koontz1973 wrote: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.
Moderator: Community Team
koontz1973 wrote:fully agree 25%
disagree 44%
The rest is just wasted fluff and needs to be ignored.
ahunda wrote:To be honest: I donĀ“t actually see a need for a new rank system. The old one works just fine, and IĀ“d go with "If it ainĀ“t broke, donĀ“t fix it" on this one.
Shannon Apple wrote: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%
Shannon Apple wrote: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%
Funkyterrance wrote:koontz1973 wrote: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.
Funkyterrance wrote:Shannon Apple wrote: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.
cooldeals wrote:This would be a tragedy for the Society of Cooks training program. They'd have no one to teach.
qwert wrote:little experiments on how ranks will could look in diferent angles
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.
Is that an Official Rejection of this suggestion then?rdsrds2120 wrote: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.
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.Fewnix wrote: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.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users