#26 09.04.2015 20:47:17

HanduMan
Player
Posts: 91

Re: A new (or an alternative) point system

I never said I disliked rankings. I like to get some reward for my hard work playing as well as I can. And also get some feedback of how I was doing compared to others. I just don't like the ranking system forcing people to play in certain manner, in this case genocidal. There will always be some players who play that way, and it is perfectly allrigth. As long as the rules don't require destruction of predefined number of nations for us to be able to end the game. So I am not requesting any changes to ruleset to make it harder to go on war path or easier to play a peceful game. Just more freedom to choose how to play.

The final score report becomes visible for everyone when the game ends. But there may be some issues to that. I did some testing on my Windows laptop yesterday. I set the end trun and when that turn was over (the end turn is the last playable one) one of the two attached clients chrashed and in the other I could see the score tab appear just before the server cicked it out and restarted the game. tongue After a couple of retries I managed to keep the clients logged in and actually read the score report. And log out and in again and get the report one more time. The default behaviour of freeciv server at the end of the game is to wait until all clients have disconnected and then restart the game. I didn't find an option to prevent restarting (didn't look too hard either). 

I also checked the source code from freeciv trunk which holds the most recent versions. The unit parts still remain in the score calculation. They had also added there something called 'culture' which is probably some 2.5 thingy. So I'm afraid the Math of Freeciv is a bit inaccurate with this issue.

Offline

#27 09.04.2015 21:51:20

Corbeau
Player
Posts: 217

Re: A new (or an alternative) point system

Is there a way to force historian reports?

Offline

#28 10.04.2015 05:31:29

mmm2
Player
Posts: 565

Re: A new (or an alternative) point system

wieder wrote:

In LT30 there were 20-40 nations teaming up to kill 3 nations. Then again in LT31 we had an alliance of maybe 20+ nations doing the almost same thing. This can't be avoided but it can be discouraged. The game is more interesting to many people if this is discouraged. Just like the game can be more interesting to some people if there are no restrictions for going this.

Wieder:
You/Admin's tried to solve problem, but by solving problem, you created new one: now noob/casual players are always going to lose. If the noob team really won Lt30!!??? that is amazing accomplishment, why not to CONGRATULATE THEM for impressive feat instead of PUNISHING THEM by imposing this idiotic rule to limit them to small team size???? I was actually very impressed with the "Church team" in Lt31 - it was becoming somewhat of a legend - why to stop this???

If you want rule change, you should write the code like maho, but since this rule is ambiguous and undefined anyway, you would not be able to!! So, if you want real rule, it should be written into game and validated by server. Players are going to get around rules and not pay attention to them if they are really motivated to win. It is same way as if Government announces ambiguous and undefined rule to citizens: most often it will be ignored. If the citizens do follow the undefined rules, they are usually at a disadvantage to those that are unaware of the rule or don't pay attention to it and thus earn more money, etc by being unhindered by it...

I would also like to mention that last Lt33 was spoiled due to the fact that there was disagreement and squabbling among my team about this very rule about team size. Everyone had there own interpretation of it, despite the many pages of forum threads about it... If not for this rule, we may have been able to counter against your "all star" team.. but there was major disagreement about people's interpretation, and our team actually split in half because of it and then began fighting each other instead.. This rule greatly assisted your all-star team to have an even easier victory... smile...

Last edited by mmm2 (10.04.2015 06:29:54)

Offline

#29 10.04.2015 08:10:12

Corbeau
Player
Posts: 217

Re: A new (or an alternative) point system

mmm2 wrote:

I would also like to mention that last Lt33 was spoiled due to the fact that there was disagreement and squabbling among my team about this very rule about team size. Everyone had there own interpretation of it, despite the many pages of forum threads about it... If not for this rule, we may have been able to counter against your "all star" team.. but there was major disagreement about people's interpretation, and our team actually split in half because of it and then began fighting each other instead..

Well, then it's not the rule's fault, it's the team's fault, right? Nobody forced those players to squabble wink

Offline

#30 10.04.2015 11:08:01

wieder
Administrator
Posts: 700

Re: A new (or an alternative) point system

"You/Admin's tried to solve problem, but by solving problem, you created new one: now noob/casual players are always going to lose"

In LT30 the winners were aloril, wieder, cgalik, munk, duncan_shriek, jhh, ollikka, kevin551, modeemirotta and elrik.

I don't think all of them were casual players even at that time. LT30 had lots of issues and believe me, some serious ones akfaew tried to solve at a later time as I was also trying to figure out with LT34.

If you don't like the limits, we can of course change the rankings limits or introduce another ranking for those players who feel that the current ranking is not for them. I know both rankings may inspire some people to play in a certain way, but I don't see how that could be changed.

In LT31 many people joined The Church of Sim City Playing because they felt that it was not possible to win the game by T180 and it really didn't matter. The turn limit was a major annoyance for some players since they believed that it would have been possible to actually conquer the world by T190. Not that it really matters big_smile

How about having another ranking in the future? Probably not for LT35 if it's a team game with 2 teams. Or?

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB