Run the site without a scoreboard or scoring system.
Eliminate the point system and scoreboard.
Why? The current system has been a breeding ground for cheating, and manipulation of the the scoring system. It would eliminate the need for premium account holders to create multi's.
but if u think about it the scoring system gives mos tppl insentive 2 play better cause they try and acheive a better rank or get better if we elimnate it yes there wouldnt be as many cheaters but i bet less ppl would play and there would still be cheaters because ppl wouldnt wanna buy premi but would want more games there for creating more acounts so its mostly bad
Disagree nyg5680. I think people play because they like the game. I think the points and ranks make people play differently. They play private games so they don't have to play low ranked players. It is creating a divided site, the have's and have not's.
thats also true ppl do play just for the fun of it and all but i think most ppl would admit theat the scoring system is a fun part of the site and i find it fun trying to compete for higher ranks
But because of your rank you get to player higher ranked people. To many of the higher ranked players are protecting their points by limiting the public games they play in.
Yes the socring system does add some fun to it. My wife and I are always giving each other a hard time about points.
Evil Semp wrote:But because of your rank you get to player higher ranked people. To many of the higher ranked players are protecting their points by limiting the public games they play in.
Yes the socring system does add some fun to it. My wife and I are always giving each other a hard time about points.
i litterally just had the same conversation with cdmilliner...but to get rid of points altogether will get rid of the competitiveness altogether....like not getting paid for going to work...i like what i do, but the check is what makes it worthwhile...but i do probono stuff when i get a chance, so having the option is all i would like to see
Eliminating the scoreboard would be a bad idea. I know that a lot of people play just for fun, but the scoreboard keeps a lot of us here. I like playing this but the fact that there's a scoreboard and that I'm really competitive makes this even better.
What should change is the way players loose points. The fact that a colonel looses 50+ points in a public game is to much. Even in a public 6 player game he will not make that many points. And most high ranked players don't really play public games is that privates usually attack the high one. I've been in games where 2 low ranked players just allied and took me out from the start.
"Every battle has been won before it's been fought." Sun Tzu
Then you are just giving players another way of protecting their points.
If we have a point system the games should be worth putting your points on the line. But thats what part of the problem is higher ranked players are afraid to put the points on the line with lower ranked players. The system was good enough for them to get the points now they want to protect their points.
Although I dislike the abuse of the points system - with no points system I wouldn't play. I would like to see a more chess scoring system in place - it's been around a lot longer so I think they know what they are talking about
cyberdaniel wrote:What should change is the way players loose points. The fact that a colonel looses 50+ points in a public game is to much. Even in a public 6 player game he will not make that many points.
Which brings me back to the question. If the point system was ok for you to get points why is it no ok for you to put your points on the line?
cyberdaniel wrote:And most high ranked players don't really play public games is that privates usually attack the high one. I've been in games where 2 low ranked players just allied and took me out from the start.
But it has been stated in the forums that the high ranked attack the lower ranked so they lose less points. What makes one worse than the other?
i only really play friends from my clan or from our dragoons open games although i hav a few rt friends i play. one of them is an 800 point private but that doesn't stop stop me playing and i am not biased in game because of it.
i lost 52 points in 1 game but it was a gd game so i don't care. next game i won 9 points back from the player but as i said who cares? i think u shouldn't limit urself to only high rank people but high rankers often play other high rankers because it guarantees a more even game
cyberdaniel wrote:What should change is the way players loose points. The fact that a colonel looses 50+ points in a public game is to much. Even in a public 6 player game he will not make that many points.
Which brings me back to the question. If the point system was ok for you to get points why is it no ok for you to put your points on the line?
cyberdaniel wrote:And most high ranked players don't really play public games is that privates usually attack the high one. I've been in games where 2 low ranked players just allied and took me out from the start.
But it has been stated in the forums that the high ranked attack the lower ranked so they lose less points. What makes one worse than the other?
How many games have you seen where 2 high ranked players just join a random public game and ally from the start to take the lower ranked players out?
I'm not saying that because I'm high ranked I should win as many points as before, but loosing 50 points in a game and wining 40 points from a 6 player game is not ok.
"Every battle has been won before it's been fought." Sun Tzu
cyberdaniel wrote:What should change is the way players loose points. The fact that a colonel looses 50+ points in a public game is to much. Even in a public 6 player game he will not make that many points.
Which brings me back to the question. If the point system was ok for you to get points why is it no ok for you to put your points on the line?
cyberdaniel wrote:And most high ranked players don't really play public games is that privates usually attack the high one. I've been in games where 2 low ranked players just allied and took me out from the start.
But it has been stated in the forums that the high ranked attack the lower ranked so they lose less points. What makes one worse than the other?
How many games have you seen where 2 high ranked players just join a random public game and ally from the start to take the lower ranked players out?
I'm not saying that because I'm high ranked I should win as many points as before, but loosing 50 points in a game and wining 40 points from a 6 player game is not ok.
Why do people keep putting forward that stupid question when the answer is perfectly obvious to anyone who actually thinks about it?
Everyone started off at the same rank, rookie. For most of the older players, when we played everyone was around the same rank. Rookie, Private, Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Major. There were no Generals, very few colonels and majors. Everyone was relatively close in rank comparatively so there was little dramatic point gains and losses.
If you want to whine about playing the way we did then why don't you actually try it. Work your way up.
Only in the latter half of the year when people started getting really high ranked did this question come up. From newbies.
kill the points system! make this site for fun. but maybe, if you win a tournament, you could get a pic badge next to ur name. like the perosn who starts the tourny says here's the badge you get for winnning. if u win, that badge gets put next to ur name, like a rank. that'd be cool, but i think hard to implement
