point system

by **fusibaseball** on Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:31 pm

Edited

by **Metsfanmax** on Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:33 pm

Like all rating systems, this is designed to discourage playing against players ranked much less than you.

by **fusibaseball** on Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:45 pm

Edited

by **Metsfanmax** on Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:52 pm

fusibaseball wrote:figures a moderator would be not help. only disgusts me more. grow up.

Oh, I didn't realize you were asking for help.

My recommendation is to stop losing against lower ranked players

by **jltile1** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:35 am

Metsfanmax wrote:
fusibaseball wrote:figures a moderator would be not help. only disgusts me more. grow up.

Oh, I didn't realize you were asking for help.

My recommendation is to stop losing against lower ranked players

Ok your right but there should be a system that blocks them from playing then. I think the maps played should dictate the points earned doodle 1v1 should not give a hat 100 points against a general. Most people won't play that 1v1 but classic everyone plays and I have not played for the only reason that if I loose I will drop 30 points. The system does not make higher rake players play speed games everyone would enjoy!!!

by **jltile1** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:38 am

I would like to add this as I play a lot of speed games if the point system was half way square I would play a lot more. I do get scared that a hat joins takes 50 points and it takes five games to get it back, that is not right.

by **Chariot of Fire** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 3:02 am

jltile1 wrote:I would like to add this as I play a lot of speed games if the point system was half way square I would play a lot more. I do get scared that a hat joins takes 50 points and it takes five games to get it back, that is not right.

Same. Would love to play speeders but with starting odds of approx 1:4 what's the point?

by **betiko** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 4:04 am

yeah i don't see the point system as wrong, i see the joining system wrong. basically you are allowed to create private games, you are allowed to foe people, but you are not allowed to have an option that forbids low ranks to join a game you create, mostly for speed games.

but i guess I'm the wrong person to say so as I join way too many 1vs1 speeders vs any rank and get way too many point drops..

by **Arama86n** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:45 am

betiko wrote:yeah i don't see the point system as wrong, i see the joining system wrong. basically you are allowed to create private games, you are allowed to foe people, but you are not allowed to have an option that forbids low ranks to join a game you create, mostly for speed games.

but i guess I'm the wrong person to say so as I join way too many 1vs1 speeders vs any rank and get way too many point drops..

I kind of think the points system is spot on. Here's my argument.
betiko holds major despite playing point negative 1v1's. =D>

That proves he's a skilled player. You may say "but, shouldn't he be a general then?". Let me counter by asking if you've read "The Art of War"? One point Sun Tzu repeatedly shoves down your throat is picking you battles, choosing your opponents, and only fighting when you know victory is yours. Although playing whoever may be something we applaud, it isn't great strategy, and that's the point. Ofc, in real life, you die if you lose, it is not so in conquer club, or in any virtual game, we just get 'game over' and start again...
That said, picking your battles wisely is a huge part of military strategy, and I don't think the point system reflecting this is a bad thing.

I've seen a player stay around the rank of Brig playing 200ish tourney games in a row, majority 1v1's against whoever, 98% lower ranked ofc. If he can do it, so can we, ofc, most of us are not good enough simply, or don't have the patience, or put in the effort.

TLDR version; Game selection is a big part of rank, and that's the way it should be. Picking your battles is a vital aspect of military strategy.

by **g8keepr** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 9:09 am

hmhm, I have to say that I hate loosing - especially just because of the "drop" or dice in the first round. Both are likely to happen in 1 vs 1 - so I totally understand why high ranks seldom play a 1vs1 on a easy map. Just like Sun Tzu they pick maps or settings to (try to) control "Lady Luck". At the moment I have no solution how a fair point system could look like - but the option to limit the Ranks that could join a 1vs1 speeder (or any another game) could be interesting option.

one thought: in real life most point systems do not differentiate between the ranks. in soccer it does not matter if Real Madrid beats Getafe or Barcelone - a vicotry is still 3 points worth. looking at CC there is a risk of exploiting the system by playing comeplex maps or settings that favour experience and make players unbeatable (look at the latest conquerors).

If CC wants more interaction between high and low ranks in speed games (except for settings that high ranks can control), a change of the point system is necessary!

by **KraphtOne** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 12:11 pm

betiko wrote:yeah i don't see the point system as wrong, i see the joining system wrong. basically you are allowed to create private games, you are allowed to foe people, but you are not allowed to have an option that forbids low ranks to join a game you create, mostly for speed games.

but i guess I'm the wrong person to say so as I join way too many 1vs1 speeders vs any rank and get way too many point drops..

this will never happen in ever apparently... has been brought up, mmmm just about every year...

Why I remember this one handsome fellow. Started a thread that said "hey there are a ton of new recruits joining my fuedal games, there should be a way to disallow players below certain ranks from joining your game.

And then shortly thereafter, handsome guy got a warning for farming...

Don't bother looking for the thread where handsome guy complained about new recruits... they deleted it

by **Serbia** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:00 pm

Bold - the new CAPS LOCK.

by **Lindax** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:22 pm

Chariot of Fire wrote:
jltile1 wrote:I would like to add this as I play a lot of speed games if the point system was half way square I would play a lot more. I do get scared that a hat joins takes 50 points and it takes five games to get it back, that is not right.

Same. Would love to play speeders but with starting odds of approx 1:4 what's the point?

The point is FUN!

I know I won't get above the rank of Major (occasionally Colonel) playing public speed games, but it's fun. And private games with higher ranked players don't fill anymore like they used to.

In general I win enough games to not go down in score too much. However, I rarely play 1v1, usually 6, 7 or 8 player games. It's true that one loss can take away more points than you sometimes win in a game, but if you play good enough you can win enough games to more or less balance it out.

Having said that, I don't like the current point system either. I would like a system where you set up a speed game for, say, 25 points. Everybody joining stands to lose 25 points, regardless of their score. Obviously the winner wins x times 25 points (50 in a 3 player, 125 in a 6 player, etc.).

Lx

by **chapcrap** on Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:43 pm

Lindax wrote:
Chariot of Fire wrote:
jltile1 wrote:I would like to add this as I play a lot of speed games if the point system was half way square I would play a lot more. I do get scared that a hat joins takes 50 points and it takes five games to get it back, that is not right.

Same. Would love to play speeders but with starting odds of approx 1:4 what's the point?

The point is FUN!

I know I won't get above the rank of Major (occasionally Colonel) playing public speed games, but it's fun. And private games with higher ranked players don't fill anymore like they used to.

In general I win enough games to not go down in score too much. However, I rarely play 1v1, usually 6, 7 or 8 player games. It's true that one loss can take away more points than you sometimes win in a game, but if you play good enough you can win enough games to more or less balance it out.

Having said that, I don't like the current point system either. I would like a system where you set up a speed game for, say, 25 points. Everybody joining stands to lose 25 points, regardless of their score. Obviously the winner wins x times 25 points (50 in a 3 player, 125 in a 6 player, etc.).

Lx

This is pretty much how I feel.

I do think that it could be beneficial to have a different ranking for every map, so that if you are playing a cook that is an expert on Doodle Earth, that they don't actually count as a cook, but more as a Sargeant (or whatever they are). But it's all just fun.