admits as much . I on the other hand never used any dubious tactics yet you tar me with the same brush as the ' cheats '

I'm not sure I mentioned you..which has more to do with my poor memory than anything else!

I'm aware of Jr's farming, however I also remember checking his sequential record (trips etc) back in the day and thinking 'this is a chap with real ability'. Rabbiton is in the same category; farmed his way to the top but is actually an excellent player.

Look at it this way...

Conqueror 1: Completely legit. record to achieve the title
Conqueror 2: Awful record to achieve the title but otherwise an excellent player
Conqueror 3: Awful record to achieve the title and actually not that good a player