limit amount of points that can be gained on one setting

[owenshooter]

FredVIII, I think deep down there is a good idea lurking here. That good idea is to recognize players that are more versatile, that can succeed on many different maps and map settings.

isn't that what the medals are for? in no way should CC tell me that my points for doubles/sequential/chained or unlimited on any map, will be capped. i have no interest in non-team games, freestyle, assassin or anything else... seems to me they are dealing with what jeff hardy has an issue with, with the new farming guidelines (or at least a start to the issue). and as someone stated before, cap the points, eventually the scoreboard becomes even among a slew of players. horrible idea...-0

[a.sub]

i see yoru point and agree that point gains from a single map is bad, how ever i dont like a lot of maps on CC, like waterloo
instead of a cap it should be like a decay curve
N = p * (x)^(-g)
N = net points won from game
p = point won from game normally
x = some constant that should be determined by someone good at deciding these things
g = #games played

now the decay would look like this
(im setting p = 20 and x = 1.0011)
N=20*(1.0011)^(-g)
g..... N
100 17.9177659
200 16.05231675
300 14.38108269
400 12.88384365
500 11.54248472
600 10.34077696
700 9.264181043
800 8.299671361
900 7.435578426
1000 6.66144768
1100 5.967913005
1200 5.346583408
1300 4.789941495
1400 4.29125252
1500 3.844482904

with this system you can always play your favorite map and you can always gain points from it, but a serious CC player who was after points would have to switch maps to be effective.

seem fair?

[Thezzaruz]

dont you get it? they play the same map over and over again. they are good at that one thing and hence their points do not go down but up.

yes, its to try and stop farming

i dont see why you can get a score reset for one type of farming and not another - both give you a rank you dont deserve and hence mess up the score system

But it is NOT farming...
It is not an illegal or unwanted behaviour and hence it shouldn't be punished in the way you suggest it to be.

1. I don't know what you are referring to, I have not edited any of your quotes.

Yea you did (laziness I suppose). You put your opinions (marked by red) inside his quote. I know it's common practice on here to do it but most people at least has the curtsey to clearly mention when they do it.

[Artimis]

Applying a penalty to players who find a favourite group of settings is always a bad idea. This suggestion would have no impact on me as I play a wide variety of settings, but I think any suggestion that advocates the limitation of choice by a diminishing returns penalty should be tossed straight in the bin.

Go to the bin, go directly to the bin, do not pass muster, do not get recycled.

[AAFitz]

If you do this, youd probably have to say someone can only lose the same amount on a map or setting...

sure, I have won over 5000 points on world...but Ive also lost 3000 on doodle, and hundreds on other maps.

the reason Ive won points on world, is because I enjoy playing on world...There are many who play world exclusively, and probably for some of the same reasons I do. Personally, I think its the most fair map on CC..and it has no real tricks, so I dont feel bad about winning on it one bit. (Im not sure world is the best example either, because on 1v1 it would be very hard to really gain much in score after you hit the 3000 mark. I havent tested that fully, but unless you played it freestyle and exploited freestyle to its max, I doubt you could really milk it for points on 1v1. Either way, it wouldnt be all that fun I suspect.) Now, if I could make limits on who could join my games, Id keep every new player out of every one of my games, and as it is, I suggest they avoid them when they do join.

Now, I love playing good teams on world too. Ive been lucky enough to play some of the best teams on the site on it. I set up some tournaments on it, some of which had great teams in it too. I was lucky enough to win them all so far, but I never expected to of course.

The reason this suggestion doesnt really work, is because if a person likes playing on one map, it will mean they can continue to do so...but it will mean they wont be able to play on other maps...Because the scoring system is relative to score...if you stop a person winning on one map or setting, it will throw everything off. I do enjoy winning on world, I enjoy playing on it...its the epitome of risk in my opinion. At this point, I actually would probably leave CC if world wasnt around, simply because Ive had so much fun playing it. Since Ive played it so often, Ive won a lot of points on it.

