Conquer Club

Idea: When multiple games have the identical players, map, and settings, then don't list them all in "join a game".

Specifics: Instead, have one of them there. When someone joins the game, add one of the additional identical games to the list so that people can either join the first one, or join the second afresh. Keep adding them to the list once they become different from the template.

Why: It would remove a lot of clutter from the page, make it easier for people to find a game quickly, and fill up some of the multiple games a lot faster for those who want to start a lot of games with the same settings. It'd remove a few pages from the kind of games I look for at least.

nah. Cause if i search for games of the kind i like, If i see one guy made 10+ games all the same, I will join all of them cause i like the game type.

If I could only see one, i would only join that one, and not bother looking back to see if another one appeared in its place...

When I do mass joining of games, I only do one search and just open a new tab to join it. It's faster and easier. This would prevent me from doing stuff like that and would suck... Besides, how would I join all of wacicha's games when he makes them if I could only see the one?

Concise Descripion:

• A check box or radio button to reduce game finder games, such that exact duplicated don't appear.

Specifics:

• This button enabled would cause the following effects:
  
  • Hide games based on settings (duplicates only)

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Make game finder more managable
• Reducing clutter when looking for a casual game.

- I considered this idea based on that some people / teams start numerous amounts of games on the same settings, and while that's fine, sometimes it would be nice to just scroll and see whats available without having to click next page to get off of one ore two different game types. This would be optional for use, so for those looking for a set of games could still see them. And also, with less results to display I think this would be much more efficient. Any comments CC?