oh you mean the available points?

it seems odd that it is remaining points, rather than total points. that gives a false impression of a players status, if he has a lot of points in play. I have found myself downgraded as I have joined games, and thought it unfair.

The system really is a disincentive to joining games, if you do not wish to lose your status.

The rank thing is just a bit of fun that's quite interesting when you first start but doesn't really mean anything. I don't think anyone considers it a useful measure of how good a player is.

I think it's greatest achievement is teaching players not to care too much about ratings. Players that do tend to become insufferable bores :p.

Yes Mark, available points. And I agree with Octavious, ranks are interesting for the first couple of months while you are passing through them, later, you stop to care...

Mark, another ranking system was developed. You can find it here:

http://tournaments.webdiplomacy.net/theghost-ratingslist

I think it would be fair to say that for most people who play very regularly on webDip and who care about that sort of thing, the Ghost-Ratings are the "real" rankings for the site.

GR is an Elo-based system. Points are not. Points were designed to discourage CDs and such. The more people realize points don't matter, the better. I've seen someone actually purposely lose a game rather than force a stalemate because he'd get more points out of a loss than a draw. It's stunning that people play Diplomacy for...points. Not to play the game.

Thanks for your replies everyone. What are the ghost ratings mentioned by ckroberts??

http://tournaments.webdiplomacy.net/theghost-ratingslist

MarquisMark GR is like the better you are rated, the more you have to "bet" to play. It means that the more highly you are rated, the more damaging it is to your rating if you lose to a bunch of noobs. It's a very eloquent system. Some people don't like it because it "penalizes new players," but after you get a few games under your belt it's hard to argue it isn't the rating system most representative of your skill.

Acosmist, that happens in PPSC and you can throw a game to take 2nd place for added ghost rating the same as for points. I have done so myself (incidentally why I don't play PPSC anymore, because that's a silly way to "win"). Play WTA and you won't have that problem.

For anyone who likes to take over Great Powers in Civil Disorder, especially if the positions taken over tend to be 1-SC or 2-SC microstates, the Ghost Ratings system is utterly and completely useless. The points system, on the other hand, offers a challenge simply in giving you the opportunity to stay even.

Yeah, maybe the changes to track reliability rating will also allow us to fix GR and not punish takeovers.

Yellowjacket - I took over a civil disorder position in that game. I never gave much thought to the idea that people would be playing a Diplomacy game to do something other than play Diplomacy, but now I know better, and will avoid PPSC games (and probably, others, at this point).

No good deed goes unpunished, I guess.

I take over any 1 or 2 SC live game I can. If I win or get in on a draw, that's a triumph, something out of nothing. If I lose, the full brunt of the loss moves my ghost rating even farther downward. That means any subsequent loss or draw to me is *even worse* for people who care about ghost ratings.

Yep aco, as somebody who pays attention to GR, I'm not likely at all to take over resigned positions. I don't think we should be punished for doing others a favor by playing out a lost cause.

Four users in a row support my comment and I don't get a single +1? ;-)

You know depth charging the site doesn't work and is against the rules, right JECE?

Or three now, I guess. What happened to Acosmist?

depth charging?
I don't see how anti-submarine warfare is relevant to anything here.

Ghost ranking... ha! The losers incentive to try to get a cancel or resign in the hope of someone else taking over the position. (I'm not accusing anyone of that... it's just the incentive.)

Depth Charging has long been the term used for trying to push a thread off the front page of the forum by posting new or promoting old threads up to the top.

You've been around long enough to remember that.

You may also remember it as an Edibomb.

Of course, the Edibomb was usually reserved for in game usage before the scrolling and history of the chat tabs was available.

I have been around for a little over four years now, but I think the Archives were already implemented by then. So I wouldn't know about 'Edibomb'.

And Draugnar, I guess I just not as active on the forum as often as you think. In any case, I wasn't trying to suppress any thread.

I guess I'm

What's the Edibomb?

Before in-game messages were archived, each country chat box could only hold about 100 messages. If you posted something in the wrong window (such as Global), you could spam the chat box until the message disappeared. Our friend Edi Birsan made note of this.

Edi had a birthday the other day or it is coming up this week. I forget which. But linked in told me (it's good to have a politician on your linked in list).