Some general queries...

[Virtuoso]

Hi folks.

Asking cause curious. Answer my questions!

1. Are the points on MC sum-zero? Everyone starts with 1225. But we gain and lose points off other players. It would seem if points were sum-zero, I'd be encountering basically as many sub-1225 players as I would, over-1225 players. I've hardly encountered virtually anyone below 1225. So what's going on?

2. Why is it for my Europe Massive games, the "Troops Due" does not factor in troops due, due to commands held, like all the other maps I've played? In this game, for instance, all the numbers of troops due for all the players is strictly derived from the number of terts held. Are there other maps where this is the case, and if so, which ones?
https://www.majorcommand.com/games/480224/

3. Also WRT the above link. So I eliminated a player (my first in a mercenary). I notice my score was updated immediately, but my kill count and kill streak were not. So those get updated when the game is finished? But how does that work? Suppose I kill 3 players then die. Is that a 3-game winning streak or a 1-game losing streak?

4. I've noticed the number of active players has fallen by over 100, since I arrived here not too long ago. There's now less than 1000 active players. Is this going to be a problem? What efforts can we make to build the site numbers? I realize there's a lot of competing sites out there, but I find the gameplay here to be the best, but it's not being really reflective in the popularity of the site it seems. I think the need for Flash player is a concern as not all browsers run it.

5. You really long-time players. Do you still "learn" from games? I'm not saying when you try a new map or whatever. Let's say you've already played 2000 4-player "Classic Evolved" games. Do you still discover new strategies on occasion?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Hi folks.

Asking cause curious. Answer my questions!

1. Are the points on MC sum-zero? Everyone starts with 1225. But we gain and lose points off other players. It would seem if points were sum-zero, I'd be encountering basically as many sub-1225 players as I would, over-1225 players. I've hardly encountered virtually anyone below 1225. So what's going on?

2. Why is it for my Europe Massive games, the "Troops Due" does not factor in troops due, due to commands held, like all the other maps I've played? In this game, for instance, all the numbers of troops due for all the players is strictly derived from the number of terts held. Are there other maps where this is the case, and if so, which ones?
https://www.majorcommand.com/games/480224/

3. Also WRT the above link. So I eliminated a player (my first in a mercenary). I notice my score was updated immediately, but my kill count and kill streak were not. So those get updated when the game is finished? But how does that work? Suppose I kill 3 players then die. Is that a 3-game winning streak or a 1-game losing streak?

4. I've noticed the number of active players has fallen by over 100, since I arrived here not too long ago. There's now less than 1000 active players. Is this going to be a problem? What efforts can we make to build the site numbers? I realize there's a lot of competing sites out there, but I find the gameplay here to be the best, but it's not being really reflective in the popularity of the site it seems. I think the need for Flash player is a concern as not all browsers run it.

5. You really long-time players. Do you still "learn" from games? I'm not saying when you try a new map or whatever. Let's say you've already played 2000 4-player "Classic Evolved" games. Do you still discover new strategies on occasion?

Thanks in advance.

Ok, lets go through all the questions.
1. Not really 'sum-zero' because players come and go all the time, many of the long time players have won points from players who have since left.
2. EM is different in the respect you describe because the troops due to commands are auto-deployed onto specific terts instead of being available for the player to deploy. Other maps have auto-deploys (Africa, Cold War), and those don't show in the 'troops due' either. Just a quirk that you need to get used to.
3. Kill counts are updated at the end of the game. If you don't win the Mercenary game, you'll get credit for the kills on your totals but it would be a -1 on game count, not +3.
4. Hopefully when the site rebuild (with HTML5) is completed and everything is smoother and faster, the number of active players will increase.
5. I think I occasionally learn something new, not in every game obviously, but once in a while.

 

[Virtuoso]

3. Kill counts are updated at the end of the game. If you don't win the Mercenary game, you'll get credit for the kills on your totals but it would be a -1 on game count, not +3.

So does the last player in a 10 player mercenary (the "winner") get a 9 enemy kill streak even if they kill less than 9 players?

