Conquer Club

*****

BGtheBrain wrote:

xroads wrote:WOW, accelerating fast. Down to 7450, how long until we fall through 7000?

6 weeks later and there has been an INCREASE of 67 users.

Does anyone care to speculate what caused this huge spike in users?

It usually does this time of year.

Winter sets in, days get short, people are stuck inside more.

Thats an increase of .8993%

At thos rate, we should pick up an additional 22 members by the new year.

I hope they becpme toirnament players, the tournament dept seems to be suffering quite a bit.

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:Thats an increase of .8993%

At thos rate, we should pick up an additional 22 members by the new year.

I hope they becpme toirnament players, the tournament dept seems to be suffering quite a bit.

Yeah, it has been.

Good to see you back in the game!

7572.

7584

Is CC inclining?!?!

BGtheBrain wrote:

xroads wrote:WOW, accelerating fast. Down to 7450, how long until we fall through 7000?

6 weeks later and there has been an INCREASE of 67 users.

Does anyone care to speculate what caused this huge spike in users?

They're cooking the books again BG.

7617

When I post a number its one obtained by a standard format, clicking on
Scoreboard (at the top of the page, between Maps and Tournaments)
and clicking on
Full Score Leaderboard

Metsfanmax wrote:

BGtheBrain wrote:

xroads wrote:WOW, accelerating fast. Down to 7450, how long until we fall through 7000?

6 weeks later and there has been an INCREASE of 67 users.

Does anyone care to speculate what caused this huge spike in users?

They're cooking the books again BG.

I've never really seen this game advertised anywhere. I don't remember how I first found it even. What platforms have they tried to get information out about the site? Facebook, twitter attract some I would assume (less than you think) - what about Reddit and Imgur - the market is huge and you are able to post interesting eye-popping posts. Interesting posts on those sites get millions of views. I came back because I missed playing the game. I'm sure a lot of people get back on cause they missed it, like me. Those sites are free advertising though, and it might be worth looking into.

Fewnix wrote:7617

When I post a number its one obtained by a standard format, clicking on
Scoreboard (at the top of the page, between Maps and Tournaments)
and clicking on
Full Score Leaderboard

Metsfanmax wrote:

BGtheBrain wrote:

xroads wrote:WOW, accelerating fast. Down to 7450, how long until we fall through 7000?

6 weeks later and there has been an INCREASE of 67 users.

Does anyone care to speculate what caused this huge spike in users?

They're cooking the books again BG.

So you can go a little further and sort by games completed, then go to the very last page and see that there are several hundred or more players that show to have 0 completed games. Currently the no. Is 6859. Which os the number before they cooked the books.

Some make claims that these non-counting games should reflect the number of players on the scoreboaed, others will say they shouldnt.

Regatdless the books were cooked and all the hard work that was put in this thread early on is useless now.

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:
Regatdless the books were cooked and all the hard work that was put in this thread early on is useless now.

-----Well,your great work was ruined. The count down aspect of this thread. It was a thread at first. To point out the decline. But soon was full of wonderful ideas to help revive the site. Ideas that even the Pinball Wizard could of made use of. Yes, Useless seems to go hand and hand with changes made or not made by the High Command.
-----THE GOOD NEWS ,is I think we bottomed out and hit the ground floor. We will see a few leave and a few join or find there way back. It looks like there is a loyal base of 7000+ active players. So there is a little silver lining. ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion).

My read is BigWham is going to go all in, pretty soon. Major changes to the site in hopes of attracting, and keeping, more premium. If that doesn't work, shut'er down?

I back BigWham.

Fewnix wrote:My read is BigWham is going to go all in, pretty soon. Major changes to the site in hopes of attracting, and keeping, more premium. If that doesn't work, shut'er down?

I back BigWham.

shut er down? hahahaha

are you fucking stupid?

no seriously?????

do you know business at all?

wtf does that mean? shut er down? is it like get er done?

i think he bought it for around $200 large.....he is not just gonna shut er down!

that may be the most ignorant thing i have ever heard.

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:

Fewnix wrote:7617

When I post a number its one obtained by a standard format, clicking on
Scoreboard (at the top of the page, between Maps and Tournaments)
and clicking on
Full Score Leaderboard

Metsfanmax wrote:

BGtheBrain wrote:

xroads wrote:WOW, accelerating fast. Down to 7450, how long until we fall through 7000?

6 weeks later and there has been an INCREASE of 67 users.

Does anyone care to speculate what caused this huge spike in users?

They're cooking the books again BG.

So you can go a little further and sort by games completed, then go to the very last page and see that there are several hundred or more players that show to have 0 completed games. Currently the no. Is 6859. Which os the number before they cooked the books.

Some make claims that these non-counting games should reflect the number of players on the scoreboaed, others will say they shouldnt.

Regatdless the books were cooked and all the hard work that was put in this thread early on is useless now.

I see what you mean, but you can go a little further. If you look at some of those players, they are new players playing only Bot games. And in some instance, have actually played and completed 1 game. Click on some of those players and hit the find all games in their game profile.

