[GO] [Rules] Rank Restricted Games

[max is gr8]

Either way you rank them it would increase farming. High -> Low means that the team games filled with Brigadiers would be the first on the list thus attracting low rankers.
Low -> High would show poor ranking players waiting to be made prey.

[Hamtrigger]

Everyone knows that a good risk game consist of good play from all players across the board. While I'm not trying to discriminate against those less competetive players. Somthing needs to be done about them joinig high ranking games. I always host my games, always. And I always get at least one VERY LOW level player. And 80% of the time he results in the obvious and preventable win for one certain player. Normally this is by attacking a wweaker player while the stronger one takes the game winning position. My suggestion is game option.

Lowest Rank Allowed to Join this game

and maybe another for

Highest Rank Allowed to join this game (must be at least the same rank as host)

This would allow for hosts to get a competitive game without two things: Higher ranked players farming lower ranked games, and lower ranked players screwing up higher ranked games.

[jpcloet]

This idea has been rejected probably a 100 times over. There are alternatives being the informal rank restrictions in the callouts area.....

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=31

[eddie2]

just another idea. would it be possible to have somthing in set up games that will allow us the choice of minimum rank requirement for joining the games.

[ljex]

suggested and denied a million times.

[rutty]

I would like to suggest that it would be great to have optional upper & optional lower limits for players to enter a game. Can you please respond with a good reason why this idea has been rejected a milion times.

Regards,

Rutty

[rutty]

Upper and lower limits as entry requirement option

There are clearly a lot of players interested in this option. Can you tell me what percentage of premium players would have to show an interest in this option for it to be implemented?
Could we have a questionaire circulated to gauge interest?
'Just quid suggesting this' as a reply, would give me the impression that so many players are interested in this option, that its getting annoying.

Also i've not seen any posts on upper limits, just lower limits. Have i not looked properly or has nobody mentioned this yet?

Regards,

Rutger

[eddie2]

also would this not take the farming out of the game. because if lower ranks can stop high ranks from playing they then will not be able to put this accusation up.

[72o]

I would like to suggest that it would be great to have optional upper & optional lower limits for players to enter a game. Can you please respond with a good reason why this idea has been rejected a milion times.

Regards,

Rutty

I think a lot of people, including myself, would agree with you, but lack is concerned that this would create too many issues, and lower ranks and noobs would be excluded too often. So, you have private games as your option to avoid low ranks.

Another idea I had, that was shot down by the powers that be, was to create a script that would parse through the scoreboard and automatically foe people who had characteristics you selected, such as low score, low turns taken percentage, low rating, etc. If I knew how to code, I would make it myself, but I do not.

[eddie2]

or you could have set points for games depending on difficulty level of game

[jefjef]

This absolutely ends farming. many have attempted to push this suggestion thru.

I support blocking ?? from joining games officers are in but the 5 games of being non-ranked are just too much segregation in the eyes of CC . They have no real interest inhibiting or preventing what they classify as farming.

[Sturgeron.15]

I would like to suggest that it would be great to have optional upper & optional lower limits for players to enter a game. Can you please respond with a good reason why this idea has been rejected a milion times.

Regards,

Rutty

I think a lot of people, including myself, would agree with you, but lack is concerned that this would create too many issues, and lower ranks and noobs would be excluded too often. So, you have private games as your option to avoid low ranks.

Could it not be created so that you could only exclude people with more than a 2,000 point difference. Then it could work both ways. Of course not everyone is going to use this anyway: from what I've seen it would be the small majority that actually play Private Escalating games.

[Woodruff]

I think a lot of people, including myself, would agree with you, but lack is concerned that this would create too many issues, and lower ranks and noobs would be excluded too often.

A feeling which has no basis at all in logic. Those newbies/cooks/cadets SHOULD be playing other newbies/cooks/cadets (Lord knows, there are plenty of them). If the player is actually any good at all, then they will rise above that level almost immediately by doing so anyway, so no harm and no foul...they're that quickly able to play games against higher ranks.

This absolutely ends farming. many have attempted to push this suggestion thru.

I support blocking ?? from joining games officers are in but the 5 games of being non-ranked are just too much segregation in the eyes of CC . They have no real interest inhibiting or preventing what they classify as farming.

This is correct. I am convinced that CC actually prefers farming to occur. Why, I do not understand, as it certainly doesn't assist their business model.

