Les Aventuriers du Rail Europe 15<sup>e</sup> Anniversaire Les Aventuriers du Rail Europe 15<sup>e</sup> Anniversaire

Forums

Recherche
Forums » Ticket to Ride - the Board Game - English » Please, please, please add this feature.
Montrer: Messages du jour 
  
AuteurSujet
*player25691
Member

Messages: 36
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2004
Please, please, please add this feature. Mon, 16 May 2005 22:13
Okay, after being away for several months, I came and played a few games, all with the same result. Total annihilation of my opponent, gain 0-1 points. This makes for a VERY boring gaming experience.

Can you PLEASE make it so that we can limit the ratings of the players that can join our games? Playing against anyone under 1500 simply isn't fun for me and it discourages me from playing here at all.
      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Mon, 16 May 2005 22:48
AlexM wrote on Mon, 16 May 2005 16:13

Okay, after being away for several months, I came and played a few games, all with the same result. Total annihilation of my opponent, gain 0-1 points. This makes for a VERY boring gaming experience.

Can you PLEASE make it so that we can limit the ratings of the players that can join our games? Playing against anyone under 1500 simply isn't fun for me and it discourages me from playing here at all.



I agree. This is one of the features we have asked for under the 'suggestions for next release' thread. The devs have stated that all the suggestions are possible and MAY be added, but no timeframe has been given. Another important feature that could be added would be opening up the game histories for all to see, in order to discourage cheating.

I noticed the site was changed today, but the areas we have asked for improvement in have remained the same. I wish the devs would just come on and give us a yes or a no, and if yes, a timeframe we can expect.
      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Mon, 16 May 2005 22:59
The two things mentioned here would be my top requests too. Perhaps if there is enough consensus on the most important changes that would help the developers prioritize things.

In the other thread there was quite a laundry list, it isn't surprising that there wasn't a response to it.

1) Limit games by rating (open, 1400, 1500, 1600 would be good enough for me). Someone might want to only play *under* a certain rating too.
2) Open the player histories. If there is a privacy issue it could be made optional I suppose.

If there are problems with implementing either of these two features perhaps they could be mentioned and we could help come up with solutions or alternatives.
      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Tue, 17 May 2005 16:31
If anyone else reads this thread and wants these 2 features, please post a 'yes'. I don't know if the devs missed this thread but they have not replied as yet.

[Mis à jour le: Tue, 17 May 2005 16:38]

      
Optimus
Senior Member
Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2006

Pages Perso
Messages: 279
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Tue, 17 May 2005 17:27
I'm inclined to acquiesce to your request. Means "yes". (I love this movie Very Happy )
      
*player25691
Member

Messages: 36
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Tue, 17 May 2005 19:20
Something that would go a long ways towards a short term fix would be to simply show a person's rating in the room before you start the game. Then I could at least leave the game when people too far out of my range join.

(Allowing the game host to boot people before you start would also be good)
      
*player24262
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 1710
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Tue, 17 May 2005 19:34
AlexM écrit le Tue, 17 May 2005 19:20


Allowing the game host to boot people before you start would also be good


I don't like the idea to select people by the ranking even if I know from experience how it hurts when you lose 7 points in one game...
But can you imagine one second, a new player or a not very good player, spending his time to receive hass kicking by top ranked players ? If I was one of them, I would simply quit the site Mad

Ask rek, I'm for democracy, everyone must be allowed to play with anyone.

I learnt much in my games with good players, it would be a pity if that was not possible for the others !
Quote:


Something that would go a long ways towards a short term fix would be to simply show a person's rating in the room before you start the game.
I agree : but only to know who is in front of me and adapt way to play
Quote:


Then I could at least leave the game when people too far out of my range join.

Mad Mad Mad

[Mis à jour le: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:39]

      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Tue, 17 May 2005 19:58
léachris wrote on Tue, 17 May 2005 13:34

AlexM écrit le Tue, 17 May 2005 19:20


Allowing the game host to boot people before you start would also be good


I don't like the idea to select people by the ranking even if I know from experience how it hurts when you lose 7 points in one game...
But can you imagine one second, a new player or a not very good player, spending his time to receive hass kicking by top ranked players ? If I was one of them, I would simply quit the site Mad

Ask rek, I'm for democracy, everyone must be allowed to play with anyone.

