#1 Ranking

Agree. Sadly this has been raised as long as Bytro came into play with Supremacy.

And that was more then 8 years ago...

I do not see any advantage in this. I start a game with the objective of staying in first for this and others do not participate of many at the same time only to give priority to the current ones

markprice112 wrote:

I have noticed a lot of players play for rankngs rather than wins.

When I see that a highly ranked player has played in a very large number of games, but has very few if any game wins, and has a kills-to-losses ratio near 1:1, that speaks volumes about the style of play and the sophistication of tactics employed by that player. Other key stats I look at when I am evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of a potential adversary (or ally) are the specific kills-to-losses ratios for tactical bombers and armor units, and I want to see how many industrial/infrastructure improvements they build in an average game (including reactors). Players who have a low kills-to-losses ratio against other human players are often just clanging large stacks of units against other large stacks, and that is not a particularly sophisticated way to play COW. I am also highly skeptical of any player who has a low kills-to-losses ratio against AI opponents; with experience, an adept player should have a minimum kills-to-losses of 5:1 versus AI countries. If you have something like a 1:1 ratio against AI opponents, you probably need some coaching.