You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I think before adding a third player to an alliance, I'd want to
institute a rule to keep it fair. What about something like this:
1) Two players may always ally to form a new team, no matter how
dominant that new team would be.
2) A player may not join an existing team (of at least two players) if
by joining that team they would more than double the score of the next
largest team.
This would encourage underdogs to band together to defeat the top
team, and discourage the top team from snowballing to victory with a
bunch of hangers on.
I think I could implement this change in a fairly straightforward
manner.
Regarding player ranking. I like Templar's suggestion of keeping
total wins, %wins, and total victory points as three separate scores
and simply report on all of them and let the player community decide
which one they care about the most.
If we ever get enough players, I will implement a ranking system that
takes into account the ranking of the players you defeated. But We'd need to
have a lot more players before it would be worth implementing that.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 20 Jun 2011 at 3:01
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
[email protected]
on 20 Jun 2011 at 3:01The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: