You are not the only one to notice this point. You were just ignoring the points that were being made. While certainly there are people who "camp" at the top of the leader board, not everyone does that. It is very true that after 60 days you have no rank. Look at my profile. I have no rank in a lot of games, even ones I feel like I just played. I do not make any effort whatsoever to make sure I get a game in at the 59 day mark to keep my rank. That includes the ones I actually have a high rank in. We don't all do that.poichich wrote:That's my all point, thank you for telling this. Because with the previous posts of the others answering me, i felt like i was the only one to notice this point. Now that it is on the line, i can wait.sourisdudesert wrote: At first, we are totally aware of the situation. Some players are really "camping" at the top of some games leaderboards, taking the minimum risks, and this is not what we want for the BGA competition system.
If my rank showed, I would be in the top 10-20 in Chinagold. But obviously I haven't played it for over 60 days. And I don't want to. Not because I'm afraid I might lose. But because I don't feel like playing it. I haven't lost any skill - I can play as well as I could the last time I played. So there's no reason I should lose any ELO, and I'm not on the leader board annoying you. There's no reason I should lose my rank either. After enough time, sure, people lose skill. But not after a few months.
There are lots of things here you apparently are not thinking about:
Is this the only place people can play games? Someone maybe hasn't played a game here for two years, but they might play it elsewhere, including f2f, and not have lost any skill at all.
What about people who play turn-based? It can take a couple of months just to finish a game. Every time someone posts on this topic, I'm fairly convinced they have never considered people who play turn-based. Do we deserve ELO and ranks any less?
Not everyone stops playing cause they're afraid of losing rank. Sometimes people just don't feel like it, or they need a break. So what?
Nearly always, this suggestion comes with outrageous time frames. Say someone knows and likes 60 games. They are on the leader board of 15 of them. But they still don't want to lose ELO points or their rank on any of the 60. So even that requirement of 30 days would require that person to play two games per day to keep up with all 60 games. That's ridiculous unless you have no life. For turn-based, that can even be impossible. (So that's addressed to every person who wants to reduce the 60 day time and hasn't thought through that math. The more games someone knows and plays, the worse that problem becomes.)
But once a day? Now that person above has to play 60 games a day!! Even if they only played the ones they are highly ranked in, that's still 15 games a day! That's not even an opinion - that's just basic math. It is also insane. I'm not concerned cause they'll never do that but....
Your main point was people camping at the top of the leader boards, and I know I understood that point, and since you kept repeating coming on every 60 days and playing for 7 minutes, I'm sure others got the point as well. (Though methinks you exaggerate a bit.) But if that was your "only" point as you're now claiming, that's an insane way to try to solve it, which is why you got the responses you did. I'm not sure it even can be solved, without creating a lot of other problems. And their "solution" is more adding onto things rather than really changing what already exists (regardless of what they might "push"), and is for more competitive people and those who like their trophies.
