Rank Restricted Games

Have any bright ideas? Share and discuss them with the community

Moderators: Suggestions Team, Global Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

And don't forget to search for previously suggested ideas first!

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby lord voldemort on Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:45 am

rank segregation is bad simple as that...
As an option or as a site feature. If you dont want to play lower ranks join one of the many tournaments of usergroup that only has high ranks. Or create private games and post them in callouts
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant lord voldemort
 
Posts: 9650
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:39 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Medals: 66
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (4) General Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (13) Tournament Contribution (8) General Contribution (3)

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby Woodruff on Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:49 am

lord voldemort wrote:rank segregation is bad simple as that...
As an option or as a site feature. If you dont want to play lower ranks join one of the many tournaments of usergroup that only has high ranks. Or create private games and post them in callouts


So what you're ACTUALLY saying is that rank segregation is ok (i.e. posting in callouts, the various rank threads, etc...).
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 4973
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am
Medals: 27
Standard Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Contribution (4)

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby lord voldemort on Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:55 am

no im saying that implementing it as a feature is bad. It only encourages further segregation, there is already things in place that if you really dont want to play lower ranks then do this...xyz
Image
User avatar
Lieutenant lord voldemort
 
Posts: 9650
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:39 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Medals: 66
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (4) General Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (13) Tournament Contribution (8) General Contribution (3)

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby Vermont on Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:18 pm

lord voldemort wrote:no im saying that implementing it as a feature is bad. It only encourages further segregation, there is already things in place that if you really dont want to play lower ranks then do this...xyz


You are missing the point. Rank segregation is ALREADY occurring. If you use pre-set ranges via a drop-down like I suggest, you would actually find MORE people posting public games and have more people able to find games to play. GameFinder would become far more useful.

As it is now, segregation is actually worse because we have the added separation of those who have found the forum thread & learned the secret password(s) and those who haven't and try to pick up the occasional game where they can.

Having clunky, non-obvious, artificial rank segregation is not a good way to avoid rank segregation!

Suggesting people segregate manually because you think segregation is wrong is rather inconsistent, no?
Major Vermont
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:28 am
Medals: 12
Standard Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (1)

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby KraphtOne on Wed Oct 07, 2009 1:31 pm

lord voldemort wrote:rank segregation is bad simple as that...
As an option or as a site feature. If you dont want to play lower ranks join one of the many tournaments of usergroup that only has high ranks. Or create private games and post them in callouts



Its This Kind Of Comment From Mods That Just Blows My Mind...

"It's Bad, Simple As That"

Obviously Its Not As Simple As That Kiddo Or You Wouldnt Have Megabytes Worth Of Forum Posts Arguing That We Should Have A System To Allow Certain Ranks In Games W/Out Having To Do The Pain In The Ass Callout Forum That Takes A Month To Get A Game Full...

There Is No Point In A Cook Joining An Assassin Game With 3 Generals... It's As Simple As That...

The Mods Saw Fit To Adding Manual Placement Of Troops, (The Worst Idea EVER) Yet Don't See The Bonus Of This? This Should Have Been Looked At, And 2 Days Later Implemented Into Gameplay With A Post In Forum Of "Great Idea Guys"
User avatar
Major KraphtOne
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 7:33 pm
Medals: 75
Monthly Leader Silver (1) 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 (2)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (3)
Random Map Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (4) Battle Royale Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (3)
General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (1)

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby slash17 on Wed Oct 07, 2009 8:58 pm

lol ure complaining ..buuut u are winning them all wich makes u win some EASY points
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class slash17
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 7:21 am
Location: Chicago,ill
Medals: 3
Standard Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)

Ability to Specify Min/Max Rank in Public Games

Postby Joedimag on Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:50 am

It would be nice to be able to be able to place minimum and maximum levels of opponents when starting public games. Other sites permit this, particularly chess websites. I believe it would encourage less forum shopping (lots of players confess to only entering games with higher/much higher ranked opponents in a unabashed attempt to climb ranks).

It somewhat discourages folks from starting public games when, as a major, you need to beat 4 lietuenants in 1-1 play on New World to get 50 points, but lose just 1 game against a private, and you lose 50. One bad drop and going second, and you lose 50 whereas you might play wonderfully, winngin 4 games against better opponents, including going second and with poor drops, and yet remain flat.

This seems perverse.

I am surely not the first to make this comment, so reiterate the calls of my brethren and sestren!
Major Joedimag
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:03 pm
Medals: 17
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: Ability to Specify Min/Max Rank in Public Games

Postby owenshooter on Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:05 am

Joedimag wrote:I am surely not the first to make this comment, so reiterate the calls of my brethren and sestren!

nope, you aren't... you should have done a search... and if you want ranked games, go to callouts or send out private invites... good luck, this has been suggested and turned down numerous times...-0
Image
DoomYoshi, "GD has no traffic because of venereal diseases like you."
User avatar
Captain owenshooter
 
Posts: 9041
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Tx
Medals: 27
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (4) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1)
Fog of War Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (2)

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby Vermont on Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:17 pm

I'd really appreciate a cogent response to my question above. The lack of a reply containing a consistent answer indicates my assessment may be accurate.
Major Vermont
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:28 am
Medals: 12
Standard Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (1)

Re: Ability to Specify Min/Max Rank in Public Games

Postby danoprey on Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:22 am

Or install BOB, a Greasemonkey addon script for Firefox.
User avatar
Lieutenant danoprey
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Medals: 7
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2)

Game finder: similar strength (minimum/maximum rank)

Postby GazduRam on Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:03 pm

In Game Finder one wants search for games whose players are similar to him in strength.
(If rank does not measure play strength [I do not know well yet], a strength meter would be necessary. (As in chess.))
Fighting with much much weaker opponents has less sense than with similar strength.
The optimal is when I have (real) chance to win, but my victory is not certain.
Cadet GazduRam
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:30 pm
Medals: 2
Standard Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1)

Re: Game finder: similar strength (minimum/maximum rank)

Postby frankiebee on Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:12 pm

You may want to check out the 'callouts' forum. Where you can challange people who have a certain point level.

For the idea, I think it's pretty good to have a rank option in the game finder, so you can filter out the low/high ranks you don't want to play with..
User avatar
Colonel frankiebee
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:05 pm
Location: Wildervank/Leeuwarden
Medals: 24
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Clan Achievement (4)

Re: Minimum Rank...

Postby Vermont on Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:18 pm

It has been a week. Should I assume there is no rational explanation?
Major Vermont
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:28 am
Medals: 12
Standard Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (1)

Point ranger in "start a game"

Postby jleonnn on Thu Oct 22, 2009 10:46 pm

Concise description:
Why not have a point ranger where we can set a range of points and start the game. The game will only be open to the players with points within the range

Specifics:
For example, I start a game with a range of 500-1500. Only players within that range can join it. Of course, there is a limit for how much the range can be. for example, maybe the limit for the range can be 500 pts less than the players points, to prevent noob farmers.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:
  • Players can start games with their own settings and play with others suited for their level.
  • Players can start games with their own setting without worrying that another, much more experienced player joins
User avatar
Major jleonnn
 
Posts: 1787
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:11 am
Location: The communist republic of Aoria
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (4) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (10) General Contribution (1)

Re: Point ranger in "start a game"

Postby TotoroHat on Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:51 am

Use the search button. This has been rejected about a thousand times maybe more. I would still like to see a max button though where you can limit those in your games to people under 1300 points or something so that cooks can play cooks but it will never happen!
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TotoroHat
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:31 pm
Location: 100 Miles from a Wall Mart in Oregon
Medals: 21
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (2)

Re: Point ranger in "start a game"

Postby jleonnn on Fri Oct 23, 2009 2:16 am

guess so
User avatar
Major jleonnn
 
Posts: 1787
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:11 am
Location: The communist republic of Aoria
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (4) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (10) General Contribution (1)

Re-Think the rank restriction rejection.

Postby The Neon Peon on Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:51 pm

HEAR ME OUT!!! I have actual reasons and am not just restating the old threads.

Concise description:
  • Minimum/Maximum rank option for PREMIUM members when starting a game.

Specifics:
  • The suggestion is old, and commonly repeated... basically allow premium members to set a minimum rank allowed to join the game and a maximum rank. With these two alterations: the games are restricted to premiums like speed games.
  • This will NOT make farming easier. Simply make a restriction that your rank must be within the limits. In that case, a major trying to farm lets every captain, lieutenant, sergeant etc. on the scoreboard join. Not exactly farming... especially hard to farm premium members either way.
  • This will NOT make the games for new recruits and cooks. There are plenty of freemium members on the site. And they generally take their turns much faster than paying people since they only have a few games. By making games faster, the new members are more likely to stick to the site.
  • There is nothing wrong with rank segregation if games are still available for all ranks. If there was something wrong with a ton of majors/colonels only playing other majors/colonels, you would not have allowed clans and threads for the purpose to be created. A lot of people only play high ranks by doing this, but it's a hassle.
  • Games without the restrictions fill faster since the ranks excluded and all freemium members can still join. This means that the feature has no chance of becoming used for even close to half of all games.
  • The rejection was a long time ago. I believe this needs to be re-evaluated.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:
  • More New recruits will stay because their games go buy/fill faster.
  • More people buy premium because it allows them to use one of the most suggested features to the site.
  • The scoreboard will mean more since more people will gain points from playing their own rank rather than gaining points from those with a quarter of their score.
User avatar
Lieutenant The Neon Peon
 
Posts: 2342
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:49 pm
Medals: 31
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (2) General Achievement (3)

Re: Re-Think the rank restriction rejection.

Postby Wellspring on Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:20 pm

The scoreboard will mean more since more people will gain points from playing their own rank rather than gaining points from those with a quarter of their score.


Arguably the scoring and ranking system would mean less not more with this system. People would only play against people of their own rank or higher, therefore never risk losing a large amount of points. There would be very little movement between ranks.

