A Rethink of the Farming Rules

[Symmetry]

I would actually go further on the SOC. While it is a decent program for teaching straight "classic" style maps and play, so much emphasis on that one style actually discourages people from trying other maps that often are easier to play and that just plain offer variations you don't get out of ANY board game. I would like to see a bit less emphasis on SOC being the way to learn, and more on helping people find their own "niche"... whatever it is.

A mentor program, along with a guide to the maps would go a LONG way towards that. However, I am not even sure we really need a true mentor program. There is one, I know unofficially. However, my point in this thread is that often a lot of thise "anti-farming" stuff actually hurts the people who ARE decent players. Anyone who plays a lot of lower ranks or who just plays a lot of one particular map risks being labeled a "farmer".. just because they do that. I know of a couple of people who used to play AOR2 exclusively. I played them fairly often because it was/is one of my favorite maps. Then they disappeared. Why? Because starting so many maps of the same type was considered "farming".

To be fair, the guy involved in the original complaint that kind of inspired this thread, basically admitted he was farming, just that he was doing so within the bare limits of the rules.

His reply

And the money quote:

SInce what I do is NOT technically FARMING, can you call it near-farming, or ranching or herding like I do. I take offense at people calling me a farmer -- it's Baiting and Flaming. (Mods, you can put a stop to that)

He would prefer to think of it as herding new players, or ranching them of course.

[PLAYER57832]

SInce what I do is NOT technically FARMING, can you call it near-farming, or ranching or herding like I do. I take offense at people calling me a farmer -- it's Baiting and Flaming. (Mods, you can put a stop to that)

He would prefer to think of it as herding new players, or ranching them of course.

Honestly, if he plays decently, who cares? However, my experience is that people who show little regard for others in one fashion tend to be all around jerks. It is the "being a jerk" that needs limitation. I would change the "no farming" rule to "if you show a habit of being nasty to lower ranks (or other groups), you will be excluded from playing".

[nebsmith]

I like the idea of a mentoring program for new players to introduce them to the various styles of play.

On Farming a couple of ideas

1) Stop players over a certain rank playing in 1 v 1 games with ?

2) come up with a definition of farming that involves a percentage of your opponents in your last 50 games being ? This could be tracked automatically and warnings sent that you were nearing your NR limit. The idea being that if you get one of these warnings it is time to change the type of games you play for a while. If you ignore the warning and go over your NR percentage then your games could be looked at by the mods.

[Gillipig]

I like the idea of a mentoring program for new players to introduce them to the various styles of play.

On Farming a couple of ideas

1) Stop players over a certain rank playing in 1 v 1 games with ?

2) come up with a definition of farming that involves a percentage of your opponents in your last 50 games being ? This could be tracked automatically and warnings sent that you were nearing your NR limit. The idea being that if you get one of these warnings it is time to change the type of games you play for a while. If you ignore the warning and go over your NR percentage then your games could be looked at by the mods.

Well we could just start an unofficial program and help low ranks and newbies by ourselves! Wasn't that how SoC was created? I don't remember SoC as official when I was new here.

[PLAYER57832]

I like the idea of a mentoring program for new players to introduce them to the various styles of play.

On Farming a couple of ideas

1) Stop players over a certain rank playing in 1 v 1 games with ?

2) come up with a definition of farming that involves a percentage of your opponents in your last 50 games being ? This could be tracked automatically and warnings sent that you were nearing your NR limit. The idea being that if you get one of these warnings it is time to change the type of games you play for a while. If you ignore the warning and go over your NR percentage then your games could be looked at by the mods.

Well we could just start an unofficial program and help low ranks and newbies by ourselves! Wasn't that how SoC was created? I don't remember SoC as official when I was new here.

There is one already...

[Gillipig]

I like the idea of a mentoring program for new players to introduce them to the various styles of play.

On Farming a couple of ideas

1) Stop players over a certain rank playing in 1 v 1 games with ?

2) come up with a definition of farming that involves a percentage of your opponents in your last 50 games being ? This could be tracked automatically and warnings sent that you were nearing your NR limit. The idea being that if you get one of these warnings it is time to change the type of games you play for a while. If you ignore the warning and go over your NR percentage then your games could be looked at by the mods.

Well we could just start an unofficial program and help low ranks and newbies by ourselves! Wasn't that how SoC was created? I don't remember SoC as official when I was new here.

