Conquer Club

READ BELOW

Wouldn't make any diffrens.

The problem for this is a rather big one, with *10 points, it is much, much harder to earn points, which would be a good thing, except only for the top players. If you make earning points twice as hard, the people on top will stay there, and the people at the bottom will never get up there.

As for point farming, not a solution. Right now, they lose 94 points when playing a new recruit, with your suggestion, they earn half as much, but will only lose 47 points. Reducing the price and the benefits equally does not exactly work...

no matter what the system is, there will always be ways to get around it, wouldnt it be easier to just make it so that new recruits can only play players with ranks below 1500. that way the highest a farmer can get is to 1500, then he is up to his own merit.

hwhrhett wrote:no matter what the system is, there will always be ways to get around it, wouldnt it be easier to just make it so that new recruits can only play players with ranks below 1500. that way the highest a farmer can get is to 1500, then he is up to his own merit.

You'd have to limit that to 1v1 seeing as people rank 1400 ish could play in 8-man games with people rank 3500 etc.

FabledIntegral wrote:

hwhrhett wrote:no matter what the system is, there will always be ways to get around it, wouldnt it be easier to just make it so that new recruits can only play players with ranks below 1500. that way the highest a farmer can get is to 1500, then he is up to his own merit.

You'd have to limit that to 1v1 seeing as people rank 1400 ish could play in 8-man games with people rank 3500 etc.

y so? you often see 8 man games with a bunch of question marks and a brigadier that arent some sort of point-farming scam?

hwhrhett wrote:no matter what the system is, there will always be ways to get around it, wouldnt it be easier to just make it so that new recruits can only play players with ranks below 1500. that way the highest a farmer can get is to 1500, then he is up to his own merit.

There will always be a way around it, I think ...
Take a look at my recent suggestion - divide competition into divisions - which has as one of its benefits a protection against noob farming. Tell me if that's too easy to get around ?

This suggestion would simply reduce the points won and lost in all games by half. It would not effect farming as they would still they same proportion of points as they do now...

The scoring formulas is someone here's baby, and they won't admit its ugly no matter how many negative effects you point out.

Don't worry, there is no farming problem on this site. It's all made up nonsense by a bunch of troublemakers who can't get over 4000 points.

to answer your first point, i must say that i have already thought about the current point spread and a one time curve would need to be implemented to reduce the highest from the lowerst score a bit.

To answer your first question the reason it would deter from point farming is not so much to give less points but to slow the process down to a point where people who farm would be very bored. Just to gain 100 points would mean to play 50 games instead of 20 or so. Higher ranks would lose the fun in farming and would start to play more diverse games.

The Neon Peon wrote:The problem for this is a rather big one, with *10 points, it is much, much harder to earn points, which would be a good thing, except only for the top players. If you make earning points twice as hard, the people on top will stay there, and the people at the bottom will never get up there.

As for point farming, not a solution. Right now, they lose 94 points when playing a new recruit, with your suggestion, they earn half as much, but will only lose 47 points. Reducing the price and the benefits equally does not exactly work...

i like this idea very much and that was actually going to be my original suggestion. somehow make it so certain players (depending on rank) could play certain players, but due to the complexity of that i decided not to go with it. Instead this current suggestion would take a mere switghing of a logrithmic calculator and would take much less effort to assuage the current problem.

hwhrhett wrote:no matter what the system is, there will always be ways to get around it, wouldnt it be easier to just make it so that new recruits can only play players with ranks below 1500. that way the highest a farmer can get is to 1500, then he is up to his own merit.

As this topics title points out the key word is "DETER" There will still be farmers out there trying there best to rack up points. BUT by slowing there process down immensley they will no longer want to continue there farming. Hence it will DETER them away from it. The problem will always exist, but the amount of people doing it will drop very much.

spiesr wrote:This suggestion would simply reduce the points won and lost in all games by half. It would not effect farming as they would still they same proportion of points as they do now...

It would not deter from farming as it would slow the rate of point increase for all games by half. Point farmer would still be worth the same proportionally to other games as it is now...

THE ARMY wrote:to answer your first point, i must say that i have already thought about the current point spread and a one time curve would need to be implemented to reduce the highest from the lowerst score a bit***#3.

To answer your first question*#1 the reason it would deter from point farming is not so much to give less points but to slow the process down to a point where people who farm would be very bored**#2. Just to gain 100 points would mean to play 50 games instead of 20 or so. Higher ranks would lose the fun in farming and would start to play more diverse games.