I learnt much in my games with good players, it would be a pity if that was not possible for the others !
Quote:


Something that would go a long ways towards a short term fix would be to simply show a person's rating in the room before you start the game.
I agree : but only to know who is in front of me and adapt way to play
Quote:


Then I could at least leave the game when people too far out of my range join.

Mad Mad Mad



That might be 'democracy' a.k.a. socialism, but in the real world what most of us (at least in this country) cherish most is FREEDOM, the freedom for anyone to CHOOSE who they want to play (or associate) with. Is this not just?

Wow, so many parallels to the politics of the real world... absolutely amazing.



Best,
SKM
      
*player25691
Member

Messages: 36
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Tue, 17 May 2005 20:37
léachris wrote on Tue, 17 May 2005 13:34


I don't like the idea to select people by the ranking


Why?

Quote:


even if I know from experience how it hurts when you lose 7 points in one game...


Who cares about the rating? I just want a real game! If I lose to a 1400, I deserve to lose 7 points. That's NOT what this is about.

Quote:


Ask rek, I'm for democracy, everyone must be allowed to play with anyone.


What does that have to do with democracy? Your concept of "everyone being allowed to play everyone" doesn't take into account that boring unchallenging games will drive me away from this site then no one will be able to play me at all! If no one gets to play me, how is "everyone" getting to?

Quote:


I learnt much in my games with good players, it would be a pity if that was not possible for the others !


Then you should FEEL FREE to play all those players and help educate them. As this bores the hell out of me, I have no interest in doing so.

I might as well play chess vs. a computer at level one or play Civiliation on Chieftain or for that matter just play a DumbBot. Not being presented with a challenge is simply not fun.
      
*player24262
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 1710
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Tue, 17 May 2005 21:04
AlexM écrit le Tue, 17 May 2005 20:37

Who cares about the rating? I just want a real game! If I lose to a 1400, I deserve to lose 7 points. That's NOT what this is about.


sorry, sorry, sorry
But so many players asked the same as you do, only not to lose too many points,
I thought it was you aim too Embarassed Embarassed
Ok, your aim is laudable, forget what I said !
Quote:

Ask rek, I'm for democracy
Quote:

What does that have to do with democracy?

it was only a veiled message to rek Wink

      
Caboose
Senior Member
First Lieutenant

Pages Perso
Messages: 1628
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 08:34
I'm hoping it NEVER gets implemented and here is why

Will give an "elitist" attitude to the top rank people and newbies will never get a chance to catch up.

People forget that it is a GAME - plain and simple.

Boo hoo if a low level person wants to join a game with a high level and the high level LOSES - rank isn't that important and should be treated as such.

And remember, you can always create private games. So enough said.
      
gwen
Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 80
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 09:13
I share your point of view Caboose. It is just a game, and it should stay that way (eventhough i'm totally addicted to it Smile ).

Discrimination of lower ranked players is not acceptable, since we all started at a low ranking.

Just keep playing, and the better you play, the less you loose. Stop caring about the points you might winn or loose, it will cause you less stress and sleepless nights.

Good luck and a lot of fun to all of you in your future games Smile .

Gwen
      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 10:30
Caboose wrote on Tue, 17 May 2005 23:34

I'm hoping it NEVER gets implemented and here is why

Will give an "elitist" attitude to the top rank people and newbies will never get a chance to catch up.


This is a fatuous argument. Newbies can work their way up without playing top ranked players. I couldn't even find a top 100 player until I made it there myself.

Quote:


People forget that it is a GAME - plain and simple.

Boo hoo if a low level person wants to join a game with a high level and the high level LOSES - rank isn't that important and should be treated as such.



Does it not make sense for people to find evenly matched competition? It is just a game, which to me means it should be fun. Trust me, it is no fun repeatedly pounding the crap out of sub-1500 players. I don't think they are having fun either.

It has almost nothing to do with the possibility that a high-ranked player might lose. I say almost because there is the case where a strong player could use a dummy account to take points from another high rated player -- and if you think this sounds silly, it is, but there is lots of precedent for such shenanigans.

If some people want to take rank seriously I don't see why that should be a problem to you. If you want to be non-competitive that's fine, but it is kind of obnoxious to impose that on other people. For some people being competitive is fun. Rolling Eyes

One thing that would make sense to do is not let someone limit who they play to more than 100 less than their own rating. E.g. a 1642 rated player could not set a limit higher than 1542.

Quote:


And remember, you can always create private games. So enough said.