[rutty]

This is a good idea. I suggested something like this too... all that is needed to make it fair is to make is so you shouldn't be able to set it higher than the rank that is a few ranks below you. Then there is no reason you can't still have a site with good quality inter-rank play.

I don't think it would be a good idea to restrict the upper and lower limits in any way. If a cook were to specify opponents with a lower limit of 2400 and no upper limit than i think he/she should be allowed to do that. Marked forces will decide if that game will be played! Fairness is not really an issue here.

As for discrimination of weaker players:
Unlike a game like poker where a difference in playing skill does not make for a bad game per se, conquer club or risk is very sensitive to difference in skill levels. One player can very easily destroy an 8 player game in one unthinking move. That is why its important to have the option to invite players of a similar level. be that low or high. The private game option gives players a way to discriminate as does the friends and foes list. All these options are widely used and liked. Discrimination of weaker players is a feature of conquer club and the marked demands it.

Private games:
I only play private games speed and 24hr. I've got about 60 friends in my friends list and many of whom expect to be invited to games where all opponents are 1600+ or 1800+ or 2000+. every time i'm setting up a game i have to check my friends list to see what each individual players rank is to see if they qualify for a specific points range. If friends would have they're rank next to their name in the friends list it would be easy to scroll through, but since they do not, i have to click on the name, wait for the page to load and check the ranking. This process takes ages. The other drawback of this system of inviting is that i only play against players who are in my friends list. So by adding an optional top and bottom limit to the game setup i would infact be playing a larger number of different players! Because I do not have access to all elligable players when i start a private speed game, it sometimes takes ages to fill, which is a real pain for players with limited time on they're hands.

It seems that not implementing this simple suggestion is going against marked forces. Players want to choose the opponents skill level, they allready do it through private games. It could be made more user friendly.

I hope you will re-visit issue

Regards,

Rutty

[FarangDemon]

It would make it easier for players who want to play their peers to automatically organize games. This is not everyone's definition of fun, though I think it would be good for the competitive aspect of this site. It takes more effort to screen potential people and send mass pms and its a shame that it must be done that way.

There is a problem remaining - there is a not-uncommonly held belief that some of the highest ranked players are not really as skilled as their scores indicate. People with this conviction are going to be against any kind of avenue for allowing high ranked players to easily filter out the lower ranked from their games, seeing that as a form of point incest where the high ranked maintain their pool of incestuous, imbred points by only playing one another, thus denying some of the worthier lower-ranked a shot at their points.

I understand this theoretical possibility, but in the long run, I think CC will be made more competitive by implementing the suggestion.

[FarangDemon]

As Ahunda said, there are many, many players who would like this to happen. That is why it continues to be brought up almost every day, until each OP realizes they are wasting their time and gives up.

As Sully has once said, the reason this won't be done is that they believe if new recruits are less able to join games with high rankers, that means they are going to be playing with themselves more often. Games with new recruits are generally less enjoyable because they tend to deadbeat or suicide more often than experienced players. So new recruits would be less likely to stay and ultimately purchase premium because they would have a more negative experience by playing in games with more deadbeats like themselves.

However, I bet a lot of lower-ranked players would use the min/max rank filter to exclude high ranked from joining games, so there would be lots of potentially enjoyable games for new recruits to enter. Society of cooks would probably want to exclude some of the highest ranks so as to help new players gain confidence and build morale by playing peers.

Another reason there will be plenty of games for new recruits to join is that many players are going to continue to create games without the min/max rank filter because they wish to play with their friends, clanmates or family members. Many objections to allowing a min/max rank filtering system are from these people, so there would definitely be plenty of games like this available for new recruits to join.

This option would desegregate the top ranks by making it easier for them to organize games that would include MANY TIMES MORE PLAYERS than the ones they are currently inviting by private pm's and secret passwords in callouts.

[ljex]

OP is using flawed logic

By making it easy to set rank limits MORE rank segregation will result. The inherent laziness of human nature insures that the create private games option(premiums only) is used by few people. This helps to ward off rank segregation for the most part.

Actually, I'm not. Do a search on non-team speed games at different times for a few days. Tell me how many you see that have any sort of upper rank. It doesn't happen but rarely - players are already self-segregating. Sure occassionaly a high ranking player starts a speed game, but it is definitely the exception rather than the norm. (Yes, I am aware there are fewer high ranking players, but the gap is exponentially higher than that.)

