Treatment of low ranks.

Is the rank restriction of countries/sides in a scenario/map coming any soon?

Lol i remember my first time joining 3v3 as r5 and clovis was the one who said :klevis we don't want you and i told him that his mother does than he become nice to me

Low ranks could also just not join as big countries

Napisano od clovis1122, 29.07.2015 at 14:57

Napisano od Dereny, 29.07.2015 at 14:21

Low ranks could also just not join as big countries

Italy? Romania? Are those big countries? Romania is literally the most useless country in the Entere. If they had picked UK, Russia, France, or even Serbia then maybe your argument would'be right...

Napisano od clovis1122, 29.07.2015 at 10:32

Is the rank restriction of countries/sides in a scenario/map coming any soon?

We need this or else the unfair kicks won't stop.

Italy is pretty important

Napisano od Dereny, 29.07.2015 at 15:01

Italy is pretty important

Italy is as important as Bulgaria.

(hint: not important).

Napisano od clovis1122, 29.07.2015 at 15:02

Napisano od Dereny, 29.07.2015 at 15:01

Italy is pretty important

Italy is as important as Bulgaria.

(hint: not important).

Italy is important if you know what you're doing otherwise sit in Spain and blitz

Italy is vitally important to WWI. He needs to be able to hold the Adriatic and prevent Austrian submarines from harassing France's North Africa shipment while holding the trenches, knowing what units to make in order to eventually break through to Austria, and keeping cp sufficiently occupied in the Balkans to stop them from being able to mass enough to break the British trench. If Italy is a noob, he could decide the game for the entente, as has happened many times from what I have seen.

When you've played through times when five or more remakes fail due to low ranks fucking up the game, you'll understand why we kick them.

Napisano od Guest, 29.07.2015 at 19:37

Italy is vitally important to WWI. He needs to be able to hold the Adriatic and prevent Austrian submarines from harassing France's North Africa shipment while holding the trenches, knowing what units to make in order to eventually break through to Austria, and keeping cp sufficiently occupied in the Balkans to stop them from being able to mass enough to break the British trench. If Italy is a noob, he could decide the game for the entente, as has happened many times from what I have seen.

I like how you try and make the act of stacking trenches and building naval mine walls seem difficult.

Napisano od Witch-Doctor, 29.07.2015 at 20:05

Napisano od Guest, 29.07.2015 at 19:37

Italy is vitally important to WWI. He needs to be able to hold the Adriatic and prevent Austrian submarines from harassing France's North Africa shipment while holding the trenches, knowing what units to make in order to eventually break through to Austria, and keeping cp sufficiently occupied in the Balkans to stop them from being able to mass enough to break the British trench. If Italy is a noob, he could decide the game for the entente, as has happened many times from what I have seen.

I like how you try and make the act of stacking trenches and building naval mine walls seem difficult.

and most most r6< are still incapable of mastering this art. for noobs, the temptation to suicide their army is too great. what works in rp doesn't work everywhere

Napisano od Guest, 29.07.2015 at 20:18

Napisano od Witch-Doctor, 29.07.2015 at 20:05

Napisano od Guest, 29.07.2015 at 19:37

Italy is vitally important to WWI. He needs to be able to hold the Adriatic and prevent Austrian submarines from harassing France's North Africa shipment while holding the trenches, knowing what units to make in order to eventually break through to Austria, and keeping cp sufficiently occupied in the Balkans to stop them from being able to mass enough to break the British trench. If Italy is a noob, he could decide the game for the entente, as has happened many times from what I have seen.

I like how you try and make the act of stacking trenches and building naval mine walls seem difficult.

and most most r6< are still incapable of mastering this art. for noobs, the temptation to suicide their army is too great. what works in rp doesn't work everywhere

I'm not a WWI expert, but in the few games I've played in the past rank 5 doesn't suicide on trench. At least, the ones who talk. The most dangerous players on every game are the people to whom you talk, but they never reply. Even rank 10's that are biggest noobs does this.

So ok, let's say Italy is important. How about Romania?

What you are trying to do is undermine an accurate stereotype. As long as we continue seeing a very high percentage of trolls concentrated in lower ranks, we will continue kicking them or putting rank limits on our games. When we see that low ranks are leaving and breaking basic rules (such as no wallfuck, no taking allied cities) at a rate similar to that of higher ranks, we will adjust our attitude. That hasn't happened since the complaints about rankism first started rolling in, so don't expect any changes soon.

