Conquer Club

Many people have suggested a change where it would be possible to create games that filter out lower-level players, and while this has its benefits, it just doesn't make sense as it would segregate the CC community.

On the other hand, it still seems like a huge problem that I lost 57 points against two cooks and private, and won three games in a row before that for less than 57 points combined!!

There's gotta be a new way to do the calculations that narrows the margin of how much you can lose against lower ranked players, and how much they can win against you. It reminds me of driving games, where the player who is losing gets a boost to his speed to help him catch up. But what fun is that?! It's not real competition, it's charity for the less skilled and a stake in the back of true competitors. The only people who benefit are the ones who "just wanna have some fun" so they can feel good about playing. But the people who want to compete get screwed in the process.

I know other suggestions as this have been rejected in the past, but I am not asking for anything specific, just that it will be considered... that possibly, just maybe, there is another way to calculate points. And I don't know what that is.

So please, feel free to post your ideas and/or comments below. Thanks for all your hard work, Lacks.

One thing I ask of anyone posting in this topic is that you state your rank. Thank you.

This has been suggested a multitude of times...no matter what system we use, people will become unhappy with it.

have a nice day!
jennifermarie

jennifermarie wrote:This has been suggested a multitude of times...no matter what system we use, people will become unhappy with it.

have a nice day!
jennifermarie

Obviously you are one of those people who do not care for competition, but just a "fun way to waste some time =)"

if you hate cooks then just play rpivate games simple as that. the system works and it really isnt hard to gain points

and what are you classifying as a high rank?

In a way I agree with Herakilla - if you don't like lower ranks then find games with higher ranks.

I myself play against lower ranks all the time (though, yes, in doubles so it is a bit different) and I know that it hurts to lose to a lot lower rank guys but this is the risk that I take when I play them. And I have no trouble taking that risk because I know that if I lose then they had to be better than me.
I'm absolutely sure that there are games with people who are close to your points and rank.

About your suggestion - basically different pointing system if I understood correctly... If somebody figures out something better then I'm sure that it will be seriously taken under consideration but until there isn't anything better then it wont be on people's mind a lot.

seriously what is "higher ranks"? you have 1200 points.... not much higher than said "lower ranks"

Don't spam, he'll answer when he comes online. I don't think that everybody is sitting online 24/7, like you and I

Oh, and when I used the expression higher and lower rank then I meant like: "higher rank than yours", "lower rank than mine" etc.

And I actually think that he seems to think that Cooks, Cadets and Privates are lower rank and everybody else higher

Oh, and I forgot to post before, I think I'm middle rank
Because there's exactly 7 ranks higher than mine and 7 ranks lower than mine (didn't count ).

i was your rank a couple days ago then i lost to some with 600 points XD but i didnt cry about it

killthejoe wrote:There's gotta be a new way to do the calculations that narrows the margin of how much you can lose against lower ranked players,

There is, you can only lose 100 in any game. I'd say that's a pretty good cut off.

Herakilla wrote:i was your rank a couple days ago then i lost to some with 600 points XD but i didnt cry about it

Who was that pointed at?

BaldAdonis wrote:

killthejoe wrote:There's gotta be a new way to do the calculations that narrows the margin of how much you can lose against lower ranked players,

There is, you can only lose 100 in any game. I'd say that's a pretty good cut off.

ROFL

PS sorry for double post

amazzony wrote:

Herakilla wrote:i was your rank a couple days ago then i lost to some with 600 points XD but i didnt cry about it

Who was that pointed at?

at you, you are (or were at the time of my post i didnt bother looking again) a sarge first class and so was i

I definitely think a change to the score calculations would be good to make point loss/gain not as extreme when there are low and high ranks in the game...

Maybe something like (loser's score)/(winner's score)*10 + 10

This would cut the impact of rank in half relative to what it is now. I guess I would be considered a higher rank though, usually a captain/major, so the lower ranks would probably all hate it if this was the new formula

score system changing isnt going to happen, just let it die and live with the system that works perfectly fine

Mentos- wrote:I definitely think a change to the score calculations would be good to make point loss/gain not as extreme when there are low and high ranks in the game...

Maybe something like (loser's score)/(winner's score)*10 + 10

I'm not saying the current point system needs a major overhaul, just a slight tweak, and the formula above is just one example of what could be done.

I'd just like an answer as to why this has been universally rejected and not even CONSIDERED. If there are so many people that have a problem with this rule (so far a resounding 50%!!!), then why can't it even be examined?

Does anyone have any other formulas they can suggest?

Again, I will repeat "If there are so many people that have a problem with this rule (so far a resounding 50%!!!), then why can't it even be examined?"

If you don't like losing lots of points either:

A) Don't play low ranks, or
B) Don't lose

Seriously, if you lose to a cook you deserve to lose big points because you should be more skilled than them which gives you a big advantage.

For me, when I played public doubles I never thought the system should be changed even when I lost 40 points against a couple of corporals. Because I knew that 8 times out of 10 I would beat that team, so it all evened out in the end.

Of course it doesn't work so well if you are playing 1v1 which is 90% luck. So I suggest not playing that game type if you are interested in points

Herakilla wrote:

amazzony wrote:

Herakilla wrote:i was your rank a couple days ago then i lost to some with 600 points XD but i didnt cry about it

Who was that pointed at?

at you, you are (or were at the time of my post i didnt bother looking again) a sarge first class and so was i

I never ever cry about losing points. Either learn to read or... yeah, learn to read

And now, on-topic. As mentioned a lot before - if you lose to a cook then you deserve it If I lose to a cook then he either had better strategy than I had or had better luck. Either way it's a fair win as both elements are part of this game.

i played in a terminator game, lost 50 points when i was eliminated, then proceeded to win a 6 player standard game, and made 59 points, THATS INSANE. i prefer open games as u get a wider variety of maps etc and for all u people who only play private games its easy for you to say ''if u lose to cooks u deserve to lose alot of points'' well sure i deserve to lose a few more, but i simply cannot win EVERY TIME. there are factors out of my control such as dice, the drop and the other players! i would like the cap to be much less than 100, maybe 40 would be better.

amazzony wrote:

Herakilla wrote:

amazzony wrote:

Herakilla wrote:i was your rank a couple days ago then i lost to some with 600 points XD but i didnt cry about it

Who was that pointed at?

at you, you are (or were at the time of my post i didnt bother looking again) a sarge first class and so was i

I never ever cry about losing points. Either learn to read or... yeah, learn to read

And now, on-topic. As mentioned a lot before - if you lose to a cook then you deserve it If I lose to a cook then he either had better strategy than I had or had better luck. Either way it's a fair win as both elements are part of this game.

i agree, you lose, then you deseved it somehow whether inferior tactics, or luck you had it coming