Points system

[jrh_cardinal]

my guess is it was rejected because people could abuse it. You could have a couple people in the game who just want to get some good practice in, then one idiot joins and suicides on everyone for no reason at all.

And how exactly is that abuse?

are you serious...

Unwritten Rules

Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, holding players hostage, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new recruits.

just because it's not for points doesnt mean people are allowed to ruin your game by suiciding at everyone

I don't think that would happen often enough for this idea to be rejected.

i may be wrong, that's just my opinion. It's not rare for a suggestion to be rejected because of the extra work it would give C&A mods (that's not necessarily a bad thing, it's just a thing)

[MichelSableheart]

A player's point total should be an indication of their skill. The current point system is set up under the assumption that if you have double the points of someone else, you are 4 times as likely to win a game. In other words, if you have twice the number of points then another player, and you play that player 5 times, you should be expected to win 4 of them, and if you do, your point total shouldn't change.

A higher ranked player is not being punished for playing lower ranks. If their point totals are good indications of their skill, the higher ranked player should expect not to lose points on average. Only when their point total is higher then reflects the actual difference in ability would they lose points.

If you get a high score by specialize in certain settings, then your score won't reflect your ability outside your specialisation, and you should expect to lose points if you venture outside your specialization.

[SirSebstar]

Excuse me, SirSebstar, but can you tell me if the option to play non-ranked games was ever suggested? If so, can you tell me what was the ruling on it (or preferably, find me the link?)

Thank you!

because it was asked:
the oldest suggestion about practice games was rejected
viewtopic.php?f=471&t=1218&hilit=practice+games back in 2006

current suggestions
Points suggestions (alter win/loss points transfer method): http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=120108&hilit=non+rank+games
Please..... TWEAK the point system :http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=119242&p=2629927&hilit=non+rank+games#p2629927

sorry but thats all i wanted to know, so i did not look for any more threads. There are loads more out there though

[SirSebstar]

@Rules thank you for reinterpreting the rules..
However throwing games is not a single game where you get pissed off and try to take someone out at the cost of loosing the game, but the systematic loosing of games e.g. because you want to get low points.. Be aware though, suiciding is a good way to get your ratings lowered.
My advice do play low rank and high rank alike, but do not play low rated. you might not enjoy the game..

[Qwert]

he-he bunch of >COlonels< complain abouth points distribution. How the hell you get these rank, Luck or skill?
When you been low ranks,then you dont complain,but now when you are colonel,then you see that its not good for your rank. Im play here almost 4 years,and i never see that point are problem(dice are biger problem). If you are good,then chances for lost against low ranked,are minimal.

[SirSebstar]

i know. i have been playing a lot of (type of) games that are new to me. so i dropped down a lot. Now that i understand what i am doing, i climb back up.

[SgtMadDog]

Using the ELO system is fine, but they would need to adjust the formula to include variables for initial troop deployment and luck of the dice. This is not factored in to the current system and makes the points system flawed. FIX IT!!!! and disallow the game cheat add-ons unless they are standard for all maps and users. This is something else not factored into the points system, in summary it has alot of issues that need to be addressed to make it fair.

[maasman]

A player's point total should be an indication of their skill. The current point system is set up under the assumption that if you have double the points of someone else, you are 4 times as likely to win a game. In other words, if you have twice the number of points then another player, and you play that player 5 times, you should be expected to win 4 of them, and if you do, your point total shouldn't change.

A higher ranked player is not being punished for playing lower ranks. If their point totals are good indications of their skill, the higher ranked player should expect not to lose points on average. Only when their point total is higher then reflects the actual difference in ability would they lose points.

If you get a high score by specialize in certain settings, then your score won't reflect your ability outside your specialisation, and you should expect to lose points if you venture outside your specialization.

Thank you for being one of the few logical people here.

Well, I think they should change the formula at the least.

Just beat a newb and was awarded "3 POINTS"!!! weeeeee
Then lost to one and lost 54. Where is the fairness in that????

Ever think that noob is not so much of a noob? It's very fair. If you played that person a hundred times then your points would even out against him and you'll know how much better you are than him. Maybe having 5+times more points than him is not a very good measure of the gap in your skill levels, ever think of that?

[SgtMadDog]

If they dont adjust the formula for all the examples i gave then might as well have a set amount for all players. if you are good then you'll win more games and your points will reflex that, if not they will reflect that skill level as well. as it is now a bad player can win 1 game out of five against a good player and still gain points which shouldnt be the case. as i read the current points/rank system was designed for games of pure skill such as chess. this is not chess, the board changes every game and luck is involved in 75% of it. A change is needed and if you dont see that then you are homophobic nazi who hates asparagus!

