It's only my problem that I find only new players?

[MorteEterna]

Well, after FFA and FFA trying to be at least second, I find only noobs trying to cheat, in 3-4 games that I played this week, I got in 3 games 2 point and in last one 1 point only. Why have I to play noobs? In my last game after I conquered the last capital, he could kick me (and he did), now I have seen I got 1 point, hoping he didn't give me the loss..

I wouldl like to play some top players, the only one that I could play, the first, is only a coward that doesn't want to play.. I find other players few times and I don't know, if I lose with bad luck I could lose 30-40 points, if I win I get 1 point only, why don't they change it? At least there should be a thing to see their rank, however, I'm upset

PS: Now I have seen I got the points, it was 4 instead of 1, however, in about 4 games I got 2*2 points, 1 and 4, it means 9 points in 4 games.. I don't know how others get so many points fast

Maybe the next poll would be "How many members are so egoistic to lower my rep for stupid things?"

[*Futureheads*]

I have to agree with you there. I played 3 head to head games last night, I was in the top 50 ranked players but had checked before playing these games and I was ranked 85. First game was against someone quite low maybe top 1000 well the game lasted 30 mins he quit. I then played against a guy who was ranked 75 and he was Zulus rushed me but my archers killed his army he then froze and would not leave. Eventually he quit and I won again. Next game I played someone who was ranked in the top 50, and I rushed all the computer players and by 100BC I had 8 cities to his 2 he was ahead of me in the tech but I had rushed 3 horseman armies and was about to take one of his cities and he quit. Now I expected my rank to go bck into the top 50's but it only went to 73.

So if people quit does the points allocation get reduced?? Just seemed a bit odd that I never got that many points for 3 wins but when I lose I drop 25 to 30 places!!!

[MorteEterna]

It doesn't change if they lose or disconnect. However, this is a big problem, there are a lot of cheaters/noob that would do all things to get a win, maybe one with 0 points could cheat against me getting more than 100-200 points. I would like to play only good players, or at least not ONLY new players

[*Futureheads*]

I know what you mean I tend to steer clear of the free for all games overall I enjoy them more but they last longer so I can only play them at certain times, also more chance of the game freezing. My free for all rank is awful, I think im in the top 500 but I have had over 30 games freeze on me.

Hopefully if a patch comes out they should rectify it, but I am sure certain people know how to freeze a game. Last few days I have ony played top 100 - 200 players in head to head games which is good as at least you get out of the medievil era!!!

[MorteEterna]

Seems that in my last game I got 0 POINTS. I was 79-16 with 1974. Now I'm 80-16 with 1974, I think it's not a bug, however, that's really stupid

[badken]

I gotta say, I don't feel all that sorry for you with your terrible problems staying at the top. The simple fact is, once your rank is high, you are much, much more likely to spend most of your time playing against lower ranked players. That's as it should be, otherwise how would any new player ever rise up the ranks?

I don't get the bit about cheating, though. It's pretty much impossible to hack an Xbox 360 game, since hacked xboxes can't use Xbox Live. I suppose people could use ping bomb attacks, but how many would really go to the trouble of doing that? I think actually the Xbox version has some of the same connection problems as the PS3 version and it just shows up differently in the Xbox multiplayer.

[MorteEterna]

I gotta say, I don't feel all that sorry for you with your terrible problems staying at the top. The simple fact is, once your rank is high, you are much, much more likely to spend most of your time playing against lower ranked players. That's as it should be, otherwise how would any new player ever rise up the ranks?

I don't get the bit about cheating, though. It's pretty much impossible to hack an Xbox 360 game, since hacked xboxes can't use Xbox Live. I suppose people could use ping bomb attacks, but how many would really go to the trouble of doing that? I think actually the Xbox version has some of the same connection problems as the PS3 version and it just shows up differently in the Xbox multiplayer.