 

[Redstorm]

So does the last player in a 10 player mercenary (the "winner") get a 9 enemy kill streak even if they kill less than 9 players?

yes. think of it this way. the mercenary game option awards a bonus or reward for each kill u make but otherwise the game is still a singles player game therefore, the winner of the "game" gets full credit (in ur example, 9 kills) for winning the game although the "points" may be split as bonus or reward to other player(s).

Similarly, the assassin game option has a little quirk too. Since the game is won when the winner's target is killed, even if the winner didn't do the killing, u can win both the points and the all the kill credits even if you didn't actually make the kill. (I'm sure that in the past, someone has won an assassin game without ever taking a turn!).

Hope that helps. and good hunting

 

[Sebrim]

Shall I say something, Cards?

 

[Virtuoso]

yes. think of it this way. the mercenary game option awards a bonus or reward for each kill u make but otherwise the game is still a singles player game therefore, the winner of the "game" gets full credit (in ur example, 9 kills) for winning the game although the "points" may be split as bonus or reward to other player(s).

Got it. Although I could conceive of a format in which anyone with kills, gets a streak of the number of kills they made, regardless of whether they were eventually killed. So if out of 10 people, 3 killed 3 each, and one killed one. Those 4 players leave with winning streaks of 3, 3, 3, and 1. I'm not saying this is a "better" format, I'm just saying it would be a reasonable one as well (yes they were killed, but they did leave the game with points, and may have even killed more enemies than the eventual "winner". No gripe here either way. Streaks are ephemeral anyways.

I'm still not understanding how there are so many points being held by current players (my point #1 above). Sure some sub-1225 are leaving, but so are some over-1225s. Sum-zero means, add up all the points EVERYONE owns (current and non-current players), divide by the number of all-time players, and it should come to 1225. And if it does, then the current stats everyone has just doesn't make sense to me. Not that it matters, it's just not adding up in my mind (pun intended).

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Shall I say something, Cards?

Not like I'm the only one who has ever done that.

 

[Virtuoso]

Not like I'm the only one who has ever done that.

I'm sure the ribbing is all in good fun. It did make the hall of fame afterall...

 

[periwinkle]

I'm still not understanding how there are so many points being held by current players (my point #1 above). Sure some sub-1225 are leaving, but so are some over-1225s. Sum-zero means, add up all the points EVERYONE owns (current and non-current players), divide by the number of all-time players, and it should come to 1225. And if it does, then the current stats everyone has just doesn't make sense to me. Not that it matters, it's just not adding up in my mind (pun intended).

How I understand it....everytime a new player signs up, they add 1225 into the system. They usually lose a few games then those points get transferred to the winner (usually a veteran player). So now those points remain with the veteran player. Points dont leave the system unless the veteran player is either banned or retires. So with every new player that signs up, joins a game and loses, more points will get added to the MC system /community. Typically those new players stop playing and they have less than 1225, which you dont see. So it is net zero, but since those players dont play anymore you will never see net zero. Does that make sense?

 

[Pariah]

Html5 would definitely help build up the community numbers, half the reason people abandon this site is due to flash problems, i suspect.

Plus, aren't they putting the axe to flash sometime real soon anyways, or maybe just something i thought i heard.

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Html5 would definitely help build up the community numbers, half the reason people abandon this site is due to flash problems, i suspect.

Plus, aren't they putting the axe to flash sometime real soon anyways, or maybe just something i thought i heard.

That is correct. Judging by the Beta tab progress, shouldn't be too much longer...

 

[Virtuoso]

How I understand it....everytime a new player signs up, they add 1225 into the system.

I got that. But the theory doesn't match the evidence. I'm in like 20 active games of 6 to 24 players and I don't think there's even ONE player who's score is sub-1225. The total positive score ABOVE 1225 in my 20 games alone is probably around 300 000 points (barring repeat players, of which there are "many"). Even if all these droves of "failed players" came in and each gave away 1000 points, in my games alone, that would be 3000 players who came in, went from 1225 to 225, then left. The issue is, I don't see even a single one of these 1000-point leavers (And not to mention, there are players who gain points (above 1225) and leave too, so those folks are taking points with them). When you play online chess, HALF the players you encounter are below 1200 (if the starting score is 1200), which makes sense. So why am I not seeing those players here?