No, you'll have to say a lot more: that was a pretty mediocre attempt to champion mediocrity. You even contradict yourself: Rank isn't important, but it is important to be able to catch up in rank? Which is it, does it matter or not?

Ultimately it's up to DoW to decide. They saw fit to put a ranking system in. I think it was a wise decision because it gives the games a context -- the possibility of having goals that extend beyond a single game -- and that adds a lot of replay value. Any measures that can allow that system to work more smoothly would be a big win and I think it would go a long way to building and maintaining an active player base.

Sure there are people who enjoy splashing around at the bottom of the rankings. Your "mediocritist" attitude does, however, detract from the enjoyment of the elite (such a dirty word!) and those who aspire to be elite.



On to Gwen:

Quote:


Discrimination of lower ranked players is not acceptable, since we all started at a low ranking.



"Discrimination"? What a high powered instrument of political correctness to unleash! We can't be discriminatory! Heaven forbid! That would be almost as bad as being competitive, or Shocked blocking!

Ok, sarcasm aside. What is discrimination? Handy-dandy dictionary.com says:
Quote:


Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.



Err, ok, so where's the discrimination here? I'd say rating is a measure of individual merit, no? No one is asking for an option to not play against Germans (...hmmmmmmmm Idea! ). Why can't the rating system allow for people to earn their way through the ranks? By your argument we should let anyone participate in Wimbledon, or jump in the ring against the reigning world boxing champion. Of course Ticket to Ride is a much less serious thing, but the ranking system is a meta-game. If you don't care about it fine, but why do you insist on hindering it for those who do?

The funny thing is I'm pretty sure neither of you really want to play anyone at the top. You'd be deer caught in the headlights with your anti-competitive attitudes.

Phew (fingers need a rest), ok, I wanted to touch on the real world parallels to this argument that drive me nuts (e.g. the move away from testing and grading in schools, hiring or not firing incompetent people in public jobs, etc.) Let's leave it at this: The distinction between two very different meanings of the word "discriminate" seems to be lost on many people... One is a bad thing (prejudice), the other is good (to make sensible decisions; judge wisely).

I'm worried that my strong words might give the wrong impression. You've made arguments that I think are very wrong and I feel strongly about it (even more so because the real world parallels are pet peeves of mine!). I hope the sprinkle of humour and rhetoric doesn't offend -- I've got to throw something in to keep people reading! Also I'm not some hyper-competitive psychopath (IMO). I think there are plenty of players out there who would attest to my unselfishness in playing and helping them learn how to play better. Tex, civ, thaddäus, miket, Jacqueline, and many others. I have no issue playing lower ranked players and would continue to often do so even if there was a mechanism to be selective. I find many of them to be very good players and these I seek out and play because they give me a good challenge. I give them the opportunity to take points from me; the best way to get another game from me is to beat me! Thaddäus almost single-handedly dropped me 50 pts over a few days and continued to play her. I share my strategies openly, I often leave my games open to watch when I'm playing someone I think I can trust (even though there is a risk of being cheated). It isn't all about rank to me, though I do find that the ranking system makes it more fun and adds a lot. I'm certain that I'd have stopped playing very early on if it wasn't there. On the other hand, it is true that I don't want much to do with anyone sub-1400. I think it would be saintly for a 1700+ player to feel any other way. Having a way to draw a line would be great.

Rebuttals? (or reversals, please? Wink) Very Happy

[Mis à jour le: Wed, 18 May 2005 18:29]

      
Optimus
Senior Member
Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2006

Pages Perso
Messages: 279
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 12:16
AlexM schrieb am Tue, 17 May 2005 20:37


Who cares about the rating? I just want a real game! If I lose to a 1400, I deserve to lose 7 points. That's NOT what this is about.


I care about the ranking!
I have no problem with losing (with winning either Very Happy ) when I know it happened 'cause opponent did a better job. BUT if some from-luck-kissed-guy (German expression, rek Wink ) draws tickets 4 times in row and keeps 6 tickets he already had finished then I really don't feel I deserve to lose 7( Crying or Very Sad ) points. Because I think the ranking shows how good someone plays not how much luck he has (or at least it should)!

