I like most of the changes that went on last night, but I was shocked to see the minimum general score dropped 1,000 pts! I agree that 4,000 may have been too high, but is 3,000 too low? I always liked how it seemed to be such a challenge for anyone on the site to get to the general level, but now it's right in front of them. In less than a month we could have 10+ generals. Still not sure how much I like that, but hey maybe it'll turn out good. Any thoughts?
Given that no one has ever topped 2800 I think 3000 is a good level to set for general.
Taking an enemy on the battlefield is like a hawk taking a bird. Though it enters into the midst of a thousand of them, it pays no attention to any bird other than the one it has first marked.
why should it be impossible to make general? whats the point of even having the rank if no one can reach it? I think it would be great to get a few generals in here. Thanks lack for making it possible.
not impossible, just very challenging. my initial reaction to the score change was that now maybe it's not challenging enough, but HighBorn made a good point, and, like i said, it could turn out to be great. Haha it won't affect me for awhile so I mainly wanted to get your alls thoughts.
I think every1 brings up a good point but the 2 i liked best were, Seeing as ow no1 has ever passed 2800 points it shouldnt be to low for a general. And if to many generals show up 1 day u can always change it back.
Personally I think it was another smart change by lack!
I think it's a good idea to make the status to a reachable one.
If we have "too many" generals, it's possible to introduce a new rank which can be reached by getting 4000 points.
This seems to be the most gripping way in my opinion.
"This is getting embarassing. If I had passed every test I told my mom I had, I would be commander in chief of the entire universe."
(Rimmer, Red Dwarf)
Yeah I think the old leap from 1600 to 4000 was way too much, especially when looking at the other rank increments. 3000 is much more reasonable, though a 5 star general rank of 4000 wouldn't be bad too add if the elite get eliter ( ...I was thinking "rich get richer"). We'll see how it plays out!
Hmmm, we have 15 players with colonel score in almost 3000 players in the scoreboard. This is 0,5%, or 1 in 200. Isnt become colonel already a challenge? General, then...
Stick a Marshall rank in if a 4000pt mark is needed. 2000 - 4000 is too big a jump.
Taking an enemy on the battlefield is like a hawk taking a bird. Though it enters into the midst of a thousand of them, it pays no attention to any bird other than the one it has first marked.
I disagree. The problem is mainly not the points you gain for the victories, but how the points you lose grow in the losses. This can help you to achieve a higher score, but reach 4000 is still impossible, because you will always still lose games.
Belz fell back a few hundred afte almost breaking 2800. But alster hasn't had any sudden surges or drops (even though some of the other birds did) and he's almost at 2800 now. This could be the first general ladies and gentlemen!.
...I was thinking "rich get richer"). We'll see how it plays out!