Rather than attempt to attack my logic, perhaps you should check out the facts for yourself first?

The point (which I'll state again) is that segregation is ALREADY occurring, but it's done in a clunky, non-obvious way, using private games and semi-secret passwords. If you use min and max rank options that are sufficiently big, this would allow players to create more public games (I sure would!), that more people would be allowed to play in, without requiring players to jump through extra hoops.

Edit: fixed typo.

This is because most speed games are not an effective way to gain points, because it is hard to be so much better than everyone else at game settings that you can get to be high ranking. I can think of less than 10 players that can do and most of them arnt doing it anymore. You mention that if they aren't team games and that is becasue the way to gain points is to play team games its not like there are a lot of private team speed games consisting of high ranked players. If you are are going to talk about people not attacking you logic please provide a logical example not one where you twist the facts to support you opinion. Also CC has long stood by the principal that anyone can play anyone which is why this idea has and i hope never will be implemented and why players that only play low ranked players are not banned for farming.

Also what do you define as high ranking i was setting it at colonel but if you lower that to major then you point is even less logical and my point still stands that it is hard to gain points playing speed games.

[rhp 1]

Never give up! Never surrender!

But seriously, is "avoiding rank segregation" the reason this idea is being ignored? Because rank segregation is already here; maybe some people just don't want to acknowledge that or play only team games so they have no exposure to it.

I actually agree with Vermont.. the problem is, why does the problem exist? try to help the noobies (by crushing them and giving them advice on why they got crushed) there are plenty of tools in place to narrow the range of players one exposes him/herself to, e.g. foe list, private games, invites etc. more to the point, just play everyone who isn't worthy of the foe list and the site will naturally be more enjoyable and competitive for all! i think i'm gonna go eat a granola bar and hug a tree now.

[rhp 1]

This has been suggested many times, and always rejected.

So, it's not taking place.

If it's been rejected to prevent segregation then the fact that segregation is now actively, consistently, occurring should at least revive the discussion. Or was there another rationale for rejecting it?

Lack himself basically said no.
And when lack says no, you listen.
Once it's been rejected once, even more so several times, it's rarely looked at again.


"Segregation" has been occuring since this site started, and this "idea" has been brought up ever few months or so and rejected each time.


As much as I would love some sort of max/min rank option, it most likely won't.

you actually took a screen shot of being sgt 1st? that's funny.

[Aalmeida17]

4 years passed and everythink is exacly the same , FARMING IS NO PLAYERS FOUL , FARMING IS SISTEM FAIL

[Orange-Idaho-Dog]

Concise description:

• Put a drop-down tab when starting a game to allow a player to set rank limitations as to who can join their game.

Specifics:

• The default setting would be no restriction, so that you can still make games that anyone can join.
• You would only be allowed to set a rank limitation up to your rank, IE. My current rank is Captain. I would be able to set a limitation so that only X to Captain can join my game, X being any rank lower than Captain.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• This will allow more equal games when it comes to experience, and prevent games such as a Terminator game with me vs 3 low ranks (corporal or lower) where I am immediately targeted by all 3 players and stand no chance to win what-so-ever, and end up losing 30+ points.
• This would also help cut down on the current way to setup a rank-specific game; making a game with a password and waiting for who knows how long for players to reply asking for the password.

Before anyone says it, no amount of strategy or epic dice will prevail in a 3v1 situation, I don't care who you are.

Opinions?

[fumandomuerte]

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 71&t=47216

[MrClimax]

Nice suggestion. Never tought of this before because of my low rank, but good idea.

--MrClimax--

[Orange-Idaho-Dog]

I believe my suggestion has the limitations needed to make this work. From what I've seen, the other suggestions have failed to have the limit where you could only set the limitation up to your own rank.

If needed, there could be a limitation added so that only X rank or higher can use the option, so that Cooks and New Recruits couldn't use it, as there's really no need.

If it is implemented, there would have to be special searches available to find the games.


*Edit*

Weather this is implemented or not, rank specific games still happen in the Callouts forum. This would just let things be quicker, and less spam games posted in the forums. It would make things easier all-around.

[TotoroHat]

This has been rejected every time someone posts it... Thats why there is a search forum.

The only way this could work, imo, is to have a max rank limit of say 1200 for games in which only players under 1200 could play and no one over 1200 could play... Other than that this is crap!