I have seen about 100 players trying to cheat or doing stupid things, sure about 60-70 at least. And why should I play getting from 0 to 5 points and the possibility to lose with cheaters is about 70% if they cheat?? I would lose a lot of points and I don't like that, I would like also to play all top players, not new players

[Leo]

I don't get the bit about cheating, though. It's pretty much impossible to hack an Xbox 360 game, since hacked xboxes can't use Xbox Live. I suppose people could use ping bomb attacks, but how many would really go to the trouble of doing that? I think actually the Xbox version has some of the same connection problems as the PS3 version and it just shows up differently in the Xbox multiplayer.

i think you have jumped too far ahead, thinking that cheating involves hacking things or manipulating the data flow (like people might have done if this was a pc game).

the cheating involved in this game doesnt require any of that knowledge or any 3rd party interference, the tools to do this exist in the already present 360 live interface and game functions. if you like, you could call it abusing bugs rather than cheating (if you associate cheating with hacking), they arent doing anything more than pressing some buttons on the 360 controller.
2k know all of this of course, hopefully it will be fixed (someone could do these things by accident pretty easily too, it is not something that immediatly suggests cheating, but the way the game reacts to it has these kind of results).

[Leo]

the matchmaking system annoys me as well, yesterday night i was just under 1900 in ffa, so somewhere close to the top 10.

i played a game, the game froze and i lost a load of points, roughly 8 wins worth of points, this is very frustrating. all those games, all that time, wiped out in one game that bugged, it will take another 8 wins or so to get back up again. don't they use the trueskill thing that i thought all MS live games used these days? i almost never match with anyone decent in ffa.

[badken]

Interesting, I wasn't aware that a sequence of button presses would mess up the game, but that makes sense. Hopefully they'll fix those problems soon.

[badken]

i played a game, the game froze and i lost a load of points, roughly 8 wins worth of points, this is very frustrating. all those games, all that time, wiped out in one game that bugged, it will take another 8 wins or so to get back up again. don't they use the trueskill thing that i thought all MS live games used these days? i almost never match with anyone decent in ffa.

It sucks that you lost ranking points to a bug, but it's not the fault of the ranking system. No ranking system can be stable in the face of interrupted games or glitches. It has to treat a win as a win and a loss as a loss, however the game reports them. If the game isn't reporting them right, or is crashing or has other problems, the ranking system results are going to be garbage in, garbage out.

I'm pretty sure that Civ Rev uses whatever the standard matchmaking & ranking system is on Xbox Live. If you aren't playing against people near your rank, that probably just means you're high enough that there's simply a much smaller chance of players ranked near you being online and looking for a game at the same time as you. The longer you wait for a match, the looser the matchmaking gets, to avoid making players wait forever to get a game.

[badken]

BTW, just found this very interesting article about TrueSkill ranking and matchmaking:

http://research.microsoft.com/displa...e.aspx?id=1361

[ben666satan]

You are playing this game for the wrong reasons, play to have fun and not to increase some meaningless number.

[MorteEterna]

You are playing this game for the wrong reasons, play to have fun and not to increase some meaningless number.

These aren't meaningless numbers, who wants to play a leaderboard and wants to be a top player, would also like to get few bugs, not only, play for fun and lose all times.. And, I play for fun, or at least I learn new things if I don't do the same. Today, I was closed in a position where 3 conquers could block me. After I conquered a city beeing smart and stopped a rush, I could expand more, and the game went good for me, that became funny also becase I found an AI teching as well and expanding fast, that was Tokugawa

[ben666satan]

These aren't meaningless numbers, who wants to play a leaderboard and wants to be a top player, would also like to get few bugs, not only, play for fun and lose all times.. And, I play for fun, or at least I learn new things if I don't do the same. Today, I was closed in a position where 3 conquers could block me. After I conquered a city beeing smart and stopped a rush, I could expand more, and the game went good for me, that became funny also becase I found an AI teching as well and expanding fast, that was Tokugawa

You weren't complaining about a bug to start with, you are complaining your rating doesn't go up high enough when you win a game. Of course when you raise to the top of the leaderboard it is going to be more difficult to raise even higher, and you will get little or no points for winning against lower ranks. That's just the nature of it... You can choose to only play against people you know that are top ranked, but playing just for leaderboard points takes the fun out of the experience IMO.