[jrh_cardinal]

If they dont adjust the formula for all the examples i gave then might as well have a set amount for all players. if you are good then you'll win more games and your points will reflex that, if not they will reflect that skill level as well. as it is now a bad player can win 1 game out of five against a good player and still gain points which shouldnt be the case. as i read the current points/rank system was designed for games of pure skill such as chess. this is not chess, the board changes every game and luck is involved in 75% of it. A change is needed and if you dont see that then you are homophobic nazi who hates asparagus!

first, thanks for flaming/baiting half the people on the thread.

second, no it's not perfect. In chess, there is one way to play. You play against one opponent, with the same rules (same "map" and "settings") every time. CC is totally different. There are a ton of options, and your score isn't going to reflect your ability in every option. Now if you have some simple, magic formula that will allow everyone's score to perfectly reflect their ability in every map/game type, please share.

If not, you're gonna have to choose whether you want to exploit the flaws in the scoring system and raise your score, or just play for fun; which is what this site is meant to be.

[SgtMadDog]

"or just play for fun; which is what this site is meant to be." It would be a lot more fun if they changed the scoring system to reflect the intangibles of CC that are not present in a chess. game! Damn man did you even read my post or did you just glaze over it and write a response to what you wanted me to have meant?

Hey, if i followed your logic we shouldnt try to improve anything! let's just hang out, be mellow and smoke a dube.. is that your life philosophy?

FIX THE DAMN SYSTEM>

[SgtMadDog]

If they dont adjust the formula for all the examples i gave then might as well have a set amount for all players. if you are good then you'll win more games and your points will reflex that, if not they will reflect that skill level as well. as it is now a bad player can win 1 game out of five against a good player and still gain points which shouldnt be the case. as i read the current points/rank system was designed for games of pure skill such as chess. this is not chess, the board changes every game and luck is involved in 75% of it. A change is needed and if you dont see that then you are homophobic nazi who hates asparagus!

first, thanks for flaming/baiting half the people on the thread.

second, no it's not perfect. In chess, there is one way to play. You play against one opponent, with the same rules (same "map" and "settings") every time. CC is totally different. There are a ton of options, and your score isn't going to reflect your ability in every option. Now if you have some simple, magic formula that will allow everyone's score to perfectly reflect their ability in every map/game type, please share.

If not, you're gonna have to choose whether you want to exploit the flaws in the scoring system and raise your score, or just play for fun; which is what this site is meant to be.

And secondly.... I'm not flaming/baiting anyone. I'm stating my opinion. If you're offended or more likely don't comprehend it. well then welcome to the real world. You must work in a government agency, or maybe you get paid $40hr to tighten a lugnut on an assembly line? whatever it is i bet it's union work!!!

Was that a flame? I'm not sure.

[greenoaks]

the points system is not broken

[SirSebstar]

.....Was that a flame? I'm not sure.

Flames are posts or parts of posts which, directly or indirectly, insult, belittle, bully, name-call, or otherwise attack another user is not allowed.

so yes.

state what you have to say, but the pointsystem is not "broken". It might not be the best system, but if you have a better one, please submit it to the suggestions forum and see if you can rally enough support to get it accepted.. do not go on with your flaming in the Q&A section.

[jrh_cardinal]

if you dont see that then you are homophobic nazi who hates asparagus!

This line is what I was originally citing as a flame. That goes beyond your opinion, directly attacks any and everyone that disagrees with you.

You must work in a government agency, or maybe you get paid $40hr to tighten a lugnut on an assembly line? whatever it is i bet it's union work!!!

lol, I get paid much less than that per hour the 8 hours per week I work (at least for most of year, more in the summer)

"or just play for fun; which is what this site is meant to be." It would be a lot more fun if they changed the scoring system to reflect the intangibles of CC that are not present in a chess. game! Damn man did you even read my post or did you just glaze over it and write a response to what you wanted me to have meant?

Hey, if i followed your logic we shouldnt try to improve anything! let's just hang out, be mellow and smoke a dube.. is that your life philosophy?

FIX THE DAMN SYSTEM>

Sure, it would be more fun. However, since there is luck involved the scoring system will never be perfect, because luck will always skew the results somewhat. As I said, if you have a solution I would love to hear it, but I'm almost positive there's not a way for everyone to have one score that accurately portrays their abilities throughout CC's many game options. Yes, clearly I read your post. Most of your post was a list of complaints. Here is the best part of your post:

if you are good then you'll win more games and your points will reflex that, if not they will reflect that skill level as well. as it is now a bad player can win 1 game out of five against a good player and still gain points which shouldnt be the case.

