reason for minimal games for ranking?

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderators: Global Moderators, Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.

reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby xiangwang on Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:54 pm

Anyone know why there is a reason for minimal games to hit a certain ranking? What's the policy behind it? Seems a little discriminatory to freemiums since we are limited in our games. I really want that star :cry:
Brigadier xiangwang
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 10:39 am
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby Paddy The Cat on Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:16 pm

i dont know the exact reason, but i have postulates

first off, I think that someone with under the minimum games might not yet be 'proven' of their rank.

ex. someone has score 1150, but only 6 games played. They'll still be a private 1st class, and i think they should be. They might have won just one game they got really lucky in, maybe against some decent rankers, and then lost the others to high rankers also, making them lose few points from their game. Therefore, I think someone with 1150 point but 40 games played would most likely be a better player, and the rank reflects that.

However, for the case of really high ranks, like yourself, it is clear that you aren't just lucky, and that youll probably still be right up that after another 100+ games. That being said, I do think experience should be a factor. Someone with only 125 games at 4000 points probably isnt as well versed as a person with 5000 games at 4000 points, and the one with more games is probably more skilled on more settings. The rank reflects that.

That being said, I dont think you should be sad, I love looking at the scoreboard and seeing the hat symbol up there with generals and brigs, or a captain symbol with the colonels, etc. And i love clicking on your name and seeing 3943 - Colonel. Very impressive :D
User avatar
Colonel Paddy The Cat
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: PA
Medals: 64
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (4) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (9)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby xiangwang on Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:14 am

Paddy The Cat wrote:i dont know the exact reason, but i have postulates

first off, I think that someone with under the minimum games might not yet be 'proven' of their rank.

ex. someone has score 1150, but only 6 games played. They'll still be a private 1st class, and i think they should be. They might have won just one game they got really lucky in, maybe against some decent rankers, and then lost the others to high rankers also, making them lose few points from their game. Therefore, I think someone with 1150 point but 40 games played would most likely be a better player, and the rank reflects that.

However, for the case of really high ranks, like yourself, it is clear that you aren't just lucky, and that youll probably still be right up that after another 100+ games. That being said, I do think experience should be a factor. Someone with only 125 games at 4000 points probably isnt as well versed as a person with 5000 games at 4000 points, and the one with more games is probably more skilled on more settings. The rank reflects that.

That being said, I dont think you should be sad, I love looking at the scoreboard and seeing the hat symbol up there with generals and brigs, or a captain symbol with the colonels, etc. And i love clicking on your name and seeing 3943 - Colonel. Very impressive :D


Well, I just dislike the aesthetic look of a colonel hat compared to a general. And actually, it's 4009 :D
Brigadier xiangwang
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 10:39 am
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby AndyDufresne on Fri Dec 07, 2012 12:27 pm

I think Paddy The Cat hits some pretty good points. I think it comes down to essentially trying to factor in some sort of Experience data into the rank.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
Retired Administrator
 
Posts: 25587
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo
Medals: 20
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) General Achievement (4) General Contribution (2)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby ManBungalow on Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:12 pm

xiangwang wrote:Anyone know why there is a reason for minimal games to hit a certain ranking? What's the policy behind it? Seems a little discriminatory to freemiums since we are limited in our games. I really want that star :cry:

Incentive to buy premium?
Image
User avatar
Colonel ManBungalow
 
Posts: 3338
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:02 am
Location: On a giant rock orbiting a star somewhere
Medals: 84
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (2)
General Achievement (10) Clan Achievement (12) Tournament Contribution (3) General Contribution (6)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby greenoaks on Sat Dec 08, 2012 12:27 am

xiangwang wrote:Anyone know why there is a reason for minimal games to hit a certain ranking? What's the policy behind it? Seems a little discriminatory to freemiums since we are limited in our games. I really want that star :cry:

it doesn't discriminate at all, the exact same number of games are needed by Feemiums as Premiums
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class greenoaks
 
Posts: 9997
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:47 am
Medals: 138
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (4)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (30) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (14)
Tournament Contribution (34) General Contribution (4)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby Funkyterrance on Sat Dec 08, 2012 12:30 am

xiangwang wrote:Anyone know why there is a reason for minimal games to hit a certain ranking? What's the policy behind it? Seems a little discriminatory to freemiums since we are limited in our games. I really want that star :cry:


Is this your first account? I'm just wondering because whenever I see lower ranked players with higher scores my mind always tends to get the impression that they "started over". Not sure if this is the case with you but just thought I would ask.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby trevor33 on Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:19 am

Funkyterrance wrote:Is this your first account? I'm just wondering because whenever I see lower ranked players with higher scores my mind always tends to get the impression that they "started over". Not sure if this is the case with you but just thought I would ask.