[MorteEterna]

You weren't complaining about a bug to start with, you are complaining your rating doesn't go up high enough when you win a game. Of course when you raise to the top of the leaderboard it is going to be more difficult to raise even higher, and you will get little or no points for winning against lower ranks. That's just the nature of it... You can choose to only play against people you know that are top ranked, but playing just for leaderboard points takes the fun out of the experience IMO.

I have played a lot of bad players and that's becoming annoying. I would like to play also top players for fun, and I have already done unranked games. I play this game for fun, and for the leaderboards. Now I'm going to be first in one leaderboard and second in another one, if I would get some top players against. The problem is that there are also bad players in the top players, who avoids others also playing lower ranked players (but now I seem to know how the first in FFA is the first, but not sure).

There should be a way to play top players and not only low ranked players, 60-70% of them are cheaters. In a game you have many possibilites to get at least a cheater or one that would do all things possible to get a unfair win

PS: How did this post get an auto title?? I didn't clicked on that and it seems to hear me ahaha

[ben666satan]

Your complaints about 70% of people cheating make no sense, what are you even referring to?

[MorteEterna]

Your complaints about 70% of people cheating make no sense, what are you even referring to?

I meant that that's pretty sure that in a FFA game I can find a cheater or one trying to get a unfair win, also disconnecting fast in some ways that could kick you

[ben666satan]

I meant that that's pretty sure that in a FFA game I can find a cheater or one trying to get a unfair win, also disconnecting fast in some ways that could kick you

A cheater or one trying to get a unfair win? There's no such thing as an unfair win, and as far as cheating by "disconnecting fast"... Let me tell you this is not a problem with cheaters online but a problem with your connection (or it has to do with bugs in the online code causing players to freeze-up?) I can't say for certain this is not being done at all, but I do know that 60-70% of the people playing this game are not trying to cheat you with disconnect hacks...

[xbman22x]

sorry morte, the reality is that the majority of console gamers are dumbasses. if you want real strategy game competition go back to PC.

[ben666satan]

sorry morte, the reality is that the majority of console gamers are dumbasses. if you want real strategy game competition go back to PC.

ROFL... You're obviously not a PC gamer (at least you don't play online)

[Michelasso]

I meant that that's pretty sure that in a FFA game I can find a cheater or one trying to get a unfair win, also disconnecting fast in some ways that could kick you

Can you explain it better? If one disconnects "fast" (unplugging the ethernet cable?) still s/he is technically the one the lost the connection. How do you get kicked? Unless they block your IP in the router (that wouldn't take too much, but I am not sure about the results..). I don't know.

[xbman22x]

ROFL... You're obviously not a PC gamer (at least you don't play online)

nah, i dont dont play PC much anymore. but i have on many occasions played kids under the age of 12 on 360, not quite as much on PC, as the kids cant afford a good PC.at least this eliminates the amount of stupid-easy wins that i get in strategy games.

[MorteEterna]

I didn't remind a word, however, I mean that they try to disconnect themselves very fast and the game could freeze at the first turn, I have seen also friends playing togheter, and many other things.

