Rank Restriction for Game Joining?

[Temujin87]

I've sick of playing 1v1s with <1000 . What's the point of even playing? I win I get 10-12 points, i lose I lose 4 times as much. Why can't I filter these out when I make a game?

[t-o-m]

[Quicksigns]

[FabledIntegral]

Hence the stupidity of CC!

[Plutoman]

So, when you fall below 1000 at some point, and have no one play you, enjoy!

[FabledIntegral]

There's always enough people who want to bash noobs. Can you blame peopel for wanting to participate in a game revolving around strategy and not wanting those who care less?

I'll tell you what - most low rankers come into games, make absolute shit moves, and then when called out say "whatever it's just a game I don't look into it too seriously." Well I DON'T want those players in my game - they ruin the point of it. I have NO problem in games where players go "oh, I don't know what I did wrong, I'm not too experienced, can you explain it to me?" But more often than not, if a player is a cook, they don't give a shit and they just continue to suck. There might be some exceptions, but I personally have NEVER found a decent cook player, and they almost always ruin games. Actually ruin them, not just make stupid moves for themselves, but ruin the strategy of an entire game. If you can possibly blame someone for NOT wanting to play them, it's beyond me. It's even more frustrating to see one win because of unfathomable dice and to lose 100 points to them, even if they attacked every 3v3 in the game down to singles and such.

[Temujin87]

Here is an example. 1 v 1 , I was playing against someone rated ~800.

He had a much better drop than me on Classic.

I pooled all my forces together 1st round, which amounted to 17 (!!!).

Guess what he does?

He puts 4 on a 3 territory, next to my 17. And, he attacks. He was able to knock me down to one. What in the world? Who in their right mind would make such a move? For THEIR FIRST MOVE? Needless to say I lost that game, and lost 40+ points...

So seriously, did he even think his move through? He could've taken a cont on this turn (hence why I pooled).

I was pretty pissed.

[GoVegan]

Blind luck happens sometimes... but on 1v1 if you are decent you should be winning 85-95% of games against sub 1000 players.

[meathead]

I've sick of playing 1v1s with <1000 . What's the point of even playing? I win I get 10-12 points, i lose I lose 4 times as much. Why can't I filter these out when I make a game?

Try being a colonel. We get about 5 points for beating a <1000 and lose 70 if we lose to them.

I lost 4 games to <1000 yesterday due to horrendous dice and instead of pushing to reach brigadier, I'm back at 2600.

Suck it up and carry on.

[Scott-Land]

I've sick of playing 1v1s with <1000 . What's the point of even playing? I win I get 10-12 points, i lose I lose 4 times as much. Why can't I filter these out when I make a game?

Try being a colonel. We get about 5 points for beating a <1000 and lose 70 if we lose to them.

I lost 4 games to <1000 yesterday due to horrendous dice and instead of pushing to reach brigadier, I'm back at 2600.

Suck it up and carry on.

Let's say for instance that rank is indicative (for sake of argument in this example) of one's skill level. At 4100 I can beat a Major at 2100 and make 10 points and lose 39 points. Take the same example and apply it to a Corporal First Class at 1200 -- I'd win 6 points lose 68 points. If apply those numbers to a 1 vs 1 match, which rank would I prefer to play- a Major or the PFC? I would only gain 4 more points for playing the major; someone that's [twice] as good. Granted I would lose more points if I lost to the PFC but the reward for playing someone better is minimal- for 4 points I'd rather play against someone that isn't nearly as good. I'm sure if someone ran the numbers, you could find an optimal rank to play to yield the highest return for your specific rank.

[spikeboat]

these are just some of my ideas about how to avoid this problem of starting a 1v1 which anyone can join...

a) play maps that help negate the effects of drop and dice and focus more on strategy

b) play freestyle-esc, I have never met a complete noob who could keep up in a competitive freestyle contest (without amazing dice) for a variety of reasons

... before i understood this i definitely hated starting a 1v1 game. i remember a malta game i was in where the noob round ONE auto'd every single 3 he had on the map and killed like 9 of my terts, giving him the win in the end. sometimes, these situations cannot be avoided...

[frogger4]

Listen. I am a sub 1000 player. I play a clean game, without screwing over other players (I have a 5 rating). I tend to have about average luck, not often the winning strategy though, and so I am a private.

But if you can't beat me then that is just sad.

[Temujin87]

Yes well I learned my lesson.

I only make freestyle 1v1s now. Noobs get crushed.

[owenshooter]

Yes well I learned my lesson.

I only make freestyle 1v1s now. Noobs get crushed.

yeah, and that is what is important... seems like you hardly learned any lesson... *rolling my eyes*... yet another reason i don't play 1v1...-0

[gdeangel]

Blind luck happens sometimes... but on 1v1 if you are decent you should be winning 85-95% of games against sub 1000 players.

No way. I don't care how good you are. About 1 in 10 1v1 drops on many maps are virtually un-winnable from the start. You have to become a specialist in something like feudal or Waterloo fog (or WWII Ardenes) to get the numbers you throw out.

And doesn't this belong in suggestions, merged with the other 100 or so threads suggesting this (the frequency of which say something about the current system, eh?)

[frogger4]

If you don'd want to risk points by playing 1v1 against noobs, then just don't play 1v1 against noobs. that simple.

[gdeangel]

If you don'd want to risk points by playing 1v1 against noobs, then just don't play 1v1 against noobs. that simple.

That means you can't start public games... not the best policy if you want people to feel satisfied with the site.