Conquer Club

Posted: **Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:29 am**

Offical Suggestion wrote:Concise description:
Allow players to create games that would setup a restriction on what ranks would be able to join the game.

Specifics/Details:
Setting up these games would be a premium only perk.
When setting up, players would be allowed to restrict games to players that are one rank above and one rank below their current rank.
After joining a rank restricted game, players would not be kicked out if their score dropped below the required score.
These games would be treated the same as private games and dropped after the allotted time period.
These games should be able to be searched for from game finder.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
Allows people to easily search out players will similar scores/skill levels.
Gives people something to strive for.
Allows players to play up a rank if they desire.

chapcrap wrote:Under new management, this suggestion is no longer deemed to be under rejected status. Please continue a discussion on it.

That being said, the new leadership has expressed a concern of activity:
There needs to be some kind of tradeoff between allowing filtering and encouraging overall activity.

So, for those interested in this suggestion. Please be aware that it needs to be set up to encourage activity if the rank segregation in implemented. Please read agentcom's summation below.

agentcom wrote:Mod edit: This will be a repository for most suggestions that in some way attempt to allow an option for players to segregate public games by score. There are many users on this site that would like this to be a feature. But for now, the official status of these suggestions is REJECTED. All of them. Even ones that limit to +/- 2 ranks above/below the creator's. No matter how creative or unique they have been, they have all been REJECTED up to this point. This is not to say that the discussion needs to stop, or that you should be discouraged from lending your support to this idea. However, as it stands now, this is not and will not be implemented. It has been suggested for a variety of reasons including reducing farming, reducing defenses to farming allegations, convenience and personal preference. If you must post a new suggestion of this manner, please catch yourself up on this idea's history. Your idea has probably been thought of and posted before. If you see any other topics that should be MERGED with this one, please post them here. - agentcom

On a similar note, other methods of segregation have also been REJECTED. For example:

By allowing this option only for premiums - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=100129&p=2274718
By allowing an option to disallow lower ranked players - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=68844
By other criteria such as games played or attendance/turn percentage - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=103184&p=2334949
Or even by age - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=105383&p=2376063
By allowing players to drop a game that has a high point difference - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=156448&p=3429757

Also included but without link:
Search filter in GameFinder
Restrict by Rating
Add all members of a certain rank to foe list (they may be removed once the rank changes)

Here are some highlights of this thread:

July 11, 2006:
lackattack wrote:I don't like this idea. What if it became popular? New recruits would have trouble finding games. They would be stuck in games with other new recruits and their first CC experience would be full of deadbeating.

You only get one chance to make a first impression

July 15, 2009:
Thezzaruz wrote:
AAFitz wrote:
6evil9 wrote:i am not a gold member, so how can i avoid playing cooks?

$25

He could find a premium friend that starts passworded games too.

cowboyz wrote:If this gets brought up multiple times a month maybe there is something to it?

A poor and/or unwanted idea doesn't get any better/wanted just because it is repeatedly suggested.
Rank discrimination is still possible, CC just don't want to make it too easily done.

July 17, 2010:
TheForgivenOne wrote:The reason this won't be done is that they believe if new recruits are less able to join games with high rankers, that means they are going to be playing with themselves more often. Games with new recruits are generally less enjoyable because they tend to deadbeat or suicide more often than experienced players. So new recruits would be less likely to stay and ultimately purchase premium because they would have a more negative experience by playing in games with more deadbeats like themselves. Along with the fact point segregation is bad. How are lower ranks supposed to learn if they can't find an open game against a higher rank? They will just keep learning bad strategies

Finally, some users have posted suggestions that you be able to filter Game Finder results by rank (among numerous other desired filters). This thread is not intended to cover such modifications to the Game Finder results and display. I recognize that there are topics along those lines that were merged with threads that were later merged here. However, if you would like to propose modifications to the Game Finder search results/display, please find an appropriate thread. One is here: viewtopic.php?f=471&t=104785&p=2365772

Mod Note(s):

-An error in merging resulted in a thread including this concept and a request to count Peloponnesian War as an "advanced" Map being merged in.

Posted: **Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:32 am**

Get off your High and mighty horse dagreatbroomhead!!!
I can understand the option to have invite only games as we all get to know one another better and would like to limit perticipaction to a certain list of people such as a buddy list or somtin, but it sounds like your more concerned that some one like me in 6..houndreth place (a private) is going to make a fool of ya, chump up and play whoever, take a good game and give a good game, enjoy. Dont POINT HUNT.
just my opinion Joetalk OUT

Posted: **Tue Feb 07, 2006 3:48 am**

Although I agree with joetalk, I feel your pain broomhead. I'm woefully poor at this game and so low-ranked, but what wants to roll the dice with any other person what turned up and may be a bum. I want to DEMAND that Lackattack TAKE MY CASH for private, by-invitation only games. It's the LET US PAY YOU, LACKATTACK! campaign! Let us pay you, Lackattack. I'm mad and have excess income! I'm as heavy with rage as my pockets are with cash! TAKE MY MONEY!

