unfair point loss

clayzigzag · Post by **clayzigzag** » Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:48 pm

i recently played a game. lost but had a fun time. when i looked down into the box i had lost about 20 points. "so"i said then looked at someone who had ben deadbeated after playing only one turn. he lost 4 points. how does he loose less points hen i played so much better than him, i dont get it. its not fair point loss. i should have the amount of points deducted depending on how i play not at random. that is what i am suggesting, points be deducted on how you play the game. well or unwell not at random. anyone else have this problem? feel free to tell storys

soundout9 · Post by **soundout9** » Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:52 pm

Ya i dont like that either but thats just how the score goes. you obviously had a higher score than the other guy that lost 4. But you still lost so you lose points. I'd rather have points for 1st and 2nd place but that has been rejected

Herakilla · Post by **Herakilla** » Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:58 pm

the system is

(loser's score / winner's score) * 20, up to a maximum of 100 points from each opponent.

so either that player had VERY FEW points or the winner had A LOT of points

insomniacdude · Post by **insomniacdude** » Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:20 pm

Herakilla wrote:the system is

(loser's score / winner's score) * 20, up to a maximum of 100 points from each opponent.

so either that player had VERY FEW points or the winner had A LOT of points

Most likely the former, since the original poster said he only lost 20 points and he's a Private First Class.

clayzigzag · Post by **clayzigzag** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:01 pm

i guess that makes sense the guy who beat me had 700 more points than me and the guy who lost 4 points had 700 less than me

WalkingShadow · Post by **WalkingShadow** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:04 pm

cry me a river dude

Risktaker17 · Post by **Risktaker17** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:06 pm

I offered a change to the score but no one liked it. I wanted

(winner score/loser score) * 10 + 10

This takes a small emphasis of rank but it was rejected. I still like it.

DiM · Post by **DiM** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 10:14 pm

Risktaker17 wrote:I offered a change to the score but no one liked it. I wanted

(winner score/loser score) * 10 + 10

This takes a small emphasis of rank but it was rejected. I still like it.

yeah

if your idea is implemented then all high rankers will play only cooks or lower.

let's see (2500/500)*10 + 10 = 60 points.
so if a major beats a cook he gets 60 points.
if a cook beats a major he gets 12 points

if this would be implemented i'd be a field marshal in a week

Risktaker17 · Post by **Risktaker17** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 11:55 pm

wait flip it the other way! haha. Yeah its
(losers score/winner's score) *10 +10