Forum
New Kdice : A Josélito perspective
|
Josélito Michaud wrote
at 8:25 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT
The problem I see with the new format is that there NO way of measuring skill level anymore so we end up playing with people of different skill levels. From the simpler kamikaze connector to the highly strategic monk.
Even on the 100+ tables, there is as much "bad" playing as on the lowest tables because everybody can just stay in the 10+ tables and gain as many points beating novices and people who just like to click on pretty colors. I spent 90% of my time on the 10+ tables and gain as much points as I played on the 100+ tables. So anybody really can gain access to higher tables, not just the good players anymore. I think that is where lies most of the frustration here. Playing against people who will do anything to attack even if it does nothing for them, destroying your "strategy" because they play illogically is what is irritating me the most. That and I think the point distribution is not optimized. ELO was good for one thing, do a natural selection amongst player of all skill levels. Well, feel free to discuss. I used all the English words I know. Josélito ;-) |
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 8:38 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT Query:
When you say you spent 90% on the 10+ and presumably 10% on the 100 tables, is this because you wanted to play at the 100+ tables only 10% of the time, or you could play at the 100+ tables only 10% of the time? |
|
suckmyballs wrote
at 8:43 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT Joselito: I think you are attempting to compare the 100 tables to the 2000 tables of old. I don't think this is a fair comparison. Perhaps wait until there are 500, or 1000 games and see what kinds of miscreants show up there.
|
|
Tenacious Dio wrote
at 8:49 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT Agreed.
|
|
|
Josélito Michaud wrote
at 8:50 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT @skrumgaer
I played there cause I like to know that if I play correctly, the most points I could lose is -6 (compared to -12 in the 100+). Plus I can always rack up more poinst as the leader because some noobies won't flag. @suckmyballs : Like I said there won't be a place like the 2000+ tables anymore because anybody, even a mad clicker can rack up points beating other novices. Today i've seen the worst player in my life and he had 79 pts already. ELO system was designed for that effect, create a ladder of players of different skills level. Point system will never achieve that. |
|
|
Josélito Michaud wrote
at 8:56 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT Another thing:
The current point system is creating chaotic play in position 3-4-5-6-7 because of the anemic proportion of points distributed for those positions. There is no point of playing strategically so everybody just "go" at it, suicide, or try to outluck others to maybe get +1 or 2 |
|
2Blue wrote
at 8:58 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT i agree jos
|
|
|
Josélito Michaud wrote
at 8:59 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT I don't want to sound like I'm whining, just letting you know of my impression.
I know Ryan and Sinth worked hard to make this game better. Just see these observations as contructive criticism. |
|
Gauntlet15 wrote
at 9:46 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT For all the times a disagree with Jose, I agree with him, some people have never played kdice before attack anything with no strategy behind it. I bothers me cause im stuck at the 0 tables when i was in the 2000's last month.
|
|
|
Tenacious Dio wrote
at 9:49 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT Again agreeing with Jos, I think that 1st and 2nd only receiving points (which happens in most games I think), is too stingy. And 1st only gets +15 or so sometimes... There needs to be more of a payoff for 1st 2nd and 3rd place at least.
|
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 9:51 PM, Monday September 3, 2007 EDT From your answer to me you prefer the frustration that you are complaining of, since frustration is associated with the same noobies that you are preying upon.
|
