"As far as lower "bracket" games I think it is a good idea to increase those initial ranges, so that new players will not have to wait very long before a game starts." ~ Crovax.

It is my understanding that Raptor thinks this way as well. Why? If you make the first bracket 1-50, sure you'll be increasing the initial ranges, but you'll also be increasing the rewards in game. a 1-50 game will give its top player 50 points, not 40. so the point system will become inflated, and the over all number of players in that bottom bracket will remain the same.

right now, if you win one game at 1-40, you get a score of
(40 +1)/2 = 20.5 rounds to 21. so you can enter 21-60 (or 21-80) games imediatly after your first game, if you had only entered one game at a time. how much do you learn in just one game? depends on how many inactives... my first game everybody was a multi, and req. kicked them out, so I won by default...

anyhow, this fast startability isn't going to change if the bottom bracket is 1-50. the top score will be 50, so (50 +1)/2 = 25.5 rounds to 26 will get you into a 26+ game. people want to get out of that lowest bracket ASAP, mainly because if they want to stay, they want to play other people who want to stay, and the lower bracket is riddled with new players who join a game, and never log in again.

hmmm... Raptor's original ranges were

1-50, 41-70, 51-80, 71-90, and 81-100

now, reconsidering, this does look slightly better than I had thought (at least the first two brackets), better on my reconsideration than a 1-50, then 25-75 in some ways, because you can't just pop out of the first bracket with a single win.

I see the main issue here as being that our first bracket is flooded with inactives. right now you can skip beginer games and head on right to campains, and with serious people that I have brought into the game, people I know, I have encouraged them to do this. however, I think to ferret out the good from the bad, the beginer games should be played again. anybody who doesnt go inactive (whether they win or lose) should be alowed into the first bracket.

with this as a buffer, perhaps the first bracket will regain some of its purpose. right now, its good for nothing other than keeping people out of 41+ who wont log in, and those who belong in 41+ have to skuddle through all that to get where they should be.

EDIT:
however, the ranges of the 5 brackets Raptor has suggested needs some explaining. I don't see how they could work even if I liked the idea of 5 brackets. your 41-70 and your 71-90 brackets are going to be a bottle neck, holding people back, here's why:

in the 41-70 bracket, only 41-50 lvl people will usually join, since if you are 51+ you will be in the 51-80 bracket. theres a 20 lvl. span in this gap, so more people will stay in the 51-80 once they get here. but it will be difficult for them to get to the 51+ because the games in the 41+ will not fill up as fast, since there will be fewer people entering those games.
the same logic aplies for the 71+ games... nobody is gonna stay there long, since the next level is 81+

if you are gonna add another bracket, make all the transitions equal, and cut the current range by 1/5th in each bracket to make room for it. thats the only way it will work correctly.

also, I agree with all of you that we need some way for people who have gotten in last place once or twice to have to shift down a bracket... this inflation of campain rank isn't good.

Last Edited : Tuesday, 28 September 2004 - 16:17

REQ, as usual, you seen the 'picture' clearer than most.

I agree that the narrow range brackets suggested would be a move in the wrong direction...and...the more open 3 brackets suggested by REQ is the way to go.

The narrow range brackets suggested would do exactly as REQ noted, ...they would minimize ranking impact even with a last place finish, helping to maintain a small group of higher ranked players. At the same time it would slow down the advancement of a new player, requiring more games and longer in game experience to achieve that highest level.

Allowing new players to gain rank quicker and giving them interaction with more skilled players will contribute to maintaining the player base.

thats right sugar.
also, as ector stated, with a 41-70, noone above 50 would join it as they would just join the higher ranked group.
and with so many groups, it cuts down the number of available opponents.

i think the 3 groups is best.
Basic (2-50, a beginners game must be completed to get past 1)
Advanced (25-75)
Expert (51-100)

This falls in line with the new troop/tech system for the new version as well.

There may also be a special (80-100) Master game. Or we can just leave those games to invite only for members that password protect their custom games.

blah did u guys not read about the -10 to the result for games over 50 so in a 71-90 game the points given out would be from 61-90 that way its creating a penalty for those finishing 9 and 10

Yep, I saw that...AND Fanatic's suggestion at giving a +10 for the winner. So...let's look at that, a 71-90 bracket, with a -10 for the loser and a +10 for the winner...what's the result? 61-100...what we've got already.

I think the K.I.S.S. method is the answer here...go with the 3 brackets that REQ suggested and provide more choice for more players.

BTW...K.I.S.S. = "Keep It Simple, Stupid." No reference to any player intended.

but i never wanted the +10 just the -10 and if it was with the plus and minus on the results it wouldnt be the same
cause the entry would make it hard for u to go in if u come in 10 placeand u go below the lets say 71-90 game and u end up 10th and ur now 69 u wont be able to go into that game no more...

I don't think we would need to do as Fan suggested for the +10 as well. But the -10 for the higher brackets is something that I think should be strongly considered. Because as it is now, one you get up to 61+ lvl you never have to go down, even if you finished in last place for 5+ straight games..

Req has indicated that is something he wants players to go down in lvl. That clearly isn't happening. so for higher level games, this -10 would do just that.

I do agree that the KISS method should be used in many cases, however, this mostly applies for new players. once somebody who has played 4-5+ games, they are going to understand how the scoring works and such, so for higher levels, its ok to add things taht are more complex.

I strongly disagree with the 3 bracket system that Req is reffering to. I do like the requirement of a Beginner game to get to lvl 2. but having a 51-100 range for Expert games.. that is just absurd. I like the ranges as they stand now. Though I do think the ones Rap suggests would also be good. Since this makes it easier for lower level games to start quicker. Which is a very good thing.

But to have the ranks tighten up as a player progresses in his level is also a good thing, so they can still be playing people who should be equivalent to their level. you match any of the elite players in this game against somebody who is in the 60 or less group, and that means the elite player gets a free castle, and probably wins the game because of getting it so quickly.