Unrated, Unranked, or No Points Games [REJECTED]

[Woodruff]

If a suggestion is rejected, then a new member joins, couldn't that new member make the same suggestion? If so, even if the new member checked the forums to find the rejected suggestions, couldn't the new member still add his/her opinion by opening a new suggestion? If a veteran player, who has been around for a long time comes up with an idea that is the same as a rejected suggestion, wouldn't the site be interested to know how many people support the notion or the whole suggestion?

I guess I'm not understanding why it is wrong to have ideas and to come up with new iterations of previously rejected suggestions. Even if the suggestion is exactly the same as a rejected suggestion, I would think management would be interested in knowing how many people are interested in seeing a particular change.

Wouldn't the same be accomplished by the "additional member" (if you will) posting in one of the MANY, MANY threads that already exist on the subject? In fact, I would strongly suggest it would be more efficient to do so, as management is just as likely as I am to get sick of pulling up all the damn threads on the same subject and just stop at some point.

I completely agree that posting to an existing topic is the right way to express support for an existing idea, and management is already insulated from the vast majority of suggestions by the organization of the Suggestions forum with its Submitted Suggestions subforum. However, I believe my post did not fall under an existing topic. I proposed a Solitaire mode. It was intended as a way for a new player to become familiar with the mechanics of the game as played on this site without waiting for another player, and possibly as a way to explore the idiosyncracies of a particular map. It was not intended to be a game between players with no points at stake, nor was it intended to involve any AI. Lacking any real competitive aspect, I felt that it would not detract in any significant way from regular games. Because of these distinctions, after searching the fora unsuccessfully for any mention of "solitaire", I started a new topic. Regrettably, it did not draw as much discussion as I had hoped and never came close to being submitted (perhaps because it was mistaken for another "no points game" suggestion). Unfortunately, now it has been merged into a topic which hides its distinctive qualities. Could the topic title at least be modified to "Unrated Games/No Points Games/Solitaire Games"?

I agree with you that your suggestion is different than previous similar suggestions. However, and I asked this previously, I'm not sure there is a real difference between your suggestion and the 'no points games' suggestions, as far as the impact to the site. The benefits and negatives of both seem to me to be precisely the same.

Don't misunderstand...I'm in favor of both, personally. In fact, I personally would dearly love to see Tournaments be excluded from points. In fact...now that I think about it, I'm going to suggest it.

[Queen_Herpes]

Why would anyone have a problem with a player who gets better at a map without risking points? How could that possibly be cause an issue with this site?

then your points and rank to not reflect your overall ability

Exactly! Thank you for falling into my trap. The points and rank in the current ranking system do not reflect overall ability. In fact, the system is so full of holes, we should eliminate ranking and just play casually, no points. It is, after all, "A casual gaming site."

the points and rank do reflect overall ability

Farmers? Multis?

[TheForgivenOne]

Why would anyone have a problem with a player who gets better at a map without risking points? How could that possibly be cause an issue with this site?

then your points and rank to not reflect your overall ability

Exactly! Thank you for falling into my trap. The points and rank in the current ranking system do not reflect overall ability. In fact, the system is so full of holes, we should eliminate ranking and just play casually, no points. It is, after all, "A casual gaming site."

the points and rank do reflect overall ability

Farmers? Multis?

How many true "farmers" are on the site? AND NO, I am not talking about users who play low ranks. THAT IS NOT FARMING, per the definition that lack came up with.

[Queen_Herpes]

There are plenty of farmers and plenty of multis. Since the games they played to "earn" their rank are never deleted, and the "point reset" is rarely (if ever) used, all ranks and ratings are suspect.

We have a "conqueror" who earns a title that is, at best, a little bit tarnished. There have been farmers at the top, multis at the top, etc. It would be nice if the system was a little bit cleaner, with the option to play games that didn't risk points. This might even hve the added effect of curbing some multi-ism and farming activities. Perhaps, even if new recruits' games automatically didn't count for points, it would detract the preceding activities (at least in the first five games) completely.

In addition, there is the obvious difficulty of dealing with the fact that there are multiple maps - so any points or ranking system should really focus on each map individually. Anywho...have fun! Great idea here to offer up games with no rating and no points. Could really help the system.

[PLAYER57832]

There are plenty of farmers and plenty of multis. Since the games they played to "earn" their rank are never deleted, and the "point reset" is rarely (if ever) used, all ranks and ratings are suspect.

This is LEAST of reasons why points don't mean much. The REAL reason they don't mean much is that our games here are so varied, one uniform point system really cannot possibly rate one's proficiency in them all.

Most of the people at the very top are "specialists" of one type or another (farming being one "type", actually). So what? If you consider your CC rank more than just a game, then you have a few other problems CC won't fix. Most of us come here for fun, to play and chat when we wish.

If you are going to make more suggestions, it would be nice if you actually paid attention to what happens here. It seems as if you just keep persisting with ideas that have nothing to do with how CC operates, but because you occasionally get a few new people to pull on, you keep up with the suggestions.

[PLAYER57832]

The "no point" option has been rejected again and again. Points are an inherent part of CC. If it is keeping some people from trying new maps, then ... well, they are probably the same ones who throw tantrums when the "dice don't work properly", when other people "make stupid moves"... etc, etc etc.

Play, have fun or don't play.

[Mr_Adams]

get over the points and play for fun. I could be a major or better if I played for points, and Tdans could be conqueror. But we both play for fun, and so our ranks are lower (albeit, mine is MUCH lower )

[mybad]

+1 and slap knowitall freemies

[Queen_Herpes]

get over the points and play for fun. I could be a major or better if I played for points, and Tdans could be conqueror. But we both play for fun, and so our ranks are lower (albeit, mine is MUCH lower )

I'm confused. Is your argument in favor of "no points games?" I continue to think that there would be a great benefit to the system to offer "practice" games where points are not risked and I fail to see the detriment to the system if such games exist.

[Funkyterrance]

Concise description:

An option to play against someone without points at stake.

Specifics/Details:[/b

A Gentleman's wager has nothing at stake but the honor and standing of the opponents involved. This would be a way for friends to play one another without having to feel bad about winning (or losing lol) points from a friend.


[b]How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

It would be a way to let down your guard a little and try out maps that are unfamiliar without having to lose tons of points in the process. It would also be a much more pleasant way to play against a friend. Sometimes the whole points thing can overshadow a game and it would be nice to drop that weight every once and a while .

[TheForgivenOne]

Merged

Try searching before posting

[Funkyterrance]

Lol thx.

[blakebowling]

This has been rejected many times.

[Funkyterrance]

Could you in a few sentences explain to me why it has been rejected?
My biggest bone of contention about rated games is I don't like to play my friends for points. While sometimes it can be completely cool there are other times where it can be... awkward.
As far as learning new maps there are other ways to get then hang of them and I am usually willing to try a map a few times if it interests me and usually end up losing in the process to someone who has already gotten the drop on it.

[blakebowling]

Points are supposed to be a measure of skill, not a currency with which to bet.