Changing the game to accommodate a ranking system dishonors M.U.L.E.

[C64 nostalgia]

I spun this into a new thread. To me, rodz's post is mostly about the game, not so much about the ranking system.

after some thought on the matter (yes it hurt) i feel some changes need to be made if we change to this new ranking system, they are

...
2. no land auctions in round 1 ( more luck than skill to get one)
3. no land win/loss before round 4 (again luck not skill and can dramatically affect game outcome)

other than that i feel the game is as perfect as you can make it and thank all those involved for the great work you are doing.

Luck is a vital part of the game. I'm not sure why there is a movement to root it out. Luck provides randomness. Luck allows anyone to win.

To use a ranking system as justification to excise luck out of a clearly luck-dependent game epitomizes the cart leading the horse (I hope this idiom extends past English.).

[Chuckie Chuck]

Hear Hear - Agree 100%

I'm all for high risk gambles, that's the nature of the game.
So is the randomness.

To me, this is really close to having artificial real life in a game, it's amazing how well they implemented the concept 27 years ago on a simple Atari.

Having a truskill ranking system, with the game the way it is, seems very fair to me.  You're measured on skill and strategy, and so you get some points for any placing in the game above 4th.  There is a goal of having an overall successful colony, not just to win here.  In Gambit's post in the other thread, it's clear that he/she doesn't understand that.

The truskill ranking system also to some extent may show how successful a gambler you are.  I don't think this game is just about winning.  I've mentioned some of my ideas about ranking in the original thread.

Would like to note, the over all success of entire colonies is tracked.  We can sort the games by highest overall game score.  Some games you can tell people are playing to win, to the detriment of the colony.  The game finishes with a low overall score.  The game is ranked low.  Somehow those stats should play into how many points a player gets overall.  First thought was this might be complicated to implement, but actually would be very easy.

Simply, give players a point count in the stats that is 10% of their personal final points at the end of each game.  Ex:  Player gets a final score of 47,053 at the end of a game, then the ranking reflects a 471 point increase in rank.  (Use the round up above 5, round down below 4 concept.)

My thoughts anyhow.

[rodz]

c64

the reason i see the need to change some, and only some, of the things as outlined is because if the new rating system is based on skill then skill has to be the predominant feature.
the changes suggested dramatically affect the skill of any player and this is the reason i suggested these.