13-04-2002 05:58									#1
	1 Vs 1 Ratings Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Should we start to rate one vs one games? If so how do we control or monitor them/rate them.

Should we rate them by game wins ie: end game winner.

Should we use PG or civ score, on that note we should have a CTP score competion to see who can get the highest score vs AI.

Let's here it vote too please

	13-04-2002 06:35									#2
	Remove this text

I am currently in 2 1on1's with Siege and C-Matrix. Sige nor I have discussed ratings and C-Matrix just asked me about it. I was going to offer them both rated at the end like an alien victory, x3 wins against player(s). While I havnt formally made any arangments to these games, I think I will see how this goes.

	13-04-2002 10:15									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Thanks for the input Nim..Since it is new here and we the community have to agree collectively on these things what is your take on the situation?

	13-04-2002 13:56									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I am very much in favour of having all games rated, but PBEM 1v1 will not be allowed in the main PBEM results, for the reasons I have already mentioned.... Firstly 1v1 PBEM would be better fought as Internet games, and secondly better rated as Internet games....I.E. upon complete victory... without the input of diplomacy a single player will often get far ahead and will have autowins for every rated turn, and rated turns may come up far too fast, I am in a 1v1 with Darth Viper which we started when he could not get online.... and he is kicking my ass off the map!! to lose once in the game would be acceptable to me, but to lose once every other day for the next 4 weeks is not acceptable! - But hell yeh lets get em rated, just differently...

Also Team play... there are 5 new team games started, about to start - we need a rating system for those I think.

	13-04-2002 14:48									#5
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

As always in these cases, the final word is mine, as the ladder owner .

I am against rating 1v1 games, mostly because a different system would be needed. However, if Gav can propose a different system that would work well with the current one, I'll take a look at it. It's all because I want just one system, not two or more.

As for team games, I have a couple of blurry ideas, but pretty stupid ones.... what do blackice and Gav think about those team games?

	13-04-2002 14:56									#6
	Support Apolyton

My delusions of importance have been shattered! Here was I thinking this was a democracy...

The problem with using the same rating system is that we are not comparing like with like... If you try to use the same system for one kind of game as with another, it becomes unfair - Using the same Formula but applied at different times MAY work.... but team games I don't think would even allow that....

Firstly in teams there MAY NOT be the same number of players on either side.... I had an idea that for each team game there could be a series of actions that result in point scoring... Capturing cities, hitting certain techs/ages, hitting certain populations, any number of statistics... But the ideas are fluid and I have nothing concrete to propose...

	13-04-2002 15:10									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Gav,

So let's agree not to rate 1v1 games. As for team ones, we might need a real time conversation.

	13-04-2002 17:47									#8
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Good points all, what if two player games were scored as three or four player games. That would work yet we may end up with a mad rush for two player games just for ranking points. Tribes could be based soley on win/loss.

Be nice to see more input here from all