|
 |
Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:22 pm |
 |
 Author |
Message |
CYN
Admin
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
Posts: 1407
Location: United States
|
| Post subject: top players that dont play |
 |
|
I have been here around four years now and it has always disturbed me that players that make the top ten, stop playing on that account. I would like to readdress the policy that would reduce players points by a tenth for every month they do not play at least 3 games within that month. While some earn every point, some have been advanced by winning tourneys which is fine. BUT to stop playing on that account to keep your top rating i do not feel is fair.
This is my opinion and would like to hear others. Although I know of one that will disagree completely.
_________________
CYN
ITS ALL GOOD |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:31 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
MrCrabbs
Guest
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| MrCrabbs wrote: | I would probably not agree with points self-destructing but I would like to see what arguments were raised in any debate.
One argument against is that players do have lives, and do need to take breaks, and it seems a bit unfair. On a related note, the game is kind of addictive already, I think it would be bad for players who care about points to know that if they didn't play for a week, a fortnight or a month, their points would be cut. It is nice to have it as a game you can dip in and out of, and old players would be less likely to come back if their accounts had shrunk back to where they started.
I mean, thevery creator of the game has been away for over a year - players getting punished in terms of points for doing that seems wrong. |
| Bill2k06 wrote: | the pluses, are that players will look at the points table and see the top as achievable,
im torn between the two to be honest, and i think if in a poll i was asked i would say keep it as it is now, for the very reason,2 tournament wins and a few high profile wins, and you are up there.
also having a ''top 10'' ladder, show players what they have to aim for , and so that creates extra drive too |
| bezma2 wrote: | You have no need to play with that acc David. Its your personal acc and noone , even Kreso can't reduce your points . Its your personal record and acc and you have wright to do with it whatever you want ...play with or noth ..its your personal decision . We discus on that several times and I asked Kreso to protect all our acc . Thats the right way and the only way .
This Bill idea to reduce acc to inactive players is sad and patethic . Its like if world atletic federation decide to erase Bob Beamon record in long jump ( 8.90m ) so others can become new world record shampions in long jump . There is Bubka and many others . Why not erese ther records and start from begining ? Can it be done ? No way .
And one more thing... we discus many time about big prizes for tournaments .... and now its 70k for first place .... 70k today --- 100k tomorow .. and I even wont to think about prizes in future . Congrats to whoever decide to give so many points for first place . As long as I remember we decided in past that first place prizes would be max 30-40k .What happend with that ?
David ... for me and most of the players , you are ( for now ) the No1 on GM and first on record scale , and any reducing points or anything else , can't change that fakt . Thats my opinion . Bez |
| MrCrabbs wrote: | Bez,
I agree with your view about points - if they are fairly earned then it is not right to take them away.
About tournament prizes, check out this thread: http://www.galacticmag.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=33804#33804. It provides some interesting arguments for smaller prizes in tournament, and more spreadout points to players who get to the semi finals. |
For convenience I copy pasted views that have already been given to this idea. |
|
|
|
Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:46 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
trace567
Guest
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with the idea. But maybe to help those top players find games and keep their ranking, we could have a similar system to the ladders. So those high players have a chance to pre-arrange games via the forum.
If then they still don't play, I'd be 100% the idea. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:34 am |
|
| Author |
Message |
Magflag12
Moon
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Posts: 373
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
I am opposed to the idea. I do not think we have a right to force players to play on an account.
I am all for incentives to play, and I am even for limiting the amount of accounts a player can have, but not this.
_________________
If you're in a war, instead of throwing a hand grenade at the enemy, throw one of those small pumpkins. Maybe it'll make everyone think how stupid war is, and while they are thinking, you can throw a real grenade at them. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:38 am |
|
| Author |
Message |
bezma2
Guest
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
Who are we to decide what to do with other players points and acc .If he/she want to play or not with that acc its his/her decision and should stay only his/her decision . He/she earn that points fairly in game , did he/she or not . Than , people , the only way to be on top ( if that is what you wont ) is to play ( especialy in tournaments becouse its best way to earn many points in one day ) and that way , and only that way , try to reach players on top just like they reach the top in past .
