Ranked Games

[Deano2]

Hi
I've been playing a few ranked games but I'm confused about how it works. I was one turn from a good win in a game when the opponent surrendered and there was no change in my ranking, while in another game I was well ahead at 10 to 36 when another player surrendered and my ranking actually went backwards 11 ranking points, how could I be so far ahead when he surrendered and be classed the loser?
Is there a problem with the ranking system when players surrender?

Thanks
Dean

[Deano2]

Correction it was actually 15 ranking points that I went backwards in the second game not 11.

[Deano2]

Just been told the Ranking system for Ancients is broken, the scores should go up when you win and down when you lose. The surrender option was working as it should it's the normal victories and defeats that are back to front. They are planning a reset when the fix is in.

Regards

Dean

[rbodleyscott]

The fix is now in, and the scores have been reset

[Deano2]

Now that I've played many ranked games I was wondering if any thought had been put into adding an option to give the player putting up new games a choice of accepting or rejecting the offer of battle from other players?
Back when there was no ranking involved it didn't matter so much but now it would help even things up. At the moment you put up a game (or games), the other player can see your ranking before they choose to take it up, but the player who put up the game has no option to accept or reject that match. In many cases I imagine a lower ranked player may not wish to play a high ranked one or visa versa given that a lose to a low ranked player can have you losing twice the points you would stand to win.
It would be nice to have a "do you accept yes/no" option so both players have some input into who they play not just the player intending to take up the games.

[rbodleyscott]

Now that I've played many ranked games I was wondering if any thought had been put into adding an option to give the player putting up new games a choice of accepting or rejecting the offer of battle from other players?
Back when there was no ranking involved it didn't matter so much but now it would help even things up. At the moment you put up a game (or games), the other player can see your ranking before they choose to take it up, but the player who put up the game has no option to accept or reject that match. In many cases I imagine a lower ranked player may not wish to play a high ranked one or visa versa given that a lose to a low ranked player can have you losing twice the points you would stand to win.
It would be nice to have a "do you accept yes/no" option so both players have some input into who they play not just the player intending to take up the games.

I take your point, but the general policy is not to add additional back and forth stages to the game setup process.

[Deano2]

Okay but you know it's human nature to want to win so you will get some higher ranked players that will jump at the chance to take up games put up by lower ranked ones (hopefully not too many) and that will be a huge disincentive for lower ranked players to put up any games. However if they could choose to play games against similarly ranked opponents it would encourage more games being offered and played.

[rbodleyscott]

I hear you, but adding an extra stage to the setup process is against policy.

Those who don't want to be head-hunted can always set up non-ranked challenges.