The community is better without player with such an ignorant attidute. Good riddance I say!

Buton

"The community"..... nobody will keep playing this game if the scoring is so screwed up. Take a look at half the threads on this forum - they deal with the scoring system. Instead of pussyfooting around someone needs to speak the truth before the idea for a great gaming network is screwed up because people try it for a few days and leave.

Fix it and fix it fast before many potential players bail on the game.

(and FYI.... I love the idea for this game - I play dice wars all the time).

bye chris

Ryan,

I think you miss the point of what I'm trying to say here. I love the idea of this game. I love Gpokr. I'm on here all the time and I want to see this game succeed. But this scoring system will end up ruining whatever chance this game has to become great. Look at the other topics in here. Look at most of the suggestions.... they deal with the scoring system and it's flaws.

I understand what you are trying to do with the scoring system - and realize it must have been a ton of work to implement. But, when you have to send people to wikipedia to learn how to get points - there is something wrong with that idea.

Yes, I'm being overdramatic... I'm trying to make a point. There are a lot of other games out there that people can play that have a scoring system that can be understood in a matter of seconds. I've played 20 games and I still have no idea what is going on. How can you lose points without even playing the game? How come you can get the most spots on the board for 3 or 4 turns - but still end up with negatitive points? How come someone can sit out the entire game and end up with more points than you.

There are too many quirks in this system and it needs to be addressed. Right now - while it's new - and all the gpokr folks like myself are checking it out is the time to fix this. I bet many others like myself will come here and go "wtf?" when the scores are tabulated.

I think you should read the ELO thread to the end. We were actually critically discussing the new system and have come to a conclusion that I think you missed.

You are correct Ryan - apologies are offered. I still don't agree with the system you are going for, but anything is better than the current one. My biggest beef personally is these folks that never play a turn - but since they aren't attacking nobody attacks them and they end up beating 3 or 4 other people that are playing. When I play - I am attacking, moving people, trying to win the game. Some people simply try to move into a corner and sit. Both of these are stragegies. But not playing at all and still coming out ahead doesn't seem right.

Ryan, the more I am playing this the more I see flaws with this scoring system. It is silly that people can sit out the entire game and be rewarded. At least at poker you still have to post the blinds and will lose money. Someone sits out so they aren't a target - and they end up getting more points. I was at a table with 3 people playing and everyone else sitting. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of "multi-player"?

If you actually deserve that score you worked "oh so hard" for, you'd have absolutely no problem getting there again.

If you can't win a game with a bad start, you don't deserve a high rank. That's where skill is supposed to come into play. If you only win when luck turns your way, you aren't playing with skill, but with luck, and should be totally satisfied by a system that measure your luck. Why would you want a system that measures skill, when all your wins have been from luck?

Mr. K have you played this game? Tell me the skill when you don't even get a turn? Tell me what "skills" you have that allow you to win when you are wiped off the board before even playing? I was up over 350 points, and lost 5 games in a row. I never even got a turn in 3 of them - and in the other two I attacked with 6 dice against 2 dice - and lost both of them (and was subsequently killed the next turn).

I'll admit I'm not the best at this game - but I don't suck at it. This is more a game of chance than skill. You can have 5 different territories at full strength that attack the same enemy who only has 4 dice - and yours will lose every roll... how is there skill in that?

Comparing this to a "skill" game like chess is BS. In chess - you at least get 8 or 9 moves to develop your strategy. In this game - you either luck out with good grouping at the start and good rolls - or you don't and you lose. Since you are penalized so much for losing... and you have no control over it - it is silly.

If I was a dumbass and went and attaced every neighbor until I was down to one army and then got killed - that would be my fault. But I'm not - there are many games where you are given 4 territories spread out to start with and no way of even gaining any more. The scoring system should take this into account.

so.... your here complaining about the scoring system while you could be out there Building your score back up. In fact.. why am I here? I'm gonna go play some more! :D