Again, doesn't really matter what the answer is to this I guess, but I was just wondering.

 

[Bluebonnet]

I got that. But the theory doesn't match the evidence. I'm in like 20 active games of 6 to 24 players and I don't think there's even ONE player who's score is sub-1225. The total positive score ABOVE 1225 in my 20 games alone is probably around 300 000 points (barring repeat players, of which there are "many"). Even if all these droves of "failed players" came in and each gave away 1000 points, in my games alone, that would be 3000 players who came in, went from 1225 to 225, then left. The issue is, I don't see even a single one of these 1000-point leavers (And not to mention, there are players who gain points (above 1225) and leave too, so those folks are taking points with them). When you play online chess, HALF the players you encounter are below 1200 (if the starting score is 1200), which makes sense. So why am I not seeing those players here?

Again, doesn't really matter what the answer is to this I guess, but I was just wondering.

Peri is correct. Try perfecting UDO hunting. The easiest are the players who joined, start 1 casual game then never show up to play it. Same in real time. I made a habit of looking for them. When this place was busier i could get several a week easy with barely trying. When real time was alive, i could get 1 a day on average who never played a turn.
Or they play so miserably the first few games and leave.

Years ago it was rare to see a general. Now we have several. Even 2, 3 or 4 stars. Only difference is there is more points in the system and points flow upwards.

Reason you probably arent seeing it is you play a lot of casual games. The donors rarely last long enough to make it to mulitplayer casuals. And a lot less donors out there then there used to be.

 

[Virtuoso]

OK - I think see how this happens. This site apparently had much more traffic/active players in the past. The remaining 1000 or so are those leftover from the previous busy days. So current players are the ones who would've benefitted from all the bygone (and probably generally inferior) players who are no longer here. As you say, there are newbies who sign up for games, don't play them, then disappear. Each one of those spews 25 points per game they signed up for but didn't play (or more precisely, didn't win). I guess if the site had a short history, then none of the ratings that active players have now would make sense. But I guess there's years of a much busier history, that feeds all the points currently in play.

 

[Bluebonnet]

you got it.

and it was a totally different time. 10 players or more in real time all the time. rarely had to wait for a game. it was fun.

 

[Rimbaud]

Yup, that's right, if some admin could tell us the number of profiles created, then surely more than 70% would be inferior to 1200.

Also, it took 3 years for the first general to appear.

 

[Virtuoso]

So what's a CUDO 20 medal? Consecutive UDOs?

So... that would be someone who kills 20 NEW opponents in consecutive order? So if someone kills 19 new opponents, then repeats someone, that DOESN'T get a CUDO 20 medal? Really? That's kinda really hard to do if you've been around right?

 

[Redstorm]

So what's a CUDO 20 medal? Consecutive UDOs?

So... that would be someone who kills 20 NEW opponents in consecutive order? So if someone kills 19 new opponents, then repeats someone, that DOESN'T get a CUDO 20 medal? Really? That's kinda really hard to do if you've been around right?

That's a damn good question and unfortunately I don't know. Its been so long for me

 

[Bluebonnet]

So what's a CUDO 20 medal? Consecutive UDOs?

So... that would be someone who kills 20 NEW opponents in consecutive order? So if someone kills 19 new opponents, then repeats someone, that DOESN'T get a CUDO 20 medal? Really? That's kinda really hard to do if you've been around right?

Correct if i am understanding you . 1 24 player singles game earns you a 20 CUDO.

The count starts over as soon as you lose a game. so if you nailed me on a 20 cudo streat, then you lose. Then you could count me again on anew streak. In a single streak, each person has to be unique.

Otherwise someone could just set up a dummy acct or beat their friend 20x in a row. No fun and a lot more possibilities of fraud.

I know of a couple 40 silver cudo's. I think someone has a gold cudo medal. Forget whom.

 

[Virtuoso]

Ah. Ok that makes sense. If it was 20 never-before-beaten players, that would be incredibly difficult.