suggestion - more ranks

[hunterw]

Sure this system may not be perfect, but it's already in place. This is simply an expansion of a system that already works.

Sure this system may not be perfect, but it's already in place. This is simply an expansion of a system that already works.

Sure this system may not be perfect, but it's already in place. This is simply an expansion of a system that already works.

[Dragon45]

Uhh, ladders ftw. Let that be your rank. If you're actually good, then you're good. Simple, no?

[AF]

I'd like to see a ladder setup so I can integrate AFLobby with it, but it'd have to be mod independant, allowing multiple ladder entries for a player for each mod

[Neddie]

I'd like to see a ladder setup so I can integrate AFLobby with it, but it'd have to be mod independant, allowing multiple ladder entries for a player for each mod

I could handle that. Anyway, Dragon, don't sweat the ladder.

[AF]

ah, great, pm me the details

[Boirunner]

First off, I hate how many of you are suggesting that a person's skill level remains static once they get past the initial learning curve.

That's not what I was saying at all. Case in point: I was a lot better then I am now when I was at 120 hours, because then I was unemployed and played spring for 4 hours a day. Now, I'm at 200+ hours and suck because I play a couple games a week, and when I play I just play for fun without the bitter commitment to winning I had. Maybe at some point I'll start playing in earnest again, and be better. See what I mean?

[Relative]

Haven't you guys noticed that out of 90 votes 77% want to see more ranks based on hunterw's ideas? The only ones arguing against this rather simple and superficial extension seem to be the minority whom voted against it.

[Ishach]

First off, I hate how many of you are suggesting that a person's skill level remains static once they get past the initial learning curve.

That's not what I was saying at all. Case in point: I was a lot better then I am now when I was at 120 hours, because then I was unemployed and played spring for 4 hours a day. Now, I'm at 200+ hours and suck because I play a couple games a week, and when I play I just play for fun without the bitter commitment to winning I had. Maybe at some point I'll start playing in earnest again, and be better. See what I mean?

Yeah this is exactly right


I got like 300 hours but i'm pretty mediocre now cause i kinda lost interest after supcom beta and the ladder stagnating

[jackalope]

wait, you lost interest in spring? I didn't know that.

[AF]

BURN THE HERETIC!!!!!!

[EXit_W0und]

+1 to 300hr, 500hr etc ranks.
I don't see it causing any harm at least.

I might go try AF's lobby client out if its ready, is it?
Might also be nice if you could have a personal rating system, where you mark players that you found easy to beat, beatable, just your level, lose alot to, or impossible to beat (maybe just have a number 1-5). Only you would see these ratings, and could use it to help you remember who is roughly the same skill level as you.
This might encourage more 1v1 games.

AF please implement this in your lobby client :)

[Pxtl]

Well, if the rank is intended to show how experienced you are, then stopping at 100 is absurd. I've a 100 rank, and I play almost exclusively AA/BA... and I still get absolutely pantsed by most moderately good players. Never played SpeedMetal, and avoid GreenFields.

Spring is really, really hard. It takes over 100 hours to get even passable at it. Now, if you want to consider "*" as "practiced", then that's fine. But if you want the star to represent the hardcore players, then you may as well go much further with the ranks.

[drolito]

Never played SpeedMetal, and avoid GreenFields.

Stop saying that sort of think ... all maps are differents and specially speedMetal and Green_fields ...

U always say : "thats noob maps" but if u want i play against u on them after playing against u on others maps ... i like to play others map but i like to play SpeedMetal sometimes ...

I think you are just intolerant against others who dont like the same as u ... like bikers against drivers !!!

But these maps are the most popular and most played map ... so u have to think !!!

[Relative]

Never played SpeedMetal, and avoid GreenFields.

Stop saying that sort of think ... all maps are differents and specially speedMetal and Green_fields ...

U always say : "thats noob maps" but if u want i play against u on them after playing against u on others maps ... i like to play others map but i like to play SpeedMetal sometimes ...

Well they are n00b maps

No, the problem with those maps are that the tactic and strategies (of lack of them in speed metal's case) are fundamentally different from "normal" maps. Thus the experience gained from playing these maps leaves the player very ill-experienced outside of said map type.

This is all off-topic, but whatever.

[drolito]

No, the problem with those maps are that the tactic and strategies (of lack of them in speed metal's case) are fundamentally different from "normal" maps.

different strategies thats sure but speak about a lack of strategy in speedmetal ... do u want to play against me on it to see that "lack" of strategy ? you may be very surprised i think ^^

But it's sûre this map dont requiere the same game play as an altored divide need for exemple ...


You're an intolerant player !!!

H.S

[Pxtl]

Relative, no, that's on-topic. You hit the nail on the head perfectly - I have over 100 hours of experience, primarily on the mainstream maps like Moon2Q0, Crossing_4, Small Divided, Altored Divide, (and more Castles than I'd like to admit) etc. I try and apply everythign I learn from other players. Plus I played AA back on the OTA platform, and OTA on TEN before that... only a little, I admit, but still. Either way, that's about as specialized as you can get in standard AA/BA gameplay. I've played EE, Gundam, and CVC once or twice each (and would play more if more games were hosted) - but still, I'd say that 95% of those hours were standard AA gameplay.

And, compared to even the weakest clanners, I still suck and die superfast. Maybe I should give up because Spring hates me and I am innately made of lose. Or maybe this game is just really, really hard and 100 hours doesn't mean squat?

[clericvash]

moooorrreeee ranks!

[Relative]

moooorrreeee ranks!

This is perhaps the most compelling argument evar!!

Edit: It's 78% now!! ha ha

[LordMatt]

Relative, no, that's on-topic. You hit the nail on the head perfectly - I have over 100 hours of experience, primarily on the mainstream maps like Moon2Q0, Crossing_4, Small Divided, Altored Divide, (and more Castles than I'd like to admit) etc. I try and apply everythign I learn from other players. Plus I played AA back on the OTA platform, and OTA on TEN before that... only a little, I admit, but still. Either way, that's about as specialized as you can get in standard AA/BA gameplay. I've played EE, Gundam, and CVC once or twice each (and would play more if more games were hosted) - but still, I'd say that 95% of those hours were standard AA gameplay.

And, compared to even the weakest clanners, I still suck and die superfast. Maybe I should give up because Spring hates me and I am innately made of lose. Or maybe this game is just really, really hard and 100 hours doesn't mean squat?

If you've really played that much and you still suck, you must not be learning what you need to to get good. I would be happy to play you 1v1 and see what your problem appears to be.

[DemO]

You can play 600 hours and still be rubbish. It's not just about playing the right maps you gotta play the right opponents.

You get better much faster by playing against good players if you can pick up on what they do then find out how you can do it better. Playing pub games on green fields/speedmetal/tangerine/tropical etc tend to average in with a lot more newbish players so you're not really getting a good challenge, and you probably pick up on other players bad habits/dont recognise what you're doing wrong, etc.