1. I did not ask any questions.
2. Get bored.... hm.... they all have premium, and most of the time the new recruits do not even play. If they play the same amount of games and against the same type of people, the lower score gain does not affect how much fun they have. It affects the score.
3. If you reduce the highest score, and the score gained, the relative score gained will remain the same, therefore not affecting the relative high score of farmers at all, which is why this does not solve anything.

so maybe instead of keeping it protortional we just change the equation to make it exponential as it should be. But even more exponential then it is now. That will definitely deter point farmers.

ARMY, would it be useful to move this thread over into General Discussion and see if people can collectively come up with an idea to change the scoring system?

At the moment this thread should probably be called "How can we make the scoring system different to deter farming?" since it doesn't seem to have a suggestion that works in it.

Perhaps someone in General Discussion will then have an idea and post it here under "Improved Scoring System to Deter Farming" and we can get into the idea in detail.

No offence, but the idea you've posted - as others have pointed out - doesn't really do anything.

MY OPINION
Seem like a good farmer, will wait till a new recruit just joins, than ,enter that game right away. In other words sitting at there computer waiting for new games, with new accounts.

We all know alot of newbies are either multis or been referred by others, and have an idea how the system works.

Maybe instead of a different scoring system, different joining system for TOTALLY newbies, cause if they were referred , they were told but the referree , the way to gain the most points, is to in fact play some one with lots of points. But if you are not referred and just checking the site out it is not fair at all for the newbie.

Restrict anyone playing a newbie with a certain amount of points!!!

see but the thing with your suggestion and many suggestions by others and even suggestions by me are just too complicated. The administration would never change something that is just too complex like that. But a scoring system change would have the same effect while changing a small part of the mainframe.

Megadeth666 wrote:MY OPINION
Seem like a good farmer, will wait till a new recruit just joins, than ,enter that game right away. In other words sitting at there computer waiting for new games, with new accounts.

We all know alot of newbies are either multis or been referred by others, and have an idea how the system works.

Maybe instead of a different scoring system, different joining system for TOTALLY newbies, cause if they were referred , they were told but the referree , the way to gain the most points, is to in fact play some one with lots of points. But if you are not referred and just checking the site out it is not fair at all for the newbie.

Restrict anyone playing a newbie with a certain amount of points!!!

I have a question.

Who cares if the top ranks farm points?

If you do, why? How does this affect you one bit?

Further to my previous post and at THE ARMY's request:

Moved to General Discussion to allow the general CC population to consider whether a different scoring system could be created that would deter farming and generally improve the CC experience.

Anyone coming up with a workable, well specified suggestion please post in Suggestions & Bug Reports

Cicero

Its too hard to gain pts at high ranks as is...

I might be able to out play the lower ranks every game but all it takes is one lot of unbalanced dice and bam a #^@* of pts gone. You have to win 9/10 games against a low rank to not lose pts.

A much better idea would be to have score brackets for games:

So in the "Start A Game" menu there would be a option to select say 1000-1500; so no high ranks can play in your game.

The higher ranks would benefit as well; they could select say 2000-max, this would be a nice alternative the all the "rank"+ call out threads

Bones2484 wrote:I have a question.

Who cares if the top ranks farm points?

If you do, why? How does this affect you one bit?

its no fun for the low ranks/new players trying to learn the game

1. it isn't supposed to be easy to gain points, it takes skill, when i see a general i want to think "man that dude is good, maybe i shouldn't play against him, he'll kick all our butts he is so smart" i don't want to think "oh, playing against another general, well that should be fun, the player probably farmed for those points and isn't that smart so probably easy to beat"

2. I like your "start a game" menu selection, but this won't solve the farming problem most players have with higher ranks

Cundy wrote:Its too hard to gain pts at high ranks as is...

I might be able to out play the lower ranks every game but all it takes is one lot of unbalanced dice and bam a #^@* of pts gone. You have to win 9/10 games against a low rank to not lose pts.

A much better idea would be to have score brackets for games:

So in the "Start A Game" menu there would be a option to select say 1000-1500; so no high ranks can play in your game.

The higher ranks would benefit as well; they could select say 2000-max, this would be a nice alternative the all the "rank"+ call out threads

I would strongly advise using thr ELO system for scoring. It's more accurate in measuring head to head skill, and it's used in many competitive games, like chess, and some sports. It won't deter farming, however. Perhaps if noobs are started at a lower score , such as 800, may make them less desirable to farm. Look up ELO scoring system on Wikipedia for more info.