You stated the problem well. Then, in my post, I answered:

if you have some simple, magic formula that will allow everyone's score to perfectly reflect their ability in every map/game type, please share.

so, yes, I read and responded to your post. Now, do you have a good solution to the problem?

[SirSebstar]

Good points jrh_cardinal

if you are good then you'll win more games and your points will reflex that, if not they will reflect that skill level as well. as it is now a bad player can win 1 game out of five against a good player and still gain points which shouldnt be the case.

question, WHY exactly should a player not get point for winning against a vastly superior player? if its 4 losses and 1 win and the net result is you get ahead, well good for you. the relative strength of the higher player is diminished, since he lost 1in4 where he should have lost 1-5. In absolute terms however the stronger player rightly stays the stronger player.
Both pointranks reflect that. I really do not see the problem in the system itself.
now about CC, that has a lot of overvalued players. Maybe you are such a player, maybe not. I cannot tell. Fact is some players with (relative) higher scores have not really earned them at all. they have simply gotten lucky or have played against similar players and thus won more points then they should have.

somewhere i heard an idea of fixed rewards. now that the dumb. That only rewards those players who play a lot.

my suggestion is that you ignore rank and instead focus on having a good game.
regards

[Dr Madvibe]

To me, ELO means the Electric Light Orchestra.

More enlightenment needed please.

[SirSebstar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
The Elo rating system is a method for calculating the relative skill levels of players

[KoE_Sirius]

Well, I think they should change the formula at the least.

Just beat a newb and was awarded "3 POINTS"!!! weeeeee
Then lost to one and lost 54. Where is the fairness in that????

i suggest you visit the suggestions forum and make a post there.
otherwise. a low ranker half your points should be beatable by you twice at much as he can beat you... Maybe you should better pick on someone your own size..

Thats all very well,but my games are open to all big or small.A lot of the lower ranks miss turns and this is reflected in the rank they hold.Some of the the top ten have win ratios of less then 30%.Some cooks have actually won more games then them.Something need to be done about the scoring system and players without unique defeats should be stripped of points at the end of each month for non-playing.So I do not think its about picking on players,its a much bigger issue.

[SirSebstar]

I don't understand.
You have a problem with top ten players have played less games then a noob and with win percentages of 30% or less?? I mean, if they managed to get there, then they must have won a lot more then average against players much higher ranked. So they picked their battles.

If you have a problem with picking battle's you could participate in the alternative tourny setting open for all players. the highest ranked there is the one who wins the most..

You cannot give fixed points for a win, cause then the most active player (as opposed to the best) will have the most points
you cannot force players to play eachother in a fixed schedule. some players just dont turn up even for tournaments they signed up themselves..
I understand the current point-system, and though its not entirely fair, i'd like to hear a better one instead of whats wrong with this one.

[SgtMadDog]

I don't understand.
You have a problem with top ten players have played less games then a noob and with win percentages of 30% or less?? I mean, if they managed to get there, then they must have won a lot more then average against players much higher ranked. So they picked their battles.

If you have a problem with picking battle's you could participate in the alternative tourny setting open for all players. the highest ranked there is the one who wins the most..

You cannot give fixed points for a win, cause then the most active player (as opposed to the best) will have the most points
you cannot force players to play eachother in a fixed schedule. some players just dont turn up even for tournaments they signed up themselves..
I understand the current point-system, and though its not entirely fair, i'd like to hear a better one instead of whats wrong with this one.

Use the current system but change the formula values to reflect the luck and other intangibles reflective of this type of game.
It aint brain surgery! I don't understand the mentality of thinking it will never be perfect so lets not TRY to make it more so!

[natty dread]

Use the current system but change the formula values to reflect the luck and other intangibles reflective of this type of game.

How?

[SirSebstar]

sigh, how indeed.
I know i'd like to add luck, attention and add on programs to factor into the scoring, i just dont see how another formula could be more fair. So lest start with the exact formula and then explain to me why its more fair.

[KoE_Sirius]

Its not a fair system where players feel they can't play lower ranks,because they'll lose to many points and where cooks that have won more games then a general.
I hope that has cleared up what I posted before..I know I was ranting a little.I'm sorry.

[stahrgazer]

Well, I think they should change the formula at the least.

Just beat a newb and was awarded "3 POINTS"!!! weeeeee
Then lost to one and lost 54. Where is the fairness in that????

i suggest you visit the suggestions forum and make a post there.
otherwise. a low ranker half your points should be beatable by you twice at much as he can beat you... Maybe you should better pick on someone your own size..

Which means the lower ranker should get 6 points for a win to ksslemp's 3 points for a win.... not 54 to 3.

It should only be 54:3 if the newer player was 18 times more 'beatable' than the higher player.