Generally, what is a "good" rank?

[lalaland]

Obviously, if you're a Brigadier or General or the like, then you're considered a fairly elite player, while cook/cadet is generally considered inferior.

However, what would you classify as the "good, but not outstanding in any sense of the word" ranking?
The "respectable but not fantastic" ranking?

Just wanna know what you lovely folks think

[Georgerx7di]

Major. If you want a short answer, that is it.

Long answer. You can find the median rank by going to score board and going to the middle page, (I think there's about 80 pages, so page 40 would be the middle). On this page you will find the median, which I think is like 2 stripes or something. That might be seargeant, I don't know the striper ranks since they changed them. So if you are above that (whatever it really is), then that's above average.

Generally however people who have been here for a while only distinguish between striper (really means enlisted ranks) and officer, (Lt or above). Some good players fall to captain or Lt, when they are medals hunting, but people know who they are so it doesn't matter. The important thing is that they were able to attain a higher rank when they wanted to.

So people who are captains or Lt's are sometimes good players. But as a general rule if you are a Major people expect that you know how play. To get much higher than major you have to be selective with games. See my thread on point manipulation viewtopic.php?f=6&t=104964 for more on being selective. This is why when good players stop caring what they are playing and join anything they often go back down to major, although not always.

[AndyDufresne]

From a personal perspective, once I finally ditched the bars/stripes, I felt like I was 'out of the masses' a little more.


--Andy

[danryan]

I'm never embarrassed to be at major, but I am a little shamed whenever I fall below it. I haven't had stripes in so long I've forgotten what that feels like.

[ljex]

I'm never embarrassed to be at major, but I am a little shamed whenever I fall below it. I haven't had stripes in so long I've forgotten what that feels like.

Same for me, and to think when i was first here i thought majors were unbeatable.

[L M S]

Generally considered by others? Major. I will tell you that it's almost more fun to be a sergeant...for many reasons.
-most times you aren't targeted to be killed.
-high ranks don't expect you to know what you're doing so it's fun when you smoke them at their own game.
-people play differently when the 'pressure' to maintain rank isn't there
-less rude comments
-more 'open' games, by this I mean...you are less likely to run into say, the CoF, Blitz, Space Cowboy, etc. team and get completely slaughtered
-It's cool to get 30+ points for a win again
-playing for fun instead of medals, rank, points or whatever is refreshing
-when someone gives you grief about it you just run back up to major in a week and it shuts them up real quick

[Army of GOD]

It's all relative to what your highest has been. I haven't been higher than a LT (I got within 10 points to Captain, but I lost a lot somehow), but the switch from sarge first class to LT was pretty big. It's nice not having to see those annoying ass stripes.

[Sir. Ricco]

Once you become a Major, you feel like you reached the "good" rank. If you go above it to Colonel, you few like you reached the elite. If you drop below Major, you never feel as good about your rank. This is from personal experience. So I think Major is the "good" rank.

[Joodoo]

If you are not selective about game types, I'd say major.
If you play a lot of team games and very little standard/terminator/assassin, becoming a colonel or brig is a lot less harder if you play with a regular, reliable team.

[hwhrhett]

major.

but the shame level happens when i fall below captain, thats when the cooks and privates in my games call me noob. when your a major or a captain they just complain about how its rigged in favor of higher ranks..

[lord voldemort]

yep definately major....but like george said...there are definately times that capable players fall below that for whatever reasons. They know they can push up the board at anytime

[hwhrhett]

yep definately major....but like george said...there are definately times that capable players fall below that for whatever reasons. They know they can push up the board at anytime

i got down to whatever you call the rank with stripes for a while last month in the midst of a bunch of medal-hunting games... took me forever to get the hang of nuclear, lol...

[rockfist]

One rank higher than whatever rank I am.

[KoE_Sirius]

Obviously, if you're a Brigadier or General or the like, then you're considered a fairly elite player, while cook/cadet is generally considered inferior.

However, what would you classify as the "good, but not outstanding in any sense of the word" ranking?
The "respectable but not fantastic" ranking?

Just wanna know what you lovely folks think

Its not obvious to me that a Brigadier or a General are good players.It more obvious that they are boosters or snobs.
Colonels are generally a good all round player unless they are on the way up to fast.Then they fall into the previous group.
Now Cooks are complicated.Some of them have bad internet(dial up 28k) or need to drop games quiet a lot due to happenings in the RW.IE, they start a game and dinner is served halfway through or the dreaded g/f-b/f says they have to stop playing more often then not.Some are playing for the lowest score of all time(this is the most common).
The rest of the ranks are just here to play risk and who cares about mythical points that cant even buy you an item off the £1 menu at McDonalds.

[squishyg]

i was extremely proud once i became lieutenant. to me, that was proof that i knew how to play the game. maybe i'm odd, but i see medals as more indicative of a player's ability.

[Joodoo]

i was extremely proud once i became lieutenant. to me, that was proof that i knew how to play the game. maybe i'm odd, but i see medals as more indicative of a player's ability.

A preimum player can simply start 50 Luxembourg/Doodle Earth Assassin Games to hunt for the Gold Assassin Medal, and they can do the same for the other game type medals.
What I think is more indicative is how many games it takes for a player to earn that particular medal, excluding 1v1 because it's so drop dependent.

