10 most dangerous MP players in Dom3:Just for fun.

[Twan]

As it's the day of "most dangerous list", ladders and tournaments proposals. I launch my own little ranking system.

The "mp forum grand prix" ranking of winners will consider that particular settings/starting positions/special rules tend to balance themselves over time, and won't try to establish fair rules. I will simply consider the results of any game posted on these forums and make a weighted list of winners.

My system will be very simple and in the dominion spirit (there can be only one winner recieving points per game) :

rule 1 - open games recruiting their players on this forum and including more than two players will be counted, no matter what kind of special settings, mods of rules they use, as long as their system allow *one* winner (cooperative/teams games won't be counted), the only other restrictions are in rule 4

rule 2 (value) - each player has a value of 10 + 10% of his actual score, the value is the number of points another may win against him

rule 3 (score) - winning a game no matter the settings add the total value of all other starting players to the winner score

rule 4 (homologation) - to simplify my work only games hosted by someone including a list of the players in the first message of their thread will be counted (I won't search hidden players lists, and so will ignore games without a list in the first message) ; as well only game reported as finished in the title of the thread will be counted (I won't follow all games to see if there is a result)

rule 5 (actual games) - for the games already started I will count the number of players actually figuring in the first message of the thread (even if more have started), for the next games to start I'll use the number of players figuring in the list when the game start

Note that it will be a grand prix system not an ELO system, so the more you play and win against many players the more you have points, you lose nothing for defeats.



(edit : another finished).

The actual forum grand prix result is :
1. Meglobob (score 110)
2. Franck Trollman (61)
3. all others (score 0)

Finished :
- Research game (Meglobob winner)
- 6 players, 150 prov. (DrPraetorius) : (Frank Trollman winner)


The following games will be counted when reported as finished here :
- Mid Era Orania (DrPraetorious) : 10 players (90pts unless one of them win a game before the end of this one)
- Undertow Random Nations (Velusion) : 12 players (110)
- Jinxed Frechdrachs (Bluebird) : 14 players (130)
- Cradle of Dominion (upstreamedge) : 10 players (90 / 101)
- Dawgies Does Dominions (Pashadawg) : 15 players (140)
- Mid Era Game (DrPraetorious) : 9 players (80/91)
- MP Game Middle Age (Graeme Dice) : 15 players (140)
- Concept of Creation (Sheap) : 20 players (190)
- Dawnstrike (Pashadawg) : 18 players (170/181)
- Newbie Game 2 (WZaboPeter) : 12 players (110)
- New Pbem Game (johnarryn) : 15 players (140)
- New Game Early Era - Glory of The Gods (Manuk) : 19 players (180)
- Faerun MA Pbem (Hadrian II) : 18 players (170)
- Newbie Game EA (Ironhawk) : 20 players (190)
- Wrath of Opposing Fates (Pashadawg) : 12 players (110)
- Late Age Game, Random Map, Victory Points (Graeme Dice) : 15 players (140)
- MP Game, Early Era, Random Nations, Victory Points (Graeme Dice) : 16 players (150/161)

(Other started games may be counted too, if the host add a player list in the first message.)

[solo]

I have only played in 4 games so far here. One has been completed (see "Looking for an early age PBEM game"), but the other 3 have been going on for quite a while.

Even so, I have not made contact with all of the players in two of these games, so my list will mostly be based on the game statistics. In no particular order, the 10 players are:

CharonJr
ajr
hadrian_II
twan
tibbs
upstreamedge
Jurri
Teraswaerto
Migaaresno
Meglobob

[Gandalf Parker]

No Quantum_Mechani? IFIRC He has been one of the top MPers in the Dom3 beta tests.

[Agrajag]

Twan, I suspect your ranking system won't work that well, there are few games, but many players, so I'm guessing you'll end up with a pretty short list of winners with very high scores, and then a much longer list of zeroes

Personally, I don't really like ranked games, since I play for fun, not to win or prove myself or earn some title, and I also don't like seeing what some people turn into if they win too much, or try too hard to win.
When games are ranked, you have a tendency to get arrogant winners, and angry losers, and sometimes a few "explosions" as well ["You caused me to lose that game! Now I won't be #1! *roar* I'll hunt you down like a dog!" etc. or on the other hand "Your opinion doesn't count, you only have a score of 20 (loser)"].

Though that's just my opinion

[Foodstamp]

^^ I agree with your opinion. I cringe at theought of inflated egos such a system could produce. Such a ranking system would only work for 1 v 1 games anyway I think because diplomacy plays such a large role in the bigger MP games.

I would expect that you would find scores all over the place depending on who was part of a stronger alliance during their games.

On top of that, a ranking system would make certain players more visible if they had a high score. That may cause lower ranked players to gang up on that player in larger MP games to eliminate the "threat" early.

[Twan]

I don't think anyone will give it as much importance as you think (it's not like an official system or one in which you may win something) and will stop if it creates a bad ambiance. But as there will anyway be threads about most dangerous players and occasionnal bragging contests among veterans in the middle of other discussions... I just see as a good idea to keep trace of the real results (of course the list of winners will be short, but if there will be just 5 or 6 players winning all the games it's anyway good to know when you play with them).

ps : diplomacy is of course a large part of the "winning a mp game with more than 2 players" skill, but is only balanced if all players know who are the best ones

[DrPraetorious]

What's wrong with diplomacy? If people come into games with preformed alliances - well, that isn't cricket. On the other hand, negotiating with the other players is a legitimate component of any multiplayer game.

[Gandalf Parker]

Also most games are played on small maps set to blitz settings and player-kill-player victories. Because more of those games can be played in the same time period, those games would have the most answers available. Since those games create a game where certain nations and strategies have advantages, I would hate to have people think that the rating reflected an overall rating of all players.

Other than that, its interesting to see the lists.

Gandalf Parker