A discussion on the merits of the 4 quick 10 turn wins vs 40 turns 1 game
win might be relevant. How would you advise that that be taken into
account in the equations?
SIMPLE. HAVE NO EQUATIONS. Have no highly flawed ranking system that can be expoilted by a few, to the detrement to the many.
From experience most games end under a year
nowadays. So the 40 turn game is an aberration. The 4 wins on turn 10 is
a much bigger aberration of game slews. To have played in 4 games where
you lose on turn 10 (or similar) would be enough of incentive for players
to give up the ghost of playing as it is I think....
Which is what I believe will happen if a ranking system is imposed. Cunning players will join as neutrals, pile on one side, get a quick victory, then move on to the next oppertunity to increase their rankings.
Lots of little victories will be far more rewarding to the rankings, than longer, balanced games, with a fair chance of losing.
Darrell Shimel
···
_________________________________________________________________
Unlimited Internet access -- and 2 months free!� Try MSN. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp