ive been playing many strategy games in the past decades,what most of them had in common before 2010 was a proper ranking system.
the idea of it was to measure ones strength appropriate,so better players can enjoy themselves with equals as much as worse players could do the same.
meanwhile this system here is kind of manipulating everyone with an iq below 100(that people with such a lack of intelligence are already trying themselves on strategy is a problem in my opinion) and giving them the idea they are good because they played long enough.
i had a really disgusting game yesterday,i dont say im good,but im not as bad as what was displayed by these 2.
first of all we have the picking phase, my team consisted of people whos level equaled their IQ:https://prnt.sc/h8q0o0
they were almost lvl 60 and look at their pickshttps://prnt.sc/h8q0f2
mitochondria seriously asked me why its bad to have 4 territories in a corner of a bonus while you will be able to guess whats happening to the blue player.
yea right,turn 4 and hes done 4https://prnt.sc/h8q0xr
at the end of this all i had to face stuff like "im lvl 60 man,you are just lvl 20"...i felt like i was cornered by monkeys.
there are other genres where its alright to keep it casual,but i dont see any point in doing so on a in-depth strategy game.
give me something reasonable as for why it is as it is...making these apes happy cant be the reason...or can it?
Edited 11/10/2017 15:09:44