Plus, games against high ranked players are much more exciting to me! It's almost like a chess game. Thats why I enjoyed (and still enjoy Very Happy )the tournament games so much.

qwen schrieb


Discrimination of lower ranked players is not acceptable, since we all started at a low ranking



Well, this is a very nobel statement. But I think you can't force high ranked players to teach low ranked or new players. And nobody said: "Low ranked players must not play with high ranked players."
I think most of the low ranked players don't even want to play against those "blockers". They might have much more fun playing their way. I've opened a thread month ago myself complaining about blockers, because I didn't want to play that way. (but some thing change... Cool)

reck{} schrieb


No one is asking for an option to not play against Germans (...hmmmmmmmm ! Idea).


I can imagin why this sounds attraktiv to you Wink

[Mis à jour le: Thu, 19 May 2005 19:53]

      
thekid
Senior Member
Vainqueur AdR European Map Championship 2010

Messages: 1054
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 12:42
I'll chime in here. I don't care how many points I win or lose when playing a game. I have payed many 3000 and now 4000 ranked players. I would say I win at least 95% if not more. Most of these games are not close and are quite simply boring as I just lay my tracks and blow them away. The rare loss comes from the ticket fiend. It really isn't any fun for me to play such non competitive games.
      
Optimus
Senior Member
Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2006

Pages Perso
Messages: 279
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 13:12
thekid schrieb am Wed, 18 May 2005 12:42

... I don't care how many points I win or lose when playing a game. ...


I wouldn't care either if I'd be 23 points ahead of the next player in the list. So, as long as that isn't the case I do care.

[Mis à jour le: Thu, 19 May 2005 19:54]

      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 14:29
Rek,

What an absolutely awesome post. You (and Optimus) hit the nail on the head so hard that I really don't have much more to say here, except to stress the point that, despite how any of you feel about lower ranked players and 'elitist' attitudes, there are lots of accounts out there that are sub-1400 and play like gangbusters. These are likely second accounts for high-ranked people, so we can probably safely assume there is lots of 'padding' going on. So opening up the histories AND being able to limit ratings of people you play would go a LONG way toward solving the cheating problem.

Still have heard nothing from DoW. A new version is coming out with Ticket to Ride Europe. Brice, are some of these changes going to take effect then? And when (approximately) will this happen?


SKM
      
*player76100
Junior Member

Messages: 11
Enregistré(e) en :
February 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 16:47
I think "elitist" attitude is way off the mark. In fact, I believe that there are more people in the lower score spectrum that would appreciate this feature than there are in the high end. This would probably make 1500 or so on the lower end happy verses maybe 200 on the high end. If somebody doesn't want to be competitive, that's fine, but it's not the way I play and unfortunately, I've made a lot of people irritated. I was once told that I played unfair and that the object was to complete as many tickets as possible, not to win...yes, that's right, NOT TO WIN! Clearly, this person would be much happier playing somebody less competitive. I think there are just as many people that feel this way verses those crazy people playing to win. For that reason, I think that it's a feature that would make everybody happy. Just my thought for whatever that's worth. On a side note - this whole attitude reminds me of the Buddy Bears from the old Garfield cartoons, if anyone has seen this you'll know what I mean.
      
*player76100
Junior Member

Messages: 11
Enregistré(e) en :
February 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 17:35
To add to what I wrote. If a "non competitive" person says the object is not to win, then what is it that they are so upset about? Shouldn't they be happy with the outcome of the game no matter what? This should probably be a whole new thread in itself.
      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 18:36
Optimus wrote on Wed, 18 May 2005 03:16


reck{} schrieb


No one is asking for an option to not play against Germans (...hmmmmmmmm ! Idea).


I can imagin why this sounds attraktiv to you Wink


Rolling Eyes

No, you I would play anytime! You are an honourary non-German! Wink
      
*player49521
Junior Member

Messages: 8
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 19:07
I'm split on the issue. I'm a sub-1500 player that wants to get better, but I probably don't play enough to get "really good" consistently.

I would suggest adding channels, similar to the system set up for Blizzard's Warcraft/Starcraft series (Battle.net). You click on a channel ("Newbies", "Ladder", etc...) which will at least get some segregation to the groups. You then start games from within the channel and can't chat with people outside the channel...

      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 19:23
karlori wrote on Wed, 18 May 2005 10:07

I'm split on the issue. I'm a sub-1500 player that wants to get better, but I probably don't play enough to get "really good" consistently.

I would suggest adding channels, similar to the system set up for Blizzard's Warcraft/Starcraft series (Battle.net). You click on a channel ("Newbies", "Ladder", etc...) which will at least get some segregation to the groups. You then start games from within the channel and can't chat with people outside the channel...