If you subtract the 5000 Points from my score that Ive won past 400...thats fine...Maybe I really do deserve a score of -2000...but somehow, I dont think thats more accurate. If you dont think I should be able to play the game I like on here, thats fine too...but If I cant, Ill just leave, so while your intentions may even be noble here...it wont solve any real problem.

The fix is really far more simple...give me the option to block new players from my games...and Ill never kill another one ever again...its really that simple...as far as killing non-new players....I simply have no remorse for that... The score is just a score, it alone will never be able to decide the best player, and really isnt meant to in my opinion. The score tells you who has won the most points. Thats all it really ever will do...certainly better players will have more, and less experienced may or may not have less, but limiting won points to 400 wont stop any farming...it will only stop people from playing the games they like in the long run...

There is also a fundamental problem with the whole Idea, that many miss. This site thrives on specialties. Many see it as a negative, but in the end, its really not. Weve many different people to gain conquerer, and almost all have got there using a slightly different method...people have spent time, specializing and excelling in one area, because it is fun to do so. Also, it acutally adds to competition, and doesn't detract from it. Certainly an athlete that can play hockey, golf, baseball, basketball, football, and soccer would be an exceptional athlete...but its the ones that focus on one sport, and sometimes even one aspect, of a sport that make the game fun. Mike Jordan is a good example...he is a great athlete, and played some baseball on a professional level.. theoretically, if he focused only on baseball, he may even have been a great player...however, he focused all on basketball, and became an icon. He essentially defined the sport, and became the shining star, and gave all a new bench mark....had he tried to play all the sports...he would have done well, perhaps...and maybe he even would have been a better athlete for it...but it would not have added competition. Granted, he only played against pros, but he had a system to preclude non pros from playing him also.

The point is, that while its easy to say that people shouldnt be playing only one map, one setting, or one game type, that doesnt mean that that is true. It certainly doesnt mean that its bad for the site that people do play niches, or even that they profit from them. In the end, it makes for a highly competitive site...those that specialize in one area are indeed rewarded, and at the same time, add to the competition and the excitement of the game. Myself, Ive seen so many different conquerers, and so many others that have risen to the top, using so many different types of games, that it simply adds to the value of the site. If every number one player was playing exactly the same game, I would undoubtedly agree that there was a major problem with the system...but since nearly every new challenger and every new conquerer has a slightly different method of playing, that while it doesnt necessarily prove they are the best player on the site...which no scoring system ever will...it does make it a competitive, and fun site to play on.

The problem is not the number of points won on one map or setting...the problem is only against who those points are won against....and really...the only ones that need to be protected from losing points, are new players that simply cant be expected to compete at a high level.... any player thats played 250 games or 500, or some other benchmark however, are fully capable of playing the game, and certainly should have picked it up by then, and if they want to have a go at the best player on one setting, they should be able too, and no one should be penalized...certainly there needs to be a handicap, which there is...but nothing more is needed to add to the fun of the site. Its only new players that should not be in the pool of points...and while if I joined, I would instantly join games against the best of the best...certainly some just dont know what they are getting into. That should be the focus of any discussion here...that is what will stop the supposed farming...and what will improve CC...any changes to points won on a map or setting on the other hand, will only reduce the overall competition of the site...

We just need to get rid of the steroids...not the ability to get a great batting average

[oVo]

if you only play or are only good at one setting then you dont deserve a good rank,
simple as that.

I disagree and don't think it's as simple as that. The next step is limiting how many rated games a person can play each month. Since some players up their rank thru quantity over quality, there will always be inaccurate or "undeserved ranks" by your concept on the scoreboard.

We have the same rank at the moment Fred but your current account is only one month old, yet has completed almost triple the games I've accumulated over two plus years. Rank is a basic indicator and not an absolute truth when comparing players' gameplay abilities and it seems silly to me to attempt to refine or calibrate it's accuracy to the "nth" degree.

Rank, the number of games played and percentage won is a barometer of sorts that gives me an idea of who I'm playing against. Perfection of the system isn't required, I just want some entertaining games.