Please..... TWEAK the point system

[iamkoolerthanu]

I like the current points system...

[jefjef]

How about 20 or 25 points per game. Flate rate points system. Not this nuclear escalating system.

[ljex]

How about 20 or 25 points per game. Flate rate points system. Not this nuclear escalating system.

Would cause huge escalation of the scoreboard at the top and deflation at the bottom

[jefjef]

How about 20 or 25 points per game. Flate rate points system. Not this nuclear escalating system.

Would cause huge escalation of the scoreboard at the top and deflation at the bottom

Well lucky ass Cook dice causes me serious deflation and it takes 2 or 3 games to escalate them back.

FINE. Give us option of rank segregation.

[Army of GOD]

It's not rank segregation, it's common sense.

Generals can still play cadets, they just won't get the points.

[stahrgazer]

I will even give you another golden idea. Play in sequential 8 man games with a high relative rank, but join the game directly after the player MOST LIKELY to make the mistake that will hand you the game. This will increase your probability of winning games slightly and that slight increase will be shown in moving up the scoreboard.

That last part about the golden idea is brilliant. I have never considered the fact, that I could increase my winning percentage by signing up after a poorly skilled player. This little trick could be worth an extra 3-6% or more. In a game of percentages, every little bit helps.

See, he EARNED his birdie!

[army of nobunaga]

I like the Ideas guys. Thanx for responding.

Im not a math genius, I know a little.

But I know our "top" players all win on quads, trips, and freestyle 1vs1, and its so competitive at the top they dare not even try any other type of game.
And then when someone trys to get ahead within the rules by having teammates taht arelow ranked, he gets piled on.

People, its the system... and there is nothing wrong with a point tweak.

Every business , well every successful business Ive ever seen, tweaks they way things are done. Even crappy businesses like facebook games tweak constantly. They piss off the top 5% of players but they make it up by the incredible amounts of NEW revenue they bring in from the changes. Im a top 5% player of mafiawars on facebook (sad I know) those MF-ers tweak ALL THE TIME... pisses me off to no end.. but they keep growing, and I have to admit, making it better.

[SirSebstar]

I was thinking of something intelligent to drown this suggestion, but the reply is quite simple Thai Robert
You operate on a faulty premisses that you can only be conqueror if you play teamgames and that one should play loads of 1vs1's. The place to see real conquerors i agree is in tournaments, of which blitz has won his fair share.

The current points rules show relative rank, not absolute rank. they also mix teamgames and singles. I believe you should get a different rank based on type of gamesbut i wont see it happen because the current system is simple, efficient and obvious. its flaws are also obvious, but thats more a matter of player style and behaviour then anything else.

your suggestion however could only help farmers. that should not be the case
regards,
SirSebstar

Concise description:
The current point system creates paper champions. We have conquerors and wanna be conquerors that play nothing but 1vs1 freestyle agaisnt slower weaker players, we have top players that actually create private games for privates and cooks. We have a point system in which a good player named blitzaholic is set upon by his fellow players because of his methods to gain rank!
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=119100


why? Why does our point system have to be so biased towards unsportsmanlike like competition? The Spirit of CC is dying because of this point system. And when it is dead, when the average person realizes he/she can never be in the top 50 because they dont want to play cheesey cheat like games, then the site will die.



Specifics/Details:
*Less points awarded for team games won, more points lost for team games lost.. Make it harder for 4 generals that play nothing but quads to move up.
*Less points, far less when you beat a cook or private. Far less. More points taken than current when said cook or private beats you.
*More points for people that win singles matches, and more points as there are more people involved in the match.
*It all just needs to be tweaked. Someone that wins 40% of 5-8 man rooms, should be able to overtake the team playing people and the noob farmers.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
Fair play and sportsmanship that is promoted always benefits all.

[Chuuuuck]

That may be a better suggestion than tweaking the way it is done. Instead, ask for separate points for separate game types.

In fact, I really like this idea because it would encourage people to be good at everything. You can be like "look, I am #1 at team sequential games, but I am a cook at standard games, or 1v1 games"

[army of nobunaga]

That may be a better suggestion than tweaking the way it is done. Instead, ask for separate points for separate game types.

In fact, I really like this idea because it would encourage people to be good at everything. You can be like "look, I am #1 at team sequential games, but I am a cook at standard games, or 1v1 games"

Good points.

Thanx man. I think people thought I was attacking them with this thread. I never meant for that to be conveyed. I just see something that could be improved and with a limited intellect tried to post a solution.
I think game types probably should have different point structures.

[Army of GOD]

But there should be a "who's the best at everything rank", like an average.

But what categories would we have separate points for?