Multiple channels for chat would be nice, but probably a non-trivial amount of work. Often I'm not even playing, but just chatting with other players and it strikes me that it isn't really the best chat program out there. Wink

Why are you split on the issue? Nothing about it would keep anyone from becoming a better player.

Right now there is no specific proposal on the table that we are discussing, so it is hard to argue about what the consequences will be.

Here's what I would propose:

You can set a rating range that your opponent(s) must be within. The lower bounds of the range cannot be more than 150 pts less than your rating. The upper bounds cannot be less than 150 pts more than your rating. So a 1500 player could set a range from 1350 to 1650, or they could make it broader on either side.

The whole point is to help people to find a good match. It won't stop people from progressing. Starcraft is a great example of this. It was very easy find a good matchup. And like T2R it was completely silly to have a top ranked player playing a low ranked player. Neither would get anything from the experience.

It would be nice if the settings were persistent (this goes for some of the other defaults too, like Observation, and number of players).

[Mis à jour le: Wed, 18 May 2005 19:25]

      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 19:32
rek{} wrote on Wed, 18 May 2005 13:23



The whole point is to help people to find a good match. It won't stop people from progressing. Starcraft is a great example of this. It was very easy find a good matchup. And like T2R it was completely silly to have a top ranked player playing a low ranked player. Neither would get anything from the experience.

It would be nice if the settings were persistent (this goes for some of the other defaults too, like Observation, and number of players).




I agree except that I think your original suggestion was better... 100 points. 150 is a bit too broad, in my opinion, especially in a game where 99% of players probably fall within 300 points anyway (1400-1700).

I LOVED Starcraft (and Warcraft II). Makes me want to break it out and play again. It's been years. Very Happy

[Mis à jour le: Wed, 18 May 2005 19:36]

      
*player50072
Senior Member

Messages: 109
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 21:19
The philosophical discussion about discrimination may be intellectually interesting. I play who ever I want, among those persons who want to play me. I choose T2R opponents, friends and sex partners for reasons, others might find prejudiced. And I don't care. Period.

Personally, I don't play guests, because I want to know who I'm playing. Personally, I find it even interesting to play people with 1300 points and newbies, just because it's a challenge to make absolutely sure, I will win, even if those are lucky ticket fiends. Few times I lose. 20 wins equal one loss. With people below 1300 points, I have a 100% ratio. In total, I don't make or lose points with these players. That tells me, that Elo is just a fair system.

I like the idea of setting rank limits. But I like more the idea of having channels or chat rooms.

Appropriate ranking levels is only one way to select opponents. There are many more distinctions possible: blockers and sugar-on-top-players, guests and members, quitters and anti-quitters (as I am, I never quit and refuse to play anybody who quits without strong excuse), social players or serious-for-ranking-players or whatever. If DoW had to implement all that in software, that would be quite a lot of work.

Channels or chat rooms would allow people to self-organize and change the way they select their buddies.
      
*player25691
Member

Messages: 36
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 22:24
SKMorefield wrote on Wed, 18 May 2005 13:32

especially in a game where 99% of players probably fall within 300 points anyway (1400-1700).


Where are you playing? The majority of people I play are under 1400.
      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Wed, 18 May 2005 22:46
AlexM wrote on Wed, 18 May 2005 16:24

SKMorefield wrote on Wed, 18 May 2005 13:32

especially in a game where 99% of players probably fall within 300 points anyway (1400-1700).


Where are you playing? The majority of people I play are under 1400.



Ouch, sorry. Not sure what I was thinking there. I guess 1400 starts around rank 1500-2000 or so? But still, 1300-1700 is not that big to limit it as far wide as 150. I still think 100 would be better. But 150 would be a compromise and better than nothing, if DoW so chooses.

I'm not sure the majority I play is under 1400, probably would guess somewhat higher than that, but I tend to try to play more ranked people I know or find ranked people who are logged online to 'call out.' Smile But that doesn't always work.



      
onyx puffin LOL
Senior Member

Messages: 1770
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Thu, 19 May 2005 14:32
mixed feelings on this. Still wish there were a ranking system for 2-3 player games and 4-5 player games.
My experience with 2000+ ranked players indicates they play for fun, and get mad when in a two player, one goes out fast or blocks them. Also, they are the ones generally jumping into 4 player games, and take a two for what they think will be a quick fun game. Then when trounced, they do get mad.
having a seprate ranking would on those categories I think would really help.
But I will take my 90% win rate, knowing that 9 wins gains 9 points to the one -6 point loss. Net gain helps.
      
pilke
Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 93
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Thu, 19 May 2005 15:28
SKMorefield wrote on Tue, 17 May 2005 17:31

If anyone else reads this thread and wants these 2 features, please post a 'yes'. I don't know if the devs missed this thread but they have not replied as yet.