One of the solutions that I propose is that team games require r7+ since they engender more responsibility, but this is for another discussion.

Napisano od Guest, 29.07.2015 at 22:23

What you are trying to do is undermine an accurate stereotype. As long as we continue seeing a very high percentage of trolls concentrated in lower ranks, we will continue kicking them or putting rank limits on our games.

What I am trying to say is that if you will kick them anyway, then pls just put the rank limit. In both screenshots both rank 5 were kicked even when they took countries like Italy and Romania.

It is a lot easier, nicer, if that host had made the game rank 6+... I support your proposal, make it rank 7+ then but pls no more kicks...

I kick r14s from all my games.. Such noobs...

I am only just a rank 6 and if I am joining a game then I don't expect to be kicked because of my rank, if you did not want me in the game then make the Min rank the rank in which you would allow into your games, hosts should take responsibility!

Napisano od King Smith, 31.07.2015 at 04:44

I am only just a rank 6 and if I am joining a game then I don't expect to be kicked because of my rank, if you did not want me in the game then make the Min rank the rank in which you would allow into your games, hosts should take responsibility!

The reason hosts might not set rank limit is to allow the match to fill up faster. Most people rather join a 7/10 scenario than a 2/10 even when there are low ranks involved. Then when getting people to join their game is no longer an issue; they start kicking low ranks to make room for higher ranks or to appease complainers.

This isn't hard to figure out if you
>use brain

Napisano od Witch-Doctor, 31.07.2015 at 05:20

Napisano od King Smith, 31.07.2015 at 04:44

I am only just a rank 6 and if I am joining a game then I don't expect to be kicked because of my rank, if you did not want me in the game then make the Min rank the rank in which you would allow into your games, hosts should take responsibility!

The reason hosts might not set rank limit is to allow the match to fill up faster. Most people rather join a 7/10 scenario than a 2/10 even when there are low ranks involved. Then when getting people to join their game is no longer an issue; they start kicking low ranks to make room for higher ranks or to appease complainers.

This isn't hard to figure out if you
>use brain

This would make me feel used and angry. Just set the rank limits or wait for more players. I've still never been able to play role play because I was kicked every time! So I quit trying to even see what it's like.

Well that's extremely unfair on the low ranks, their being used and it's not right!

Fully no support,low ranks made themself weak cuz they like rp,it will never be better,but will change.
Today's rank limit is 7+ by default,for a few months it will be 8+.

We aren't even asking to let them play (At least, I am not). Just to use the Rank restriction instead of kick and that is. As King Smith already say, when a player join a game he doesn't expect to be kicked by his rank.

If you guys think, for example, that no rank 5 can play ANY country in WW1, then host 6+ and that is.

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 06:24

Napisano od King Smith, 31.07.2015 at 04:44

I am only just a rank 6 and if I am joining a game then I don't expect to be kicked because of my rank, if you did not want me in the game then make the Min rank the rank in which you would allow into your games, hosts should take responsibility!

You wouldn't be kicked because of your rank, you would be kicked because you are not skilled enough. Rank is just a basic indicator of skill. If the host had seen a certain rank 6 play before and was okay with letting him join again then he would, but would also kick the rest of the rank 6s because you could reasonably assume that they are just not good enough.

Napisano od clovis1122, 31.07.2015 at 06:08

We aren't even asking to let them play (At least, I am not). Just to use the Rank restriction instead of kick and that is. As King Smith already say, when a player join a game he doesn't expect to be kicked by his rank.

If you guys think, for example, that no rank 5 can play ANY country in WW1, then host 6+ and that is.

What if that rank 5 country was already taken? Should we just not kick them because their feelings might be hurt?

well thats fair enough but surely they deserve a chance first before you even think about kicking them?

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 06:24

You wouldn't be kicked because of your rank, you would be kicked because you are not skilled enough. Rank is just a basic indicator of skill. If the host had seen a certain rank 6 play before and was okay with letting him join again then he would, but would also kick the rest of the rank 6s because you could reasonably assume that they are just not good enough.

If rank is the indicator of skill, you're being kicked because of your rank.

How could the host have seen a rank 6 play good before if he kicks them in the first place? And how will he be able to know if a r6 is good or not, if each time one joins, it immediately gets kicked!

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 06:24

What if that rank 5 country was already taken? Should we just not kick them because their feelings might be hurt?

