Moderator: Community Team
Metsfanmax wrote:I will probably not approve a suggestion that allows you to specify the point range that is allowed for the games you create. Please come up with ideas that are more inclusive for the community at large.
Foxglove wrote:All right, the original post in this thread is from 2006. Let's do something useful with it! I want to organize the original post into several different feasible rank restriction ideas and then submit the suggestion. bigWham is open to considering almost any type of suggestion, so let's lay out some clear ideas for him to consider if and when he's ready to develop them.
My personal preference is to implement straight point level restrictions, like we have had unofficially in the Callouts forum for years and years. 2000+, 2500+, 3000+, etc. There have been quite a few AutoTournaments with point restrictions - both floor and ceiling values - so there seems to be no reason why we can't make normal games with point restrictions as well.
jammyjames wrote:Agreed with the above, Fox makes an excellent suggestion.
Now can we finally get something like this approved? I'm starting to get fed up with low ranked players who have no idea what they're doing joining my escalating games and ruining the fun for evereyone else in the game.
judge_reinhold wrote:I've solved everything. You don't need rank-restricted games. You need fixed-ante games.
The shitty part about the rank system is that a low rank player's luck is enough to cost a high rank player a lot of very hard earned points, while the low ranker risks almost nothing. Another shitty part is point yo-yo-ers (or point dumpers) who don't care about points winning games as Cooks that they joined as Majors.
My idea is: every player puts in 20 points, which is immediately deducted from their score (this would also limit the number of games people could play). Then points are paid out to the winner when the game is over.
The number of points to ante up could be a game option. Perhaps low-ranked players could only join games that cost 20 points per player, whereas higher-ranked players can create 30-40 point games if they want, which lower ranked players can't join. They won't worry about lower ranked players in their games in any case, since the potential point loss is predetermined. But lower ranked players should be restricted from 30-40 point games for their own safety.
When you "level up", you "unlock" higher point games. E.g. Only 20 point games allowed for players with a score below 1500. 30 point games unlocked at 1500, 35 point games at 2000, 40 point games at 2500. Etc.
Other benefits:
It would eliminate the annoyance of point yo-yo-ing bullshitters who momentarily reach Colonel and join a high-rankers tournament and end up winning a game as a captain and taking a lot more points than their click-happy playing style deserves.
Players stuck in a stalemated game could set up a tie-breaker game worth very low points (5 points/player? maybe even 0?) to determine who wins the valuable game.
You're welcome.
rhp 1 wrote:Leave it to judge.. Perfect idea.
ViperOverLord wrote:Anyone who is familiar with Yahoo Hearts knows that rank (score) restrictions work just fine. If you don't, then go play it and learn exactly how it works out.
WILLIAMS5232 wrote:only problem with doing that here is it will further thin out the chance of starting a game.
degaston wrote:WILLIAMS5232 wrote:only problem with doing that here is it will further thin out the chance of starting a game.
Or it might increase activity because...
- It's something a lot of people have asked for, and people are more likely to participate and support sites that give them what they ask for than those that don't.
- Players may be more willing to join a partially full game if they know that someone with a much higher or lower rank will not be joining after them.
degaston wrote:WILLIAMS5232 wrote:only problem with doing that here is it will further thin out the chance of starting a game.
Or it might increase activity because...
- It's something a lot of people have asked for, and people are more likely to participate and support sites that give them what they ask for than those that don't.
- Players may be more willing to join a partially full game if they know that someone with a much higher or lower rank will not be joining after them.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users