I haven't had time to read everything what is written after SKM, but my answer is YES!

"Limit games by rating" Does rating mean score or rank? I think it would be better to limit it by score.

And one very important feature for me would be that the gamelist would have 60 newest games instead of 60 oldest games.
I love to follow the tuornament games and nowadays it is frustrating to try to do it when crowded.
      
Caboose
Senior Member
First Lieutenant

Pages Perso
Messages: 1628
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Thu, 19 May 2005 18:43
I expected this type of response...and just proves the point of "elitist"...all the top people want it and everyone below them are up or down.

And then people will leave and then alas no one will play again except a select few. This has happen in other online games and then people start showing up since it is no longer fun. Obviously you folks don't care about the FUN factor..that is all the game is.

Have fun - and remember to turn out the lights whomever the last person is around!
      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Thu, 19 May 2005 19:11
Caboose wrote on Thu, 19 May 2005 09:43

I expected this type of response...and just proves the point of "elitist"...all the top people want it and everyone below them are up or down.


So any disagreement serves to prove your point? Nice.
Quote:


And then people will leave and then alas no one will play again except a select few. This has happen in other online games and then people start showing up since it is no longer fun. Obviously you folks don't care about the FUN factor..that is all the game is.

Have fun - and remember to turn out the lights whomever the last person is around!

Please tell us why you think the proposal would hurt the game. People spent a lot of time addressing your concerns and all you've done is restate the same points that have already been countered. Did you read the replies?

Taking the game seriously isn't incompatible with it being fun!


[Mis à jour le: Thu, 19 May 2005 19:27]

      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Thu, 19 May 2005 19:46
Caboose wrote on Thu, 19 May 2005 12:43

I expected this type of response...and just proves the point of "elitist"...all the top people want it and everyone below them are up or down.

And then people will leave and then alas no one will play again except a select few. This has happen in other online games and then people start showing up since it is no longer fun. Obviously you folks don't care about the FUN factor..that is all the game is.

Have fun - and remember to turn out the lights whomever the last person is around!



I think people leaving because of changes in the rating system is the last thing DoW has to worry about. In fact, were it not for the rating system I doubt there would be as many people playing as many games online as there are. Most people would play a few games, then lose interest. I know I would. As Rek stated in his excellent post (which still stands unrefuted), the ratings system provides a meta-game that makes each game bigger than that game alone, which is why so many people play online every day, which is why we ALL are able to find someone to play anytime we want.

Aside from calling our arguments 'elitist', you offered nothing to counter all that has been offered in this thread. Why not have options that make it fun for all, even us 'competitive' types? If you don't want to be competitive nobody is twisting your arm. But if you don't want to be competitive, why do you care about the ratings system or who you get to play anyway??

Ah, but that's the great paradox, now isn't it?



SKM
      
Caboose
Senior Member
First Lieutenant

Pages Perso
Messages: 1628
Enregistré(e) en :
May 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 02:00
SKMorefield wrote on Thu, 19 May 2005 11:46



I think people leaving because of changes in the rating system is the last thing DoW has to worry about. In fact, were it not for the rating system I doubt there would be as many people playing as many games online as there are. Most people would play a few games, then lose interest. I know I would. As Rek stated in his excellent post (which still stands unrefuted), the ratings system provides a meta-game that makes each game bigger than that game alone, which is why so many people play online every day, which is why we ALL are able to find someone to play anytime we want.
SKM


I doubt that - you mean you wouldn't play the game IF there was no rankings? Gee, the board game has no rankings - so you dont play that? Nice try..doesn't work. In addition, there have been numerous software testing cases, that people would play a game MORE without rankings (or variations of that) vs one with rankings. When those cases show the opposite, maybe I'll think like you folks - but so far, you've got a LONG ways to go to prove this.

SKMorefield wrote on Thu, 19 May 2005 11:46


Aside from calling our arguments 'elitist', you offered nothing to counter all that has been offered in this thread. Why not have options that make it fun for all, even us 'competitive' types? If you don't want to be competitive nobody is twisting your arm. But if you don't want to be competitive, why do you care about the ratings system or who you get to play anyway??


