Ladder for Multiplayer

[Burlington_Northern_3140]

The best two out of three rule should not be a permenent rule since not everyone wants to take that much time and it is not necesary to keep the game fair. This can always be chosen or defined as you and your opponent, "establish a basic idea of how to play." This should keep things simpler for new users and keep users from being tied to extremely limiting rules. The start, "any new challengers must start at bottom and work up," is allready defined in, "you must post a chalange to the lowest ranking user." It might be a bit troublesome to have to doccument the levels and all of the wins and losses so just post what you know if you want to. Hopefully this is reasonable. Does anyone oppose this?

[darthdroid]

I'm fine with all of it except I do believe for fairness these matches should be 2 out of 3. There are maps that are moderately inequitable that maybe you don't appreciate BN. Example: On Island hopping if both players are advanced and one starts in NW corner, that player is almost guaranteed a win as the start there is a short city with a metropolis....almost impossible to beat someone with that start if they know how to use it.
On Northwest, (a favorite of many players) many times one starts with 5 incomes the other has to completely move to a better location, again making it almost impossible to beat the lucky start.
So... Either it needs to be best 2 of 3, or we need much more complicated rules on which maps are ok and which are not. Lucky starts are frankly existent on many maps, the only way to avoid "LUCK" being a major cause of a win is to do 2 of 3 matches.
This is hardly a constraint, the match between crash and myself lasted maybe an hour to play all 3 games... And we are both very advanced players, which tends to make games longer, not shorter.

Consider these things BN, the way we did it worked well. If you don't want to require documenting all the map wins, that's fine. But best 2 of 3 should be the norm for a variety of reasons that perhaps you have not experienced yet. However, I'm fine with the idea that if two players want to have a ladder match and want it one map (winner takes all) and they add all kinds of rules they agree on, who cares, that's legitimate enough. However, norm rules need to be in place (2 of 3 should be one of them) in case they DON'T agree on how to play it, if they cannot agree, then they need to play by the "Base Ladder Rules" which are outlined in this thread I believe.

[Burlington_Northern_3140]

I see your point and think it is fair myself, although I don't want that rule or any other rule on fair game play, besides cheating, to be outlined. It may be seen as outrageously over reacting to a need for fairness. I have seen games which restrict you from taking any others finnished goods. It is completely fair for them but, to others and myself, it isn't how we want to play the game. I think that this way both of these styles and more can be used in the ladder and no person is left out. If there is argument between two users, they can cancel their game and refuse to continue. I will add to the rules that, "if an inability to continue through the ladder because of the other users rules and ideas", complaint is placed down by someone, it will be listed in the same way as cheating. The other player may be allowed to just skip them and continue on though. Is this fair and are there any other ideas?

[Kroguys]

1. I challenge Bob at the earliest time possible.
2. Please refer to number 1.


Would a disconnect be considered a lost?

Also I dare anyone to challenge me, because 2 poeple can only be called a step, a ladder it does not make.

[darthdroid]

1. I can play tomorrow (sunday) crash, and look forward to it

2. BN: I made a valid rebuttal on the 2/3 issue. You really didn't address the issue. While diplomatic, your response essentially said: "those are valid points, but I'm not going to address them and would prefer that on many of the matches it is essentially a dice roll, that sounds fun to me..."

I'm sorry, that is a poor rebuttal to a valid issue. I also think you should consider your own level of play...are you really qualified to define the rules BN? Can you describe the starting points on rivers run for example and which one is usually the best? The reason I ask is because advanced players would indeed have the same answer for which one is usually the best. This reveals it is indeed likely to be weighted on this map. This is now about the 4th example I've offered, the earlier 3 being ignored. If this ladder is going to be a dice game (1 match takes all as the base rule),.... count me out. Or perhaps I'll start a ladder suited toward advanced players on another thread.

I previously made the suggestion of 2 ladders, perhaps for the amateur players again, the rules could be different, one match takes all, etc. I really don't care.

But see it's like this: Say I play crash on YOUR rules, and we do NW. He starts out with zilch, having to spend all his $ to get to a decent city and start again (frequently happens)...I start out with 3 corn and coal nearby my city, which accepts both. Betcha I win, and betcha I don't really feel justified about it....so again, the final argument would become...what's the point of the ladder? To see who is the most skilled or to see who has the best luck?

Solutions: 2 ladders, one suited for advanced players with rules agreed upon by said players. 1 for lesser players who can do as they wish. Neither being mutually exclusive to the other.

Call it what you are wishing it to be: a "Luck Ladder"

Start my own ladder which actually ADDRESSES the issues brought forth here so far acknowledged, but ignored.

Forget the ladder altogether since the knowledge of the most advanced players are being ignored.

Wait til we get at least a 3rd advanced player and put it to a vote...

Personally, I would rather forget it than lose or win due to luck, my 2/3 rule is valid and overcomes this issue of the game.

[darthdroid]

Also, the only issue brought forth by BN is a time constraint... this is confusing as I already addressed it....noting that the 3 maps played thus far totaled about an hour.

2ndly: Any player who is willing to register on hookedgamers and join the ladder is certainly dedicated enough to play 3 maps to get their placement, or defend it.

I'm curious what the issue here is? Time is hard to swallow as now re-demonstrated.

[Burlington_Northern_3140]

Ok, It is a rule.

[Kroguys]

No can do Bob. Sunday is football day. Any other day is fine. GO GIANTS!

[Lordsson]

Hey hey hey. Look at that. Lunatic and Crash in a battle for the titel of 2. Naah. I must join the combat and take on the challange myself. Is there prestige to win, then I'm in.

Lordsson

[Kroguys]

Good to see you Lordsson. I haven't seen Bob lately, but I'm still here. Let me know when you want to play the 3 games. And let the fun begin.

[Burlington_Northern_3140]

Bumped incase anyone needs it for reference. (Namely Me!)

[Burlington_Northern_3140]

If I haven't gotten enough info or haven't posted the right stuff please tell me.