There are many players from treaty, only julian was considered top. Because his supremacy rating is high. The rest are not so they are not top players
Julian was considered the best treaty player before he started playing supremacy.
Do you need to talk like a child honestly? Like you are at best arguing in bad faith.
2 Likes
Back to the title this is why treaty is removed from ranked. Treaty does not represent one player’s rts skill, so there is no point putting them in a ranked system
Treaty like all other game modes have skill differences, There exist many modes in many different games that aren’t the official main mode but yet still have (sometimes hidden) ranking systems.
if i am number 50 on the treaty leader-board and i play against a dude that is number 2000, all else being equal i will win. The point of ranking in a computer game fundamentally is to enable fair and fun matches, it is not to enforce some value judgement on people.
The treaty ranking system by in large works, i at least ain’t aware of any major cheaters on it.
The reason the treaty quick matching was removed is because it often produced poor match quality, there is no other reason.
6 Likes
No, the reason treaty was removed from auto queue ranked is because treaty players weren’t finding the queue useful and preferred custom games.
Now on my elo I have to wait 25 minutes… I even stopped playing ranked battles. I can’t sit around and kick noobs from the lobby for so long.
You and I often disagreed. But this statement is absolutely stupid. Please forgive me for being rude.
This was in reference to Ranked Quick Search for Treaty, which no longer exists (probably a good thing). In the quick search it basically gave you anyone with a pulse if it got over 7 minutes.
Easy answer
Because you start the match in imperial and for much civilization you cant be able to chose the abilities from ageing up. Or build the wonders. 
I played a couple of games in treaty recently, just to try them out, and maaaaan, what a bummer that the ranked option doesn’t allow a 10 minute treaty, it’s either 20 or 40 minutes.
And as predicted, 5 of 9 games played had the guy quit at the first sign of trouble, just because “They didn’t have time to prepare”…
Oh well, between friends it’s fun, not with ranked strangers.
1 Like
That? Of course not. That would be stupid.
I guess you’ve never lost a single game ever.
in team deathmatch you start playing in post imperial age , so is unbalance for some civilization no choosing their wonders or for example USA cant chose the extra age cards . maybe a deathmatch starting in age 1.
I understand what you mean, but in the treaty it is not usually played like that.
Note: It sounds like you’re responding to a deleted comment and maybe I responded to somethingdecontextualized.