So far, I think elitist is well deserved - have heard from like about 5 or so people on this item. And, without looking at the ranks, I bet they probably are in the top 20-30. I rather think of the majority vs the minority...an item that serves the majority is always (but NOT always) better than the minority.

And the private game option still is option to use. I believe, and this is probably the opinion of most of the people, that they could CARE less who they play as long as they play. So let's end this discussion right now and carry on with other items. You of course are free to carry on - but I have no plans to do so.
      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 03:17
Caboose wrote on Thu, 19 May 2005 17:00


I doubt that - you mean you wouldn't play the game IF there was no rankings? Gee, the board game has no rankings - so you dont play that? Nice try..doesn't work. In addition, there have been numerous software testing cases, that people would play a game MORE without rankings (or variations of that) vs one with rankings. When those cases show the opposite, maybe I'll think like you folks - but so far, you've got a LONG ways to go to prove this.



Ok, great, we are inching towards a meaningful point here. Now you just need to give references to the "numerous software testing cases". A board game is a totally different thing. It takes an hour or more to play and you do it in a much more social setting. I doubt very much that anyone has played 200 live games of Ticket to Ride, let alone 2000.

The board game and the online game are two different things. The online game is so quick and anonymous that you need the rankings. I wouldn't have played more than 100 games if there were no rankings.

I work in the software industry, by the way, and it seems pretty improbable to me that any study such as the ones you suggest have ever been conducted.

Quote:


So far, I think elitist is well deserved - have heard from like about 5 or so people on this item. And, without looking at the ranks, I bet they probably are in the top 20-30.


I don't see a lot of support for your point of view from the vast majority of people who aren't in this elite category. It is true that when I was lower ranked I really didn't care who I played at all. As I got better it became more and more an issue.

You are currently rated 1434, under the proposal I made only 68 out of thousands of people would currently be in a position to restrict your from their games (at the top end).

Quote:


I rather think of the majority vs the minority...an item that serves the majority is always (but NOT always) better than the minority.


Cancer treatment and the Jaws of Life serve only a minority of people, are they bad things? Being against this just because it might make things better for people at the top of the rankings smells like envy to me.

Quote:


And the private game option still is option to use. I believe, and this is probably the opinion of most of the people, that they could CARE less who they play as long as they play.


The private game is a pain to set up. If most people share that opinion, where are they? So far it is just you and Gwen opposed.
Quote:


So let's end this discussion right now and carry on with other items. You of course are free to carry on - but I have no plans to do so.

You still haven't offered anything resembling an argument and you want to declare the discussion over? I don't know why you are so opposed to this, you seem to have some bizarre agenda or chip on your shoulder that I can't fathom. Sort out the reasons for your feelings and come back. While you are doing that you should think about SKMorefield's question: if you think ratings are so irrelevant, why do you care about this at all?

Anyway, you don't settle a debate by walking away... or at least you don't settle it in your favour.

[Mis à jour le: Fri, 20 May 2005 03:20]

      
eric
-= Crew =-
Entraînement au combat niveau avancé

Pages Perso
Messages: 3187
Enregistré(e) en :
October 2002
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 05:18
Ok, finally caught up on this thread (we do work, once in a while Rolling Eyes ). As evidenced by the arguments on both sides of the fence, this is an issue that is somewhat loaded (ie it generates strong feelings both ways).

What I will say for now is that there most likely won't be anything addressing this in the upcoming release: we already have enough on our plate w/o topping it off Embarassed We will consider the wishes and concerns expressed by all here at some later point.

Now back to our regular games Razz

eric
      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 06:14
Spoilsport! This is more fun than playing. Wink

I'd still like Caboose to post the references to the studies he mentioned. They sound very interesting.
      
thadd
Senior Member
Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2008

Messages: 253
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 11:36
This is really intresting!
I played Rek, thekid, Natural1der, airbus, etc when i was ranked 1200 and i enjoyed it; i am pleased that i had the occasion to play them!
I don't know if i would have known you in that way i know you now if i hadn't had the occasion to play you!
But everyone should be free to play games the way he wants to. Some days i really hate to play lower ranked players, just becuase i am losing my rank (bad days, bad games...). I admit that i am quite ambitous and i like to win and it is always a challenge to earn more points. That's one of the reasons i play online.
Other days i just open my games and i play whoever joins and i don't care about ranking, it is all about having fun.
But why not to be able to choose?
And if a lower ranked person wants to join a game which wouldn't be availible for him he can always ask for it!
I often asked higher ranked for games and i can't remember any bad experience to be refused (my charme???).

