Ok, it isn't fair to say that I am a bad player. I just haven't had the time to practice and become better that you have. You have played twice as many games as me.

The top 100 what, out of curiosity?

Oh. Its top 100.
Lame elitist crap like the GR system where the top players only play each other jockeying a stranglehold on the same positons.

I think you overestimate the elite nature of the top ranks of GR :p. There's not much difference between a top ten or top 500 player. Anyone who knows how the pieces move, has a bit of experience, is willing to dedicate time to talking, and ready to take risks has every chance of beating any other player.

Touch a nerve, uber?

My point is there arent any top 100 players challenging shitty players regularly to give them opportunities to advance. Its not like the top 100 want to drop in rating. Its the same problem with chess ratings. The good players have little incentive to actually play people they risk rating vs

I would never let a idiot like you touch a nerve, so no.

Looking at even the top 50, I dont think ive been in a game with a single one of them. And ive never been invited to be. All invitational games are typically among a very very small core sample size either insanely high RR, insanely high GR, or insanely hogh stakes point pools.

There isnt much parity.

https://sites.google.com/site/phpdiplomacytournaments/theghost-ratingslist

Ive played maybe 8 of these people in the top 50 since 2012.

Yoyo, !, DemonOverlord, xorxes, Split, HR, Amwidkle, ssoren.

I think I did okay vs them all. Ive not played any of them a ton in anything other than gunboat or a tournament.

My point is I dont think the top 100 care about playing outside the top 100 other than actually all the above mentioned

Quite a few of the top 100 don't play much at all. I think that's part of why they're in the top 100, as it means they can avoid distractions. I'm convinced it was the only way I got into it back when I had a ranking, especially as I'm not a leftie :p.

The trouble is that if you only play a handful of games a year, once you've signed up for a tournament and an invitational with people you've enjoyed playing before there's precious little opportunity for much else.

Much of my stats is gunboats. I never took the game of diplomacy seriously until the last year and a half where I actually wanted to talk to people and play the game. Ive found it fun but at times I look at my 600 or worse rating and see how much time I spend on this site and wonder why given my status on the forum im actually what most would consider a terrible player.

When I say terrible, I mean someone outside the top 100. My win % is small given how many games ive played. My draw % is slightly above my loss column. So yea Im sub par. And mostly I end up playing other sub par players who are eager to play me because of my forum persona

People who play non-anon or passworded are worse than Hitler.

Octavious is right, except that top players don't play much. Many of them play a lot of games. In fact I'd be willing to bet that over half of the top 50 players have over 100 games under their belt.

Against each other

I'm going to do some Tableau visualization of GR stuff over the next few weeks.

Holy crap, I took a multi-year break and I'm right at the bottom of the top 200.

comin' for that numba one spot

I used to play non passworded games and then capt brad ruined that experience for me.

I find playing with Brad hilarious, it's such a mind fuck when names are revealed. Everything clicks into place.

I'm ranked 28 in the latest GR list and I'll play anyone if they're reliable. Wanna set up a gunboat with me, brainbomb? I don't have time for press these days.

You have to have played some number of games to reach the top, but it's certainly true that you tend to do better and end up higher if you don't try to simultaneously play twenty games.

I think you are being somewhat unfair brain. That 7 day phase game that is semi-anon with you in it has 5 players in the top 150 in GR in it. I find people near the top enjoy playing with reliable players - and it just happens that as you move down the GR list, reliability tends to drop as well.

Condescension:

Congratulations on this, your upcoming liberal match.

...one might observe that this is merely a shitty copy of a pre-existing conservative match, since you Nancy Boys are out of ideas.

Best of luck though, Old Sport. Please don't let your lack of originality interfere with your enjoyment of this copy-cat game.

People in the know all laugh at the GR. Total boys club. Have fun in your tree fort, boys.

Some people in this thread didn't catch the sarcasm of the OP. I wonder if GR and IQ somehow correlate.

@Condescension:

Also, were you aware that your score were less than a third of my score? What gives? Communist tendency to ed-emphasize achievement?

And yours in under a third of mine, bucko.

BB I think we played when I was in the top 50. Maybe that's why I'm not now!

Hazel Arab, if be up for that. Gunboats about all I can handle

Hmmm. I'm not leftie. What am I doing in here. I must read Webdipia Alt-Hist Simulator 3.

I like that Al criticizes GR for being a bad metric and then uses points.

@ghug

Well played, Sir.

Now ranked 10th on GR FP games. I'm one of the worst culprits. I only play one FP game at a time. For me, it definitely helps the rating to limit the number of games I spend with Dip. PS: I'm not a socialist. I like anarchy as a political philosophy.

Which kind of anarchy? You're probably still left.

Unless you're an ancap in which case ):

Grats on the spot, by the way. Maybe I'll oust you next month. :P

Al? The guy who hasn't played a game since May 2016?

Irrelevant.

BTFO

No. Not left. I am not an advocate of anarchy for the sake or creating a socialist government like some in the Antifa crowd. IMO, any central government of any significant size leads to corruption, theft, and unintended consequences.

I'm archo capitalist. We should be free to buy and sell what we want without government picking sides and choosing favorites.