There is one already...

Is there? How active is it and what guidelines do they follow?

[PLAYER57832]

I believe this is the latest link:

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23562&view=unread#unread

I don't know the current status.

[Gillipig]

I believe this is the latest link:

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23562&view=unread#unread

I don't know the current status.

I think it's still active, question is how active though. One big problem I have with this group is that mentors are allowed to play against the players they mentor. To remove eventual farmers and be credible it mustn't allow games like that.

[Symmetry]

I guess there are a few main suggestions that have emerged, but

1) Increase the threshold of players that can be considered to be farmed to at least 10 games completed.
2) Change the name of the Society of Cooks to make it more attractive to new players.

Seem to be the most easily implementable, and least controversial.

[PLAYER57832]

1) Increase the threshold of players that can be considered to be farmed to at least 10 games completed.

Not sure how this would help?

See, I questions the whole premise. Basically farming says that simply winning against poorer players is somehow wrong in and of itself. I think that basic premise is just faulty. Unless someone is repeatedly playing the same person, and basically against their will, then why is it even considered wrong?

[Gillipig]

I guess there are a few main suggestions that have emerged, but

1) Increase the threshold of players that can be considered to be farmed to at least 10 games completed.
2) Change the name of the Society of Cooks to make it more attractive to new players.

Seem to be the most easily implementable, and least controversial.

Those are the minor suggestions!

[Metsfanmax]

See, I questions the whole premise. Basically farming says that simply winning against poorer players is somehow wrong in and of itself. I think that basic premise is just faulty. Unless someone is repeatedly playing the same person, and basically against their will, then why is it even considered wrong?

Farming is the practice of winning against players by taking advantage of their unfamiliarity with game and site mechanics -- many of the New Recruits will have come here with only board game experience and will be unfamiliar with the styles of non-geographic maps. That's why farming is currently restricted to NRs -- it is assumed that after 5 games completed, you have a basic understanding of how CC operates. One question is whether this assumption holds true, or whether someone should have more games under their belt before it is decided that they are on their own. Another question is whether ranching (as DH/GLG so elegantly put it) should be restricted in nature. That's the one you're criticizing.

[PLAYER57832]

See, I questions the whole premise. Basically farming says that simply winning against poorer players is somehow wrong in and of itself. I think that basic premise is just faulty. Unless someone is repeatedly playing the same person, and basically against their will, then why is it even considered wrong?

Farming is the practice of winning against players by taking advantage of their unfamiliarity with game and site mechanics -- many of the New Recruits will have come here with only board game experience and will be unfamiliar with the styles of non-geographic maps. That's why farming is currently restricted to NRs -- it is assumed that after 5 games completed, you have a basic understanding of how CC operates. One question is whether this assumption holds true, or whether someone should have more games under their belt before it is decided that they are on their own. Another question is whether ranching (as DH/GLG so elegantly put it) should be restricted in nature. That's the one you're criticizing.

I understand, but here is also the thing. If I take the time to learn and understand a map, and win, then that is how one plays the game. Its not like football or boxing, where now knowing what to do might get you hurt. Further, just because someone has lower rank does not mean they will make for a better game playing experience. In fact, I have often found that cooks and privates are something among the nastiest idiots here.

That is why I say, I think the entire approach and attitude is just wrong. Further, I now it has resulted in ousting some decent people whom I used to play. A couple were not necessarily the most "welcoming" of people, granted. That is, they played, did not chat, etc. though I would not say they were mean. I enjoyed the fact that I could come here and pretty much gaurantee to play at least one game on my favorite maps. Now, it has changed, and becuase of the farming rule.

Some people play all the same map because they just like that map. If its classic you like.. great! CC celebrates you. IF not... well, you can be labeled a farmer. That's what I don't like.
and, really I don't think it actually improves the site experience, not really. Instead, we should concentrate on making better ways to encourage new people. (made a couple suggestions in that regard separately).

[Symmetry]

See, I questions the whole premise. Basically farming says that simply winning against poorer players is somehow wrong in and of itself. I think that basic premise is just faulty. Unless someone is repeatedly playing the same person, and basically against their will, then why is it even considered wrong?

