72o wrote:If you think that 5 is not an accurate rating, you shouldn't assume that people with an average lower than 4.5 are people you shouldn't play.
jefjef wrote: CC wouldn't let us to put rank limits in to join games. Imagine this will not be allowed either.
Thezzaruz wrote:Because sully has missed the obvious "any limit should be a +/- range from the game creators rank" part of this. Would be pretty stupid if you could set a limit that would enable yourself to not be allowed in your game.
KraphtOne wrote:Thezzaruz wrote:Because sully has missed the obvious "any limit should be a +/- range from the game creators rank" part of this. Would be pretty stupid if you could set a limit that would enable yourself to not be allowed in your game.
Ok that sentence is more brilliant than it seems...
In setting a rank limit for a game it would apply to everyone in the game...
So there would be no way to noob farm because if i have a rating of 4000 i would have to set the game to minimum rank X to maximum rank 4000 or else i couldnt play :0)
Great Idea and absolutely no reason not to be able to do this...
Cooks could open up games and not have to worry about majors joining them...
Send It In ...
mattattam wrote:It would be cool if there was an option to create a public game and limit the people who could join to a certain rank. So if you created a game you and are a Captain you don't have to play a game with privates and below or something like that. I know this would be a little harsh on cooks and in particular new recruits. But I think it would be a nice option.
Thoughts or variations?
lackattack wrote:I don't like this idea. What if it became popular? New recruits would have trouble finding games. They would be stuck in games with other new recruits and their first CC experience would be full of deadbeating.
You only get one chance to make a first impression
what if i have some real life mates and i want to play a game with them, but they are ranked say luitennant or something. i take it i would just not select the minimum rank option or would this effect my entire game?
sully800 wrote:A lot of the concerns revolve around this: Most people (save the society of cooks) generally don't like the play with new recruits because of the fear that they deadbeat more often and therefore make the game less enjoyable. The logic then goes that if all new recruits are put together in a game then a potential new player might get stuck with all deadbeats in the first game or two and be less likely to join the site.
Vermont wrote: * Players of various levels could actually start games for each other. Currently, they need to somehow learn there is a specific forum thread, learn a secret password, and hope someone has started a game. They can start one themselves but then it is only open to other players who are aware of this artificial, clunky, non-obvious process. What compelling reason is there to make people jump through these hoops? They are in effect going through these manual steps to play games with people somewhat near their rank.
* This would reduce farming accusations for the higher ranked players that want to add a public game.
* New players would be able to play other games against only other new players, if they prefer.
* Players would meet more new players. As it is, many players only play against other players that are aware of the special process for playing people your own level.
* Both settings are optional so you still keep all existing games the way they are.
* Game finder actually becomes useful again for these types of games. I can't tell you how often speed games are searched on and there is nothing from players other than the lowest ranks, since all the others are being done privately (since an option like this does not exist.)
sully800 wrote:I agree that it's a very good idea to say the minimum allowed rank is your own rank. That effectively prevents farming, and is a good solution.
But the other half of the problem still exists: New recruits would find themselves only with low ranking players and therefore would have a worse initial experience and be less likely to remain on the site. At least, that has been the prevailing opinion for the last 3 years and it's why this suggestion has never been implemented.
I understand the concept that you should be able to beat people at your own level before moving up and playing the next level - on many levels it makes sense. But it also segregates the score board and could prevent low ranks from joining a lot of games and that is something CC has been wary of from the get go.
OliverFA wrote:Lower limit: From 0 to Player Score/2
Upper limit: From Player Score*2
Thezzaruz wrote:OliverFA wrote:Lower limit: From 0 to Player Score/2
Upper limit: From Player Score*2
Far to narrow limits IMO as that would mean that the only ones to really be excluded from games would be < 750 players.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users