Moderator: Community Team
King_Herpes wrote:Mr Changsha wrote:King_Herpes wrote:Is this a thread about how erect you are? If so I'm at about 45% right now. FYI
Can you see it yet?
Only if I don't eat seconds. Do you want to cyber??
Mr Changsha wrote:King_Herpes wrote:Mr Changsha wrote:King_Herpes wrote:Is this a thread about how erect you are? If so I'm at about 45% right now. FYI
Can you see it yet?
Only if I don't eat seconds. Do you want to cyber??
With an avatar that symbolises the King of STD's?
Only on the weekends old chap, only on the weekends...
King_Herpes wrote:Mr Changsha wrote:King_Herpes wrote:Mr Changsha wrote:King_Herpes wrote:Is this a thread about how erect you are? If so I'm at about 45% right now. FYI
Can you see it yet?
Only if I don't eat seconds. Do you want to cyber??
With an avatar that symbolises the King of STD's?
Only on the weekends old chap, only on the weekends...
Well, looks like I may as well just add Mr. Changsha into my little black book.
King_Herpes wrote:Oh, you can't kid a kidder. You got me all randy and now you're just gonna play shy?
Stephen Wayne wrote:hmm i have missed about 100 turns and still have 99% the rounding is ridiculous so really haveing 100% is not that impressive
owenshooter wrote:Stephen Wayne wrote:hmm i have missed about 100 turns and still have 99% the rounding is ridiculous so really haveing 100% is not that impressive
you don't have 100%, so of course you would say that... those that are failures at maintaining 100% often try to tear those of us down that excel at it... i am shocked at the hater attitude, mr. wayne!!!-0
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Robinette wrote:maybe the # could be just a bit more accurate...
since this rounding thing doesn't truely identify the real 100%'ers...
I'd still be at 100%, but many would drop to 99.x%
while stevie would likely be 98.5%
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
owenshooter wrote:yeah, but the percentage doesn't measure "all time", it is kind of like B.C. and A.D.!!! so, you have yet to miss a turn under the new watchful eye of the turn percentage watcher!!-0
lancehoch wrote:owenshooter wrote:yeah, but the percentage doesn't measure "all time", it is kind of like B.C. and A.D.!!! so, you have yet to miss a turn under the new watchful eye of the turn percentage watcher!!-0
You sure about this? I do not believe that this is right. I thought it calculated all time?
lancehoch wrote:I was wondering if the turn taken % is for all games ever played or if it is only for games played since this feature was added.
lackattack wrote:For all games
Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
Fruitcake wrote:Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
Well to be precise, to miss a thousand turns would require at least 200,000+ turns taken if the 'decimal' was rounded to the nearest 0.5%. If it was to 0.1% then a player would have had to have taken 1,000,000+ turns for mising 1,000 to not register.
Crazy maths indeed. Sorry Robinette.
whitestazn88 wrote:Fruitcake wrote:Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
Well to be precise, to miss a thousand turns would require at least 200,000+ turns taken if the 'decimal' was rounded to the nearest 0.5%. If it was to 0.1% then a player would have had to have taken 1,000,000+ turns for mising 1,000 to not register.
Crazy maths indeed. Sorry Robinette.
technically, you're crazier maths fruitcake. either or, that means i've got a long ways to go before i get rounded up to 100%
whitestazn88 wrote:i meant crazy maths as in i didn't wanna do the math myself, therefore you were crazy to do it yourself.
Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
Stephen Wayne wrote:Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
thats what im saying 100% not impresve
Fruitcake wrote:Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
Well to be precise, to miss a thousand turns would require at least 200,000+ turns taken if the 'decimal' was rounded to the nearest 0.5%. If it was to 0.1% then a player would have had to have taken 1,000,000+ turns for mising 1,000 to not register.
Crazy maths indeed. Sorry Robinette.
Robinette wrote:Fruitcake wrote:Robinette wrote:This means that someone who has played 10,000 games could've missed 400+ turns in escalating games and still have 100%...
And if they play flat rate or no cards, where games last way longer that 8 turns... they could have missed THOUSANDS of turns and still have a 100% rating...
I say add a decimal.
Well to be precise, to miss a thousand turns would require at least 200,000+ turns taken if the 'decimal' was rounded to the nearest 0.5%. If it was to 0.1% then a player would have had to have taken 1,000,000+ turns for mising 1,000 to not register.
Crazy maths indeed. Sorry Robinette.
All Ya'All are miss'n da point...
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users