Public games are just not feasable...

[Bruceswar]

When you hit a certain point on the scoreboard, you cannot play public games anymore and keep where you are score wise. Once you get above say 2500 it gets very hard to maintain that score in public games. You have to work 10 times as hard to keep the score. One loss to a SGT cost you 50ish points. You win an 8 man games sometimes where you only net just above 50. Not that I care so much about the points or where I am on the score, but the score system is so bottom heavy it leaves a lot to be desired if you make it to a higher rank.

I hate to say it but I now understand why so many high ranking players go into private games only or the majority. I would love to play public games but I cannot play as many anymore. I just do not like to work harder than most of the people in public games yet come out on the losing end of things. I enjoy 8 man games and I won say 15 of the 30 I started and came out so much in the hole it was not good. I will be scaling back my public games as I cannot see winning close to 50% of any game type yet going backwards. Not to say I did not love the fun people I met in them and sometimes unexpected moves by some. Gave it some flavor for sure.

OK so flame me for being an elitist or whatever you want to call me. The point system is what it is and everybody can choose what they want to play and when. Anyhow I will be starting a few private games if any of the other high ranks are interested.

Flame on!

[Ditocoaf]

exactly. The whole idea of "your wins and losses balance out, reaching an equilibrium where your score is accurate" is flawed. Because that only works for a varied selection of opponents and games. You can throw off that equilibrium by walling yourself off in a different playing feild, one that only includes a certain, strategically-chosen map and settings, and high ranked players. And because it can be done, it is what must be done in order to reach the highest rank possible. Which is why score, after a certain point, isn't really an accurate gauge of your skill; it also becomes a gauge of how well you know how to work the system.

[happy2seeyou]

I play a lot of team games that are open to the public. I won one the other day and won a whopping 5 points. Now if I had lost, I bet I would have lost over 45 points. I understand why people can get frustrated with the points. I do however see a select few high ranks that play mostly public games. Risky, but without risk where would we be? lol

[Bruceswar]

I play a lot of team games that are open to the public. I won one the other day and won a whopping 5 points. Now if I had lost, I bet I would have lost over 45 points. I understand why people can get frustrated with the points. I do however see a select few high ranks that play mostly public games. Risky, but without risk where would we be? lol

I am a singles player so the risk are much higher. With team games you are more likely to win as shown by the win percentages. I like to play all ranks from cook to conquer, but I also like to get out what I put in work wise. For a singles player you can get wiped out quick by being targeted, suicided, or any other combo you can think of. Does it mean they are better than you? Surely not, but they might get lucky and win one. I am just going to scale back on my public games. That is the sad reality of it. I cannot take another 400 point loss in one day.

[Bruceswar]

exactly. The whole idea of "your wins and losses balance out, reaching an equilibrium where your score is accurate" is flawed. Because that only works for a varied selection of opponents and games. You can throw off that equilibrium by walling yourself off in a different playing feild, one that only includes a certain, strategically-chosen map and settings, and high ranked players. And because it can be done, it is what must be done in order to reach the highest rank possible. Which is why score, after a certain point, isn't really an accurate gauge of your skill; it also becomes a gauge of how well you know how to work the system.

This is not about working the system. This is about getting back what you put in work wise. I mean a person who is a cook or even a SGT is usually there for a reason. Not that they cannot be good, but generally they miss the small things that make a player better. For whatever it is worth my freestyle casual games of any settings or size show me as a Field Marshall. Which is what I enjoy the most. I will just have to adapt a bit.

[owenshooter]

agree with you totally bruce. i gave up on public non-team games LOOOOONG ago, when i realized just how easily one could lose large amounts of points due to poor play by other players in the game. even playing team games, you have to start at least 10-15 minimum, to break even, incase you happen to lose ONE (depending on the rank of the players on your team). i'm not a mega-ranked player, but i do lose enough pts when i lose to feel the pain. i still put up a non-team game from time to time, just to do something new when i can spare the points, and i really enjoy them now. however, i enjoy them because they are not my main type of game i play, and if i lose, the 30 or so pts are already expected to be gone, when i put up the game.-0

p.s.-happy, "googled goodies"? really.. sigh...

[BaldAdonis]

Boo hoo. Suck it up cupcake. If you lose points, then you didn't deserve them.

[Bruceswar]

agree with you totally bruce. i gave up on public non-team games LOOOOONG ago, when i realized just how easily one could lose large amounts of points due to poor play by other players in the game. even playing team games, you have to start at least 10-15 minimum, to break even, incase you happen to lose ONE (depending on the rank of the players on your team). i'm not a mega-ranked player, but i do lose enough pts when i lose to feel the pain. i still put up a non-team game from time to time, just to do something new when i can spare the points, and i really enjoy them now. however, i enjoy them because they are not my main type of game i play, and if i lose, the 30 or so pts are already expected to be gone, when i put up the game.-0

p.s.-happy, "googled goodies"? really.. sigh...

