New rank?

by **nyg5680** on Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:11 am

i think we should just add a new 1 like 4,000 points y insert new ranks below the genral postion that doesnt accomplish anythin we just need a new 1 at like 4,000 points

by **sully800** on Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:32 am

nyg5680 wrote:i think we should just add a new 1 like 4,000 points y insert new ranks below the genral postion that doesnt accomplish anythin we just need a new 1 at like 4,000 points

so you think its reasonable for the top of the scoreboard to go from 2000 to 3000 to 4000 points? Those gaps are so big that the good players will very rarely have any new ranks to shoot for! That's why I think we should divide it up a lot more, so the gaps are only 500 points each. It would still be adding a rank at 4000 points like you suggest though.

by **mandalorian2298** on Sat Dec 30, 2006 2:30 pm

reverend_kyle wrote:I dont know about you hendy, but I learned in history that we beat those big red fluffy commies.

Can you remind me in wich battle that was? It seems to have slipped my mind

by **reverend_kyle** on Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:02 pm

mandalorian2298 wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I dont know about you hendy, but I learned in history that we beat those big red fluffy commies.

Can you remind me in wich battle that was? It seems to have slipped my mind

It was the part where Reagan was like, " hey you commies tear that wall down" and they were like "ok"

then the USSR crashed.

by **reverend_kyle** on Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:03 pm

sully800 wrote:
nyg5680 wrote:i think we should just add a new 1 like 4,000 points y insert new ranks below the genral postion that doesnt accomplish anythin we just need a new 1 at like 4,000 points

so you think its reasonable for the top of the scoreboard to go from 2000 to 3000 to 4000 points? Those gaps are so big that the good players will very rarely have any new ranks to shoot for! That's why I think we should divide it up a lot more, so the gaps are only 500 points each. It would still be adding a rank at 4000 points like you suggest though.

I agree, I'm at 2130, and my only motivation for winning now seems to be not losing my colonel, because I dont see myself getting to general.

by **Madmartigan** on Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:36 am

reverend_kyle wrote:

from suggestions forum.. where hendy should have looked.

I'm Madmartigan and I approve of the above post!

by **tals** on Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:46 am

Ok my thoughts- taking into account from the other thread. Firstly I love the idea of more ranks!

After taking into account the comments by Sully in the other post I think the points are pretty much spot on. Noone is yet at 4000 and the way the scoring works at the moment the higher you get the harder the points become.

Tals

New rank?

Who is online