Conquer Club

I've come across players with 17000+ games and they are
rated as cooks.

Is it permitted to demote yourself?

I've heard that people are doing it because:

1. its easier to get players to join a game if you're a lower rank;

and/or

2. Supposedly, the dice rolls come out better if you are a lower rank?

is there any truth to this?

Point dumping is a no-no. Deliberately dropping games will get you some unfriendly attention from the mods.

As far as I know, the dice are the same, no matter your rank. It's just random strings of code, and whenever you roll, it grabs the next batch of code.

I don't know about getting players to join, whether your rank affects it or not. I guess some people might be intimidated, but I would aspire to play higher ranks, not lower ones, anyway.

I was not talking about point dumping;

i meant: if I'm a major, for instance, can I demote myself to a private?

I am not aware of any way to demote yourself.
To get demoted, you need to lose points, which as DH pointed out, is not a good thing to do intentionally.

then how did all these guys with thousands of points become "privates" and "cooks"???

somebody had to let them lower their rank

Godrulesdude wrote:then how did all these guys with thousands of points become "privates" and "cooks"???

somebody had to let them lower their rank

You mean thousands of "games". Look up the games they play. It will be simply from losing games.

Godrulesdude wrote:then how did all these guys with thousands of points become "privates" and "cooks"???

somebody had to let them lower their rank

A lot of them legitimately suck.

Others have quit the site, and left a lot of losing games behind.

wow, I didn't know someone could play thousands of games & still suck

There is a game minimum for a lot of ranks. So sometimes you see freemiums who have tons of points who have not played enough games to get the proper rank.

i'd like a voluntary demotion, please.

For those who would like to lower their rank, I'd be happy to help you with that.
Don't throw any games when we play, just try new things. Mwahahaha.

Personally, I like playing higher-ranked players. They may be a little more difficult to beat, but:
* They donate more points when they lose and take fewer when they win.
* I learn tricks from them that help out with similar maps and rulesets.
* They have a slightly better likelihood to play their turns sooner (except when delay's a tactic).

Players I want to compete with are sometimes put off by low rank, ratings, or %turns taken.

The real worth of ranks follows a bell curve. The peak of the bell is the point where Sergeant meet Lieutenant. Both extremes are undesirable, especially the Conqueror end, since at least cooks can prepare food.

I realise this is a very old post where the original poster believed games played equated to points. But their is one issue that is as real today as it was then. The players that APPEAR to drop points periodically to achiev best achiever etc. Winning this once is fine, winning it twice is co-incidental - BUT 4 and 5 times - come on CC. It's obvious that they are exploiting this for the medal and the free credits. Add to the fact that it's always the sme guys each month on the leader board and each has 20K+ games shows these players are not best improvers but best exploiters and stealing legitamate medals from our newest players - SHAME ON THEM>>>>>

Delf wrote:I realise this is a very old post where the original poster believed games played equated to points. But their is one issue that is as real today as it was then. The players that APPEAR to drop points periodically to achiev best achiever etc. Winning this once is fine, winning it twice is co-incidental - BUT 4 and 5 times - come on CC. It's obvious that they are exploiting this for the medal and the free credits. Add to the fact that it's always the sme guys each month on the leader board and each has 20K+ games shows these players are not best improvers but best exploiters and stealing legitamate medals from our newest players - SHAME ON THEM>>>>>

These were my thoughts as well in my 1st half year , I even went through those players walls to see what they do to get them . Launched a C@A report on a couple players for game info on wall {I was such an idiot}. but yet didnt see what it was cause how did i know what to look for. Somehow i did achieve my first set within the 1st year.

Life hit me hard about 5 years ago and took me away for about a year , my points plummeted because of all the games i was in [sorry everyone}. When i came back to CC i was so eager i bought premium and well the other set of medals followed.

2022 was not a good year, took me out for a year and a half and again i should have recognized what was causing the first wave of missed turns and warned the clan/ask the clan to cover but as a man i ignored it to something that would blow over. For this i am really sorry to the clan and all the players that got stuck in games.

Obviously you have been here a lot longer than i have but still some things to look for
1 if that player holds a platinum Battle Royale medal , he may well hold quite a few of those monthly medals
2 more players than you currently play against [ 6 player is 80ish points ] but assassin games . quick and more points
3 they have a lot of 12 player classic escalating they will be on again off again.

for me i wont buy premium before my swords because i agree it wouldnt be deserving but for most it truly is the game type that they enjoy playing and their scores will literally yo yo month to month and if you see them 2 months in a row the lucky bugger got his wings.

If you are a returning player whose points have plummeted it is possible to request a promotion and I believe this has been granted in the past where cooks can be reinstated as captains.

I too had problems (medical) that took me away from the cc for 5 years. And suffered the same being a clan member (Headless Horsemen). And accept that there are reasons for a member to gain a most improved medal more than once - But more than 5 times with 20K+ plus games.

I think the medal should have a cut off. I believe it says MOST IMPROVED. It was obviously not intended for the same individuals to win it more than once in 3 months. If a player repeatedly yo-yo's between Cook and Major he or she, it is not most improved - but more accurately the most un-improved. A player that is most improved by definition has gained the experience and skills necessary to maintain a rank that reflects their ability. An ability to plummet from Major to Cook every other month is NOT an endorsement of MOST IMPROVED.

I prefer to play 12 player games, and Tournaments. I am not a lover of 2 player or three player games or speed. Mainly due to a high morphine intake that means I need time to think a game out. I am not a medal hunter, just a guy who likes to play Risk and blame his failings on bad dice.

I just think that cash prizes aimed at the most improved player should go to the most improved player. Not the same players over and over again - Should an Experienced players with Tens of Thousands of games be granted the medal (AND a prize) again and again. Rather than a newbie with 100+ games who has shown a vast improvement.

Please note this is a Personal Opinion not an attack. More a request that any exploiting of the good intentions behind the prizes is stamped out. I think CC stand for Conqueror Club. The emphasis being on CLUB.

Yeah, I can see once or twice, maybe 3 times. But over and over is just wrong.

Dukasaur wrote:Yeah, I can see once or twice, maybe 3 times. But over and over is just wrong.

I wonder if it would be possible to code it in such a way that once they win it at a certain rank, they cannot win it again at that rank or below. So if a guy gets to major and wins most improved. He can only win it again if he has reached the rank of colonel, and so on.

It might still get exploited some, but it would at least stop people winning it a ridiculous number of times.

Shannon Apple wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:Yeah, I can see once or twice, maybe 3 times. But over and over is just wrong.

I wonder if it would be possible to code it in such a way that once they win it at a certain rank, they cannot win it again at that rank or below. So if a guy gets to major and wins most improved. He can only win it again if he has reached the rank of colonel, and so on.

It might still get exploited some, but it would at least stop people winning it a ridiculous number of times.

Yeah, sounds like a good idea.

One thing I've always found dumb in the most improved is that is based in % and not in total points. like if a 3000 player wins 1000 points and end with 4000 will still rank below someone who was 1000 and ended up with 1999. even when he got more points that were harder to get ofc.

The monthly leader power rank is well done. but the most improved is a total joke.