[GO] Unrated, Unranked, or No Points Games

[Phr34ky]

If someone truly wanted to 'whore' the scoreboard now, they would play one game a month, and then feed their addiction somewhere else (some probably do).

And it's not even really about the points. There's so much competitiveness on this forum, why not add an option to practice or play friendly games?

[Incandenza]

The reason it was rejected is because:

A) Higher Ranked Players could have 1 game scored and Infinite Unranked to get their risk fix
B) The scoring is passive, so if you're good enough you should be able to point points on the line
C) If you care about points enough to want to play Unranked games you probably don't deserve the rank.

A) So? I don't see the problem with that. As paying customers that would be their right. Besides, this could easily be gotten around by only allowing x no-points game per player per month.
B) Sometimes it's more about the fun than the competition, especially when bringing in a friend unfamiliar with CC. And the "good enough" argument only works with larger sample sizes.
C) Bullshit. What gives you, or anyone else, the right to pass judgment? Besides, I care about other people's points. I'd some day like to be able to play a random 1v1 on a random map against, say, scott for shits and giggles without having to feel bad about having only 10 points on the line to his 40.

[bob72]

I too think this feature would be good but I can understand their reasons for not implementing it.

A) the server load would increase 2 or even 3 fold with 100s of speed games.

B) the number of deadbeats would increase 2 or even 3 fold leaving unfinished games that cannot be archived

However someway of implementing it so that you could only have 3 free games at one time (much like the freemiums would solve alot of these issues.

As for abusing the scoreboard. I'm sure that most people near the top are abusing the system in some way choosing players they play whoring the speed game etc and others have posted as to why it can be contained (3 free games on at any one time)

[Shelter417]

The reason it was rejected is because:

A) Higher Ranked Players could have 1 game scored and Infinite Unranked to get their risk fix
B) The scoring is passive, so if you're good enough you should be able to point points on the line
C) If you care about points enough to want to play Unranked games you probably don't deserve the rank.

Like some other people said, then limit the "unranked" games to three or four per map. I'm sure that many people refuse to play the new, more complex maps simply because they don't want to lose the points. Giving them a chance to try them out would vastly improve the site.

[blakebowling]

If someone truly wanted to 'whore' the scoreboard now, they would play one game a month, and then feed their addiction somewhere else (some probably do).

And it's not even really about the points. There's so much competitiveness on this forum, why not add an option to practice or play friendly games?

Actually, No, after 30 days of inactivity a username is removed from the scoreboard
(However it could be changed to completed a ranked game in 30 days, although it won't happen)

[blakebowling]

The reason it was rejected is because:

A) Higher Ranked Players could have 1 game scored and Infinite Unranked to get their risk fix
B) The scoring is passive, so if you're good enough you should be able to point points on the line
C) If you care about points enough to want to play Unranked games you probably don't deserve the rank.

A) So? I don't see the problem with that. As paying customers that would be their right. Besides, this could easily be gotten around by only allowing x no-points game per player per month.
B) Sometimes it's more about the fun than the competition, especially when bringing in a friend unfamiliar with CC. And the "good enough" argument only works with larger sample sizes.
C) Bullshit. What gives you, or anyone else, the right to pass judgment? Besides, I care about other people's points. I'd some day like to be able to play a random 1v1 on a random map against, say, scott for shits and giggles without having to feel bad about having only 10 points on the line to his 40.

A. It's still not fair.
B. What about making New Recruits games unranked (New recruits loose or gain no points, otherwise scoring continues as normal)
C. Anyone can Judge anyone (Do I need to pull out the CC constitution). BTW: Scott would be risking more than 40 (he almost lost about 100 to me once)

[Diamonds14]

The reason it was rejected is because:

A) Higher Ranked Players could have 1 game scored and Infinite Unranked to get their risk fix
B) The scoring is passive, so if you're good enough you should be able to point points on the line
C) If you care about points enough to want to play Unranked games you probably don't deserve the rank.

A) So? I don't see the problem with that. As paying customers that would be their right. Besides, this could easily be gotten around by only allowing x no-points game per player per month.
B) Sometimes it's more about the fun than the competition, especially when bringing in a friend unfamiliar with CC. And the "good enough" argument only works with larger sample sizes.
C) Bullshit. What gives you, or anyone else, the right to pass judgment? Besides, I care about other people's points. I'd some day like to be able to play a random 1v1 on a random map against, say, scott for shits and giggles without having to feel bad about having only 10 points on the line to his 40.

A. It's still not fair.
B. What about making New Recruits games unranked (New recruits loose or gain no points, otherwise scoring continues as normal)
C. Anyone can Judge anyone (Do I need to pull out the CC constitution). BTW: Scott would be risking more than 40 (he almost lost about 100 to me once)

This is actually a good idea..

• A. how is it still not fair? If a colonel plays one ranked and a hundred non ranked games a month he is sill a colonel. Your rank has nothing to do with the colonel rank. So who and how is this unfair?
  B. I would love to play some friendly games with some of my CC buddies, people met in real life or on CC, i would like to rematch people without having point consequences.
  C. Anyone can judge, yeah that is true. Congrats you actually have one valid point, blake.

Now for some of my opinions, There should be 2 games for freemiums a month and 20-unlimited amount of games for premiums. I am paying to play. Either way CC gets my 25 dollars.. why should they care if im playing ranked or unranked games. It takes the competitive feeling from the site but what is wrong with a friendly game? Of course keep the rule that you have to play a ranked game at least once every 30 day.. but if you make there be a limit on unranked games then i dont see how this can be a problem.

[Kotaro]

Why not just make these unranked games not count towards their points and game totals? Sort of like it never happened...

[blakebowling]

Why not just make these unranked games not count towards their points and game totals? Sort of like it never happened...

That's what the original game is for

[Thezzaruz]

A) So? I don't see the problem with that. As paying customers that would be their right.

No it wouldn't. Sorry to break it to you but you don't become god just by coughing up the 25 bux to CC. You pay for the service as it is defined by CC and that is all you can demand.
You are also welcome to suggest changes and/or additions but you have no right to demand any of them.



On topic I don't see the need for unranked games but I also don't have a problem with them bringing it in, though it seems quite clear that the CC staff ain't interested.

[Diamonds14]

A) So? I don't see the problem with that. As paying customers that would be their right.

No it wouldn't. Sorry to break it to you but you don't become god just by coughing up the 25 bux to CC. You pay for the service as it is defined by CC and that is all you can demand.
You are also welcome to suggest changes and/or additions but you have no right to demand any of them.

On topic I don't see the need for unranked games but I also don't have a problem with them bringing it in, though it seems quite clear that the CC staff ain't interested.

Yeah, you dont become a god but paying members is what making this site run as good as it is running. We are supporting the site though, and youre just draining resources. All that Incandenza was saying (i dont know him so i could be wrong) is that since we are helping this site out by paying for it then this should be a right that we can do whatever we want with. Its rewarding those who contribute to the site. (i really want to say 'We arent gods. We're just better than you but that isnt really in my character to say.)

Why not just make these unranked games not count towards their points and game totals? Sort of like it never happened...

That's what the original game is for

You cant do this in the original game blake. And Kataro that is what this whole thread is about. Making a request to CC to make a game type like this.

Diamonds.

[walnutwatson]

Ok, I don't think this has been suggested before. I'm sure a lot of people will see this suggestion as pointless but I'm also sure that a lot of people would prefer this. Here's the idea -
An option to play 'friendly' games which are exempt from the points system and possibly the ratings system.
There are several reasons why I suggest this.
1 - To create an area where new recruits can practice with no fear of being farmed.
2 - To create an area where players can try out new tactics and strategies without fear of losing points.
3 - To create an area where players will play purely for fun and not in order to earn points.
4 - To create an area where players can indulge in grudge matches without worrying about points.
5 - To create an area where players can be themselves instead of behaving according to a bizarre form of etiquette for fear of getting bad ratings.

I'll just leave you with my own personal perspective before I finish. I only play this game for fun, I could not care less about point scoring, what rank I am or what rating I have. Because of this I am constantly getting annoyed by a) more 'ambitious' players treating me like my opinions don't count. b)the same players acting like I should play according to their idea of good tactics c)the way that lots of players seem to want the 'human' element removed from the game (by this I mean revenge attacks, suiciding, anything that brings an element of chaos into the game basically)

The idea would be that you could choose whether or not your game will count towards point so that anyone bothered about points would carry on as they always have done and those not wanting to partake in the points system would get an 'opt out' option.

What do you think?

[3mp3r0r]

i like the idea, and therefore support it, with the exception of point 4:
"4 - To create an area where players can indulge in grudge matches without worrying about points."
Whats the point in destroying a rival in a grudge match if you cant take their points?

[walnutwatson]

Fair point.
Nice avatar.

[drake_259]

as much as i like this idea and would use it if it happened

i will have to say, for this not to happen

WHY?

because the whole point of the rating systems is to tell other players how good you are, if we start having friendlys then theres not much point of having it at all really, its more fun to risk your points to test out a new map than just playing friendlys where they mean nothing.

[spiesr]

Unranked games have previously been rejected. So it's not gonna happen...

[walnutwatson]

Oh yeah, I didn't see that.
Still the idea on that thread seemed to garner mainly positive support and still received no official explanation for it's rejection. Most of the objections seem top stem from the possibility of people playing unranked games and not losing ranks when they lose a game, but this just seems to be missing the point to me.
Could a mod give us the official line as to why it was rejected please?

