50 wins in a year is too high.

Another null point error.  [url][http://www.planetmule.com/hi-score-game/game?game_id=50692/url]

Off another player auction.

Please fix this.  Land has become so valuable, even over-valued in some cases, that selling land can get a player with no tite plots back into the game.  Having the game crash after an hour of playing is frustrating.

And the seller of the land gets blamed.... all he did was try to sell an asset.

Yes, I can't stand it:

http://www.planetmule.com/forum?topic=1121.msg5879#new

My post above is my intellectual argument.  Here is my emotional one:

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, do not go to a Truskill type of ranking system.  I have played other games that use it and I can't stand it. 

It especially will not work in MULE because the sample of games isn't nearly large enough.

MULE is about winning people!

WINNING!  I don't want to feel good about coming in 2nd.

I don't mind a new ranking system per se, however awarding people points for 2nd and 3rd place has a MAJOR flaw:

I would make certain plays during games to win or bust.  Sell a plot of land late, buy stite @108, etc.  Sometimes I take major gambles to WIN, not to play it safe and hope to come in second.  I have finished last many times when I could have just played it out and finished 2nd.  

I won a game last week making almost no ore or stite, but instead took all 4 river plots and won with food and energy; against very good players ranked in the top 100.  If a statagy like that bombs on me and I finish 4th and lose ranking, where is my motivation to try to experiment with something new?

The basic premise is wrong, the 4th place player is NOT nessessarily worse than the 2nd place guy and maybe even played better.  

If there is a new rating system, still award points for winning and nothing else.  Don't reward a player for just being the first loser.

One way to do it is by rewarding the winning player extra points for how much he wins by.
Winning by 5000 is a lot more impressive than winning by 500.  Although frankly I am happy with the ranking system the way it is.




 

Last place guy gets first shot at property and then next to last and so on even though those players did NOTHING to earn those advantages since the order for round 1 is randomely picked.

100% agreee.  Get rid of first round auctions.

Round 12 trading should be eliminated. 
Allow food to spike as energy does.  I don't understand why they are treated differently.
Leave the acution style in round 12,  I like to see why I won or lost.

I have waited 25 years to play MULE again and I don't get all the hate for the people who put it together.
Of course the land auction isn't perfect.... so what?

It is still better than it was and I have never lost a game I felt was due because someone was able to cheat me during an auction.  I do like players not being able to just run up the bid of an auction and then back out and not buy it. 

It takes about 1 1/2 hours to play a MULE game, so waiting a few minutes for someone to host a game is just part of playing.  There are usually players around to host if you are patient.   Pay close attenion to their host rating... a few guys are unethical.

Not letting everyone see the assay would change the game a great deal, including lowing the host advantage because everyone won't go for the same plot as often.  I am all for it.

The hording tactic would still be there... it would just be a different player doing the hording.

Also, the lag issue would be huge.  It is a case of the cure being worse than the disease.

I second this... when these guys cheat newbies they don't come back and less players hurts the MULE communtiy

Sorry, I don't like it at all... MULE is an economic game of suppy and demand... suppy housing doesn't fit