Your "feelings" would be hurt, too, if for no apparent reason you were kicked, without a warning beforehand of it happening.

Napisano od e Mare, 31.07.2015 at 06:32

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 06:24

You wouldn't be kicked because of your rank, you would be kicked because you are not skilled enough. Rank is just a basic indicator of skill. If the host had seen a certain rank 6 play before and was okay with letting him join again then he would, but would also kick the rest of the rank 6s because you could reasonably assume that they are just not good enough.

If rank is the indicator of skill, you're being kicked because of your rank.

How could the host have seen a rank 6 play good before if he kicks them in the first place? And how will he be able to know if a r6 is good or not, if each time one joins, it immediately gets kicked!

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 06:24

What if that rank 5 country was already taken? Should we just not kick them because their feelings might be hurt?

Your "feelings" would be hurt, too, if for no apparent reason you were kicked, without a warning beforehand of it happening.

Exactly what I was trying to say (Y)

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 07:23

Napisano od King Smith, 31.07.2015 at 06:30

well thats fair enough but surely they deserve a chance first before you even think about kicking them?

Sure but in most scenarios there are a limited number of places available to lower ranks. (Romania, Serbia and Bulgaria in WW1 for example.) Once those are taken, then what?

I believe I provide example of Romania in this thread. So Romania, according to that host, is not a low-rank country, or at least, not low-enough to being played by a rank 5.

I've see many host doing this before, so if you want I can provide more screenshots of different hosts kicking rank 5's.

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 07:56

Napisano od clovis1122, 31.07.2015 at 07:29

I believe I provide example of Romania in this thread. So Romania, according to that host, is not a low-rank country, or at least, not low-enough to being played by a rank 5.

I've see many host doing this before, so if you want I can provide more screenshots of different hosts kicking rank 5's.

All that proves is that he didn't want that rank 5 playing as Romania. Doesn't mean he would've kicked every rank 5.

There could have also been a rank 10 Bulgaria and he thought it wouldn't have been fair.

Well he kicked the only two rank 5 that joined, and didn't grave them any explanation about why they got kicked.

P.S: Bulgaria was not rank 10.

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 07:09

Could have seen them while spectating or playing in another game. If you kick one rank 6 but keep another then clearly rank isn't the reason they are being kicked.

So you're the one to exclusively have the right to kick people if you've never seen them play before. Okay.
P.S. Putting in images won't help you prove your point is not there.

---

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 07:09

I have been kicked, at one point in time, on practically every other multiplayer game I have played.

If you can't handle the slight inconvenience of being kicked, how will you handle all of the other bullshit like wallfucking, ally-taking of cities, leavers, etc. in this game. Think of it as weeding out the feeble minded.

Good.

No.

I love how people that never host scenarios, and most likely not even play them, think that we care about what they think.

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 08:29

Oh yes, as the game host I would have the right to kick anyone I wanted.

I have been in literally hundreds of games that have been ruined because of noob low ranks quitting early/wfing/or just generally not knowing how to play. So if you get a little bit upset that you get kicked as a precaution, you know what? IDGAF.

To kick anyone you wanted who you somehow managed to see play before, when they weren't kicked by you?

I'm not upset. In fact I got kicked( just as anyone else), but I'm sure you are able to figure that out without my help. And I dealt with it. 1v1ed with those who kicked me. But that was 600+ days ago when I played well. Now I don't play on this at all. That's what alts are for. Killing people.

Napisano od SQUARED, 31.07.2015 at 08:38

Napisano od clovis1122, 31.07.2015 at 08:05

Well he kicked the only two rank 5 that joined, and didn't grave them any explanation about why they got kicked.

P.S: Bulgaria was not rank 10.

He probably just didnt think he was good enough.

What is hard to understand about this?

If he didn't think that they* (Not he) aren't good enough, he should had set the game rank 6+.

Your logic implies that there was a rank 5 he trusted to join - there was not. He kicked ALL RANK 5 WHO JOINED.

On both ways, he didn't even grave a reason before kicking, except that they two were rank 5.

What is hard to understand? the two above sentence.

Looks like you have your own methods to determine whenever a rank 5 can play or not. As long as you give them an explanation about why they can't play, and ask them to leave rather than kicking as 1st option, everything will be fine.

As for the rest of the hosts, please set rank 6+ or 7+ as limit. If certain rank join and no country is available to him, please ask him to leave before kicking.

Problem solved.