SUGGESTION: Ranking system
Moderator: Defcon moderators
SUGGESTION: Ranking system
Ranking system: 3 reasons to set it up.
- Better gaming experience: a game with a ranking is 10 times better (for some players, like me) because it gives the game a real challenge.
- Automatic response to idiots: you don't need to worry about players who abruptly quit games, have disruptive behaviour or just have anti-game tactics, since they won't be able to connect to games with players of higher ranks.
- Boost the game's lifespan: if you don't have any kind of ranking, the game usually loses its charm after a short period of time, especially when you will continuously end up playing against players who have a much lower level than you. Also, if the gaming community withers, there won't be any mods, new patches, etc.
I'd also suggest to use a similar kind of ranking system as the Myth I and II series had. No game has ever bested that. It kept the player community hooked up with the game for over 6 years and gave life to a mod-developping community during all that time.
The Myth II ranking system had 2 particularities:
- Titles: there was about 30 different titles in the game (which always were displayed as an image next to the name); 1st player was called "the comet" and had an image of a comet next to his name; the 2nd player was called "the sun" and had an image of a sun next to his name; 3rd player was called "the full moon"; 4th player was called the "half moon"; [...] 20th to 100th was called the "emperor"; [...] 1000th to 10 000th was called "an axe"; etc.
- Intelligent point managment: you would get points in several categories and all the points would sum up as a total; in defcon, you could have points in single player diplomacy mode, single player BigWorld mode, [...] teamplay diplomacy mode, etc. The more points you had in one category, the harder it was to get more points in that same category. Also, one or several categories would be reset to 0 every month or so.
I really hope you'll take some notice of this post; otherwise I won't be playing this game more than a few days before I'll get tired of having no goal.
- Better gaming experience: a game with a ranking is 10 times better (for some players, like me) because it gives the game a real challenge.
- Automatic response to idiots: you don't need to worry about players who abruptly quit games, have disruptive behaviour or just have anti-game tactics, since they won't be able to connect to games with players of higher ranks.
- Boost the game's lifespan: if you don't have any kind of ranking, the game usually loses its charm after a short period of time, especially when you will continuously end up playing against players who have a much lower level than you. Also, if the gaming community withers, there won't be any mods, new patches, etc.
I'd also suggest to use a similar kind of ranking system as the Myth I and II series had. No game has ever bested that. It kept the player community hooked up with the game for over 6 years and gave life to a mod-developping community during all that time.
The Myth II ranking system had 2 particularities:
- Titles: there was about 30 different titles in the game (which always were displayed as an image next to the name); 1st player was called "the comet" and had an image of a comet next to his name; the 2nd player was called "the sun" and had an image of a sun next to his name; 3rd player was called "the full moon"; 4th player was called the "half moon"; [...] 20th to 100th was called the "emperor"; [...] 1000th to 10 000th was called "an axe"; etc.
- Intelligent point managment: you would get points in several categories and all the points would sum up as a total; in defcon, you could have points in single player diplomacy mode, single player BigWorld mode, [...] teamplay diplomacy mode, etc. The more points you had in one category, the harder it was to get more points in that same category. Also, one or several categories would be reset to 0 every month or so.
I really hope you'll take some notice of this post; otherwise I won't be playing this game more than a few days before I'll get tired of having no goal.
Last edited by flatrick on Sat Sep 30, 2006 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- level0
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:22 pm
- Location: Republic of Korea
- Contact:
that's good
wow
good sugesstion
that's just what i was thinking
good sugesstion
that's just what i was thinking
daset wrote:And as the Myth system, there should also be a "non-ranked" room for those who desire.
Of course, there should also be a non-ranked section.
daset wrote:And it seems that one could use the names given to the IV staff on the credits pages on the defcon site for the highest ranked. My suggestion.
This is a cool suggestion! Yeah, there could be a list of the top 100 players displayed every now and then (like the credits are).
Montyphy wrote:1) People don't always express their feelings towards stuff.
I do. I love you
Montyphy wrote:2) People hate polls
Hmmm. You sure? I can't really understand why if it's true.
Montyphy wrote:3) Give it time, this is a forum currently under heavy load. It takes time for people to read through posts.
That's true, but the title should be interesting enough.
Montyphy wrote:4) Read this
Didn't read it all through, but found the part on ranking systems interesting. That said, I don't think it's stupid to still make a poll like this. At least I make a statement of which upgrades I want to see implemented the soonest time possible.
flatrick wrote:I do. I love you
I love you too.
flatrick wrote:Didn't read it all through, but found the part on ranking systems interesting. That said, I don't think it's stupid to still make a poll like this. At least I make a statement of which upgrades I want to see implemented the soonest time possible.
Two option polls are pointless since its a yes or no, something that is better expressed in a post since you can gives reasons for your opinion.
I'd have to say no.. because as soon as you have a ranking system, you get people exploiting it to get a higher rank, and/or griefing in other ways purely for the purpose of gaining rank, no matter how lame (pulling a network plug for a second ot make peole disconnect so they're playing against CPU but get rank as if agaisnt people and the like)
Zarkow wrote:flatrick wrote:At least I make a statement of which upgrades I want to see implemented the soonest time possible.
Now I'm only hoping for some other 6000 players to do the same thing.
Hey, it's Mr. Sarcastic again!
Actually, I'm also hoping 6000 other plays do the same...IV would take even more notice of the upgrades stated the most often.
Montyphy wrote:Two option polls are pointless since its a yes or no, something that is better expressed in a post since you can gives reasons for your opinion.
I don't think it's pointless, since you either agree or not. You either want this upgrade to be implemented or not.
And the poll still gives you the chance of giving your opinion and reasons of voting yes or no by posting a reply. I doubt however that IV will be reading every reply and be interested in all the reasons you gave.
I think polls are the most efficient ways of giving a general impression.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests