Daggerheart wrote:Thanks for the support. NOW it's time to address this issue to the owner!
TheForgivenOne wrote:I did talk to a higher up power earlier, he says that they are aware of various rank limitation/restrictions, and that lack may look into the suggestion in some sort of form or iteration.
hmsps wrote:As a side note these 2 dropped the game when i joined before my partner took up the invite so these things will continue to happen until you do something about it. And just because only 2 people agree doesnt make it any less a valid suggestion
MichelSableheart wrote:To be honest, I really don't see the need for this suggestion. Coming from a mainly standard multiplayer experience, it's extremely rare that players are so outclassed that the enjoyment of the game suffers. Most of the time, playing vs. a higher rank is a good learning experience, and playing against lower ranks should give you a fun game.
The only reason I can see to limit the opponents you can play against to players of your own level is because you are concerned about losing too many points against lower ranked opponents. But frankly, that's part of the ELO like scoring system we use. It's necessary for the ranking to remain a good indicator of someone's abilities.
SneakySheep wrote:its not about protecting newbs how many times do i have to make a game only to have it fill up with privates, cadets and cooks then have cooks suicide into me
i want to be able to make a world 2.1 game and have it fill up with some players that have a idea about risk
im not here to teach newbs how to play im here to play some good games of risk, i dont like to play risk if the games going to end by round 10 thats not risk its just plain gay
i understand that you think it might hurt new players joining but ffs use your brain make it sargents and above that still gives cooks a wide range of people to suicide into but lets people who want a good strategic game to play
if your not going to look after the players you have that PAY to play then wats the point n even having new people join once they get some games under there belt there just going to end up posting in this tread or make 1 like it
i love CC but i love a good game of risk more its not like you HAVE to have a ranking option when making a game thats y its called a option
sorry if i offended people but im sick of this world and its P.C bull sh*t be real
when your new at a game you dont join a game with elite players because of course your going to get owned
does World of warCraft let you raid a lvl 80 dungeon when your lvl 1? no you start small and work your way up
tezu wrote:Add an option when creating games which defines the minimum and maximum rank a player must have to join that game.
TheForgivenOne wrote:So new recruits would be less likely to stay and ultimately purchase premium because they would have a more negative experience by playing in games with more deadbeats like themselves. Along with the fact point segregation is bad.
TheForgivenOne wrote:How are lower ranks supposed to learn if they can't find an open game against a higher rank? They will just keep learning bad strategies.
i make world 2.1 games and dont look at them until they have started if i get a PM about how im farming then whos fault is that?
SneakySheep wrote:bump this
Users browsing this forum: No registered users