So my point is, what does "cooking the books" mean really? These players exist. Whether for a short time or not. They make up the population of the site regardless of their impact to you or others. This is the base though, of new players that could eventually expand into playing more on this site. Sooooo, isn't the "cooked" number what you want to pay attention to? That would mean new randoms are joining this site. I guess your post "cooked" number would be your regular cc gamer. So maybe you should post both numbers at the same time. That way we can see the differences between the two. More information is better!!

jmyork82 wrote:

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:

Fewnix wrote:7617

When I post a number its one obtained by a standard format, clicking on
Scoreboard (at the top of the page, between Maps and Tournaments)
and clicking on
Full Score Leaderboard

Metsfanmax wrote:

BGtheBrain wrote:

xroads wrote:WOW, accelerating fast. Down to 7450, how long until we fall through 7000?

6 weeks later and there has been an INCREASE of 67 users.

Does anyone care to speculate what caused this huge spike in users?

They're cooking the books again BG.

So you can go a little further and sort by games completed, then go to the very last page and see that there are several hundred or more players that show to have 0 completed games. Currently the no. Is 6859. Which os the number before they cooked the books.

Some make claims that these non-counting games should reflect the number of players on the scoreboaed, others will say they shouldnt.

Regatdless the books were cooked and all the hard work that was put in this thread early on is useless now.

I see what you mean, but you can go a little further. If you look at some of those players, they are new players playing only Bot games. And in some instance, have actually played and completed 1 game. Click on some of those players and hit the find all games in their game profile.

So my point is, what does "cooking the books" mean really? These players exist. Whether for a short time or not. They make up the population of the site regardless of their impact to you or others. This is the base though, of new players that could eventually expand into playing more on this site. Sooooo, isn't the "cooked" number what you want to pay attention to? That would mean new randoms are joining this site. I guess your post "cooked" number would be your regular cc gamer. So maybe you should post both numbers at the same time. That way we can see the differences between the two. More information is better!!

so, cooking the books is just a fun way to say they changed up who gets added to the scoreboard. i'll give a quick rundown of how it/what happened.
1. everyone was tracking the number of players that was active in the past 30 day. it was quite fun, we were making graphs and stuff. no doubt there was a noticable decline, even the ones that kept making excuses and trying to act like the trend would reverse finally had to give in to the decline.
2. all of a sudden about 3000 members were added to the number in a single day. we knew something had happened. further investigations showed that the number now reflected members that didn't play in real games, just guide games, scenarios, and bot games.

dukasaur wrote:

3. i was pretty ticked because it seemed meaningless to do so one way or the other, nothing to be lost/gained from adding these deadbeats. except my precious graphs and all the time i spent working on it.
4. the more i argued about it i realized that there is a little more lost than gained from it because now these players that don't risk points get added to a scoreboard that shows your progress on your points risked in real games. which in turns gives the people on the low end of the scoreboard a false reading of where they stand on the site.
5. now i don't really bother with tracking the decline anymore. just poke my head in this thread every now and again.

7644

WILLIAMS5232 wrote:
so, cooking the books is just a fun way to say they changed up who gets added to the scoreboard. i'll give a quick rundown of how it/what happened.
1. everyone was tracking the number of players that was active in the past 30 day. it was quite fun, we were making graphs and stuff. no doubt there was a noticable decline, even the ones that kept making excuses and trying to act like the trend would reverse finally had to give in to the decline.
2. all of a sudden about 3000 members were added to the number in a single day. we knew something had happened. further investigations showed that the number now reflected members that didn't play in real games, just guide games, scenarios, and bot games.
3. i was pretty ticked because it seemed meaningless to do so one way or the other, nothing to be lost/gained from adding these deadbeats. except my precious graphs and all the time i spent working on it.
4. the more i argued about it i realized that there is a little more lost than gained from it because now these players that don't risk points get added to a scoreboard that shows your progress on your points risked in real games. which in turns gives the people on the low end of the scoreboard a false reading of where they stand on the site.
5. now i don't really bother with tracking the decline anymore. just poke my head in this thread every now and again.

Cleaned up the quote a bit for the sake having a smaller post.

I see where you are coming from with your POV Williams. It definitely looks fishy when you have a large population that was originally not considered beforehand included in the stats. Especially when, like you say, they dont contribute to the points because of the kind of games they play.

I will say this though. I think its still important to note both of these numbers next to each other. I don't think its necessarily a bad thing to have those players included on the scoreboard. I think it's worth noting that population of deadbeats and non point risking players.

As long as CC has existed, there have been a cycling amount of deadbeats. Keeping up with that population means you can measure if that number is shrinking, growing, or staying the same. If it is shrinking, less people are coming to your site, period. That is not good. If it is growing, more people are finding your site, good. If it is staying the same, that is your constant base of people finding your site. That means that there is always new people finding your site no matter what. As far as the non point players, some may always stay that way, but that is also the bridge from the ones that stay to the ones that leave. There have been suggestions about brand new players "crawling before they walk" so to speak, so that they are not overwhelmed with how intricate CC games can be. Non point players are just that. People who are "crawling". Whether the decide to "walk" or not, that's their choice.

BTW, this is not me disagreeing with you or anything. I just think both numbers are relevant.

MERRY XMAS

AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR

WOW

7905, up almost 500 in 8 weeks

7966

New laptops & tablets as Christmas gifts?

Is CC making money?

Is CC making the kind of money that Clash is making? Like most of us thought CC could make with our free hours? Back in the day? Like really? Like we all thought they could make?

Super lame game plan.

A few peeps, with little up front funds, made some solid dough, when they could have owned.

Like... you goofs know what we spend on clash? Hehe.... Doofuses.

There is the answer.

E.

8224

Happy to see this CC incline for 10th birthday. Keep it going!