Separate Single and Team Score

[strike wolf]

I don't like this idea. It picks on the good partners as well as the bad.

[wicked]

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

[sully800]

I've been a fan of this idea from the start, but I think it should be incorporated with the better individual statistics proposal.

Perhaps the main scoreboard could be kept the way it is, but you can sort/filter various by specifications. One would be team games only (or single games only) and it woudl display scores based only on points won and lost in team games (or singles games). If that was implemented then perhaps we could have the same thing for esc/flate rate/no cards. Maybe even a sortable scoreboard for each map and fortification type (though I don't think those matter as much.

This type of sorting would be a bit misleading, because I am not suggesting a person's scores be completely recalculated as if they had only played team games. Therefore if they win every team game they've ever played and lost every singles game played their team score would be a bit different than if they had won every team game but played no singles. I'm not sure just how much this would change a person's new scoreboard position but I don't think it would have a huge effect (the way the scoring system works seems like it would balance out large differences in the two ways I've described).

SO what I'm suggesting is not a completely seperate scoreboard and score calculation for singles/team games. Just some sort of filter that can calculate your current accumulated score from each.

[lackattack]

I've read this thread and hernando cortez's similar Doubles games and their affect on rankings (by the way this dude is CC's longest-standing active member outside of my friends and family)

Going back through games and re-calculating team vs standard scores is a lot of work and won't be scheduled any time soon. Soon enough we will have game logs and game histories available in xml format so people can crunch their own numbers and write their own tools.

I agree that there seems to be a scoring bias towards established doubles players and I believe it is because of the deadbeat teammates problem. Check out Newbs should be banned from doubles and triples games. I hope we can reduce the bias and reduce the need for separate scores...

[wcaclimbing]

why dont you just join games with good partners???

[gerard]

What about....
Calculating separate rankings and scores for single player vs double and triple scores. Then display the players different rank icons appropriately in each game type and display both ranks on the players profile etc. Two scoreboards would be needed.

I have suggested this because I see all of the high ranking players focus on doubles and triples with known partners. This is understandable because if a high ranking player is in a multiplayer game then the other players natural tendency is to eliminate them first - for the extra points and because they are the biggest potential threat.

Two rankings would totally change the dynamics of the site. More high ranking players would come back into the standard/terminator games and you would get recognition for players that tend to play this way and thus don't have as high a score. I guess the singles ranking would end up being the higher status ranking, same as tennis.

[Master Bush]

same as tennis.

You lost me here. But it come at the end, so I was able to finish reading. I voted 'who cares' cause in my mind, a win is a win in Risk.

[foolish_yeti]

I think it's a great idea.

[Russianfire8371]

I rarely play doubles/triples games, and I would love to be able to see how i fare against other ppl who play single games. Its kidna hard to figuer out if they're good because of the way the play by themselves, or due to team games.

[Robinette]

Great idea...

I'd love to see it implemented...

It would also allow you to better select opponents to play against.

(and i get the tennis comparison)

[gerard]

same as tennis.

Tennis players are either good at doubles or singles (sometimes even both) and they have separate rankings. I would say the same would apply on CC, and it would also.........

1) Get a few more of the top players into standard games where you could play against them (and hopefully learn)

2) Rankings would be more accurate - high level players would be really high level (pretty easy to run some query's to see if any of our generals are still generals if ONLY their single player games are taken into account)

[fraggle]

It's been a while since I visited the forum side ofthings, but last time I did we were discussing this. I think it's pretty simple to see there is a difference between games won solo and games won with a team.

Just go to the Game Finder and search every General's name. Not one of them is currently playing even a single solo game. And if you look at their completed games, there is a gross majority of team games. Maybe that's what they prefer, and that's fine. But, let's compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Three pretty good players who play regularly as a team are going to beat three random players nearly every time. That shouldn't be measured against a solo player taking on two to five other challengers at once.

[hecter]

With this, the problem arises that what rank would show as your little icon. Would you have a choice, would we have a general rank that would be calculated, and all sorts of things like that. I think that it requires some discusion, so lets have it people.

[Robinette]

With this, the problem arises that what rank would show as your little icon. Would you have a choice, would we have a general rank that would be calculated, and all sorts of things like that. I think that it requires some discusion, so lets have it people.

So each person would have 2 ranks...

Perhaps one set of ranks could be army green, the other in navy blue...

Or just make it silver and gold
or would it be better to say platinum and brass...

BUT, has the idea of twin scoreboards been officially suggested? or is this just a poll?

[cleveridea]

I think everyone has the tools on this site to see which high ranking players completely avoid singles games. And, they can be judged harshly (or not) as such.

Obviously, either playing singles games against others with lesser rank is an uphill climb they are unwilling or unable to climb.

The points systems is nice only as long as it is ridiculously simple. I would suggest that those wanting to trick up the points system should consider stopping to rely on it so heavily for feedback on their performance.

Until there is a methodology that players can be challenged (like a traditional ladder system), the points thing is basically a trivial amusement in my opinion. Once you throw in a ladder, you'd hear all the fun get sucked right out of the whole site.

cleveridea

[Dr. Jim]

I don't play team games, but it seems like a good idea. I don't see why not.

[maniacmath17]

The dual scoreboards is a great idea and I really hope it gets made. It's so frustrating to look up at the people ahead of me on the scoreboard knowing that they are ahead not because they are better players, but simply because they have played more team games.

[Bad Speler]

With this, the problem arises that what rank would show as your little icon. Would you have a choice, would we have a general rank that would be calculated, and all sorts of things like that. I think that it requires some discusion, so lets have it people.

If this were ever to be implememnted, it would probably be best that if you joined a team game, your team rank be shown, and when your in a singles game, your singles rank be shown

[RobinJ]

I don't like it - we've already got a 53 page long scoreboard - no more figures please! And a win is still a win!

However, if the scoreboard could be sorted this way it would be useful but I wouldn't like the figures included in profiles, etc.

[Nikolai]

There are some interesting potential steps you could take from a dual scoreboard - for instance, you don't get the rank unless you have the points requirement on both boards, that sort of thing - but I'm just not sure if it's feasible. Short of developing a completely different set of points - one for singles games, one for doubles - I don't see it happening.

[yowzer14]

What about....
Calculating separate rankings and scores for single player vs double and triple scores. Then display the players different rank icons appropriately in each game type and display both ranks on the players profile etc. Two scoreboards would be needed.

I'd say perhaps a 3 scoreboard listing. The current one and two sub listings team and singles?

[qeee1]

OK, so this was the thread that singles/teams scoreboards were first rejected in. 1 question follows... WHY?

Given the uproar over the dugcarr fiasco I ask that we look at this again. If it's not feasible fine, I'll try come up with a better solution, but a reason would be nice...

[lackattack]

Some game logs are missing so i can't go back and recalculate all scores. Resetting scores would be be less than ideal. I don't think it's a priority at this time. Them are the reasons.

[Georgerx7di]

I get irritated when I see people ranked higher than me, not because they are better, but because they setup 100 triples games at a time, beating up on noobs. I would like to see a seperate score board for those who do not abuse the points system and instead win real games. If this is to much, perhaps the points gained/lossed could be less for trips and dubs. maybe score1/score2 *10 instead of *20.

Btw, I have nothing to do today, that's why im sitting here posting in the forums.

[AK_iceman]

Please check the to-do list next time to see if your idea has already been suggested.