I tend to think the same, reaching 4000 with just 100 games played is quite impressive given that they would have to deal with new maps, settings... everything basically. Getting that rank in such a short space need a disciplined plan.
User avatar
Major trevor33
 
Posts: 807
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:30 am
Location: With the fairies.
Medals: 37
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (11)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby Funkyterrance on Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:43 am

trevor33 wrote:I tend to think the same, reaching 4000 with just 100 games played is quite impressive given that they would have to deal with new maps, settings... everything basically. Getting that rank in such a short space need a disciplined plan.


Quite.
This is why I would appreciate an answer from the OP. I'm not saying it's impossible; of course it's possible. However, to use your word, it would require a staggering amount of discipline.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby Dukasaur on Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:33 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
trevor33 wrote:I tend to think the same, reaching 4000 with just 100 games played is quite impressive given that they would have to deal with new maps, settings... everything basically. Getting that rank in such a short space need a disciplined plan.


Quite.
This is why I would appreciate an answer from the OP. I'm not saying it's impossible; of course it's possible. However, to use your word, it would require a staggering amount of discipline.

I've noticed that freemiums who are good tend to rise to higher ranks than premiums of the same ability. The 4-game limit lets them stay focused and really consider their games. Most of us premiums tend to join more games than we should on days when we're not busy, and then when we do get busy we have to rush through our turns and do a crappy job. Even if this happens only once in a while, it can cost you several games at a time.
User avatar
Lieutenant Dukasaur
Head Socialite
Head Socialite
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 136
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (19)
General Achievement (15) Clan Achievement (9) Training Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (5) Tournament Contribution (31)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby xiangwang on Sat Dec 08, 2012 5:33 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
xiangwang wrote:Anyone know why there is a reason for minimal games to hit a certain ranking? What's the policy behind it? Seems a little discriminatory to freemiums since we are limited in our games. I really want that star :cry:


Is this your first account? I'm just wondering because whenever I see lower ranked players with higher scores my mind always tends to get the impression that they "started over". Not sure if this is the case with you but just thought I would ask.


Yes this is my first account. As you can tell from my early games, I didn't have much interest and missed a lot of turns and lost many games.
Brigadier xiangwang
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 10:39 am
Medals: 4
Standard Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby KoE_Sirius on Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:20 am

You could always pay a subscription and then you'd be able to join lots more third cruisade and waterloo games.
Maybe you could even go for a cross map medal if you really want to experience cc at its best and break the monotony.
I think the Hat is the best looking icon.The ones that follow are mostly boring yellow.
Highest Rank 4th.
Image
User avatar
Major KoE_Sirius
 
Posts: 1648
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Somerset
Medals: 54
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (4) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (4)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby Funkyterrance on Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:14 pm

Dukasaur wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
trevor33 wrote:I tend to think the same, reaching 4000 with just 100 games played is quite impressive given that they would have to deal with new maps, settings... everything basically. Getting that rank in such a short space need a disciplined plan.


Quite.
This is why I would appreciate an answer from the OP. I'm not saying it's impossible; of course it's possible. However, to use your word, it would require a staggering amount of discipline.

I've noticed that freemiums who are good tend to rise to higher ranks than premiums of the same ability. The 4-game limit lets them stay focused and really consider their games. Most of us premiums tend to join more games than we should on days when we're not busy, and then when we do get busy we have to rush through our turns and do a crappy job. Even if this happens only once in a while, it can cost you several games at a time.


This is a good point and since the OP answered my question I'm satisfied. :)
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby betiko on Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:00 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
trevor33 wrote:I tend to think the same, reaching 4000 with just 100 games played is quite impressive given that they would have to deal with new maps, settings... everything basically. Getting that rank in such a short space need a disciplined plan.


