Low Ranked Players

[Hrvat]

I've now came to a new realization; I will not be playing low ranks again.

People, feel free to comment.

Thx, cb1018

[Scott-Land]

low ranks i dont say much to when they make a terrible play- it's the decent ranks that i go off on because they should know better. but- thats my problem.... i give people too much credit. one wonders how they got the rank to begin with....

[lozzini]

define low ranks? below officer?

[RashidJelzin]

To be honest, I'm more biased towards players with a lot of negatives, rather than low ranks... low ranks may just have started playing on CC, but people who have 50-70% or even more of their feedbacks in negatives, are, most of the time, jerks for some reason or another.

[max is gr8]

I've been playing since january '06 and only last month went above 1 stripe. The trick, discovering the map and the settings for me, I used to always play standard, but now I play terminator although I rarely win I do get a net profit. And now I notice that HIGHER RANKED PLAYERS are not as cautious, a difference of 200 points makes a difference to how quickly I get eliminated, instead of getting eliminated first so higher ranks eliminate the highest rank, I get to take some out. I play a simple all or nothing strategy, I had a very slim chance of eliminating someone
1v1 on the dice, I didn't win but the chance was there, Why waste it, some people percieve it as suiciding but I don't, suiciding is when you do it and you can't win. If you can who can complain?

[Kaplowitz]

I played you once
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=2362672
I didnt like that game.

[honestjohn]

I've now came to a new realization; I will not be playing low ranks again. The terrible plays, horrendous strategies seem to be very apparent amongst most, not all low ranked players. The suicide attacks and team oriented strategies in three person games have become so outrageous that it is not worth playing with or against them anymore.

When you confront these players in the above mentioned circumstances, their common responses are; stop whining, I just play for fun, you are the most dangerous, etc. Truly amazing how a player can play a game, not have any intention of winning, just to attack a player who is trying to use good strategy and win. I play mostly three player games and we all know, if it becomes a 2 on 1, there is not shot at winning.

I try not to discriminate against any player as if you view my games, I play anyone, anytime. This unfortunately will come to an end.



People, feel free to comment.

Thx, cb1018

An interesting and, in some ways understandable concern. My biggest problem with it is ..
What about all of the really excellent people you will never meet? Probably my greatest enjoyment in CC is the fun you can have with people. I have met really quality folks from all over the world and in a lot of cases it was because they were willing to get into games with me when I was still 'wet behind the ears'.
And it has gone the other way as well when I have gotten into it with some who were still wearing the 'question mark', never mind the cooks bonnet..

Someone has already mentioned the 'points' question in games with lower ranks and this is a valid concern, so I guess we must all decide for ourselves what brings us the most satisfaction in our relationships here in CC..

I recognize the on going problem there is with the ever present 'deadbeat', most of whom are found in the lower ranks, but they just go immediately to my 'ignore' column and get no more of my thoughts.

Another thought is this... I have, myself, reached the lofty heights of 'Lieutenant' (the spelling is probably wrong .. ) and due to disagreements with the 'dice goddess', find myself knocking on the door of 'private' again, .. (I'll blame the 'goddess' because that is the accepted stance in a loss here in CC .. ), but this is not something peculiar to just myself.. everyone of us has had our chances to climb and also to fall.. What's my point .. 'Rank' is nice but it's trancient for most of us. I found, when I reached the 'lofty heights', that the stress of 'staying there' was far too stressful and my enjoyment of the games was quickly fading. I opted for 'fun'.. I win some and lose some but the fun is always there..

Thanks for listening..

[zimmah]

Wrong! I just eliminated a Liuetenat in a game. Rckndrll, and with out strategy that can't happen.

it's still RISK so the random dice and other randomities can make a bad player (or a worse player) lose from a superiour player, just the CHANCE of winning is higher for the better player, because strategy does play a huge role, but so does risk at some point (especially at the start of a game at most game types and maps) i believe someone has a winning percentage of 80% or something on over 1000 game which is REALLY HIGH. but believe me, noone can ever have a winning percentage of 100% no matter how good he is (unless player versus total retards that is off course)


fact is, most lower ranked players are inferiour to higher ranked players, skillswise. means they make more mistakes in general then the higher ranked players.

even though there is a risk in all games, over 1000+ games the risk factor becomes near obsolite (or however you spell it) and the 'strategy factor' kicks in, given the fact over a 1000 games you might be unlucky in some and lucky on the others, the risk factor balances itselfs out normally, for this reason a better player will theoretically win more games and therefore get a higher ranking.

the point is, higher players have more to lose and the 'mistakes' of lower ranked players might seem total random to more expierenced players, as they are sometimes quit unlogical, sometimes even leading to nothing less then plain suicide, eventually even winning them (or another player in the game) the game, at the cost of the one who 'should be' winning the game based on strategy.

