Points for Second and Third Place

Suggestions that have been inactive for a long period of time.

Moderators: Suggestions Team, Global Moderators

Should 2nd and 3rd place get some points too?

yes
11
61%
no
7
39%
 
Total votes : 18

Points for Second and Third Place

Postby mikey6rocker on Thu Feb 02, 2006 3:06 pm

I think in bog games ( 4 or more) the 2nd and 3rd places should get some points. To last that long should be recognized.
Last edited by JamesKer1 on Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Changed Title for Clarification
Private mikey6rocker
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:50 pm
Location: Fullerton, CA
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby moz976 on Thu Feb 02, 2006 3:26 pm

I think that you should get say 5 points per person you eliminate if you do not win. But no get points just based on being second or third. You can be second or third just by staying out of ppls way.
User avatar
Private 1st Class moz976
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Location: Georgia, USA
Medals: 3
General Contribution (3)

Postby Volkmar on Thu Feb 02, 2006 3:55 pm

You should at least have some points or break eaven for second
Cadet Volkmar
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

Postby lackattack on Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:38 pm

I used to always think the guy in 2nd place was the biggest ass-kisser and it's more honourable to be 3rd. But that was back when I played "analog" Risk and NYMEX would win by manipulating some fool to do his dirty work.

The idea of getting points for each kill is interesting... maybe a 4th type of game. i.e. standard, doubles, triples, and murder (maybe someone can think of a better name)
User avatar
Private 1st Class lackattack
Retired Administrator
 
Posts: 6112
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:34 pm
Location: Montreal, QC
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) General Achievement (2)

Postby thegrimsleeper on Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:45 pm

lackattack wrote:I used to always think the guy in 2nd place was the biggest ass-kisser and it's more honourable to be 3rd.


:lol:

I think the idea of getting points for taking people out is pretty intriguing. Maybe you get as many points as the number of players? So in a six-man game, taking out all 5 of the other players would give you 30 points, plus whatever points you would accumulate for winning normally.

Would it be BAD to reward being the most Cut-Throat player? That might be a better name than murder, btw...
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegrimsleeper
 
Posts: 984
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:40 am
Location: Seattle
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) Map Contribution (1)

pionts by Murder Death Kill !!!!!

Postby joetalk on Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:54 pm

ok i second the vote for a piont system based on the removal of other players, an extra 10 I think would be good for each elimanated player, as generally doing so in any type of speed really limits a persons defence from other player in a game.
Joetalk OUT
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class joetalk
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:19 am
Location: Whitehorse Yukon. CA
Medals: 6
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1)

Postby lackattack on Fri Feb 03, 2006 4:39 pm

I really don't like this idea. Then weak players can make a deal with the game leader "let me help you cruch them and in return kill me last". I think that's poor sportsmanship.
User avatar
Private 1st Class lackattack
Retired Administrator
 
Posts: 6112
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:34 pm
Location: Montreal, QC
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) General Achievement (2)

Postby mikey6rocker on Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:24 pm

i agree, it wont work by taking out players, because if u do all the dirty work but cant get the last country because it is on the other side of the map. another player can just take that one country and get all the points. i just think coming in 2nd or 3rd place, you shouldnt loose points or something.
Private mikey6rocker
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:50 pm
Location: Fullerton, CA
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby thegrimsleeper on Fri Feb 03, 2006 7:16 pm

Why should you get to keep any points? You didn't keep any countries. You lost 'em, fair and square. If the game were timed, that would be one thing, but it's not. You play until there's only one player left on the board. If you deserved points for the game, you would have won it.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegrimsleeper
 
Posts: 984
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:40 am
Location: Seattle
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) Map Contribution (1)

Points

Postby apwessen on Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:31 am

Unless I've not noticed this, you lose pts if you don't win. What about big games? If you get second amongst 5 people do you still lose points? I would think second of five people is still worth not losing points.
Sergeant 1st Class apwessen
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:53 pm
Location: Columbus

Postby cowmonkey on Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:28 am

The problem with awarding points to 2nd, 3rd, etc. (or for that matter penalizing 2nd, 3rd less) you change the nature of the game. Instead of trying to team up against the person who is doing best on the board you end up trying to take out other weak players before you are taken out.
Private 1st Class cowmonkey
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:11 pm

Postby Lt. Bung on Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:19 pm

I think that there should be some benefit from being 2nd/3rd place and all the way down.

A couple of not well thought out ideas:

The point based system that is set up now, but instead of the winner taking points from everyone you only take points from people you conquer and award bonus points for coming in a certain place.

A system set up where each place awards/penalizes a set amount of points based on where you finish. Could be modified by amount of people in the game or game type.

As it is now a person that has less points than I starting a game will lose less points than me no matter where we end up (except for winning that is). Game 871 shows that I lost 1 more point than a person I took out.