[jefjef]

To get much higher than major you have to be selective with games.

Well this is not entirely accurate. I play the same games/types of games as I have since I joined CC. I was on the verge of being a Brig until a miserable random streak slapped me down but I am quite confident I will have a bird playing the exact same public sequential no spoils games I have always played.

Now as far as what is a good rank. Most 1st sargents and higher you can/should expect game on! I know of many sarges that are very competent. Many players that are Capt/Lt/Sarge play a lot of low win % stuff just cuz they are having fun.

Of course there are high rankers that just couldn't maintain/achieve the rank with out some shady tactics or being map specific. Not much fun in that.

[squishyg]

i couldn't say it better jef. i guess there are people who manipulate the system both in terms of points and medals.

[MeDeFe]

Ignore the rank, look at the scoreboard position instead.

Someone who's in the top 30% should be expected to know how to play the game and play it well, top 30% means you have at least more than twice as many people behind you as ahead of you, as such you're already "good" by definition.
Someone in the top 15% should be expected to be a cut better, playing at a consistently high level and making very few, if any, mistakes.
If a player is in the top 5% they can probably be considered great, and the top 1% would be the elite.

Of course, as has been pointed out, the variety of games a player plays plays a role as well. Someone who plays exclusively 8-player escalating assdoodle may be great at those settings, but another player with an identical score who has played on several different maps and settings can be said to be great at several things.

[Bruceswar]

To get much higher than major you have to be selective with games.

Well this is not entirely accurate. I play the same games/types of games as I have since I joined CC. I was on the verge of being a Brig until a miserable random streak slapped me down but I am quite confident I will have a bird playing the exact same public sequential no spoils games I have always played.

Now as far as what is a good rank. Most 1st sargents and higher you can/should expect game on! I know of many sarges that are very competent. Many players that are Capt/Lt/Sarge play a lot of low win % stuff just cuz they are having fun.

Of course there are high rankers that just couldn't maintain/achieve the rank with out some shady tactics or being map specific. Not much fun in that.

You are playing mainly team games... ofc you can make brig by playing public games. That is the counter to playing private games. Try playing people of your skill level and see how long your rank last. Majors, Colonels and brigs. Beating up on cooks makes you no better than the next person. On the other hand if you were playing std seq no spoils games and holding your rank in public games then that is something.


As to what ranks are good:


Sgt and under = total shit player
Sgt First class = OK player
Lt. and Capt = Decent
Major = Good
Colonel = Very good
Brig = Elite
General or Higher = Farmer or Super Elite

[nesterdude]

To get much higher than major you have to be selective with games.

Well this is not entirely accurate. I play the same games/types of games as I have since I joined CC. I was on the verge of being a Brig until a miserable random streak slapped me down but I am quite confident I will have a bird playing the exact same public sequential no spoils games I have always played.

Now as far as what is a good rank. Most 1st sargents and higher you can/should expect game on! I know of many sarges that are very competent. Many players that are Capt/Lt/Sarge play a lot of low win % stuff just cuz they are having fun.

Of course there are high rankers that just couldn't maintain/achieve the rank with out some shady tactics or being map specific. Not much fun in that.

You are playing mainly team games... ofc you can make brig by playing public games. That is the counter to playing private games. Try playing people of your skill level and see how long your rank last. Majors, Colonels and brigs. Beating up on cooks makes you no better than the next person. On the other hand if you were playing std seq no spoils games and holding your rank in public games then that is something.


As to what ranks are good:


Sgt and under = total shit player
Sgt First class = OK player
Lt. and Capt = Decent
Major = Good
Colonel = Very good
Brig = Elite
General or Higher = Farmer or Super Elite

Agreed Bruce.
It's very easy to start a bunch of open team games and be a colonel or a brig. As a matter of fact, if you're doing that, and you're not those ranks or higher, you're pretty bad.
I've held the bird, and been a sgt many times. But I've done so through private eszcalings and 1 v 1.
But Jef is right on streaks. Sometimes there's simply nothing you can do but lose.

[stahrgazer]

Lieutenant and above.

At the sfc rank you're coming into a level where you can really lose a lot more points than you'll win, per game, (without carefully targeting your games) which makes it harder to rise above it. Lieutenant to Major doesn't seem to be as big a leap, possibly because once you have a * you're more appealing to higher ranks as either partners or opponents (which, again, emphasizes that lieut is a good rank.)

[the.killing.44]

I love the fact that this thread is so illustrative of the divide in CC. On one hand, there are the perennial stripers who sometimes make it to Lieutenant and hail the oak leaf as the coveted "good" rank; on the other, those who have been at the top or who have tasted greatness, (correctly) placing Major as a desirable rank and Colonel as a truly "high" rank.

With that said, it all boils down to methods, explained well by Bruce.

[Mageplunka]

well in my case, i can go from colonel to private in a day and back up...some people are way into their " points" and actually foe me when im low because of their fear of losing points......id love to be able to start over as a ? if we could...there should be a place in cc where you could place your points, like a cc savings bank or something like that

[HighlanderAttack]

However, what would you classify as the "good, but not outstanding in any sense of the word" ranking?

By this I would say Captain.

I think Major is where all good players should be and I think there are many outstanding Majors--a lot of course depends on your game type.