Farming is the practice of winning against players by taking advantage of their unfamiliarity with game and site mechanics -- many of the New Recruits will have come here with only board game experience and will be unfamiliar with the styles of non-geographic maps. That's why farming is currently restricted to NRs -- it is assumed that after 5 games completed, you have a basic understanding of how CC operates. One question is whether this assumption holds true, or whether someone should have more games under their belt before it is decided that they are on their own. Another question is whether ranching (as DH/GLG so elegantly put it) should be restricted in nature. That's the one you're criticizing.

I understand, but here is also the thing. If I take the time to learn and understand a map, and win, then that is how one plays the game. Its not like football or boxing, where now knowing what to do might get you hurt. Further, just because someone has lower rank does not mean they will make for a better game playing experience. In fact, I have often found that cooks and privates are something among the nastiest idiots here.

That is why I say, I think the entire approach and attitude is just wrong. Further, I now it has resulted in ousting some decent people whom I used to play. A couple were not necessarily the most "welcoming" of people, granted. That is, they played, did not chat, etc. though I would not say they were mean. I enjoyed the fact that I could come here and pretty much gaurantee to play at least one game on my favorite maps. Now, it has changed, and becuase of the farming rule.

Some people play all the same map because they just like that map. If its classic you like.. great! CC celebrates you. IF not... well, you can be labeled a farmer. That's what I don't like.
and, really I don't think it actually improves the site experience, not really. Instead, we should concentrate on making better ways to encourage new people. (made a couple suggestions in that regard separately).

I can respect that, but clearly there's a bit of an issue with the farming rules too. I get that there are approaches that can be taken from the other side- about supporting newcomers, and those are all important too if we're actually having a rethink here.

It sounds like you have some problems with the application of the current farming rules too. How would you propose clearing them up? Nobody wants to see people caught out unfairly, and nobody wants to see people get away with stuff that's blatantly against the spirit of the rules, while being technically within the wording.

[jgordon1111]

Same topic getting beat to death again,Some of you mods say it's more work,you may be right at first.But anyone who has more than 200 games or holds the rank captain or above knows what farming is for the most part(there may be a few who dont)put a block on the inexperienced players.Dont let them join games that are against someone over 200 games experience and vice versa if you have more than 200 games experience you cant join their games. All this skirting the rules bullcrap is just that if thats how you have to play to get your rank then you dont need to be here,because its cheating dipshit. Everyone keeps saying oh i cant control who joins my games,I call bullshit (CALLOUTS FORUM). If you really want experienced players put your games there and put the password in with your games,the Noobs are not going to look there. And if you put them out there in 5 player games and get called out for farming by not putting your games in callout section then suck it up cheater and deal with it.MY what a bunch of whiners some of you are,I found out about posting games in the regular section a bunch of freaking noobs kept joining and then most of them deadbeated thats not playing, Just easy changed the type of games i am playing. This is not that hard of a thing to change on this site,you mods are in charge run it,but make sure when you put it to one person,you do it equal and across the board. It really is just that simple.Not enough MODS get more. Make 3 farming MODS thats all they do is look for farmers,just like the multi hunters.Send a message to all CC members these are the new farming rules break them and we reduce your points the first time do it again you get banned,Freaking farming will drop 90% fast for the smart ones,the stupid ones get to be a cook again, again very easy to do.

[natty dread]

I agree with Player here.

We don't need any stricter farming rules. Farming is restricted to taking advantage of NR:s, and that's good - if we start including non-NR:s to the farming rule, it will only be more harmful for the site atmosphere. People will be afraid to play any lower rankers, and it will become harder for new players to find games. Furthermore, it will be a whole can of worms opened in the C&A section - accusations will fly, whenever someone gets jealous of another's score, or has a grudge - it's easy to find "evidence" of farming when you look at someone's game history through vindictive lenses...

I mean, let's look at this rationally. The points are pretty much irrelevant. Ranks are irrelevant. Why does it matter if someone gains lots of points/rank by playing easy games? It's their choice, if they find that's the best way they enjoy this game, they should be allowed to do that. Who are we to judge them?

I'm very much against creating any more restrictions to who you can play against, or what kind of games you can create in what quantity. The NR restriction makes somewhat sense only because lots of NR:s tend to deadbeat, and it could be considered to be unfair to profit from that. But when someone is no longer a NR, it's safe to assume they'll be staying on the site and not deadbeating out of their games, most of the time.

