Conquer Club

Most high ranking players I play against seem to play 10-15 trips games then play 3-4 single games then back to the trips games to up their scores. Without a good partner or 2 you have no chance to make it anywhere or enjoy a good game even if you are serious about playing, you are left to play with new players and deadbeats all the time.

I think having more than 1 global set of points there should be various depending on the following factors:


1v1 league

1 triples league

2 doubles leagues: 2*2 and 2*3
2 singles leagues : 3-4 player games and 5-6 player games.

So in total instead of one set of points you would have 6 different points tables.

I agree. I don't think doubles and triples should be scored the same as the "all out war" games. I don't think 3-4 player games should be scored differently than 5-6 player games, as long as everyone is at war they should be in the same category. Perhaps team games should be on a differnt scoring system.

I think just a score for "singles" games and a score for "team" games would suffice.

Velvecarrots wrote:I think just a score for "singles" games and a score for "team" games would suffice.

Triples and Doubles should be seperated, There would be a huge shift in rankings if triples were discounted or halved or the like. imagine all the crying that would happen........

The point system is fine. If you are in games against nothing but deadbeats you should be winning anyways. If you are a "serious" player than I hope your skills warrant winning on a regular basis, which will move you up the scoreboard as well.

I don't have a great score, and personally I don't care. I spend my energy running tournaments that lots of players enjoy.

Besides, if you were to get into those games with those high ranked players you will probably get your backside handed right back to you in tiny little pieces. They know what they are doing, that's why they have good scores. Losing to them isn't going to do you any good either.

Just have some fun, forget about your points.

yeah I don't worry about points but some of the daft moves and ganging up i've seen especially when I last man against 2 high ranking players shows me that those with loads of points care too much about them sometimes. Sometimes more than the game itself.

Don't worry about points? If they weren't their we wouldn't worry about them. But they are there so we have to worry about them.

3seven1 wrote:Don't worry about points? If they weren't their we wouldn't worry about them. But they are there so we have to worry about them.

You have been a member of this site for less than a week. Have you even had a chance to worry about points yet?

...no. But I was just saying, they are their for us to worry about them. I have 1000 points right now, that's more than some people on this site.

Worry about them too much and you'll drive yourself crazy and the site will lose all the fun it has for you.

True.

bob72 wrote:Most high ranking players I play against seem to play 10-15 trips games then play 3-4 single games then back to the trips games to up their scores. Without a good partner or 2 you have no chance to make it anywhere or enjoy a good game even if you are serious about playing, you are left to play with new players and deadbeats all the time.

I think having more than 1 global set of points there should be various depending on the following factors:


1v1 league

1 triples league

2 doubles leagues: 2*2 and 2*3
2 singles leagues : 3-4 player games and 5-6 player games.

So in total instead of one set of points you would have 6 different points tables.

Impossible.

What I also can't seem to get it how people can have scores without their doubles/ triples games, because without them, you wouldn't have gained/ subtracted points in other games, so how do you know what your true score is without those games.

Like I said, it's impossible to do.

The easy solution would just be to copy everyone's current ranking to each of the categories, and let them vary separately from then on.

This idea makes a great deal of sense to me - chess has different ratings for different game types and speeds (lightning, blitz, regular, bughouse, etc.), why shouldn't we have different ratings for games which require very different strategy and skills?

Personally I'd say the two big differences are singles vs team games, and games with two sides vs games with 3 or more sides. That would make four rating categories: singles (3-6 player), 1v1, team (2v2 and 3v3), and 2v2v2. The last category maybe doesn't really deserve its own rating, though, and could be merged into team.

Xyl wrote:The easy solution would just be to copy everyone's current ranking to each of the categories, and let them vary separately from then on.

This idea makes a great deal of sense to me - chess has different ratings for different game types and speeds (lightning, blitz, regular, bughouse, etc.), why shouldn't we have different ratings for games which require very different strategy and skills?

Personally I'd say the two big differences are singles vs team games, and games with two sides vs games with 3 or more sides. That would make four rating categories: singles (3-6 player), 1v1, team (2v2 and 3v3), and 2v2v2. The last category maybe doesn't really deserve its own rating, though, and could be merged into team.

agreed

if your worried about points THAT much....you need to balance it out

Play some dubs and trips...and play only 1v1 with members ranked higher then you

the reason I say this..is you can't always choose your partners unless you already know them..or join a game last...

1v1...its a 50-50 chance of winning from the get go. Initial placement, using the neutrals for blockades and cover, luck of the dice, etc.....can help you win a great deal in these games

I beat higher ranked opponents all the time...I also lose alot to lower ranks..(I'm at 1300+)

all in all, mine balances out quite nicely at the end of the day.....

I stay in the corporal first class most of the time, yes I would like my rank to go up, but at the same time, I'm not gonna worry about my points, because I know I won't lose ALL the time, and I will keep within a comfortable distance for my rank to grow

If you worry about points too much, they will inevitably ruin your concentration on your games

i like it but i think that the increase/decrease should be small