All I can say is that there was exactly the same thing before and then we had 2000, 1800 and 1600 tables and everyting was fine again. Then there was the 1800 - 2100 gap again I think, and then it wouldve been sorted out to 1500-1700-1900-2100 as it will now.
relax, take it easy.

I don't think enough people are going to make it over 2100 to make your dream a reality any time soon Aliai...

i predict the 1800 tables to kick in within this week. which will in turn boost alot more people above the 2k mark. which will then finally result in giving 2100 tables at the end of june the latest.

please put in at least permanent 1900 table table ryan...

i love this game so much but i prefer playing with ppl who can play not with lunatics at 1700 level...i played a game and was winning all the way through wen 2/3 truced against me...no problems with that, bit gutted i dint win but i got -1 for 3rd place when i owned nearly all the way through...really frustrated

=(

lunatics at 1700 level? Pretty arrogant that girl, lol.

no no no, dint mean it like that lol

i mean that the game at 1900 and above is so much different and better... for example, very rare is it that u see 5v4, 4v3's early on whereas on the 1700 this happens quite a lot and people stake thier whole game on winning a 5v4...just little things like that made me say lunatics...i dint mean literally lol

u wud very rarely see that on a higher table because people understand the game tactics behind the game...

and also the flag at 1700 means absolutely nothing! on higher tables there is a respect and is undescribable for flags and between players...its just not there at 1700.

@aliaiactasunt

ur a top player, looked at ur profile just now 1900+ player, u ever play with top players?

if so, u'll know what i mean...

sarah please stop moaning.
EOD

i got two accounts in the 2K+
but I rather play on the 1700+ table, 'cause at the 2k+ tables, the players are totally weird.
They don't play to win, they play to flag.
Whenever someone is getting big, they are afraid to attack.
At the 1700+ I frequently see attacks on the leader. Why do you have to attack the leader? Because if he's the leader, you aren't winning. And winning is what it's about. Not holding out for 3° or damn 5°. That's not tactics, that's boring.
At the 2Ktables people are weird Sarah, you're lucky to be playing there.
Last two months I didn't play a really fun game at the 2K. But a lot of fun games at the 1700.
CU soon at a 1700 Sarah :) Join us, not the weirdo's.

I agree, Kristel. I prefer the lower tables, and one of the reasons I have not advanced to the higher ones is because I will play at any table, any time. I just like to play, and I still come in 1st almost 1/4 of the time, even with the lunatics. Still, in Sarah's defense I believe there should be the choice--I don't care too much about ranking, but it is nice to see it go up. I have been in and out of the 1900's 3 times in the last day, and it would be nice to have the choice of playing for fun where the stakes aren't so high, among players of the caliber Sarah describes.

What Kristel said plus

- Playing for a win means risking 5v4 and even 3v3 early. It's smart.

- Introducing the dom score was to encourage ppl to play more aggressivly.

- Flagging has no meaning in the game. As soon as the flag gets any meaning, the game is over. You are talking about diplomacy, Sarah.

- I have played with good players in December/January I think. I did loose the connection to the top some while ago, though, and I'm not certain what you mean but if I understand correctly I disagree.