Knights and Merchants.net Forum

I had the idea of making some sort of ranking, I tried a tournament, failed.
Here is another try:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... l=nl#gid=0

Post in this topic the match out comes and I will update the spreadsheet.
Only matches from 2012 and later will count.

The reason:
I am tired of playing against noobs or with noobs.
You have 1hour peace time, for what?
To build a base. Then when peace time is over, you just role over the enemy base in 20min.
OR you have some noob as ally who is covering the other side/entrances of the base. Just to see the enemy destroying everything within a few minutes and having access to your base.

So, the reason is because I am tired of wasting hours of time just to see people quit or getting powned.
I also am sick of people just trying to get a quick win.
They totally focus on (iron) troops, if you survive for like 90min, you win because now they don't have any food left.

I'm sorry, but I disagree. Newbies (like me) should be able to enjoy the game too, without being excluded from the beginning. If we do this ranking system, people will feel very excluded if others keep kicking them 'cause they aren't on a good enough. And a larger community will mean more fun in the end, right?

-.-
Do you enjoy playing against people who just overrun you?
Noobs aren't excluded.
I don't like playing against noobs, I like to play against people of my own level of skill.
Now, noobs can play against noobs and become better.
Play well, build up a reputation and play against people you want to play.
If you leave, you'll hurt your rep.

Getting overrun is a key part of learning and evolving as a player. By pitting newbs against newbs you're denying them opportunity to learn from better players, and therefore become better players themselves.

Having reasonable opponents is key part of learning and evolving as a player. By pitting above average players against newbies we are denying them opportunity to learn new skills and therefore become better players themselves. Not even being arrogant here, its just the other side of the issue I second GWB here, Ive played like 20 games and won 17 or so and it's extremely boring to find out after an hour that the game ends at 1:03 basicly, not even exaggerating. And I'm not even a good player!

For not being kicked constantly, the player with hosting rights could be abled to add something to room description. So that you can see before joining the big text: "Only rank 9000+ players". Or "4vs4 newbies".

Yeti, take a look at other games like League of Legends, you will only play against people of your own "level".
This way those totally new to the game can play against others who are still getting the hang of it.
I am sick of wasting my time with extreme noobs and leavers.
At least 90% of the matches I play have leavers or extreme noobs.
Now I am noting the leavers on my "Black list".
Whenever I play, I first check my "Black list" to minimize the amount of leavers.

League of Legends is an interesting example, as I found playing as a newbie there to be quite frustrating. Other newbies wouldn't co-operate, or you'd be getting yelled at to go here or go there - commands which would quite clearly leave huge weaknesses. I found I never quite knew what advice to take. Of course it didn't matter too much, it was fun even if my record was terrible.

Thankfully I know from my experiences that you're not being entirely truthful when you say you only play people of your own level - ignoring the fact that someone could have stacked up tons of experience on another account, and simply started a new one and whatever other loopholes. The only reason I played LoL was owing to having higher level friends who played it, and sometimes I'd play games with them. My faults were quickly drawn to my attention, and I massively improved.

This game has such a small player base that if you leave it a while simply by playing with the more experienced players, newbies will rapidly improve. If you desperately want a game now without newbies, then set up a time with some people in the forum you know to be good to play a game. I really figure that's your best bet, alongside your lists. Newbies will get better, but leavers do just all out suck.

It makes me smile when I see Biuw dragged by some GWB initiative (read his name in List).

@Yeti: Great game we had today... Across the Desert, 2v2v2, where Yeti+Me got attacked by the other 4 players.
We resisted like enraged lions, but sadly 1 defensive side couldn't stand beyond 1:40:00 and then we got ultra-destroyed.

@GWB: I have my personal Ranking... I'm used to SAVE the players I meet into a category: Starter/Average/Veteran/Elite.
To create/order this Ranking, I write down the names of players on my game, and then analyze them watching the Replay.
If a name repeats (same player), then I have another proof to revalidate his initial assignment or categorize him better.

It's good fun if you like this sort of stuff (analysis), and you will spot the sweetest players.
For instance, I consider *E to Kamykos and Czechboss.

E out of?

Starter/Average/Veteran/Elite.

Doh, too obvious why didn't I see that.

I hate all this cocky "I'm too good for you." crap. Now I understand that it is frustrating to lose a game because you are teamed with someone with less experience than you or your opponents (I don't like the word noob, because it displays pride and arrogance), or to play an all-to-easy game against a new player, but any system where one gains points for winning and loses points for losing only Leeds to people disconnecting from games, swearing, rage, and unsportsmanlike conduct. If we ever have a ranking system, I would prefer one to pick their own rank voluntarily. Perhaps an option found under settings. That way, if someone wants to embrace a challenge (you only get better by playing someone better than yourself.) than they can bump their rank up one to see if they are ready. If not, than they will choose a more accurate rating next time. If a 100% new player chooses the highest rank, than he will just end up looking foolish so that shouldn't be a problem.
I've lost games with teammates who were of less skill than me. I've lost games with teammates who wouldn't attack when I attacked, or help me out at all. Not because they were rude, but rather less familiar with the game. As veterans, we need to be the bigger person and encourage people, not kick them out.

how many games did you play?
When I say noobs, I mean people who don't understand the game at all. (Like guys who don't have a barracks after 60min)
Those are the guys I don't want to play with. I'd say "they" are wasting my time, but I know they can't do much about it.
Also, you play for 50min and someone disconnects. I was the host, I say we play on or find a replacement, all others want to rehost.
50min of gaming + about 10min to get a game started= 60min of my time wasted.

You don't like PT, do you?
I play with everyone: with starters and veterans. In both cases, I like the game.
I don't think, that we need this rankings

I like peace time, though exploring is a bit annoying.
I (unfortunately) play with everyone.
I don't mind playing with noobs if the opponents also have noobs.
The teams should be balanced.