Unranked Player

Ha, got Fendi to rank up to a more respectable 2nd Lieutenant.

I'm not happy about it..

It's a trap!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

This is the second time he has bullied me into ranking up! Though he did make a valid point..

I'm surprised and also slightly amused.

Fendi, it's your site - you could change your rank to anything you want. Like Cireon's Troll First Class.

@ cbt711, you'd think that..but alas..

I dont like this mandatory ranking up... but i will do it because the odd time i do enjoy a game of risk. My reason for not ranking up: If you at actually involved in a battle/war as a member of the military as i have its a crazy environment. Its kill or be killed, you dont know if the guy in your face is a first class private or a highly skilled green beret. Also normally commanding officers do not go in to the battle field because the risk of being captured, if they do go into the field for what ever reason; especially in a hot zone they will not show there rank, they will not allow your own men to salute them. The fact of a matter is that players on this site should play this game the same no matter who the opponent is, making every game fair; however, thats not how everyone plays when they know who and what they are facing.

[quote=Dferguson - Jun 8, 08:00 PM]The fact of a matter is that players on this site should play this game the same no matter who the opponent is, making every game fair; however, thats not how everyone plays when they know who and what they are facing. [/quote] I agree on not having to rank up (you defenitely should stay unranked :)), but not everyone should be threated equal. I play alot different versus a new player than versus Fendi, Vexer or you for that matter. Sometimes it'll be really important to break one of your regions, because I know you'll will win otherwise, while it's not nescessary for a newbie (as a matter of fact, if I do, he might revengefully suicide back on me).

I think you just proved his point, any underestimation by any opponent is valuable. Like you just said, you would break him to keep his turn in manageable because you can't trust his end game with a troop advantage 10 turns down the road knowing his skill level where a N00b you would let be to conserve your troops, assuming he would screw up the end game and you need to be stronger than everyone else to not be the target. I think Dferg agrees with that, and that's exactly why he doesn't buy the rank. What is missing though, is you can negotiate peace or just simply say your intentions or state facts when you have a decent rank, and the other players listen. So there's a yin to that rank sand bagging yang. If a private tells a player to watch the build up of Blue or he will be able to kill you for 7 cards in two rounds, the lower level guys would laugh (and not get it), but if a General like Matty said that same thing, they would act on it just assuming the general knows of what he speaks.

@Matty. Knowing your opponent because you have seem them play before and altering your play strategy is ok; you are using past experience to modify your game to better your chances of winning. My problem is players that dont know the player will play more aggressive then they normally would because they will not need to learn that there opponent is actually good or great.. By having a rank system we are forgoing the important step of learning about your opponent. New players need to first learn how to play in a unbiased why and develop there strategy and mold it around players they have become familiar with playing. Is this site against learning? I think not, so why not make all players un ranked.... do people need to gloat about there ranks? I know what my rank is thats good enough for me... if you want to find out if im any good track me down and lets go a few rounds and you can make up your own mind.

I don't understand why you don't just buy the rank of private. It's far more anonymous than this new famous rank. Keeping this rank seems like more of making a statement.

is that not the point?... do you think martin luther king should not have just accpted things has the way they were instead of making a statement? at lest im getting a gold star for my effort.

comparing your not buying a rank to MLK. CLASSY

"This, That, The Other", This is a "game" of strategy and achievement. Say what you all like, but the truth is, people don't take on rank because they; (a) Don't want to become an 'illuminated target'. (b) Want an advantage over others. The rest of us all also know this, but we take the rough with the smooth. What is wrong with a reasonably true and accurate description of your abilities and length of service (Rank)? To further the argument, if you were offered the rank of General, its privileges and the pay it deserves in the armed forces, would you take it or turn it down? If you took the rank and were therefore allowed to exercise the power that comes with it, do you think you'd be allowed to walk around HQ and it's Lobby with a private's rank (Not including covert operations) and would you be able to control anything or be taken seriously if you were allowed? For the [b]fore and against[/b] 'rank targeting' argument to stand up, all ranks would have to be removed in the Game window. davidechko123 are you trying to amass 10000 points from Same Time games and then start playing conventional Risk with the ability to never lose rank no matter how good your opponents are and how difficult it is to win? If not, what is the point in what you are doing? Imagine a D12 where you can't deceive! Imagine how many new players [i](possible future friends, future programmers, future map makers)[/i] came here, clicked on a live game to join and played an unbeatable (Basic) player in a Same Time game, not at all aware that this is neither the way Risk is really played nor that other 'Basic Players' aren't this good and then thought "this game sucks, I'll try a different site"!