P.S. I have one sugestion to those who want to reach top players fast and easy ..... maby 3-4 tournaments monthly .... that will help , for shure . |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:58 am |
|
| Author |
Message |
bezma2
Guest
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| trace567 wrote: | | I agree with the idea. But maybe to help those top players find games and keep their ranking, we could have a similar system to the ladders. So those high players have a chance to pre-arrange games via the forum.. |
Trace , they dont need you or any new rule to find games and keep their ranking . For example ...if you go higher than David is now , he will play with that acc for shure to regain his No1 status . Its competition . If David lose first or second place on scale , he will , for sure , play with that acc to go again on top . And , for finish , I dont see any problem that someone want to stay in top 10 . Try to beat them in the field , not on the table ( Pele said this once ) . Beat them in game , not on forum ( Bezma said this once ) |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:32 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
danielson999
Planetoid
Joined: 09 May 2008
Posts: 35
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
Top 10 "played" to get where they are.
Reduce will fail.
You dont have to play big pointed players to get to top 10 you have to play and win. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:13 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
DavidNobre
Ex Moderator
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 1024
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| danielson999 wrote: | Top 10 "played" to get where they are.
Reduce will fail.
You dont have to play big pointed players to get to top 10 you have to play and win. |
am i in agreence with u? lol ya ya i think so , well said daniel lol 
_________________
Just enjoying the life ;~~ |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:14 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
judd
Planet
Joined: 07 Jul 2008
Posts: 634
Location: All over the local papers
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
David,
Get yer self an avatar
 |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:08 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
MrCrabbs
Guest
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm. Don't you think it is a bit unfair if a top player refuses to play? I mean, it does stop others catching them.
A 2p game only takes half an hour to an hour. Maybe we could agree on what is reasonable, for example, if you are in the top 10, or 20, then if any player challenges you who has at least 75% of your score, you should have to accept?
That means David would have to give a game to anyone who got to about 237,000 points. And a player who had 150,000 would have to play a player who had 112,500 points. Not immediately, but you would have to agree a time to play, within a month or so, or get the points deducted from you as if you had lost a 2p.
I think a fine for refusing a challenge is a bit fairer than automatically reducing points over time. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 6:52 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
MrCrabbs
Guest
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| Bill, to help inform this debate, it would be good if you could say, for every account in the top 20 or so, when that ccount was last used in a rated game, excluding tournament games. |
|
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:08 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
Yiles
Moon
Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 441
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| Harold Coffin wrote: | | Envy is the art of counting the other fellow's blessings instead of your own. |
_________________
| Bruce Lee wrote: | | “When the opponent expands, l contract. When he contracts, l expand. And when there is an opportunity...l do not hit...it hits all by itself” | |
|
|
|
Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:06 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
Magflag12
Moon
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Posts: 373
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Don't you think it is a bit unfair if a top player refuses to play? |
No more unfair than anyone else refusing to play. I do not believe in governmental regulation in this particular case, we do not have the right to force any player to play, ever. We are more likely to make people leave the game if we do that.
_________________
If you're in a war, instead of throwing a hand grenade at the enemy, throw one of those small pumpkins. Maybe it'll make everyone think how stupid war is, and while they are thinking, you can throw a real grenade at them. |
|
|
|
Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:13 pm |
|
| Author |
Message |
MrCrabbs
Guest
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| Fair point. Well, like I said Bill should really post how frequently the top accounts have been used if he wants this debate to get anywhere. |
|
|
|
Sun Apr 05, 2009 12:04 am |
|
| Author |
Message |
judd
Planet
Joined: 07 Jul 2008
Posts: 634
Location: All over the local papers
|
| Post subject: |
|
|
| MrCrabbs wrote: | | Fair point. Well, like I said Bill should really post how frequently the top accounts have been used if he wants this debate to get anywhere. |
a players game stats are available on the rank list, here it tells you their position in games by number of players from the start. Just monitor it. |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Page 1 of 3
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next |
|
|
|