[walnutwatson]

because the whole point of the rating systems is to tell other players how good you are, if we start having friendlys then theres not much point of having it at all really

I, and quite a few others I've met on CC, have no need for the ratings system as we like playing random opponents regardless of whether they have potty mouth, play badly, etc. and as cheating and serious abuse is dealt with in the appropriate forum it has no worth to me.

its more fun to risk your points to test out a new map than just playing friendlys where they mean nothing.

Fair enough Drake, but as above I have no need for the points system either and the suggestion that it's more fun to play with points is, with respect, just your opinion and not a fact.

[Limey Lyons]

While i agree, unranked games will never happen - i've argued for this before.

however, noobs need a place to escape the farmers. there should be a maximum/minimum rank selection on the 'start a game' page.

limey.

[lancehoch]

NOT AN OFFICIAL POSITION:
I just wanted to throw my opinion in here. I have largely been against this idea in the past. It does not allow for your score to reflect your true skill, since you are practicing without it affecting your score. My usual response would be, if you do not care about your score, then why does it matter whether you have a score or not. I have an idea though based on your "zone" comment. The only way I see this being implemented is if: a) people who play non-ranked games ONLY play non-ranked games, b) you start out as a new recruit playing ranked games and have the option on your control panel to switch to non-ranked games (must be confirmed, similar to a new password; can only be done after the first 5 games are completed), c) this is a permanent change and can never be reversed. My reasoning: a) you can only play non-ranked games to avoid the change in skill affecting the points change between two players; b) the points may be what draws some new recruits, so let them start there and later decide what they want, this can be done at any time after 5 games have been completed and any active games can be completed as normal effectively the same as someone just not playing any more games; c) this is again about the change in skill, once you give up on points, you can never come back.

[walnutwatson]

Ok, the main reason I want to play unscored games with other people of the same persuasion is mainly because I find the attitude of a lot of people on the site irritating, self-righteous, aggressive and indignant. I like banter in games and I like people getting passionate about the game but I don't like people dictating how others should play or making assumptions about others based on the events in a game.
I'd simply like the option to play in a fun, friendly and welcoming atmosphere. I'm not saying that all CC games are full of elitist buffoons but there are a lot of them out there.

you are practicing without it affecting your score.

This seems to be the main argument against the idea and I have to say I find it a bit ridiculous. I'm fairly sure that most people who join CC have previously played similar games both online and on boards. This is practice without affect on score and it cannot be controlled. I for one play daily on two other similar games online and often play a similar boardgame with my friends.
I don't understand why practice seems to be a bad thing to you.

I like your idea for new players to start on unscored games with the option later to move onto scored games, the only thing I disagree with is that people should not be allowed to move back. I don't see that this would be a problem if people were willing to give up their points and rank to do so, as I think that while some people will want to move onto scored games permanently I also think that others might find they prefer the atmosphere in the unscored zone only after experiencing the scored zone.

[porkenbeans]

NOT AN OFFICIAL POSITION:
I just wanted to throw my opinion in here. I have largely been against this idea in the past. It does not allow for your score to reflect your true skill, since you are practicing without it affecting your score. My usual response would be, if you do not care about your score, then why does it matter whether you have a score or not. I have an idea though based on your "zone" comment. The only way I see this being implemented is if: a) people who play non-ranked games ONLY play non-ranked games, b) you start out as a new recruit playing ranked games and have the option on your control panel to switch to non-ranked games (must be confirmed, similar to a new password; can only be done after the first 5 games are completed), c) this is a permanent change and can never be reversed. My reasoning: a) you can only play non-ranked games to avoid the change in skill affecting the points change between two players; b) the points may be what draws some new recruits, so let them start there and later decide what they want, this can be done at any time after 5 games have been completed and any active games can be completed as normal effectively the same as someone just not playing any more games; c) this is again about the change in skill, once you give up on points, you can never come back.

I think that I'm begining to see why nothing is getting done for the better around here. I dont mean to be cruel, but, lance,That has got to be the absolute worst idea I have ever seen in this forum. sorry.

[lancehoch]

I like your idea for new players to start on unscored games with the option later to move onto scored games, the only thing I disagree with is that people should not be allowed to move back. I don't see that this would be a problem if people were willing to give up their points and rank to do so, as I think that while some people will want to move onto scored games permanently I also think that others might find they prefer the atmosphere in the unscored zone only after experiencing the scored zone.

You have this backward...I meant it the other way.

[walnutwatson]

Oh yeah, sorry. I still don't understand what you have against people practicing though.

[lancehoch]

How am I supposed to know how good my opponent is if their score is not indicative of their skill? I want to play people who are at about the same skill level or maybe a little better than I am, but if the score does not reflect the skill level how am I to know who to play?