[Past]

First, I dont get why youre crying about cheating, because to my knowledge, a PS3 or an Xbox havent been(to my best of knowledge) hackable to play online games. Maybe there have been hacks around, but as youre stating, it sounds like youve found a lot of people doing it, and I find it improbable that if its like that there havent been any other complaints nor have they been discovered: you have to remember the servers used for playing console online games are more easily watched by their admins than computer games, so all in all, I doubt theyre cheating on you. As for the other statement asking to play better players, I believe youre putting too much enfasis on your rank thinking that determines what kind of player you are. For all you know, "noobs" as you call them with a score of 0 points could very well play better than you(youre winning streak doesnt seems that awesome to begin with) and even if they dont, everyone of us always has to start somewhere so its rather disrespectful to just outright classify people as noobs and then demand a system where you can play better people. If its like that, us new players would be stuck with playing always among ourselves, gasping for a chance to play better people who we can learn from and improve our own gaming. As for the guy you call "first" being a coward because he doesnt wants to play, did you think maybe he thought like you yourself are: "why should I play this noob only to get a few points up while if he wins or "cheats" gets more points than me?" just a thought

[MorteEterna]

First, I dont get why youre crying about cheating, because to my knowledge, a PS3 or an Xbox havent been(to my best of knowledge) hackable to play online games. Maybe there have been hacks around, but as youre stating, it sounds like youve found a lot of people doing it, and I find it improbable that if its like that there havent been any other complaints nor have they been discovered: you have to remember the servers used for playing console online games are more easily watched by their admins than computer games, so all in all, I doubt theyre cheating on you. As for the other statement asking to play better players, I believe youre putting too much enfasis on your rank thinking that determines what kind of player you are. For all you know, "noobs" as you call them with a score of 0 points could very well play better than you(youre winning streak doesnt seems that awesome to begin with) and even if they dont, everyone of us always has to start somewhere so its rather disrespectful to just outright classify people as noobs and then demand a system where you can play better people. If its like that, us new players would be stuck with playing always among ourselves, gasping for a chance to play better people who we can learn from and improve our own gaming. As for the guy you call "first" being a coward because he doesnt wants to play, did you think maybe he thought like you yourself are: "why should I play this noob only to get a few points up while if he wins or "cheats" gets more points than me?" just a thought

First, if you want to talk to me, STOP INSULTS, if you want to insult somebody, go away. If you want to discuss, don't say stupid things, thanks.

I said that, because I find a lot of new players and no good players, I'm lucky if I find a top10, very lucky, but they should do as for the civ4 ladder, where you can invite friends, others can invite you, and you should find MORE players near your rank than other players.

However, I was about top5 when I asked the first that, so I don't see why you wanted to insult me. If he is really the first, he could challenge me, I challenge all players unless they are really bad, they insult too much, I can't stay with them, etc. For top players I haven't find problems, you don't fight me? Ok, you will be known as bad player, and I have seen one that has beaten me (for luck, it was one of the 3-4 times where I got no gold and he was near me), I had 0 gold (only a hut that gave me a tech) and he wasn't as good, I found him in a head to head and said, "please get ready" (about this) because he wasn't, so after some messages he start saying excuses as "I don't want to beat you again", that is really a bad excuse.

[Past]

If you dont want to be insulted, dont insult others as well. Saying open in the forums that you are too good to be playing against new players just because your ranking is a bit good is degrading towards those of us who are just starting the game. You should have chosen you choice of words better if you wanted to just suggest a better system to play against ranked players, instead of just overestimating your own abilities and basically saying a lot of us are just no good. You yourself are complaining about how the first ranked doesnt wants to play against you, and his thoughts are very similar to what you yourself are saying agaisnt the rest of us new players: why should he play a noob like yourself when hes already the best player in the boards?
Think about your choice of words next time a bit.

[Mysterio]

I'm curious, MorteEterna--do you always choose a civ for ranked games, always choose Random, or a combination of both? If a combination of both, roughly how often have you chosen a civ and how often have you chosen Random? For example, 30%/70%.

[xbman22x]

i am almost 100% sure that morte does random less than 1% of the time.

he likes to stick to his china, rome, and arabs.

[Mysterio]

i am almost 100% sure that morte does random less than 1% of the time.

he likes to stick to his china, rome, and arabs.

IMO, ranked games should be locked to Random. I have much more respect for a player who can win most of the time with Random than a player who can win all of the time with a chosen civ.