[natty dread]

Nobody wants to see people caught out unfairly, and nobody wants to see people get away with stuff that's blatantly against the spirit of the rules, while being technically within the wording.

The way I see it, the spirit of the rules is to prevent people from profiting from NR:s en-masse because they are most likely to deadbeat out of their games.

So let me put it this way. How is "farming" non-NR low-rankers in any way harmful? You haven't shown that yet. The only harm I can see in it is that some people get butthurt about it sometimes. I posit that placing more restrictions on who you can or can't play would be infinitely more harmful for the site.

[Metsfanmax]

I'm very much against creating any more restrictions to who you can play against, or what kind of games you can create in what quantity. The NR restriction makes somewhat sense only because lots of NR:s tend to deadbeat, and it could be considered to be unfair to profit from that. But when someone is no longer a NR, it's safe to assume they'll be staying on the site and not deadbeating out of their games, most of the time.

There's an important point to be made here, though; while it should probably be okay to just play against whoever you want, there's a strong argument for there being restrictions against inviting such low ranked players to your games, with the knowledge that you're going to take advantage of their lack of understanding of the maps you're inviting them to.

[Symmetry]

Nobody wants to see people caught out unfairly, and nobody wants to see people get away with stuff that's blatantly against the spirit of the rules, while being technically within the wording.

The way I see it, the spirit of the rules is to prevent people from profiting from NR:s en-masse because they are most likely to deadbeat out of their games.

So let me put it this way. How is "farming" non-NR low-rankers in any way harmful? You haven't shown that yet. The only harm I can see in it is that some people get butthurt about it sometimes. I posit that placing more restrictions on who you can or can't play would be infinitely more harmful for the site.

Infinitely more? That's a big number, not many bigger outside of the school yard, where of course, infinity plus one rules apply in such arguments.

Taking it down a notch, the case I cited in the OP was one in which a high ranking player approached players new to the site and asked them to play a game with him. Note that he approached them, and targeted new players. I tend toward the opinion that this is pretty immoral. I interpret the spirit of the rule a little differently- I think that it's to allow new players a decent shot at getting used to the game without being preyed on by experienced players. I don't particularly see it as a way of protecting high ranking players from deadbeats.

[PLAYER57832]

I'm very much against creating any more restrictions to who you can play against, or what kind of games you can create in what quantity. The NR restriction makes somewhat sense only because lots of NR:s tend to deadbeat, and it could be considered to be unfair to profit from that. But when someone is no longer a NR, it's safe to assume they'll be staying on the site and not deadbeating out of their games, most of the time.

There's an important point to be made here, though; while it should probably be okay to just play against whoever you want, there's a strong argument for there being restrictions against inviting such low ranked players to your games, with the knowledge that you're going to take advantage of their lack of understanding of the maps you're inviting them to.

I agree that inviting lower ranks specifically is a different issue, but the problem I have seen is that people who just like to play particular maps get ousted not even for inviting people, but becuase they set up bunches of the same game.

Also, its one thing to just look on the newbie list and shoot them a pm, its something else to play a game with someone and then invite them to play another.

I think the solution is to not worry so much about farming, and instead work on things like a semi-official mentor program that works in conjunction with SOC to deal with maps they don't do, and some more information for folks on the varieties of maps.

I have earlier come up with a list of maps I would reccommend for people to start. (Classic actually was not one, unless through SOC, because so many people here are just plain very good at Classic). However, it was pretty much dismissed by the posters/crowd at that time since it did not emphasize classic. Things like that will go much further to making sure the CC community is inviting and attractive than farming rules and such.

The other issue would be to somehow change the point structure. However, every change has a serious down side. For example, if you make fewer points available to people who start out, then fewer people will be willing to play them. If you give more advantage to the higher up players (as many have suggested), then you wind up with a system where it is even harder to move up, where people here early on and good have an innate advantage over later comers. ETC.

Having more awards might help some, by offering folks more ways to get their "kudos".

[PLAYER57832]

Nobody wants to see people caught out unfairly, and nobody wants to see people get away with stuff that's blatantly against the spirit of the rules, while being technically within the wording.

The way I see it, the spirit of the rules is to prevent people from profiting from NR:s en-masse because they are most likely to deadbeat out of their games.

So let me put it this way. How is "farming" non-NR low-rankers in any way harmful? You haven't shown that yet. The only harm I can see in it is that some people get butthurt about it sometimes. I posit that placing more restrictions on who you can or can't play would be infinitely more harmful for the site.

