[GO] [Rules] Rank Restricted Games

[Villains]

This might have been asked already, but I couldn't see it on the forum.

Would it be possible that when you're starting up a game an option could be included that you could choose to only allow ranked players(private & above) to join?

The vast majority of deadbeats seem to be noobs.

I realise it may seem unfair to future members who wouldn't forget about games and wouldn't go deadbeat but they would only have to complete 3 games to get a private rank.

[wacicha]

they only way would be to start a private game and post it in the callout section then give the password to who you feel is not a deadbeat

[Villains]

ok, thanks

[craig84]

such as in socom online i purpose that u can have a rank requirement for a game u start, such as im a captain so i can have only captains and higher etc.., this might take care of deadbeats that are questions marks and privates.

tell me what u think good idea or a bad idea?

[kwolff]

The only problem is that then noob's might get caught up in more of those games resulting in new players leaving .......I know if i signed up for four games and they all had a deadbeat or two i wouldnt have stayed.....

[Marvaddin]

This IS a good idea, but discussed already... the new players thing is the bad side of it. Maybe it should be another type of game, we could have public games, private games, and ranking games, and these only should only be created by premium, too, to make sure we would always have some public games with players.

[eddymush]

i like marvs idea

[General Mayhem]

Although the new deadbeat losing points system should help, people with zombie/deadbeat accounts can still ruin a game or cause serious disadvantage to the opposition, until they get their point under the new system.

The existing problems are still:

a) the other team can still get into a winning position within 3 rounds of your team mate deadbeating.

b) a zombie player with a low score can deadbeat and ruin the scoring in a game.

c) a zombie player with a purposefully low score can play to win and f*ck up anyone with a normal to high score

My thoughts (if it were possible) are:

Rather than having to set up private games and invite chosen players why not limit the rank or score of players that can join your public game?

A player with a half decent score/rank is less likely to deadbeat period.
You get to play decent honest player of your preferred minimum ranks.

the lower ranks and recruits can still play their own level players in order to advance.

[kwolff]

I think you can do that already by doing the private games so I dont see why it has to be put in as an option...........

[AK_iceman]

it shouldnt be the standard, but i would like it as an option.
I do enjoy playing higher ranked players, but if this were the standard it would make it impossible for me to steal points from newbs.

[AK_iceman]

I think you can do that already by doing the private games so I dont see why it has to be put in as an option...........

The difference is you dont have to send a pm with a password to every high ranked player in order to start a game.
They would simply be the only ones who could join.
There should also be a new name for this type of game so you could search for them with game finder.

[kwolff]

yes as an option I see your point , it would be very handy .....It would go along the lines of also maybe putting tabs on the join game so you dont have to look at everyone elses singles games when you are trying to find a team game ......

[lackattack]

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

[TuckerCase]

I think doing this would cause some points inflation. It would be easier for higher ranked players to maintain or increase their scores. So that's something to consider. Also, and more importantly, I don't really like the idea of public games that are restricted to an elite. Keep public games public.

[HighBorn]

i will vote yes on this one but "ONLY" as an "option" nothing more...... lack.....

[max is gr8]

I'm sure I have already suggested this

:strokes chin:

[jay_a2j]

Most games that I have played where people join then never play involve players with ( ? ) as their rank. I think there should be an option during game set up to exclude the non-proven players from your game. The (?) could play other (?)'s until they prove they will play the game. I usually set games (and drop them if a (?) joins as my partner) because I do not know if they will stick around CC long enuff to play or they just "stumbled" across this site, set up an account...never to return. I cannot "monitor" my waiting games to ensure I have a game that will move along at a decent pace. Or maybe a "drop game" option during play as I would rather lose points then take 2 months to play a game.















?

[AK_iceman]

If new recruits only played new recruits, how many do you think would stay at the site?
I agree with you that most dont know how to play the game, or never show up again. But we should be trying to help them instead of blocking them. If you see a new recruit in your game as your partner, send him a pm or something. Give him some ideas on how to play his turn. If he makes a few friends quickly on the site he is more likely to stay and buy premium.

[reverend_kyle]

I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.

[jay_a2j]

I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.

yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry.


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)

[reverend_kyle]

I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.

yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry.


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)

Haha, I was referring more to you in particular would be better off playing with a liberal than a new recruit.

[jay_a2j]

I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.

yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry.


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)

Haha, I was referring more to you in particular would be better off playing with a liberal than a new recruit.

Possibly. But I don't have any new recruits as partners. I take all steps necessary to avoid that.

[reverend_kyle]

I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.

yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry.


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)

Haha, I was referring more to you in particular would be better off playing with a liberal than a new recruit.

Possibly. But I don't have any new recruits as partners. I take all steps necessary to avoid that.

As do I, I dont join games without partners I knwo for sure are there..

[ksslemp]

i'M A NEW MEMBER WITH THAT DREADED "?" NEXT TO MY USERNAME. I HOWEVER WATCH MY GAMES AND PLAY IN A TIMELY MANNER, SO I DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR SUGGESTION.

HOW ABOUT REDUCING THE PLAYER TURN TIME WITH EACH MISSED TURN?
SAY 24HRS/18HRS/12HRS FOLLOWED THEN BY REMOVAL.

WHAT DO YOU THINK? IT WOULD AT LEAST SPEED IT UP!

[MeDeFe]

You should have pressed Caps Lock one more time before starting to write that post, kss...


Anyway, I guess you play lot of doubles jay and if you don't want to play with recruits that's up to you. But an option to block recruits would effectively keep them out of most games where they could actually learn something.
If you know some people you could start playing together with them, then you'll know your partners and be sure you can trust them.

btw, I've also seen a lot of privates and even sergeants deadbeat, you can never guarantee that a game will proceed quickly.



and kss, that would certainly help to speed up games a little, but sometimes people miss a turn or two because of RL circumstances, their internet connection might be down, power failures, lots of work and so on.

Deadbeats already lose points, that should be enough to discourage people from deadbeating on purpose, no need to make things harder for people who just happen to have bad luck.