[Leo]

@Past

i dont understand why his comments bother you, he is a top 5 player and has been since the game first came out, he IS better than 99.9% of all other players online.
he has a large number of games under his belt, and games (mostly wins) against all the other top players as backing or experience of this.
i think that you would have to have knowledge of these people in order to make the statements that you have done (you can't just read a post and decide that he isnt all that good, just because he said things you didnt like).
it isnt a question of arrogance, it is simply that the matchmaking system is 'supposed' to match you with players of your own level and it clearly isnt succeeding, not because those better players arent online playing because they are (you can check), it simply isnt matching. neither the better or the weaker players want to be in the same game with each other (a game where the outcome is a foregone conclusion is not fun for anyone), it isnt insulting it is just logical. i dont think you have the fullest understanding of who this person is, and who he is referring to, i do and i know he is right which is why im making this post, arrogant or not it is certainly true.

your first post - i assume your a PC gamer? you are taking a step too far when considering cheating, there are already functions within the game (bugged functions if you like) that allow you to 'break' the game pretty much at will if you know how it works. no one is hacking, they are simply using existing functions in such a way as to 'cheat' the outcome of the game, it has been known for some time by a fair number of people. i know that i have descibed the details and have informed the 2k people myself months ago, i assume others have as well, it hasnt been fixed but then again nothing else has been fixed either so far.

[xbman22x]

@Past

i dont understand why his comments bother you, he is a top 5 player and has been since the game first came out, he IS better than 99.9% of all other players online.
he has a large number of games under his belt, and games (mostly wins) against all the other top players as backing or experience of this.
i think that you would have to have knowledge of these people in order to make the statements that you have done (you can't just read a post and decide that he isnt all that good, just because he said things you didnt like).
it isnt a question of arrogance, it is simply that the matchmaking system is 'supposed' to match you with players of your own level and it clearly isnt succeeding, not because those better players arent online playing because they are (you can check), it simply isnt matching. neither the better or the weaker players want to be in the same game with each other (a game where the outcome is a foregone conclusion is not fun for anyone), it isnt insulting it is just logical. i dont think you have the fullest understanding of who this person is, and who he is referring to, i do and i know he is right which is why im making this post, arrogant or not it is certainly true.

your first post - i assume your a PC gamer? you are taking a step too far when considering cheating, there are already functions within the game (bugged functions if you like) that allow you to 'break' the game pretty much at will if you know how it works. no one is hacking, they are simply using existing functions in such a way as to 'cheat' the outcome of the game, it has been known for some time by a fair number of people. i know that i have descibed the details and have informed the 2k people myself months ago, i assume others have as well, it hasnt been fixed but then again nothing else has been fixed either so far.

i think that the big problem that this game has with matchmaking is that the game has a much lower "turnover rate" than games like halo. so even though these players may be online, they could be locked up in the same game for 3 hours.

[Leo]

yeh, you might well be right there

[Past]

@Past

i dont understand why his comments bother you, he is a top 5 player and has been since the game first came out, he IS better than 99.9% of all other players online.
he has a large number of games under his belt, and games (mostly wins) against all the other top players as backing or experience of this.
i think that you would have to have knowledge of these people in order to make the statements that you have done (you can't just read a post and decide that he isnt all that good, just because he said things you didnt like).
it isnt a question of arrogance, it is simply that the matchmaking system is 'supposed' to match you with players of your own level and it clearly isnt succeeding, not because those better players arent online playing because they are (you can check), it simply isnt matching. neither the better or the weaker players want to be in the same game with each other (a game where the outcome is a foregone conclusion is not fun for anyone), it isnt insulting it is just logical. i dont think you have the fullest understanding of who this person is, and who he is referring to, i do and i know he is right which is why im making this post, arrogant or not it is certainly true.

your first post - i assume your a PC gamer? you are taking a step too far when considering cheating, there are already functions within the game (bugged functions if you like) that allow you to 'break' the game pretty much at will if you know how it works. no one is hacking, they are simply using existing functions in such a way as to 'cheat' the outcome of the game, it has been known for some time by a fair number of people. i know that i have descibed the details and have informed the 2k people myself months ago, i assume others have as well, it hasnt been fixed but then again nothing else has been fixed either so far.