Infinitely more? That's a big number, not many bigger outside of the school yard, where of course, infinity plus one rules apply in such arguments.

Taking it down a notch, the case I cited in the OP was one in which a high ranking player approached players new to the site and asked them to play a game with him. Note that he approached them, and targeted new players. I tend toward the opinion that this is pretty immoral. I interpret the spirit of the rule a little differently- I think that it's to allow new players a decent shot at getting used to the game without being preyed on by experienced players. I don't particularly see it as a way of protecting high ranking players from deadbeats.

I know of a few cases where this happens. I also know of a couple of people who did this to up their number of people played, not so much for points.

I do think that someone who sends multiple pms to new people should be watched, if not curtailed. However, I don't believe they really have a negative impact unless they are mean and nasty. (and sadly, too often farmers are). The problem is "mean and nasty" is too subjective. Mods only have so much time, so the simpler the better.

I think farming is mostly a concern to some high rank people who have conquerer aspirations. I don't think it actually harms the rest of the community much, if at all. Yet the arguments against it are that it hurts new people.

[Symmetry]

Nobody wants to see people caught out unfairly, and nobody wants to see people get away with stuff that's blatantly against the spirit of the rules, while being technically within the wording.

The way I see it, the spirit of the rules is to prevent people from profiting from NR:s en-masse because they are most likely to deadbeat out of their games.

So let me put it this way. How is "farming" non-NR low-rankers in any way harmful? You haven't shown that yet. The only harm I can see in it is that some people get butthurt about it sometimes. I posit that placing more restrictions on who you can or can't play would be infinitely more harmful for the site.

Infinitely more? That's a big number, not many bigger outside of the school yard, where of course, infinity plus one rules apply in such arguments.

Taking it down a notch, the case I cited in the OP was one in which a high ranking player approached players new to the site and asked them to play a game with him. Note that he approached them, and targeted new players. I tend toward the opinion that this is pretty immoral. I interpret the spirit of the rule a little differently- I think that it's to allow new players a decent shot at getting used to the game without being preyed on by experienced players. I don't particularly see it as a way of protecting high ranking players from deadbeats.

I know of a few cases where this happens. I also know of a couple of people who did this to up their number of people played, not so much for points.

I do think that someone who sends multiple pms to new people should be watched, if not curtailed. However, I don't believe they really have a negative impact unless they are mean and nasty. (and sadly, too often farmers are). The problem is "mean and nasty" is too subjective. Mods only have so much time, so the simpler the better.

I think farming is mostly a concern to some high rank people who have conquerer aspirations. I don't think it actually harms the rest of the community much, if at all. Yet the arguments against it are that it hurts new people.

Sort of a big part of the argument is that is discourages new players from sticking around. I can't post any figures, I can just go with my gut on that and personal experience from other sites. Unfortunately, if they don't stick around, they won't raise it as an issue. So that part of the problem becomes a bit self-selecting. The people who experienced that behaviour and stayed are kind of by definition the ones who didn't have a problem with it.

Am I explaining that well? It's a bit of a wordy post...

[s3xt0y]

Personally I think there should be a farming rule written in the rules, not just the:

Unwritten Rules

Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, holding players hostage, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new recruits.

I think it should basically go along the lines of:

Taking advantage of unknowing players in an un-sportsman like manor. This includes but is not limited to:

1. A consistent history of farming players
2. Consistently using game settings that attract new recruits (5 player games)
3. A consistent abuse of gameplay that allows a player an advantage over another player

or something like that....

[Symmetry]

Personally I think there should be a farming rule written in the rules, not just the:

Unwritten Rules

Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, holding players hostage, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new recruits.

I think it should basically go along the lines of:

Taking advantage of unknowing players in an un-sportsman like manor. This includes but is not limited to:

1. A consistent history of farming players
2. Consistently using game settings that attract new recruits (5 player games)
3. A consistent abuse of gameplay that allows a player an advantage over another player

or something like that....

I think there's some fair points there, but if point one doesn't come with a definition of farming (unless that was what you meant by point 3), it gets kind of circular.

[s3xt0y]

There is never going to be a black and white line you can draw because someone will find a way around it. Thats why they have the unwritten rules. Thats a general list so the mods would have some breathing room to decide what is bad and what is acceptable.