64 replies to this topic

[coyote123]

If you only allow one nick a month for everyone then the real good players can not keep adding new names an would have to REALLY have to be good, if they wanted to play!

[Ben]

They actually are really good and only restart when their records look messy.

[desoLane]

Players are only allowed one nick in HOF, multiple nicks are removed when the HOF is finalized for the month.

edit moved to XCL Discussion & a reminder that suggestions forum is closed at the moment.

Edited by desoLane, 30 November 2005 - 06:07 AM.

[RoBBiBoY]

allow just one nick!! thats a great idea.

because like every dude top 50, has like 3 - 4 nicks, makes it really hard for other people to get the rank they deserve, when the 100 people infront of you are like only 30 - 40 people with different nicks.

im now talking bout top 100.

catch my drift ?

its like having a premier league with only chelsea arsenal and man utd. just under different names playing eachother

its bulls.h.i.t

Edited by RoBBiBoY, 01 December 2005 - 04:12 PM.

[i3el1ev3]

allow just one nick!! thats a great idea.

because like every dude top 50, has like 3 - 4 nicks, makes it really hard for other people to get the rank they deserve, when the 100 people infront of you are like only 30 - 40 people with different nicks.

im now talking bout top 100.

catch my drift ?

its like having a premier league with only chelsea arsenal and man utd. just under different names playing eachother

its bulls.h.i.t

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

lol

[Aegis]

Id rather a female ladder

[Jeff.]

Id rather a female ladder

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

lol ^^ and people also make new nicks so they can vs good players that they like to play against (10 win rule)

[JoKuJaK]

i like the 1 nick idea but its impossible to get done..

[CoLoKiLLz]

allow just one nick!! thats a great idea.

because like every dude top 50, has like 3 - 4 nicks, makes it really hard for other people to get the rank they deserve, when the 100 people infront of you are like only 30 - 40 people with different nicks.

im now talking bout top 100.

catch my drift ?

its like having a premier league with only chelsea arsenal and man utd. just under different names playing eachother

its bulls.h.i.t

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i agree, and half way into the month u end up playing someone that has 2 nicks already with 900-1000 pts but is using a 600 point nick against you, its not very fair

[Jeff.]

i agree, and half way into the month u end up playing someone that has 2 nicks already with 900-1000 pts but is using a 600 point nick against you, its not very fair

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

what about the 10 win rule tho....

[Aegis]

Your own fault for playing to much?

I made a topic long time ago saying that its unfair to have mutliple nick names, i dont care if one nick has like 400 pts while the other has 1000, the problem is that say you sixshot, u have 1000 points, you are already top 10, but then there is like a 100 people who are trying to get good points but get matched with top 10 players on low ranked nicks.

Do you realise how many times i got matched with people who had like 20-25 wins 0 losses 800 points? I didnt even bother playing those people, clearly people who multi-nick for some reason or another.

Its just unfair.

[Jeff.]

play too much? lol u can make 10 games vs same guy in 2 hours or less i wouldnt care for only 1 nick if they didnt had that 10 win rule

Edited by Jeff., 01 December 2005 - 11:02 PM.

[Aegis]

Dude the 10 win rule is to stop pushing or 'easy wins'.

On WOL it was a 5 game rule, not 10 wins, and there was less mutli-nicking there then there is here.

The only person who ever had multiple nicks for no reason was 'Steve'.

YOU DO NOT NEED TO KEEP PLAYING.

You get like 1000 points 'oh **** i played him 10x i guess there is no one else to play, btter start a new nickname'

Yeh thats fair?

[FresH]

nothin wrong with it...

Juz get better n start owning their new nicks :o

[Aegis]

How is there nothign wrong with multi nicking? Sash, easy top 10 player, gets rank 2, loses a bunch of times, makes a new nick, before long he has like 4 or 5 nicks in top 20 while some people cant even get to top 20 because they have to compete with 1 person on 4 names.

I remember Showtime have heaps of names, you ask for a game he would say no, then jump on his lower pointed nick name and then ask you for a game lol...

[M4rLFoX]

allow just one nick!! thats a great idea.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed. There is no justifiable reason for having multiple nicks in the ladder. The most common reason is players don't like their record. Well, the record accurately displays the players' performance. For example, a player with 50 wins and 20 losses and 950 points reveals accurately that players' performance; whereas that same player with a second nick that has 20 wins and 0 losses with 600 points is not an accurate representation of that players' performance, and therefore screws over the players who are legit 600 point players. Also, the extra nick takes up the rank that many 600ish point players are striving to obtain (if you add up all of the top players with second nicks below their potential rank, it takes up quite a lot of ranks).

There should be a one nick in the ladder per month rule.

[Chrono69x]

I agree with the one nick on the ladder thing. Everyone's had good reasons for making it a decent rule...
What are the arguments for having more than one nick?

[Jeff.]

I agree with the one nick on the ladder thing. Everyone's had good reasons for making it a decent rule...
What are the arguments for having more than one nick?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So u can play people that u enjoy playing vs more then 1 day of the month?... What if lets say example yuri ladder babak vs desr start of month they played each other 10 times then end of month they end up as rank1 and rank 2 close pts not being able to play against each other for the rank1..... thats stupid

i would like 1 nick if no 10 win rule

a public ip checker on xcc site would solve alot aswell tho (fongers ip checker is ****) so people can check who is who to spot out multinickers

Edited by Jeff., 02 December 2005 - 08:51 AM.

[Aegis]

Dude, WOL was 5 games, 10 wins is more then enough, your excuse is not valid, there is 1000's of players, not just 1.

[Jeff.]

Dude, WOL was 5 games, 10 wins is more then enough, your excuse is not valid, there is 1000's of players, not just 1.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

in the top are only a few players.....

[Aegis]

Yes but tomi still vs'ed everyone in top 10 like 20x on his rank 1 nick.

There is just no excuse, the rule is a rule for a reason, no more then 10 wins, so u play sash 10x, you make new nick to play him? dude... Top 100 was like 800pts + if u have to make new nicks cause you couldnt beat the very top players then your a **** ****. Im sick of getting to like 700pts then playing a top 5 player on a new nick, im clearly not that good and want to play people around my own skill level, no sore losing nabes who dont like bad stats.

LOL, as if you give a **** if u can only play tomi 10 wins

[DonCarlo]

I agree with the one nick on the ladder thing. Everyone's had good reasons for making it a decent rule...
What are the arguments for having more than one nick?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The ONLY reason why we don't have a 1-nick rule is because of people that have siblings playing.
If this poll is anything to go by
http://xwis.net/nuke/html/modules.p...order=0&thold=0
That could affect 45% of households
1-nick rule would solve many problems, but we have not imposed it due to the objections we would get to siblings playing.

Currently only 1 nickname is allowed in HOF - but I know there is going be some crying even about that.

But maybe we could compromise at a 2 nick-rule if its enforcable.....

[Knit]

What if lets say example yuri ladder babak vs desr start of month they played each other 10 times then end of month they end up as rank1 and rank 2 close pts not being able to play against each other for the rank1..... thats stupid

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So what, say Babak makes a new nick for Desr's rank1/2 nick to play against... somehow I wouldn't see that happening. There are plenty of other decent players outside the top 2 as well, ya know..

[Jeff.]

So what, say Babak makes a new nick for Desr's rank1/2 nick to play against... somehow I wouldn't see that happening. There are plenty of other decent players outside the top 2 as well, ya know..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

was a example ;/ and there are not much good players...... but w.e

[Aegis]

So you only want to play best, you do so by making many nicks? Yeh thats fair, and makes 0 sense