[codeblue1018]

I've now came to a new realization; I will not be playing low ranks again. The terrible plays, horrendous strategies seem to be very apparent amongst most, not all low ranked players. The suicide attacks and team oriented strategies in three person games have become so outrageous that it is not worth playing with or against them anymore.

When you confront these players in the above mentioned circumstances, their common responses are; stop whining, I just play for fun, you are the most dangerous, etc. Truly amazing how a player can play a game, not have any intention of winning, just to attack a player who is trying to use good strategy and win. I play mostly three player games and we all know, if it becomes a 2 on 1, there is not shot at winning.

I try not to discriminate against any player as if you view my games, I play anyone, anytime. This unfortunately will come to an end.



People, feel free to comment.

Thx, cb1018

An interesting and, in some ways understandable concern. My biggest problem with it is ..
What about all of the really excellent people you will never meet? Probably my greatest enjoyment in CC is the fun you can have with people. I have met really quality folks from all over the world and in a lot of cases it was because they were willing to get into games with me when I was still 'wet behind the ears'.
And it has gone the other way as well when I have gotten into it with some who were still wearing the 'question mark', never mind the cooks bonnet..

Someone has already mentioned the 'points' question in games with lower ranks and this is a valid concern, so I guess we must all decide for ourselves what brings us the most satisfaction in our relationships here in CC..

I recognize the on going problem there is with the ever present 'deadbeat', most of whom are found in the lower ranks, but they just go immediately to my 'ignore' column and get no more of my thoughts.

Another thought is this... I have, myself, reached the lofty heights of 'Lieutenant' (the spelling is probably wrong .. ) and due to disagreements with the 'dice goddess', find myself knocking on the door of 'private' again, .. (I'll blame the 'goddess' because that is the accepted stance in a loss here in CC .. ), but this is not something peculiar to just myself.. everyone of us has had our chances to climb and also to fall.. What's my point .. 'Rank' is nice but it's trancient for most of us. I found, when I reached the 'lofty heights', that the stress of 'staying there' was far too stressful and my enjoyment of the games was quickly fading. I opted for 'fun'.. I win some and lose some but the fun is always there..

Thanks for listening..

I agree with this statement 100%. Thx for posting!

[Luvr]

Codeblue1018, personally I think you're a jerk.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=50796&hilit=attitude+CC

Remember that game? You bashed me for no F'in reason!

Oh and with that said, I recently played a 4 player game and I was the highest rank playing 3 "lower ranks" in a speed I had created the game so whoever wanted could join and the 2nd person said "Let's all beat up on red so us lower ranks can win"...so I called him an idiot but that was about it. The other 2 didn't pay any attention anyways (didn't agree to that silly idea) and I left them good feedback even though I lost...

Point is I don't care whom I play although I can agree some people are funner to play than others.

[gloryordeath]

I've now came to a new realization; I will not be playing low ranks again. The terrible plays, horrendous strategies seem to be very apparent amongst most, not all low ranked players. The suicide attacks and team oriented strategies in three person games have become so outrageous that it is not worth playing with or against them anymore.

When you confront these players in the above mentioned circumstances, their common responses are; stop whining, I just play for fun, you are the most dangerous, etc. Truly amazing how a player can play a game, not have any intention of winning, just to attack a player who is trying to use good strategy and win. I play mostly three player games and we all know, if it becomes a 2 on 1, there is not shot at winning.

I try not to discriminate against any player as if you view my games, I play anyone, anytime. This unfortunately will come to an end.



People, feel free to comment.

Thx, cb1018

An interesting and, in some ways understandable concern. My biggest problem with it is ..
What about all of the really excellent people you will never meet? Probably my greatest enjoyment in CC is the fun you can have with people. I have met really quality folks from all over the world and in a lot of cases it was because they were willing to get into games with me when I was still 'wet behind the ears'.
And it has gone the other way as well when I have gotten into it with some who were still wearing the 'question mark', never mind the cooks bonnet..

Someone has already mentioned the 'points' question in games with lower ranks and this is a valid concern, so I guess we must all decide for ourselves what brings us the most satisfaction in our relationships here in CC..

I recognize the on going problem there is with the ever present 'deadbeat', most of whom are found in the lower ranks, but they just go immediately to my 'ignore' column and get no more of my thoughts.

