What about adding value to the star by having a different colour for tournament winners. Quality vs Quantity. Playing thousands of moves a month is all well and good, but not that great if the quantity of moves lead to mistakes.
It also means star goodies are shared among members regardless of level.
It can be combined with move count as well.
Why not have coloured (and spinning) stars for the amount of moves and a number of different stars for level.. So your 1000 to 1300 could have one star, 1301 to 1500 two stars etc etc. 1901+ players would have five stars. A simple way to see roughly what rank people are.
Edit -
Sorry only read the first page by accident. Doh! I like the top stars/medals idea better. You could have medals for winning tournys too maybe, or maybe that would start getting a bit crowded.
Originally posted by FeastboySome tourneys are easy to win. Other tourneys are hard to win. Number of won tournies is hardly a measure how good you are in chess.
You could have medals for winning tournys too maybe, or maybe that would start getting a bit crowded.
The winner of the Tournament 1677: "2007 Championship" (with 590 participants), Cludi, have very high respect.
The winner of the Tournament 2251: "July 2007 Octet Ib 1500-1650" (with 8 only participants), is very happy for his win, yes I know, but how much respect is earned compared to Cludi?
Some win banded tournaments by means of sand bagging preparations, still a win, but with what respect?
Just thoughts...
The stars for ratings is a bad idea since we already can easily judge how good a player is from his rating or his standing in the player tables.
We do not want RHP to be like yahoo chess with colors and ranks and etc...
Just my opinion.
However, a new recognition should be awarded for for 500.000 moves or 1.000.000 moves perhaps. A rotating black star for a million mover. 🙂
Originally posted by kenanWell, people might find me negativistic... but anyway:
The stars for ratings is a bad idea since we already can easily judge how good a player is from his rating or his standing in the player tables.
We do not want RHP to be like yahoo chess with colors and ranks and etc...
Just my opinion.
However, a new recognition should be awarded for for 500.000 moves or 1.000.000 moves perhaps. A rotating black star for a million mover. 🙂
This star rewards... I don't know exactly... It's very easy to get over a million. Just start a lot of games in tournaments, make a lot of moves, and it is just a matter of time you reach a million. You don't have to make high quality moves, you don't have to win a lot, you don't have to move in time either, you just move more or less in random. If you make a move every 10 seconds, on average, 16 hours a day, in half a year, you have your million moves. But do you merit any respect for that? In my humble opinion, I don't know...
So what brings respect, what will make the owner of a start somewhat proud?
Rating level? Yes. So I think the top active player, currently Akizy, merit a special kind of symbol. The top ten active players, currently Weyerstrass, seadevil, Korch, David Tebb, mgbal, hww, Northern Lad, PAWN RIOT, and Gatecrasher merit another special kind of symbol. The top hundred active players, currently ange47, ilywrin, woodworm, cludi, maris61 ...[text shortened]... Helio Nonato, pradipkroy, Simbad, SeinfeldFan91, FouLaufer merit a third kind of symbol.
How long you have played? One for each year you've been subscribing? Yes, perhaps this merits a special kind of symbol.
But number of moves? Is this not a level of nerdiness only? I don't know...
Originally posted by HopsterHow about putting the little red trophy next to the person's star if they won a tournament? Trophies can be added the more tournaments a person won. Once a person reaches say five tournament wins, there can be the trophy icon followed by "xn" where "n"=number of tournament wins.
What about adding value to the star by having a different colour for tournament winners. Quality vs Quantity. Playing thousands of moves a month is all well and good, but not that great if the quantity of moves lead to mistakes.
It also means star goodies are shared among members regardless of level.
It can be combined with move count as well.
Ratings and level of play depend on the individual. Talent for chess seems to be inherent, and the reward here is a higher rating.
I started this thread only because eventually many players will have the spinning star with no other goal.
I do agree that maybe Tournament wins and win/loss ration should be rewarded, but that wasn't what I was talking about. I only wanted more goals for players making a lot of moves past 100,000.
Originally posted by FabianFnasIs there any way I can check against whom my 100,000th move was made? All I know is that it happened today or yesterday (I think it was 1/20).
90 members, at this very moment, has reached the rotating star.
Next in line is Zebano.
I have mere 85 K moves to go... 😴
Originally posted by zebanoYou can download the last 100 games with timetags, import it in excel, sort the moves by date and time, count backward to see wich move it was, undo the sort and see against whom you did it.
Is there any way I can check against whom my 100,000th move was made? All I know is that it happened today or yesterday (I think it was 1/20).
Originally posted by SmookiePI see lots and lots of spinning stars..
Ratings and level of play depend on the individual. Talent for chess seems to be inherent, and the reward here is a higher rating.
I started this thread only because eventually many players will have the spinning star with no other goal.
I do agree that maybe Tournament wins and win/loss ration should be rewarded, but that wasn't what I was talking about. I only wanted more goals for players making a lot of moves past 100,000.
what do you think?
Originally posted by FabianFnasNot to distract too much from your argument but I would like to see you or anyone keep up that pace for half a year.
If you make a move every 10 seconds, on average, 16 hours a day, in half a year, you have your million moves.
Disregarding that you might want to have an outside life, I would suspect that you would burn out quite quickly.
I said before, probably a couple of years back now, that we should get 'ranks' here.
I proposed something that took not only rating, but site involvement into consideration.
- Rating, or possibly something along the lines of 'has your rating improved'
- Amount of moves
- Number of Posts
- Number of Recs
- Clan involvement
- Tournament involvement
- Siege involvement
- (and now) Club involvement
I don't really know how this could be implemented, or if it's even feasible, but I think it would be a great way to award the people who are 'involved'.