I agree totally. Winning 14 games and losing 1. I do not care what your rank is vs them, but your score should go up a bit from that, not break even or barely ahead. Being a singles player it is nearly impossible to keep the score up. Maybe I just need to shut up and take it like a man. LOL

[FabledIntegral]

I'm in about 50 games right now... SO many new recruits... I'm screwed I've been suicided on so many times... ugh...

Every morning I've woken up around 300 points lower...

[Bruceswar]

Boo hoo. Suck it up cupcake. If you lose points, then you didn't deserve them.

So if I win 15 of 30 games and come out losing that is bad? Remember these are all 8 man singles games which technically you have a 12.5% chance to win each one. I cannot see how winning 15 of 30 and still coming out behind is my fault. Seems like I kicked some serious ass.

[Bruceswar]

I'm in about 50 games right now... SO many new recruits... I'm screwed I've been suicided on so many times... ugh...

Every morning I've woken up around 300 points lower...

Yep and that sucks when it happens. You worked very hard for those points only to get suicided on. Sucks, but that what public games will do at times.

[BaldAdonis]

So if I win 15 of 30 games and come out losing that is bad? Remember these are all 8 man singles games which technically you have a 12.5% chance to win each one. I cannot see how winning 15 of 30 and still coming out behind is my fault. Seems like I kicked some serious ass.

It isn't hard to win half your games when other players aren't up to snuff. Escalating is easy to beat people who don't know the moves, and freestyle even more so. I've had 2 sets of 21 games against 5 players ("Freedom Isn't Free") where I won half, and they weren't new recruits. Plus they were the same 5, so after the first 7 games they started actively trying to keep me from winning. If you can't keep up against inexperienced players, maybe you should work on that instead of complaining here.

[Bruceswar]

So if I win 15 of 30 games and come out losing that is bad? Remember these are all 8 man singles games which technically you have a 12.5% chance to win each one. I cannot see how winning 15 of 30 and still coming out behind is my fault. Seems like I kicked some serious ass.

It isn't hard to win half your games when other players aren't up to snuff. Escalating is easy to beat people who don't know the moves, and freestyle even more so. I've had 2 sets of 21 games against 5 players ("Freedom Isn't Free") where I won half, and they weren't new recruits. Plus they were the same 5, so after the first 7 games they started actively trying to keep me from winning. If you can't keep up against inexperienced players, maybe you should work on that instead of complaining here.

I keep up just fine. Nobody can do anything about suicides, dice, and other unknown factors. Just because a player is lower ranked does not mean he/she does not know how to play. Just means their point totals may suffer from another game style or playing games like Doodle ass. Makes them no less of a player, but it can hurt if they steal one game of 10 from you.

[Ditocoaf]

This is not about working the system. This is about getting back what you put in work wise. I mean a person who is a cook or even a SGT is usually there for a reason. Not that they cannot be good, but generally they miss the small things that make a player better. For whatever it is worth my freestyle casual games of any settings or size show me as a Field Marshall. Which is what I enjoy the most. I will just have to adapt a bit.

I agree totally. Winning 14 games and losing 1. I do not care what your rank is vs them, but your score should go up a bit from that, not break even or barely ahead. Being a singles player it is nearly impossible to keep the score up. Maybe I just need to shut up and take it like a man. LOL

So if I win 15 of 30 games and come out losing that is bad? Remember these are all 8 man singles games which technically you have a 12.5% chance to win each one. I cannot see how winning 15 of 30 and still coming out behind is my fault. Seems like I kicked some serious ass.

According to the theory of the scoring system, if a Colonel can't win that insane percentage of games against Cadets, then they don't deserve to be that insanely far ahead of cadets in the ranking. It's what makes the scoring system work.

...Theoretically. But like I said, you can get away with having 5 times the rank of the average player, when you're not 5 times as good as the average player, if you choose your games carefully. That's what CC's about now, and I've learned to accept it. By not giving two sh--ts about score or rank.

[Pedronicus]

I gave up worrying about points and play public games. even at just a major I still get suicided on and it drives you mad.

[Bruceswar]

According to the theory of the scoring system, if a Colonel can't win that insane percentage of games against Cadets, then they don't deserve to be that insanely far ahead of cadets in the ranking. It's what makes the scoring system work.