This goes to warner13:
don't care about our (my) free time and hobbies...
i play as long as i think it is ok for me and my family and there is no one else who has the right to judge about my "free time". I don't ask you how much time you spend in front of the tv...

In the german forum there was also someone writing threads about people spending their time here at t2r and spoiling their time in front of the computer. Who cares!
Go and try to convert people else where, here you only find addicted and we are not "convertible" (does this word existe in english?) anymore.
We play, and play and play and chat and chat and play and play.....







      
*player12013
Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 81
Enregistré(e) en :
March 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 13:09
thaddäus wrote on Fri, 20 May 2005 05:36


This goes to warner13:
don't care about our (my) free time and hobbies...
i play as long as i think it is ok for me and my family and there is no one else who has the right to judge about my "free time". I don't ask you how much time you spend in front of the tv...


Ahhhh, A good guy in the court of opinion in TTR online one day... and a bad guy the next. And without saying a word yesterday...

# 1... I am NOT judging. & # 2... It is a two-three day old conversation that I have already DROPPED. Smile


thaddäus wrote on Fri, 20 May 2005 05:36


We play, and play and play and chat and chat and play and play.....


Laughing Indeed you do Thaddus. Indeed you do.

*
*
*
And to answer your question, I like House M.D. and Law and Order. No actually, I don't own a T.V. I am too busy in the gym preparing my second ascent of Mt. Everest in Nepal, with my bikini model team. Of course, I can't do this until the Formula One season is complete and...

I'M JUST KIDDING!

Cept, maybe about the gym... WinkLaughing





[Mis à jour le: Fri, 20 May 2005 13:34]

      
SKMorefield
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 620
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 15:17
eric wrote on Thu, 19 May 2005 23:18

Ok, finally caught up on this thread (we do work, once in a while Rolling Eyes ). As evidenced by the arguments on both sides of the fence, this is an issue that is somewhat loaded (ie it generates strong feelings both ways).

What I will say for now is that there most likely won't be anything addressing this in the upcoming release: we already have enough on our plate w/o topping it off Embarassed We will consider the wishes and concerns expressed by all here at some later point.

Now back to our regular games Razz

eric



Thanks for the post and update, Eric. From a programming standpoint I am a computer illiterate, but conceptually I can understand how limiting the ratings would be somewhat of a coding chore for now since there are more important things (not to mention a loaded issue), but any chance of at least opening the game histories to discourage cheating? That would seem to be a very easy task (??). So far I haven't encountered anyone opposed to that.

Can you throw us a bone here?!?! Wink

Thanks,
SKM




      
*player44342
Senior Member

Messages: 202
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Fri, 20 May 2005 15:55
The time to implement rank limiting would be measured in hours, if not minutes. I'd guess the same for opening the histories. T2R Europe is on the horizon, I'm guessing that is where the bulk of the dev time is going right now. Fair enough, we'll always want more than there is time (/$$$) to do.

I just hope that if there is ever time for a few improvements DoW won't be swayed by the (non-)arguments that have been posted here against these proposals. The ranking system is cleanly a massive draw for online games and anyone who thinks otherwise is living in a different world.

      
rogue461
Junior Member

Messages: 10
Enregistré(e) en :
October 2004
Re:Please, please, please add this feature. Sat, 21 May 2005 03:46
Just to put in my opinion here...

1) *PLEASE* change the list to have the 60 most RECENT games. If you want to watch a game to learn about tactics, you want to be able to watch it from the beginning... not the last 5 minutes after most of it is already over.

2) I think that the game history should be open. I don't see any reason why that would be a benefit to keep secret from other players and having the history open would help to identify and curtail the dummy account form of cheating.

3) I am in favor of the rank limit option in setting up a game. I am only a little over 1400 in score, but I can see where a rank filter would help find fairly compatible opponents. With a rank range that has been discussed it would not prevent a player from rising in the ranks, but would help to prevent accidental matchings of obviously uneven skills. Hopefully thus creating a game that both players would enjoy.

...chris...
      
Pages (2): [1  2  >  » ]     
Sujet précédent:Online questions
Aller au forum: