NEW RANKS Sugestions. [Poll Added]

[Funkyterrance]

fully agree 25%
disagree 44%
The rest is just wasted fluff and needs to be ignored.

44% wanting the insignias to stay the same means 56% are in favor of a new ranking system.

[Shannon Apple]

Should have been a simple yes or no answer.
I'd disagree with you funkyterrance, regardless of whether I like this or not. Actually I couldn't care less either way. The 3 path thing seems a wee bit confusing though. How would it be determined how many points are lost across the board?

Yes, I want new ranks, but not the 3-Path System = 8%
44% fully disagree.

People not in favour of this particular system then = 52%

[chapcrap]

I changed my vote, because I won't be lumped with people wanting those graphics. I really think what we have now, is much better graphically. So, I voted for no. I'm ok with a couple of more ranks, but not a whole overhaul and certainly not 3 or 4 divisions of ranks.

To be honest: I don´t actually see a need for a new rank system. The old one works just fine, and I´d go with "If it ain´t broke, don´t fix it" on this one.

Exactly.

[Qwert]

Should have been a simple yes or no answer.
I'd disagree with you funkyterrance, regardless of whether I like this or not. Actually I couldn't care less either way. The 3 path thing seems a wee bit confusing though. How would it be determined how many points are lost across the board?

Yes, I want new ranks, but not the 3-Path System = 8%
44% fully disagree.

People not in favour of this particular system then = 52%

Its not confusing at all- its in same rank value =General equal Admiral equal Air Chief Marshal
Army Sergeant equal Petty Officer equal Air Sergeant.

You only decide what military brach you want to have, very simple, not comlicated.
Also we Reduce Cooks , and give hem much more low ranks, so that people dont lost interest to play, because they get new posibility to try to go up, instead to become cook when they drop belove 800 points. With new 4 low ranks, only player who have below 100 points will become cooks.

[rdsrds2120]

Concerning the rank system, graphically, we'll be staying the same unless something wild happens. As for new ranks, maybe, but I feel that this is mostly preference, and that most people don't mine either way in the grand scheme of all things Conquer Club.

BMO

[Conchobar]

Yes qwert yes! Commodore Conchobar just sounds better than Brigadier Conchobar.
(As soon as I get back over 3000 that is)

[Vartiovuori]

I could sorta agree that new ranks might be nice. However, I don't agree with the current suggestion, and I'm definitely against multiple tracks, especially if they're a premium-only feature.

Just for fun, what I would suggest for ranks:
1 cook
500 recruit
700 cadet
900 private
1000 private first class
1200 corporal
1300 lance corporal
1400 sergeant
1500 sergeant first class
1600 sergeant major
1900 ensign/second lieutenant
2100 lieutenant
2200 captain
2600 major
2900 lieutenant colonel
3200 colonel
3600 brigadier
3900 major general
4200 lieutenant general
4500 general
5000 field marshal

Note that the bigger jumps are between non-coms, company officers, field officers and general officers, which I think is appropriate

[Funkyterrance]

Should have been a simple yes or no answer.
I'd disagree with you funkyterrance, regardless of whether I like this or not. Actually I couldn't care less either way. The 3 path thing seems a wee bit confusing though. How would it be determined how many points are lost across the board?

Yes, I want new ranks, but not the 3-Path System = 8%
44% fully disagree.

People not in favour of this particular system then = 52%

Not sure how you can disagree with me since what I wrote is pretty much indisputable:

"Yes, although I think the old path should still be an option (4-Path)"(First Option)= Wants new rank system

"Yes, I agree fully with qwert's proposed 3-Path System"(Second Option)= Wants new rank system

"Yes, I want new ranks, but not the 3-Path System"(Third Option)= Wants new rank system

"Yes, I like the new ranks but not the graphics"= Wants new rank system

Therefore anyone who chose any of these first three options can be lumped in the group that supports a new rank system and incidentally is in the majority.

I suppose qwert could further break up the topic but it seems clear that most who participated want a change.

[koontz1973]

fully agree 25%
disagree 44%
The rest is just wasted fluff and needs to be ignored.

44% wanting the insignias to stay the same means 56% are in favor of a new ranking system.

No, the other options have nothing to do with the suggestion. So 31% are confused by the question.

disagree 44%
confused 31%
fully agree 25%

First one wants a four path system.
Third one wants new ranks but not the 3 path system.
Forth one wants new ranks but not the graphics.
None of the above options gives anything to either side. qwert needs to remake this poll properly.

So agree with this is third in a 3 way race.

[Vartiovuori]

Should have been a simple yes or no answer.
I'd disagree with you funkyterrance, regardless of whether I like this or not. Actually I couldn't care less either way. The 3 path thing seems a wee bit confusing though. How would it be determined how many points are lost across the board?

Yes, I want new ranks, but not the 3-Path System = 8%
44% fully disagree.

People not in favour of this particular system then = 52%

Not sure how you can disagree with me since what I wrote is pretty much indisputable:

"Yes, although I think the old path should still be an option (4-Path)"(First Option)= Wants new rank system

"Yes, I agree fully with qwert's proposed 3-Path System"(Second Option)= Wants new rank system

"Yes, I want new ranks, but not the 3-Path System"(Third Option)= Wants new rank system

"Yes, I like the new ranks but not the graphics"= Wants new rank system

Therefore anyone who chose any of these first three options can be lumped in the group that supports a new rank system and incidentally is in the majority.

I suppose qwert could further break up the topic but it seems clear that most who participated want a change.

The third option supports changing the current system, but it does NOT support the current suggestion in any way. That would put the support for the current suggestion firmly under 50%.

[cooldeals]

This would be a tragedy for the Society of Cooks training program. They'd have no one to teach.

[greenoaks]

This would be a tragedy for the Society of Cooks training program. They'd have no one to teach.

the Society of Cooks training program no longer exists

[Kaiser_Tottenham]

i like the idea for new ranks, i always wished to see ranks for sea or air, but i don't want to see the ranks like that.. and i guess most people doesn't want to see such thing.

qwert doing a huge work really on this, and i think we need to help him for this. clearly a change in the site could be good at one point. I'll try to help him when i came with idea to support this one.

what i disagree, the minumum points for each ranks, i think what i suggested is more tidy..

[Qwert]

little experiments on how ranks will look in diferent angles

[Funkyterrance]

Definitely prefer the first. However, it seems like there could be an even better way? What about vertical?

[ManBungalow]

little experiments on how ranks will could look in diferent angles

[OleCowboyHippy]

I vote yes, great idea...OCH

[Qwert]

Definitely prefer the first. However, it seems like there could be an even better way? What about vertical?

[Agent 86]

This looks great, I really like it qwert Everyone would quickly get to know the new ranks and insignia's. Change is inevitable as the site continues to improve.

[Funkyterrance]

They look really cool qwert, nice work on these.
Much easier to read now I believe. It might take a little time to figure out placement on the profile, etc, but that would be a pretty easy problem to be solved. Just a matter of design.

I have been thinking about this thread/poll and I believe the reason why it's aggravating some people is because there are actually two suggestions rolled up in one here. The first suggestion being new insignias and the second being the three path system. Granted if you were voting for the 3 path system you would be voting for at least some form of new insignia since 2/3rds of the 3 path system doesn't exist yet but not necessarily the same style as the old insignias.

Is there any way to make a poll that has two separate areas, one for choosing yes or no for new insignias and another for choosing yes or no for the 3 path system or do there need to be two completely separate threads/polls?

[Qwert]

and view from game statistic side

[panzermeyer]

the ranking system is the worst and probably the only bad part of CC

it is way to subjective for the following 2 reasons

1. all players should lose the same amount of points regardless of rank. Way to many people will join or not join a game because they are afraid of losing to many points to a junior rank and they can protect their own rank by playing private games that do not allow lower ranks

2. although I enjoy them, single player and team games should NOT count towards your rank. These options (especially team) make it way to easy to stack a team and pounce on some unsuspecting newbies! and we all now most (NOT ALL) of the higher ranks are achieved in this fashion.

RANK SHOULD BE BASED ON MULTIPLE PLAYER GAMES ONLY! THAT IS WHERE TRUE SKILL CAN BE PROVEN!

[codierose]

can i ask what nationality the ranks you suggest have come from

[Fewnix]

I urge those who like the current ranking system for themselves to allow options for others. That is why I agreed with the concept of 3 different Military Paths, each with its own rank.and voted Yes the old path should still be an option (4-Path),

There are people who do not like their rank to be based on the current points system:

Conquer Club members are initially given a score of 1000. At the end of each game, the winner takes points away from each loser. The points to be awarded is calculated as (loser's score / winner's score) * 20, up to a maximum of 100 points from each opponent.

and they should have the right to be ranked differently, while those who like the old ways can still be ranked the old way.

One suggestion I find interesting is that points be awarded on a straight 20 points gain for a win, a straight 20 points loss for a defeat . So both a cook (5 finished games, minimum score 1) and a colonel (100 finished games, minimum score, 2500 points) in a 6 player game, standard setting, would gain 100 points for 5 wins by being the last one standing and lose 20 points if eliminated I may not chose this option for my ranking but would allow others the right.

Why not allow different ranking systems for those who chose different paths, say those who"enlist" joining a clan and going to war? The score is calculated per team in team games so it should be possible to get as an option a ranking system tied into clan wars or various Leagues, Conquer Cups?

Bottom line: we are talking about allowing different options> Please vote Yes.

Thank you

[spiesr]

Concerning the rank system, graphically, we'll be staying the same unless something wild happens. As for new ranks, maybe, but I feel that this is mostly preference, and that most people don't mine either way in the grand scheme of all things Conquer Club.

Is that an Official Rejection of this suggestion then?

I urge those who like the current ranking system for themselves to allow options for others. That is why I agreed with the concept of 3 different Military Paths, each with its own rank.and voted Yes the old path should still be an option (4-Path),

There are people who do not like their rank to be based on the current points system:

Conquer Club members are initially given a score of 1000. At the end of each game, the winner takes points away from each loser. The points to be awarded is calculated as (loser's score / winner's score) * 20, up to a maximum of 100 points from each opponent.

and they should have the right to be ranked differently, while those who like the old ways can still be ranked the old way.

One suggestion I find interesting is that points be awarded on a straight 20 points gain for a win, a straight 20 points loss for a defeat . So both a cook (5 finished games, minimum score 1) and a colonel (100 finished games, minimum score, 2500 points) in a 6 player game, standard setting, would gain 100 points for 5 wins by being the last one standing and lose 20 points if eliminated I may not chose this option for my ranking but would allow others the right.

Why not allow different ranking systems for those who chose different paths, say those who"enlist" joining a clan and going to war? The score is calculated per team in team games so it should be possible to get as an option a ranking system tied into clan wars or various Leagues, Conquer Cups?

Bottom line: we are talking about allowing different options> Please vote Yes.

This is a suggestion to change the graphics of the rank icons and the score requirements for the ranks. It is not a suggestion to change how points are awarded (or add additional systems for doing so). If that is what you want you need to post in a different thread.