...Theoretically. But like I said, you can get away with having 5 times the rank of the average player, when you're not 5 times as good as the average player, if you choose your games carefully. That's what CC's about now, and I've learned to accept it. By not giving two sh--ts about score or rank.

The scoring system will always be flawed. The only people who could have 5 times the score of someone are generally over 5K well if you count 250 point cooks than 2500. But using 1000 as a starting point you would need 5K in points. That is mighty tough to do. Maybe I just need to work that much harder and not lose at all. That will solve everything.

[Ditocoaf]

According to the theory of the scoring system, if a Colonel can't win that insane percentage of games against Cadets, then they don't deserve to be that insanely far ahead of cadets in the ranking. It's what makes the scoring system work.

...Theoretically. But like I said, you can get away with having 5 times the rank of the average player, when you're not 5 times as good as the average player, if you choose your games carefully. That's what CC's about now, and I've learned to accept it. By not giving two sh--ts about score or rank.

The scoring system will always be flawed. The only people who could have 5 times the score of someone are generally over 5K well if you count 250 point cooks than 2500. But using 1000 as a starting point you would need 5K in points. That is mighty tough to do. Maybe I just need to work that much harder and not lose at all. That will solve everything.

Fine, amend that to having three times the score as average, without three times the skill as average.

If you imagine that basic human logic skills are fairly competent, being three times as skilled as an average player you'd have to be very very very smart. Or just choose what games you play carefully.

[Scott-Land]

Boo hoo. Suck it up cupcake. If you lose points, then you didn't deserve them.

So if I win 15 of 30 games and come out losing that is bad? Remember these are all 8 man singles games which technically you have a 12.5% chance to win each one. I cannot see how winning 15 of 30 and still coming out behind is my fault. Seems like I kicked some serious ass.

It's hard to say what percentages of your games you have to win for you to edge a positive point gain in them, as the lineup will always be different. I don't care who is in it, if you're winning 15 of 30- you will make points. There are players that have done extremely well in those game types- some getting as high as 3700+ and maintaining it.

I do agree once you reach a certain rank, those games are not as profitable. You have 1000-1200 ( based on the rank you used as an example 2500) points to go before you will hit that brick wall though.

I say play them as long as you still enjoy them- just focus on winning and the points will take care of itself.

[Bruceswar]

Boo hoo. Suck it up cupcake. If you lose points, then you didn't deserve them.

So if I win 15 of 30 games and come out losing that is bad? Remember these are all 8 man singles games which technically you have a 12.5% chance to win each one. I cannot see how winning 15 of 30 and still coming out behind is my fault. Seems like I kicked some serious ass.

It's hard to say what percentages of your games you have to win for you to edge a positive point gain in them, as the lineup will always be different. I don't care who is in it, if you're winning 15 of 30- you will make points. There are players that have done extremely well in those game types- some getting as high as 3700+ and maintaining it.

I do agree once you reach a certain rank, those games are not as profitable. You have 1000-1200 ( based on the rank you used as an exampled 2500) points to go before you will hit that brick wall though.

I say play them as long as you still enjoy them- just focus on winning and the points will take care of itself.

Maybe so, but maybe I need more challenge. Sure I can beat up on the lesser knowing players, but what fun is that? My name is not Max. I like freestyle but damn it is so time consuming if you want to win at a high rate. I will be taking a break from it once these games end. I need to be able to go out some place and not worry if I am losing to many games. Maybe all my frustration stems from the fact I was so close to brig and missed it. I know it is a silly Icon, but it is one of my goals right now. Once I make it then I will not care near as much. At that point my score will work itself out. I will just have to go instead of 90% public down to like 40% I am in the process of changing that now. Public vs private that is. I find myself now enjoying the better players more and the games seem to be more fun.

[Phlaim]

First, I'd like to say that I agree with you, Bruce. Losing to suiciders and low-ranked people who just got lucky, isn't fun at all (we both got suicided in a game, I remember). More than often, I only join public games if the majority of players are between Captain and above, since most of them got there for a reason. Anyone can become Sergeant 1st.

Just because a player is lower ranked does not mean he/she does not know how to play. Just means their point totals may suffer from another game style or playing games like Doodle ass..

Was this directed to me? It feels so. I've played too many.

I say play them as long as you still enjoy them- just focus on winning and the points will take care of itself.

Yeah, well, there are many new maps and settings I'd like to try out but I'm a little worried of losing too many points. That's just too bad.

[Bruceswar]

First, I'd like to say that I agree with you, Bruce. Losing to suiciders and low-ranked people who just got lucky, isn't fun at all (we both got suicided in a game, I remember). More than often, I only join public games if the majority of players are between Captain and above, since most of them got there for a reason. Anyone can become Sergeant 1st.