As to your first statement, I have a problem with it because of the phrasing he used(I mentioned it as well in my previous post). Suggesting that the game matches up players in terms of skills isnt at all a bad idea, however one not only did he directly belittle us new players by stating he shouldnt be playing against us because of his skills, he also called the first ranked person a coward. Now I dont know either of them at all, but calling someone else who has a better score than you a coward because he refuses to fight you, and then go on ahead and suggest you shouldnt be playing against other new players because you are better skilled than them, is in itself contradictory:because the first is just following Morte's own train of thought. My problem is basically i felt alluded by the comment, because I myself am a new player, and I wouldnt like to lose opportunities to play against other better players than myself just because Im considered a noob: after all, we all start at it like that.

[xbman22x]

As to your first statement, I have a problem with it because of the phrasing he used(I mentioned it as well in my previous post). Suggesting that the game matches up players in terms of skills isnt at all a bad idea, however one not only did he directly belittle us new players by stating he shouldnt be playing against us because of his skills, he also called the first ranked person a coward. Now I dont know either of them at all, but calling someone else who has a better score than you a coward because he refuses to fight you, and then go on ahead and suggest you shouldnt be playing against other new players because you are better skilled than them, is in itself contradictory:because the first is just following Morte's own train of thought. My problem is basically i felt alluded by the comment, because I myself am a new player, and I wouldnt like to lose opportunities to play against other better players than myself just because Im considered a noob: after all, we all start at it like that.

Look at halo, you dont see people in the 40's playing against people in the teens. it shouldnt be different in this game.

and to be honest, if you played morte, he would take you out in the 1st 30 turns of the game and you would learn nothing, except that unit spamming is powerful. (although VERY boring)

[MorteEterna]

Look at halo, you dont see people in the 40's playing against people in the teens. it shouldnt be different in this game.

and to be honest, if you played morte, he would take you out in the 1st 30 turns of the game and you would learn nothing, except that unit spamming is powerful. (although VERY boring)

Who said I rush every time? I could not do that, and I could also not rush others.

However, the problem is that I don't want to low ranked players to lose points, I don't know them and they could cheat, if I cheat I would be known as a cheater, that's the point. However, the point is that a new player if he wants can send me a message to play a unranked match if I have time, the first that I meant for example doesn't want to fight me, that's the point.

I think they should fix it, and if one wants to challenge me, I'm open to the challenge hoping he won't insult as many players

[xbman22x]

Who said I rush every time? I could not do that, and I could also not rush others.

whatever morte, but i have never played a gvame with you where you have not spammed horseman and legion. and when you dont unit spam, you use either rome, or china. and no one else

[MorteEterna]

whatever morte, but i have never played a gvame with you where you have not spammed horseman and legion. and when you dont unit spam, you use either rome, or china. and no one else

And again you are wrong, I have also used greeks and for many games, yesterday I have asked you a rush, you are online when I have only little time or when I would like to take points

[Mysterio]

I'm curious, MorteEterna--do you always choose a civ for ranked games, always choose Random, or a combination of both? If a combination of both, roughly how often have you chosen a civ and how often have you chosen Random? For example, 30%/70%.

Morte,

You still haven't answered my question above.

[MorteEterna]

Morte,

You still haven't answered my question above.

I have said that a lot of times, maybe 10-20

I don't play random, I don't want to suicide or have NO FUN. I prefer to choose a civ, and having fun, and you could not like it, but that's my choice.

I liked to use greeks, arabs, chinese, romans, americans, english. I could try others, however there could be others on the list.