Conquer Club

Cap the number of simultaneous 1v1 games

Have any bright ideas? Share and discuss them with the community

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

And don't forget to search for previously suggested ideas first!

Cap the number of simultaneous 1v1 games

Postby georgizhukov on Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:58 am

Something has to be done about either the scoring system or the number of games someone can host at one point...We have now seen in the past month 2 conquerors jump points (josko and Ollie) by launching 200+ 1v1 games and stalling the ones they are losing on and finishing the games they are winning. Not to mention the crown. I mean Ollie went from conqueror to a colonel in 1 day. I don't see how that style of gameplay "crowns" a conqueror. Anyone with a rating of 2500+ could launch 300 games and play with this style to become conqueror at this point.

I am positive this has been discussed before, but why would the points in the game be based off starting score instead of ending score..I can't grasp that logic..

Georgi
Colonel georgizhukov
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Charleston SC
2

Re: Cap the number of simultaneous 1v1 games

Postby trinicardinal on Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:57 am

georgizhukov wrote:Something has to be done about either the scoring system or the number of games someone can host at one point...We have now seen in the past month 2 conquerors jump points (josko and Ollie) by launching 200+ 1v1 games and stalling the ones they are losing on and finishing the games they are winning. Not to mention the crown. I mean Ollie went from conqueror to a colonel in 1 day. I don't see how that style of gameplay "crowns" a conqueror. Anyone with a rating of 2500+ could launch 300 games and play with this style to become conqueror at this point.

I am positive this has been discussed before, but why would the points in the game be based off starting score instead of ending score..I can't grasp that logic..

Georgi


I'm not sure what you mean by points being based off starting score... the points for a game are calculated by (from the instructions) The points to be awarded is calculated as (loser's score / winner's score) * 20, up to a maximum of 100 points from each opponent. Those scores are the actual scores just as the game ends not the points a the start of the game.

Aside from that little technical issue, I understand what you're saying about the runs which is something that has always been possible. Another possible solution is to implement a change to the scoring system. I have seen lots of people use the delaying losses strategy to a lesser degree to get a new high score and especially to hit a new high rank. This is an extension of that and as long as he doesn't deadbeat any of those games he's sticking within the times allotted to the games and fits into the guidelines.. If you start to impose those restrictions you're likely to hamper a number of people who have paid for their premium just so that they CAN enjoy that number of ongoing games.

The whole Conqueror position mostly doesn't mean as much as so many people seem to feel and its amazing the lengths people will go to to get it. I think its more a medal for ingenuity than anything else :lol:

All in all though I think we should examine another option than limiting most legitimate users who paid for their premium because a few people used it to manipulate their score to that level.
10:16:35 ‹Ace Rimmer› haven't looked at work in ages
10:42:43 ‹Sackett58› fine, I'll take my panties elsewhere
User avatar
Captain trinicardinal
 
Posts: 2911
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 7:59 am
Location: On a Tropical Island - Coconut anyone?

Re: Cap the number of simultaneous 1v1 games

Postby JOHNNYROCKET24 on Fri Feb 21, 2014 11:17 am

JR's Game Profile

show
User avatar
Captain JOHNNYROCKET24
 
Posts: 5514
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 4:11 am
Location: among the leets
52


Return to Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users