|
Post by Speaker on Oct 27, 2006 23:13:17 GMT -5
Im guessing here but i dont think CS or SPM would agree with you on this, but i guess we gonna have to ask them! I can't speak for SPM or CS, only myself. And that is my opinion. Thanks for following me around the board though Tony. I appreciate you questioning everything I write, and really miss you on the ladder.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Oct 27, 2006 23:43:45 GMT -5
Honestly, most non-ccc teamers seem to only test a player's ability to thoroughly abuse a noob on the front of another team as quickly as possible. Hm. Some truth in that.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Oct 27, 2006 23:44:04 GMT -5
the "challenge" system is a Case's Ladder system and a requirement.
the type of game however, and it's settings, is set-up by the admins.
is it going to change? I don't know.
should it change? No, I don't think so - because:
although a player can get to #1 in a teamer, there is no system other than Case's to challenge that single player. Case's isn't set up for "team challenge" nor will they.
There ARE rules for how many challenges #1 can refuse before they lose the #1 position.
Since the rules are CURRENTLY as they are? The rules should be followed - it hasn't changed - so be it.
If #1 doesn't want to or refuses to play challenges in accordance with both Case and ladder rules, there's a rule that covers it.
It won't be the first time that a #1 loses the spot because of refusal to play challenges, nor I doubt, will it be the last.
(regardless of one admin's oppinion)
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Oct 27, 2006 23:45:31 GMT -5
and speaker? your recent posts reflect that "something has gone to your head"
please cool it and help keep the board as nice and problem free as it's been for a few months
thanks!
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Oct 28, 2006 4:04:57 GMT -5
Wow, what a pissing contest this has turned into. Tommy, again, has stepped outa the shadows an put it quite clearly for everyone to understand. As mentioned in Civ3 boards what seems like a hundred+ years ago... Cases is a fine system. Cases is set up for 1v1 play, checkers as an example and like style games. Cases was a fine and user friendly format to start a civ3( now civ4) gaming ladder, great idea, thanks for the effort! My understanding of challenges was (as most players in top notches play each other at least sometimes) any suitable game or game played after challenge would count. As pointed out, the 1v1 is the default or failsafe to keep the process running. wow, I reset my 'stats' today, took me one small game to get into the top 100 and in the top 50 after the second... come on, get over the numbers and civ it up!
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Oct 28, 2006 4:17:07 GMT -5
If a player Refuses or fails to do a Challenge Cant you Just force a report in favour of the Challenger and that would end this whole Issue
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Oct 28, 2006 13:14:53 GMT -5
come on, get over the numbers and civ it up! Yeah I've started losing interest in rank and stats (to an extent). I just want a fun fair game.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Oct 28, 2006 14:19:44 GMT -5
come on, get over the numbers and civ it up! Yeah I've started losing interest in rank and stats (to an extent). I just want a fun fair game. After losing half a million teamers this week I think I too have lost interest in rank and stats
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Oct 28, 2006 15:23:34 GMT -5
Yeah I've started losing interest in rank and stats (to an extent). I just want a fun fair game. After losing half a million teamers this week I think I too have lost interest in rank and stats Lol join the club
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Oct 28, 2006 19:58:21 GMT -5
I allways win, wonder why
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Oct 29, 2006 5:21:10 GMT -5
Yeah I've started losing interest in rank and stats (to an extent). I just want a fun fair game. After losing half a million teamers this week I think I too have lost interest in rank and stats Ugh you're telling me, if it wasn't for ctons I'd have a 40% win ratio.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Oct 29, 2006 13:34:35 GMT -5
I allways win, wonder why Self-deception. You lose 1 in 4 of your games...not close to always winning.
|
|