[GO] [Rules] Rank Restricted Games

[Daggerheart]

To be honest, I really don't see the need for this suggestion. Coming from a mainly standard multiplayer experience, it's extremely rare that players are so outclassed that the enjoyment of the game suffers. Most of the time, playing vs. a higher rank is a good learning experience, and playing against lower ranks should give you a fun game.

The only reason I can see to limit the opponents you can play against to players of your own level is because you are concerned about losing too many points against lower ranked opponents. But frankly, that's part of the ELO like scoring system we use. It's necessary for the ranking to remain a good indicator of someone's abilities.

That's the main problem now, the scoreboard/ranking is not an good indicator of your abilities...

Several here have stated that a player who enjoy playing 8 player games is doing a very well job if he/she wins 30% of these matches... since the average win rate with 8 players are far less. But a 30% win rate against random rated opponents will kill your rating in no time. Many of the high rated players now (not all but many)... they play carefully selected games...

This is why CC is worse than the boxing federations:

1) You can select the players you want to your matches, RATED matches, by the invite system
2) You can foe players that you know will usually beat you, example: in "open" 1vs1 speed matches
3) Leave matches if certain players join
4) High ranked players team up with cooks with 500 points so that they win more points... who control the cook? the guy's brother probably!

In the boxing federation they can stall a boxer for a long, long time... but if that boxer performs ... they can't keep him from a title match forever...

I really want to return playing CC. I really hope this will be addressed this autumn.

[Queen_Herpes]

Givign players the option to segregate would be nice...

[SneakySheep]

.

[TheForgivenOne]

Try searching through the forum. Already been suggested. Merging

[TheForgivenOne]

After deliberation, i am merging this into Tezu's.

[SneakySheep]

its not about protecting newbs how many times do i have to make a game only to have it fill up with privates, cadets and cooks then have cooks suicide into me

i want to be able to make a world 2.1 game and have it fill up with some players that have a idea about risk

im not here to teach newbs how to play im here to play some good games of risk, i dont like to play risk if the games going to end by round 10 thats not risk its just plain gay

i understand that you think it might hurt new players joining but ffs use your brain make it sargents and above that still gives cooks a wide range of people to suicide into but lets people who want a good strategic game to play

if your not going to look after the players you have that PAY to play then wats the point n even having new people join once they get some games under there belt there just going to end up posting in this tread or make 1 like it

i love CC but i love a good game of risk more its not like you HAVE to have a ranking option when making a game thats y its called a option

sorry if i offended people but im sick of this world and its P.C bull sh*t be real
when your new at a game you dont join a game with elite players because of course your going to get owned
does World of warCraft let you raid a lvl 80 dungeon when your lvl 1? no you start small and work your way up

[TheForgivenOne]

its not about protecting newbs how many times do i have to make a game only to have it fill up with privates, cadets and cooks then have cooks suicide into me

i want to be able to make a world 2.1 game and have it fill up with some players that have a idea about risk

im not here to teach newbs how to play im here to play some good games of risk, i dont like to play risk if the games going to end by round 10 thats not risk its just plain gay

i understand that you think it might hurt new players joining but ffs use your brain make it sargents and above that still gives cooks a wide range of people to suicide into but lets people who want a good strategic game to play

if your not going to look after the players you have that PAY to play then wats the point n even having new people join once they get some games under there belt there just going to end up posting in this tread or make 1 like it

i love CC but i love a good game of risk more its not like you HAVE to have a ranking option when making a game thats y its called a option

sorry if i offended people but im sick of this world and its P.C bull sh*t be real
when your new at a game you dont join a game with elite players because of course your going to get owned
does World of warCraft let you raid a lvl 80 dungeon when your lvl 1? no you start small and work your way up

I know, but if you actually what tezu was asking for, then you would have realized that she said this.

Add an option when creating games which defines the minimum and maximum rank a player must have to join that game.

The thread was initially started for New Recruits, but it does include everyone.

[SneakySheep]

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. Along with the fact point segregation is bad.

if your all about making money then i must be on the wrong site im not here to make you guys rich im here to play risk with good players

How are lower ranks supposed to learn if they can't find an open game against a higher rank? They will just keep learning bad strategies.

yes thats true you can only learn to play risk by playing but thats y i said sargent and above that still gives newbs good players to play then if players can't learn that suicide is a bad idea when there playing people there own rank then they will just end up staying at the bottom

i make world 2.1 games and dont look at them until they have started if i get a PM about how im farming then whos fault is that?

as i said i love CC i'd like to see CC grow so theres over 100 speed games going at all times

[TheForgivenOne]

i make world 2.1 games and dont look at them until they have started if i get a PM about how im farming then whos fault is that?

And if you actually follow'd C&A reports, you would realize that you'd have to have an extensive amount of games for farming to come into play. You'd have to create a ton of games, have only New Recruits join them, realize this, then keep creating this same type of game to be considered farming.

[hmsps]

7430954 and 743095 is precisely why this should be imnplemented i get a cook join, i ask him on his wall, (still there) politely to read chat and not miss turns and what does he do, yup misses turns. I have no problem partnering anyone but I should be able to set parameters to who joins my games either on a pts or ratings basis. I see plenty of enhancements to this site and strongly feel this would be a good addition.

[SneakySheep]

bump this

[TheForgivenOne]

bump this

If you have nothing meaningful to say or to add anything to the suggestion, do not bump it.

As i ALREADY said in this thread, the webmaster is already contemplating a form of Rank Restriction.

[greenoaks]

the system is fine the way it is

if you want to leave do so, it just means more bananas for me

[TheForgivenOne]

the system is fine the way it is

if you want to leave do so, it just means more bananas for me

I'd rather give them to Andy, but to each their own.

I'm at a neutral position on this. I can see pro's and con's on each side.

[greenoaks]

I'd rather give them to Andy, but to each their own.

bananas are suitable for my av too

[amhowie]

just wanted to know if we could get an option that automaticly foes all cooks??
if it was done right it could also unfoe them once they moved up the ranks
sorry to all the cooks out there if i have hurt ur feelings

ps did use ever make that option that let u block all low rated players??

[Joodoo]

Rank segregation has been rejected several billion times, good luck with this one.

[grifftron]

I was wondering if i could foe everyone that wasn't a cook

[Joodoo]

I was wondering if i could foe everyone that wasn't a cook

KLOBBER would like that.

[TheSaxlad]

nonono.

he would just foe anyone above a cook.

[40kguy]

just wanted to know if we could get an option that automaticly foes all cooks??
if it was done right it could also unfoe them once they moved up the ranks
sorry to all the cooks out there if i have hurt ur feelings

ps did use ever make that option that let u block all low rated players??

you can and i will tell you how
go to scoreboard and go to the cook section and start foeing its very simple

[SirSebstar]

its neither automatic, nor does it look like a suggestion.
either way, not likely to happen

[BoganGod]

I was wondering if i could foe everyone that wasn't a cook

I hear you klobber! lol

[raston_morue]

I went from a new user (?) to Private first class and skipped cook. So, perhaps putting a foe option would be good. If someone is still a cook after playing hundreds of games, perhaps someone else could join the game. also, I have had my theories that some of the players are really multi accounts and the cook has played hundreds of games without winning very many. Then, the better player chains off of the bad cooks choices.... hmmm....

[grifftron]

I went from a new user (?) to Private first class and skipped cook. So, perhaps putting a foe option would be good. If someone is still a cook after playing hundreds of games, perhaps someone else could join the game. also, I have had my theories that some of the players are really multi accounts and the cook has played hundreds of games without winning very many. Then, the better player chains off of the bad cooks choices.... hmmm....

wut?