Col Deadmarsh Posted May 3, 2001 Share Posted May 3, 2001 I can hear the cursing now and I haven't even posted this yet... If you're one of these people who are saying to themselves, "Why do we need more ladders? Don't we already have enough?", well I understand this completely--especially in the wake of the CAL ladder debate. But I will run the risk anyway because I think this is important for people playing ladder games at TH. Correct me if I'm wrong (and this means you Yobobo , but with the present scoring system, it benefits the player on the ladder to play as many games as possible to attain a higher score. Now, this is not so much a problem with people who play twice as many PBEM games as others but compare the guy who plays 2-3 TCP games a night to the guy who only plays 2-3 PBEM games a month. In the long run, those extra wins that the TCP player racked up mean more than the extra losses he took. So, I propose that we should have two ladders each for both the CAL league and the POWERGAMER league. You can (and should) be on both ladders but you would report the loss to the appropriate ladder. This seems like the only other major issue still not addressed and so I'm throwing it out there to hear what other people say about it. I'm not saying it's perfect but it may level things out considerably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted May 4, 2001 Author Share Posted May 4, 2001 BUMP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Williams Posted May 4, 2001 Share Posted May 4, 2001 Well, since nobody else wants to answer, I'll just say that I'm not for it. IMO, it would just add needless complication. I mainly just play for fun, however, so perhaps we should hear more from those who care more about their ladder scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted May 4, 2001 Share Posted May 4, 2001 I really don't like to be negative but I like to play fast, 3-5 minutes per turn on the timer, and I like to play other folks with cable or DSL modems (I have a cable modem) and I have never played more than one game per evening sitting and most games I play in TCP/IP end up being finished and somtimes started in e-mail anyway so where would you draw the line? I'm sorry I can be supportive of multiple ladders for tcp/ip and ladder play. -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yobobo@TH Posted May 4, 2001 Share Posted May 4, 2001 Nope, I don't like it. Does not make any sense to me. Look at my ladder ranking and I have played many games, TCP and PBM. My rank is low. Many players are in the same rank area I am and they have played many more games than I. What you are basically saying is we must limit games for players to make it fair. That would suck. I am playing a PBM game now with a guy I have played before. We finish a 2000 point PBM in less than a week. Some players like to take 2 months for a game. For your idea to work, we would have to limit amount of games played per-month for everyone. But since it does not help your rank I see no need Yo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts