Partner Ranking Choice

[edgarhons]

I noticed that the idea of setting minimum rankings for games has been rejected, on the grounds that it promotes elitism. While I disagree with this, I can see the reasoning behind it.

However, I think there should be an option for Team games, where if you're the first person to join a team, you can choose the minimum ranking of your partners. While the top halves of team games fill up with high-ranks in an instant, they sit idle because no one wants to join and be partnered up with a deadbeater or some first-timer.

I think it's fine to protect a newb's right to join competitive games and feel the growing pains of adjusting to the game, but it shouldn't hurt the rank of an innocent captain.

So basically when you joined a team game, you'd get asked to choose the minimum rank of your partners. You wouldn't be able to pick a minimum rank higher than your own, so in this sense those players with higher ranks actually receive a tangible reward for their good play.

This would ALSO help clear out those first few pages of games, full of one-sided team games. In fact, I think it'd be cleared out in the first day it was implemented. This would create a less cluttered first page, one that's more attractive to new and experienced players alike.

Thoughts?

[Herakilla]

basically same thing as whats been rejected, its a little better i will grant that, but i still dont like it. it just cuts down newer players which is bad

[soundout9]

I think it makes team games way more even and preventing newbs who think they are all that from embarrising themselves

[edgarhons]

It doesn't prevent a newb from joining a game, it prevents a newb from joining a team. If I were new to the site, I wouldn't have much fun if I lost a game for my partner and then had him yell at me.

And you're just assuming cutting down on new players is bad without defending that assumption. The whole goal of this is to cut down on new players in some circumstances, so it's not as if this is an unintended consequence. I can give you ample reason why not having newbs around is in fact often a wonderful scenario, so it's pretty dismissive to just throw out the blanket statement that it's "bad".

It'd be more receptive to new players if we listed the Scoreboard with the lowest score on the top, but I think you see the reason for catering to the better players.

I'm not the type of player who will only play with elite players just to preserve my rank. But I am the type of player who appreciates playing a competitive game every once in a while, but as it is, I have to join up with 4 subpar teams for every 1 quality team I get lucky enough to come across.

If you'll take a look at game 945249 (Started after I posted this), you'll see the perfect example of what I'm talking about. I'm against 3 very good players, and am teamed with a Sergeant (Who I'm glad to be partnering with and would have enabled to partner with me if I had a choice). But our partner is a private with 37 negative feedback comments, many of them about him being a horrible teammate. The feedback system is nice, but as you can see, completely worthless in this situation where my idea would be very helpful.

---

Alternatively, what about an option where I can review my team before I choose to start a game? Sort of a failsafe against a sure rankdrop?

[rsuttles58]

---

Alternatively, what about an option where I can review my team before I choose to start a game? Sort of a failsafe against a sure rankdrop?

This is a good idea, regardless of any noob blocking mechanisms. I've had so many games where I've been like "man I wish I could've had the option to check this last guy's feedback before starting". If you are playing games against people you don't play everyday, then it is a crap shoot what kind of opponents you get.

[insomniacdude]

I support both suggestions so far. I usually avoid being the first person on a team simply because this happens. I usually only ever join 2, 4, or 6 in a doubles game, or 3 or 6 in a triples game.

As a tangent, I think premium players should have the option of setting a rank limit on their created games if they want. But apparently that's already been rejected.