Posted: **Tue Feb 07, 2006 4:06 pm**

well maybe you should work your way up the ladder like everyone else instead of getting lucky and beating one high ranked person. Try to look at the other side.

Posted: **Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:25 am**

I do have some understanding and dont want people to think otherwise, im on my way to my first win When ever "people" get online and can feel the pain when lossing what points i do have, so dont think im some cold S.O.B. just a little bitter from lossing my first 8 games. :lol:

Posted: **Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:40 pm**

Offical Suggestion wrote:Concise description:
Allow players to create games that would setup a restriction on what ranks would be able to join the game.

Specifics/Details:
Setting up these games would be a premium only perk.
When setting up, players would be allowed to restrict games to players that are one rank above and one rank below their current rank.
After joining a rank restricted game, players would not be kicked out if their score dropped below the required score.
These games would be treated the same as private games and dropped after the allotted time period.
These games should be able to be searched for from game finder.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
Allows people to easily search out players will similar scores/skill levels.
Gives people something to strive for.
Allows players to play up a rank if they desire.

chapcrap wrote:Under new management, this suggestion is no longer deemed to be under rejected status. Please continue a discussion on it.

That being said, the new leadership has expressed a concern of activity:
There needs to be some kind of tradeoff between allowing filtering and encouraging overall activity.

So, for those interested in this suggestion. Please be aware that it needs to be set up to encourage activity if the rank segregation in implemented. Please read agentcom's summation below.

agentcom wrote:Mod edit: This will be a repository for most suggestions that in some way attempt to allow an option for players to segregate public games by score. There are many users on this site that would like this to be a feature. But for now, the official status of these suggestions is REJECTED. All of them. Even ones that limit to +/- 2 ranks above/below the creator's. No matter how creative or unique they have been, they have all been REJECTED up to this point. This is not to say that the discussion needs to stop, or that you should be discouraged from lending your support to this idea. However, as it stands now, this is not and will not be implemented. It has been suggested for a variety of reasons including reducing farming, reducing defenses to farming allegations, convenience and personal preference. If you must post a new suggestion of this manner, please catch yourself up on this idea's history. Your idea has probably been thought of and posted before. If you see any other topics that should be MERGED with this one, please post them here. - agentcom

On a similar note, other methods of segregation have also been REJECTED. For example:

By allowing this option only for premiums - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=100129&p=2274718
By allowing an option to disallow lower ranked players - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=68844
By other criteria such as games played or attendance/turn percentage - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=103184&p=2334949
Or even by age - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=105383&p=2376063
By allowing players to drop a game that has a high point difference - viewtopic.php?f=471&t=156448&p=3429757

Here are some highlights of this thread:

July 11, 2006:
lackattack wrote:I don't like this idea. What if it became popular? New recruits would have trouble finding games. They would be stuck in games with other new recruits and their first CC experience would be full of deadbeating.

You only get one chance to make a first impression

July 15, 2009:
Thezzaruz wrote:
AAFitz wrote:
6evil9 wrote:i am not a gold member, so how can i avoid playing cooks?

$25

He could find a premium friend that starts passworded games too.

cowboyz wrote:If this gets brought up multiple times a month maybe there is something to it?

A poor and/or unwanted idea doesn't get any better/wanted just because it is repeatedly suggested.
Rank discrimination is still possible, CC just don't want to make it too easily done.

July 17, 2010:
TheForgivenOne wrote:The reason this won't be done is that they believe if new recruits are less able to join games with high rankers, that means they are going to be playing with themselves more often. Games with new recruits are generally less enjoyable because they tend to deadbeat or suicide more often than experienced players. So new recruits would be less likely to stay and ultimately purchase premium because they would have a more negative experience by playing in games with more deadbeats like themselves. Along with the fact point segregation is bad. How are lower ranks supposed to learn if they can't find an open game against a higher rank? They will just keep learning bad strategies

Finally, some users have posted suggestions that you be able to filter Game Finder results by rank (among numerous other desired filters). This thread is not intended to cover such modifications to the Game Finder results and display. I recognize that there are topics along those lines that were merged with threads that were later merged here. However, if you would like to propose modifications to the Game Finder search results/display, please find an appropriate thread. One is here: viewtopic.php?f=471&t=104785&p=2365772

We should have games that you can enter only if you've reached a certain level, this way we can have games with people of similar skill and dedication.

Posted: **Tue Feb 14, 2006 5:57 pm**

Agreed. But i also want to kick some newbie butt

Posted: **Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:30 pm**

having this option would limit the frequency of dead beats seeing as if you payed the 20$ it means your into the game.

Posted: **Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:13 am**

Maybe you should be allowed to specify the score they need to play matches.

Posted: **Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:07 pm**

Maybe...

Well, I think this really interest only for the well ranked players, over 1400 points... But lets also think about the beginners, they will not like so much of Conquer Club if they begin playing games with lots of deadbeats... so, that specification under 1200 (maybe 1400) points is a bad idea, in my opinion.

Maybe we should have official tourneys by ranking... one only to sergeants, other for captains...

Posted: **Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:55 pm**

i am sick of going into a doubles or tripkes game and being stuck with newbs on my team, and end up loosing because they dont know how to play. i think then when we create games there should be an option that says all players or privates and above, or seargents and above, and so on.

Posted: **Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:01 pm**

I think that we all had to learn how to play and if you implimented your suggestion it would make finding a game hard for new people. And if you really don't want to play with new people you can always start a private game and advertise it on the forum. Then you can pick and choose who you play with.

Posted: **Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:30 pm**

Mike .... I feel the same way.... if you ever want a partner let me know.... I'm not a premium member... woudl have a hard time explaining it to my wife.... so I can't create private games....

Posted: **Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:18 pm**

Same, here. I am not premium. I am all for helping people play the game, m just upset at the people whom make an account join a game and dont play, then you dont have a partner. Currently i am in a triple game with 2 unranked players. ! has missed 2 turns already, so i assume he is not playing, the other is not listening to anything i have to say, even though my strategy is for the best. I dont even thing he know how to check his messages, and he hasnt respnded to the chat bnox in the game where i contacted him. its just really aggrevating because ill prbably loose the game and i cant do anything about it. i believe there should be filters. If some one doesnt want to restict anyone then they cna click all players, but for me i cant play with any new players, i just cant.

Posted: **Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:52 pm**

i understand about the not listening to the strategy part... i have a game going where my partner and i had it made, but i wanted to help him take out someone's austrailia before he ended his turn, but he ended it right away even though he knew i was talking to him. lol i want to play with people that think

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:39 am**

Soemtimes you get stuck with n00bs and deadbeats but sometimes you play against n00bs and deadbeats with another experinced player
n00bs you either love em or hate em
So far 99% hate them

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:55 am**

Food for thought: should new recruits be blocked from joining team games?

If it would make team games more enjoyable and reduce the need for private games, then that's good.

But if the first few games are teams and a new player tries to join, he/she could get frustrated and give up and never come back.

Unless we just don't list team games for new recruits. Then I'll have to make sure there is always 1 open public standard game.

What do you guys think?

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:26 am**

Yeah Lack I think that would fix the problem nicely. And I don't think you would have to worry about making sure there is always a game open there are more open games now than I've ever seen. You should definatly make it clear to the new ppl that they will eventually get ot play team games though because a lot of the draw to this site is getting to play with your friends.

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:49 am**

There should be some sort of player-rank preference system, so a General can't just go noob-hunting and join a game full of New Recruits to boost his score. You should have some control over the skill level of your opponents for a fair fight.

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:12 am**

Have you read the How to Play section? cause there is such a thing in place. If your score is 4000 and you go against people with 1000 score, you will get very little points. Please make sure you know what is in place or what has been suggested before you make a suggestion.

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:15 am**

All is fair in Love and War.

Maybe the "Ringers" should be required to play standard sequential games against any newbies, and then any advantage of freestyle/holding/doubles would not have the advantageous effect on the ranked players.

Forced to play the game as it was originally intended, these people would be on a more fair playing field regarding newer players and maybe, just maybe, their respective asses might be handed to them in a handlebasket.

Ummmm...., Notice I used the word respect. I have respect for those that have achieved ranking status by the means implemented on this board. I just do not like those types of games that allow and nuture an uneven playing field.

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:19 pm**

supermarcol wrote:Have you read the How to Play section? cause there is such a thing in place. If your score is 4000 and you go against people with 1000 score, you will get very little points. Please make sure you know what is in place or what has been suggested before you make a suggestion.

They're still allowed to do it. What fun is that? You know you're doomed when the game begins.

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:30 pm**

Not neccesarily, the game is called Risk for a reason, you may be given good countries to start off or maybe the dice tolls will go badly. Simply because they are so much higher ranked doesnt mean they are gonna own you.

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:32 pm**

And remember points doesn't reflect skill 100% People could have a better strategy but loses it is not more points you win.

Posted: **Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:39 pm**

True. But if you're a New Recruit and a Major joins your game, they probably know what they're doing better than you do.
Maybe a New Recruit Only game system? Like a tutorial for the first three games.

Conquer Club

[GO] [Rules] Rank Restricted Games

[GO] [Rules] Rank Restricted Games

Get off your high and mighty horse!!!!

fair enough

[GO] Rank Restricted Games

member only games?

Score game allowance

players

Player Balance system