Why not just play private games if you want to play against people of a certain rank?
User avatar
Major Wellspring
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:10 pm
Location: South Carolina
Medals: 31
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (3)

Re: Re-Think the rank restriction rejection.

Postby owenator on Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:21 am

Wellspring wrote:
The scoreboard will mean more since more people will gain points from playing their own rank rather than gaining points from those with a quarter of their score.


Arguably the scoring and ranking system would mean less not more with this system. People would only play against people of their own rank or higher, therefore never risk losing a large amount of points. There would be very little movement between ranks.

Why not just play private games if you want to play against people of a certain rank?


Sometimes you want to take a nibble at something new. It's like being married and waking up to the same woman...it get's boring. What? WHAT?!!! :roll: :twisted:
User avatar
Lieutenant owenator
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 9:41 am
Location: Toronto
Medals: 33
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (2)

Re: Re-Think the rank restriction rejection.

Postby Woodruff on Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:05 am

Wellspring wrote:
The scoreboard will mean more since more people will gain points from playing their own rank rather than gaining points from those with a quarter of their score.


Arguably the scoring and ranking system would mean less not more with this system. People would only play against people of their own rank or higher, therefore never risk losing a large amount of points. There would be very little movement between ranks.


Yes, and yet possibly no. If someone is really at a certain rank only due to their high frequency of playing games against...lesser opponents, that will rapidly show as their rank drops from playing the higher players more consistently.

That being said, I believe the suggestion is really just for it to be an option, rather than a requirement...which makes it a win-win scenario.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 4973
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am
Medals: 27
Standard Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Contribution (4)

Re: Re-Think the rank restriction rejection.

Postby The Neon Peon on Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:26 pm

Wellspring wrote:
The scoreboard will mean more since more people will gain points from playing their own rank rather than gaining points from those with a quarter of their score.


Arguably the scoring and ranking system would mean less not more with this system. People would only play against people of their own rank or higher, therefore never risk losing a large amount of points. There would be very little movement between ranks.


If I beat another major, doesn't that show something? There is a reason why people who play games against those of their own rank in general are more respected on the site than those who foed their own rank and only play with people 3 or more ranks below them.

I don't think you are going to find many people to back your belief that playing lower ranks and getting a high score is harder than playing those your own rank.

Wellspring wrote:Why not just play private games if you want to play against people of a certain rank?

Because
1. They fill more slowly
2. Only a small minority read the forums, so the amount of different people you can play is very limited
3. Some games types will never fill because of the small people that see the games
4. Speed games are harder to fill and usually have the same people in them all the time
5. It is extra work, why not save us the effort? Just like the game finder... we could hypothetically join all our games through the join a games page
...
User avatar
Lieutenant The Neon Peon
 
Posts: 2342
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:49 pm
Medals: 31
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (3) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (3) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (2) General Achievement (3)

Suggestion: "Start a Game" with a specific rating range

Postby cjbpulp on Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:59 pm

Quandry: I want to learn to play the harder maps (eg., City Mogul), but every time I start a game, some high-rated shark shows up and whips me, which doesn't teach me much.

So, howsabouts an option to "start a game" with a specific rating range? So me, with my 1100-1200, might specify 1100-1300, thereby getting a close game, or at least a game with other learners, while specifically excluding sharks.

Discuss?
Corporal 1st Class cjbpulp
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:31 pm
Location: Cascadia
Medals: 21
Standard Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Speed Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (4) General Achievement (1)

Re: Suggestion: "Start a Game" with a specific rating range

Postby jefjef on Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:05 pm

Make private games and post in call outs. CC isn't interested in allowing us to put rank restrictions on games even though many support it.
This post was made by jefjef who should be on your ignore list.
Image
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
User avatar
Colonel jefjef
 
Posts: 5994
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 8:41 pm
Location: on my ass
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (4) General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10)
Tournament Contribution (3)

Re: Suggestion: "Start a Game" with a specific rating range

Postby Woodruff on Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:12 pm

cjbpulp wrote:Quandry: I want to learn to play the harder maps (eg., City Mogul), but every time I start a game, some high-rated shark shows up and whips me, which doesn't teach me much.
So, howsabouts an option to "start a game" with a specific rating range? So me, with my 1100-1200, might specify 1100-1300, thereby getting a close game, or at least a game with other learners, while specifically excluding sharks.
Discuss?


<sigh> What, and solve people's problems? Nay!
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 4973
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am
Medals: 27
Standard Achievement (4) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Contribution (4)

Re: Suggestion: "Start a Game" with a specific rating range

Postby stahrgazer on Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:33 pm

cjbpulp wrote:
So, howsabouts an option to "start a game" with a specific rating range? So me, with my 1100-1200, might specify 1100-1300, thereby getting a close game, or at least a game with other learners, while specifically excluding sharks.

Discuss?


Long way around: Foelist everyone who isn't the range you want; then they cannot join a game you've started.

Option B: Ask one of those sharks to dubs WITH you, to teach you.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class stahrgazer
 
Posts: 1424
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 11:59 am
Location: Figment of the Imagination...
Medals: 57
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Bot Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (8)
Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (7)

PreviousNext

Return to Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login