Quite.
This is why I would appreciate an answer from the OP. I'm not saying it's impossible; of course it's possible. However, to use your word, it would require a staggering amount of discipline.

I've noticed that freemiums who are good tend to rise to higher ranks than premiums of the same ability. The 4-game limit lets them stay focused and really consider their games. Most of us premiums tend to join more games than we should on days when we're not busy, and then when we do get busy we have to rush through our turns and do a crappy job. Even if this happens only once in a while, it can cost you several games at a time.


This is a good point and since the OP answered my question I'm satisfied. :)


I'm not really sure his answer could've been I moved out and created a new account as I had a new ip adress, so I don't really understand why even ask those type of questions. :lol:
But yes, the lesser games the better you play them. And being freemium makes you avoid speed games. The biggest part of any brig+ ranked player is game selection and not entering any costy stupid games.
regarding the question, i think it's both reasons already stated. Have a certain experience before reaching a rank (I guess like in RL military) and make you want to buy premium.
Image
User avatar
General betiko
 
Posts: 5796
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Location: Paris
Medals: 160
Conquer Cup Gold Achievement (1) Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3)
Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Polymorphic Achievement (2)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2)
Random Map Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (2) Bot Achievement (4)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (17) General Achievement (30) Clan Achievement (12) Training Achievement (2)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby Funkyterrance on Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:24 pm

betiko wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
This is a good point and since the OP answered my question I'm satisfied. :)


I'm not really sure his answer could've been I moved out and created a new account as I had a new ip adress, so I don't really understand why even ask those type of questions. :lol:
But yes, the lesser games the better you play them. And being freemium makes you avoid speed games. The biggest part of any brig+ ranked player is game selection and not entering any costy stupid games.
regarding the question, i think it's both reasons already stated. Have a certain experience before reaching a rank (I guess like in RL military) and make you want to buy premium.


Tbh, the reason I ask those sort of questions is there are three possible outcomes:

1. The player is legit and should have no problem explaining the reason.
2. The player is a cheat and will have to publicly lie about their actions to avoid shame.
3. The player is a cheat and admits it, resulting in the ban of a cheater.

It's win-win-win.
Image
User avatar
Colonel Funkyterrance
 
Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:52 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby betiko on Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:43 am

Funkyterrance wrote:
betiko wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
This is a good point and since the OP answered my question I'm satisfied. :)


I'm not really sure his answer could've been I moved out and created a new account as I had a new ip adress, so I don't really understand why even ask those type of questions. :lol:
But yes, the lesser games the better you play them. And being freemium makes you avoid speed games. The biggest part of any brig+ ranked player is game selection and not entering any costy stupid games.
regarding the question, i think it's both reasons already stated. Have a certain experience before reaching a rank (I guess like in RL military) and make you want to buy premium.


Tbh, the reason I ask those sort of questions is there are three possible outcomes:

1. The player is legit and should have no problem explaining the reason.
2. The player is a cheat and will have to publicly lie about their actions to avoid shame.
3. The player is a cheat and admits it, resulting in the ban of a cheater.

It's win-win-win.


with those kind of points he would've never answerd number 3 because he obviously put some effort to obtain his score and he would like to be a general, but how could you make the difference between 1&2? You could only obtain this answer, therefore it's just a matter of beliefs. I do think he's legit, just that I don't see the point of asking someone if he is or not cause there is just 1 answer..
Image
User avatar
General betiko
 
Posts: 5796
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Location: Paris
Medals: 160
Conquer Cup Gold Achievement (1) Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3)
Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (3) Polymorphic Achievement (2)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2)
Random Map Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (2) Bot Achievement (4)
Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (17) General Achievement (30) Clan Achievement (12) Training Achievement (2)

Re: reason for minimal games for ranking?

Postby Gillipig on Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:51 am

xiangwang wrote:Anyone know why there is a reason for minimal games to hit a certain ranking? What's the policy behind it? Seems a little discriminatory to freemiums since we are limited in our games. I really want that star :cry:


Experience! Hard to be a general if you haven't been in many battles ;).
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
User avatar
Lieutenant Gillipig
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 pm
Medals: 38
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (3)


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login