I know that 1 point is nitpicking but it adds up. Especially when your 'score' reflects how 'good' you are in this game. I don't think I am great at this game but you'd think I was terrible with how quickly my score is plummeting :)

Now the problem with implementing a point system based on end game place has been noted in the previous post. People will play differently to get whatever points they can.

Last not thought out idea as this post is running long, maybe a point per round that you were active in the game.....errrr nevermind this is definitely not a good idea.
Private 1st Class Lt. Bung
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: San Diego

Postby lackattack on Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:57 pm

I like the idea of a Cut-Throat / Assasin game option where you only get points for eliminating people.

But otherwise I agree with cowmonkey, there is no honour in being 2nd place. It's all or nothing!
User avatar
Private 1st Class lackattack
Retired Administrator
 
Posts: 6112
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:34 pm
Location: Montreal, QC
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) General Achievement (2)

Postby Lt. Bung on Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:31 pm

I'm glad that one of my ideas was ok :)

I'd like to try out a cut-throat/assasin style of game. If you end up coding one up please let me know.

Thanks for all your great work!
Private 1st Class Lt. Bung
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: San Diego

Point system

Postby mjtrish on Tue Feb 07, 2006 3:20 pm

the point system should be relative to points that each person has. I.e. if you beat a person with 1600 points you should get more than 20points from that person.
User avatar
Captain mjtrish
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:47 pm
Location: NYC

Postby Pedronicus on Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:23 pm

There should be some sort of points for taking out someone. Even if you lose, you showed guts and ruthlessness :twisted:
Major Pedronicus
 
Posts: 2079
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:42 pm
Location: Busy not shitting you....
Medals: 71
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (6) General Achievement (5) Clan Achievement (13) Tournament Contribution (4)

What about no loss pts for second?

Postby HULK on Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:23 pm

Hey I do not know if everybody would think this is stupid, but I found that often games ends on who gets their cards at the good moment once in one-on-one. I know I lost a lot of games where at one point we were even strengh and only two players and I ended up not only winnig 0 pts, but I lost pts. It is true that the game of risk is a simulation of a nation trying to rule the world and it is true that in real life, if someone manage to control the world, nobody would care about having been the last nation to be under domination, but you have to have made good decisions to finish 2nd.

What would you think if a 2nd place out of a single game (no team) doesn't loose any pts. Am I the only one who thinks that would be nice.
Corporal HULK
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:35 am
Location: Montreal

Postby SprCobra on Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:14 am

So the winner gets less points unless the otehr players lose more points to make up for the points your keeping
Cadet SprCobra
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:31 am

Postby qeee1 on Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:34 am

I don't think there should be points for second, because then people will just strike deals that will hand cheap wins to whoever's the strongest player. ie. leave me to last and I'll help you win, or even just trying to develop some strong fortifications in a corner in the hope they will be left last.

I admit sometimes it's unfair to lose points when you played far better than some of the others, but I think on balance it'd be better not to implement this.
User avatar
Colonel qeee1
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 12:43 pm
Location: Ireland
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1)

Postby Vladsky on Wed Feb 15, 2006 7:25 am

Just play games with a flat rate or no cards and quit complaining.
Sergeant 1st Class Vladsky
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 8:55 pm
Medals: 2
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1)

Postby HULK on Wed Feb 15, 2006 2:25 pm

The flat rate or no cards is a good idea. Thanks, I did not think about it.
Corporal HULK
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:35 am
Location: Montreal

Postby Matteo_zelenko on Wed Feb 15, 2006 2:28 pm

Only problem is that those games take much longer to complete, which in turn makes you less eligible to attain points.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Matteo_zelenko
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:13 am
Location: Brampton, Ontario, Canada

Postby mikey6rocker on Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:52 pm

i agree with him. i think the winner should get the normal amount of points, but 2nd place shouldnt lose points or somehting. Coming in 2nd place in a 6 person game is hard. i think 2nd place should get some reward for lasting that long.
Private mikey6rocker
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:50 pm
Location: Fullerton, CA
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby Itrade on Wed Feb 15, 2006 10:15 pm

I agree. Getting second place would be a last ditch effort to break even. First place will still be worth risking it because of all those juicy points you'll get.
Image My set is a bone coat-of-arms and chandelier! How cool is that?
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Itrade
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 2:14 am
Location: Malaysia
Medals: 20
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (4)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (1)

Postby Ran Taro on Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:21 pm

Maybe you should lose less points progressively, depending on what position you finish in.

So first eliminated loses the most, last eliminated loses the least, percentage wise.

I think all losers should lose some points, but a sliding scale might add some interest to games where you get a bad start and have no real chance of winning. At least then you can try to hang on and do some clawing back, to save yourself some points...

btw shouldn't this be in the suggestions forum? lack is more likley to see it there...
Corporal Ran Taro
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:54 am

Next

Return to Archived Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login