Just because a player is lower ranked does not mean he/she does not know how to play. Just means their point totals may suffer from another game style or playing games like Doodle ass..

Was this directed to me? It feels so. I've played too many.

Yes I recall that game well, the one where we both got suicided on. I do not consider you low ranked. If you beat me more that likely you deserve it, or I missed on dice for a kill. Not all captains and up understand escalating well either, so we cannot generalize that. Some are terrible at it. I remember when I first started playing and got premium, I joined a ton of games and I was a noob! I played many of them with MikeZoo (Good player). Well anyhow I used to look at what he did and was like WTF? Why not take a card round 1? What is with that? Now I look back and laugh. I am shocked Mike never asked me to step out of his games. LOL Just something to mull over.

[Phlaim]

First, I'd like to say that I agree with you, Bruce. Losing to suiciders and low-ranked people who just got lucky, isn't fun at all (we both got suicided in a game, I remember). More than often, I only join public games if the majority of players are between Captain and above, since most of them got there for a reason. Anyone can become Sergeant 1st.

Just because a player is lower ranked does not mean he/she does not know how to play. Just means their point totals may suffer from another game style or playing games like Doodle ass..

Was this directed to me? It feels so. I've played too many.

Yes I recall that game well, the one where we both got suicided on. I do not consider you low ranked. If you beat me more that likely you deserve it, or I missed on dice for a kill. Not all captains and up understand escalating well either, so we cannot generalize that. Some are terrible at it. I remember when I first started playing and got premium, I joined a ton of games and I was a noob! I played many of them with MikeZoo (Good player). Well anyhow I used to look at what he did and was like WTF? Why not take a card round 1? What is with that? Now I look back and laugh. I am shocked Mike never asked me to step out of his games. LOL Just something to mull over.

No, I know it wasn't directed at me, but I found it funny because I almost went down to Sergeant from Major playing those games only. Had a loosing streak of like 10-15 games and all the lowranked players won all the time.

[PLAYER57832]

When you hit a certain point on the scoreboard, you cannot play public games anymore and keep where you are score wise. Once you get above say 2500 it gets very hard to maintain that score in public games. You have to work 10 times as hard to keep the score. One loss to a SGT cost you 50ish points. You win an 8 man games sometimes where you only net just above 50. Not that I care so much about the points or where I am on the score, but the score system is so bottom heavy it leaves a lot to be desired if you make it to a higher rank.

I hate to say it but I now understand why so many high ranking players go into private games only or the majority. I would love to play public games but I cannot play as many anymore. I just do not like to work harder than most of the people in public games yet come out on the losing end of things. I enjoy 8 man games and I won say 15 of the 30 I started and came out so much in the hole it was not good. I will be scaling back my public games as I cannot see winning close to 50% of any game type yet going backwards. Not to say I did not love the fun people I met in them and sometimes unexpected moves by some. Gave it some flavor for sure.

OK so flame me for being an elitist or whatever you want to call me. The point system is what it is and everybody can choose what they want to play and when. Anyhow I will be starting a few private games if any of the other high ranks are interested.

Flame on!

Well if your goal is to gain points. Personally, I like to PLAY ... even if I do lose sometimes.

Decide what you want... and if it really is worth just "sitting" to have that "crown".

[Bruceswar]

Well if your goal is to gain points. Personally, I like to PLAY ... even if I do lose sometimes.

Decide what you want... and if it really is worth just "sitting" to have that "crown".

It is not about the gaining / losing of points. It is about seeking out better players. Better competition if you would call it that. I enjoy this game a lot and I like public games, but I seek more from CC. Not that lower ranking people are less of a person, but this is a game of skill. Maybe I am trying to say I am a bit tired of getting suicided on or people chasing a 2 bonus in escalating cards.

[Optimus Prime]

Well if your goal is to gain points. Personally, I like to PLAY ... even if I do lose sometimes.

Decide what you want... and if it really is worth just "sitting" to have that "crown".

It is not about the gaining / losing of points. It is about seeking out better players. Better competition if you would call it that. I enjoy this game a lot and I like public games, but I seek more from CC. Not that lower ranking people are less of a person, but this is a game of skill. Maybe I am trying to say I am a bit tired of getting suicided on or people chasing a 2 bonus in escalating cards.

The problem I see with that statement is that there are countless very solid players in the ranks of Corporal, Corporal First Class, and even Private and Private First Class. I know everyone thinks that your rank is such a "determiner of skill and quality of play", but that's a load of crap in my opinion. I've got the skill to beat high ranked players without lucky drops or miracle dice (I've done it plenty of times), as do many others. The high rankers just don't want to come down to our neck of the woods and have a go at us.