Another thought is this... I have, myself, reached the lofty heights of 'Lieutenant' (the spelling is probably wrong .. ) and due to disagreements with the 'dice goddess', find myself knocking on the door of 'private' again, .. (I'll blame the 'goddess' because that is the accepted stance in a loss here in CC .. ), but this is not something peculiar to just myself.. everyone of us has had our chances to climb and also to fall.. What's my point .. 'Rank' is nice but it's trancient for most of us. I found, when I reached the 'lofty heights', that the stress of 'staying there' was far too stressful and my enjoyment of the games was quickly fading. I opted for 'fun'.. I win some and lose some but the fun is always there..

Thanks for listening..

Well said john I enjoy the games we play very much. I play a lot of maps and settings for the fun and because I like the people playing with me both old and new. As far as rank goes I am learning how to play better and still play the way I like. I was a private less than a month ago and have no plans on looking back. You must learn to beat the player not the rank. If your playing the rank than your just playing to loose.

[Bruceswar]

I think people here are missing a lot of the point to this post. Code is an intense player who likes to win. All he ask for is a fair game for all, even if he loses. By fair that means all players make attacks on each other and keep the game relatively even. Then strategy can be used and the best player win. Code will not get mad at you if you do not give him a reason to do so.

[Luvr]

I think people here are missing a lot of the point to this post. Code is an intense player who likes to win. All he ask for is a fair game for all, even if he loses. By fair that means all players make attacks on each other and keep the game relatively even. Then strategy can be used and the best player win. Code will not get mad at you if you do not give him a reason to do so.

OK I agree with the fair game for all part but it's just not true that he won't get mad at you for no reason.

Game 2396344

In this 3 player, the other person attacked him (I think suicided) where I couldn't even see and then he freaked out at them and me too even though I was just trying to play a normal civilized game. He basically threw a fit and gave the game to me but also accused me of cheating with that other person. I understand the other person's move is reason to get annoyed but I did not deserve to be treated like that. And I don't believe this is an isolated incident, his bad attitude towards other players seems to be excessive whether it's deserved or not.

[Theblackmages]

I think people here are missing a lot of the point to this post. Code is an intense player who likes to win. All he ask for is a fair game for all, even if he loses. By fair that means all players make attacks on each other and keep the game relatively even. Then strategy can be used and the best player win. Code will not get mad at you if you do not give him a reason to do so.

OK I agree with the fair game for all part but it's just not true that he won't get mad at you for no reason.

Game 2396344

In this 3 player, the other person attacked him (I think suicided) where I couldn't even see and then he freaked out at them and me too even though I was just trying to play a normal civilized game. He basically threw a fit and gave the game to me but also accused me of cheating with that other person. I understand the other person's move is reason to get annoyed but I did not deserve to be treated like that. And I don't believe this is an isolated incident, his bad attitude towards other players seems to be excessive whether it's deserved or not.

exact same thing happened in my game

[wcaclimbing]

Code will not get mad at you if you do not give him a reason to do so.

Cause the world revolves around Code and if the game doesn't go how he likes he gets angry.

[icedagger]

Anyone noticed how those low-rank types always seem to lose their points to high-rankers, typically in freestyle games? I'm tired of this low rank elitism. In my opinion, you're not a real cook unless you are equally bad at each game type. Sure I'd love to be a low rank as much as the next guy, but I refuse to specialise at being particularly bad at any game type.

Let's take alangary for example. Here is a player who clearly specialises at deadbeating triples games. While I accept he is skilled at losing at this particular game type, when was the last time he lost to a low ranking triples team? Or lost a 1v1? I rest my case.

Until this low-rank elitism stops, average losers like me can only slip down the board slowly. This is clearly unfair, and something should be done.

[Timminz]

Anyone noticed how those low-rank types always seem to lose their points to high-rankers, typically in freestyle games? I'm tired of this low rank elitism. In my opinion, you're not a real cook unless you are equally bad at each game type. Sure I'd love to be a low rank as much as the next guy, but I refuse to specialise at being particularly bad at any game type.

Let's take alangary for example. Here is a player who clearly specialises at deadbeating triples games. While I accept he is skilled at losing at this particular game type, when was the last time he lost to a low ranking triples team? Or lost a 1v1? I rest my case.

Until this low-rank elitism stops, average losers like me can only slip down the board slowly. This is clearly unfair, and something should be done.

My vote for post of the week.

[FabledIntegral]

Code will not get mad at you if you do not give him a reason to do so.

Cause the world revolves around Code and if the game doesn't go how he likes he gets angry.

No, I act virtually the same as he does. Where people don't "notice" the suicide or w/e, it usually does happen nonetheless. And if it's not a suicidal move, it's a move of utter retardation that is of benefit to neither of the players, simple the third player (and the attacking player is too friggin' stupid to realize it).

Only controversy I saw was when I joined a game with him and the third player was making retarded moves vs both of us and we were both bitching at the absolute idiocy of the third man out. And then we began bitching at each other b/c we disagreed (for example if the third suicided my stack, and then his a turn later, he would get pissed, but I would tell the third player he merely balanced out his previous shit move, etc. etc.). I eventually said f*ck it, this is BS, and suicided the guy I think and let code win.

He is also very correct on the notion that a lot of low ranks are in the shitter. I consider Major the first rank where you can see reliable play, whilst captain is mediocre-ly stable, and lieutenant and below show 80% of the time no sign of basic fundamental logic (aka, I'm going to attack whatever is next to me if it's a big number because it's a threat "somehow," and I'm going to count the person with a bonus of 9 armies to be the strongest player on the board, even though he's only had it 2 turns and the other player has 30+ more armies than him, I'm going to go out of my way to attack him instead of making the other person do it).

My biggest problems with low ranks is they think it's a good strategy to limit other players early game by using their own armies. OMFG. NEVER FRIGGIN' DROP ARMIES JUST TO DELAY SOMEONE ELSE GETTING A BONUS UNLESS IT'S A 1v1 or TEAM GAME or IF YOU'RE DIRECTLY BORDERING THEM. You have no idea how many times a player in world 2.1, when I'm about to get Europe for example and they are in SA (other people about equal strength), will drop on their single territory in Komi (like 8 armies) and kill and fortify into Moskva, just to "prevent" someone else from getting too strong. That is my BIGGEST problem with low ranks, they pull stupid shit like that off.

[Theblackmages]

Code will not get mad at you if you do not give him a reason to do so.

Cause the world revolves around Code and if the game doesn't go how he likes he gets angry.

No, I act virtually the same as he does. Where people don't "notice" the suicide or w/e, it usually does happen nonetheless. And if it's not a suicidal move, it's a move of utter retardation that is of benefit to neither of the players, simple the third player (and the attacking player is too friggin' stupid to realize it).

Only controversy I saw was when I joined a game with him and the third player was making retarded moves vs both of us and we were both bitching at the absolute idiocy of the third man out. And then we began bitching at each other b/c we disagreed (for example if the third suicided my stack, and then his a turn later, he would get pissed, but I would tell the third player he merely balanced out his previous shit move, etc. etc.). I eventually said f*ck it, this is BS, and suicided the guy I think and let code win.

He is also very correct on the notion that a lot of low ranks are in the shitter. I consider Major the first rank where you can see reliable play, whilst captain is mediocre-ly stable, and lieutenant and below show 80% of the time no sign of basic fundamental logic (aka, I'm going to attack whatever is next to me if it's a big number because it's a threat "somehow," and I'm going to count the person with a bonus of 9 armies to be the strongest player on the board, even though he's only had it 2 turns and the other player has 30+ more armies than him, I'm going to go out of my way to attack him instead of making the other person do it).

My biggest problems with low ranks is they think it's a good strategy to limit other players early game by using their own armies. OMFG. NEVER FRIGGIN' DROP ARMIES JUST TO DELAY SOMEONE ELSE GETTING A BONUS UNLESS IT'S A 1v1 or TEAM GAME or IF YOU'RE DIRECTLY BORDERING THEM. You have no idea how many times a player in world 2.1, when I'm about to get Europe for example and they are in SA (other people about equal strength), will drop on their single territory in Komi (like 8 armies) and kill and fortify into Moskva, just to "prevent" someone else from getting too strong. That is my BIGGEST problem with low ranks, they pull stupid shit like that off.

Ok fabled would you consider me a low rank b/c to codeblue I am.

[Timminz]

Ok fabled would you consider me a low rank b/c to codeblue I am.

I think it's ridiculous that codeblue left you a neg for winning when the third player suicided him.

[stahrgazer]

Hi, y'all.

I'm a low ranked player wearing one of those chef hats, and recently won a 60 and an 80-point multi-player game.

I got bawled out by a higher rank for it, not too different from some of what I read in code's gamechat that the other dude snipped for us. In my case, my strategic choice was, "take out a weak person while trying to build and get a card," vs. "Suicide against the stronger dude."

I've also noticed that when higher ranks agree to a multi with me in it, usually they come at me first, both barrels blasting, leaving each other alone.

I've also played higher ranks who appear to keep a low-rank multi, or maybe they teamed without saying.

It's the game. Y'all who don' wanna play with da cook?
No worries, I'll find people to play with.

But do me a fav. Don't blame the lower ranks. People being ijits has nothing to do with rank, and sometimes it's people with high ranks pulling the strings for the puppet teamsters and multis.

*adjusts chef's coat and fluffy hat, flips a pancake and winks*

"Don't mind (her) (s)he's only the cook." {Under Siege}
~
stahr