Conquer Club

May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

An area holding all of the past and current Monthly Challenges.

Moderator: Community Team

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Wingnut 16ga on Fri May 23, 2014 11:01 am

Tviorr,

I take offense to your comment "(simple) effort (i.e. joining vast amount of games and playing them with reasonable effort)". Do you think it's easy playing 300 active games, not missing a turn, and playing with the desire to win?

I find it amusing that so many find something wrong with a new format. So what if this months challenge is based on games played + plus wins...not everyone thinks every challenge should be the same. And it is just this months challenge I'm sure June will bring something different also.

Wingnut 16ga
User avatar
Cook Wingnut 16ga
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:49 am
Location: 1st floor of a 2 story out house
4

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby zips5000 on Mon May 26, 2014 8:52 pm

Wingnut 16ga wrote:Tviorr,

I take offense to your comment "(simple) effort (i.e. joining vast amount of games and playing them with reasonable effort)". Do you think it's easy playing 300 active games, not missing a turn, and playing with the desire to win?

I find it amusing that so many find something wrong with a new format. So what if this months challenge is based on games played + plus wins...not everyone thinks every challenge should be the same. And it is just this months challenge I'm sure June will bring something different also.

Wingnut 16ga


Not trying to be mean, but I completely disagree. There are many people here could play that many games if they wanted to - its not that hard to do.
User avatar
Colonel zips5000
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: 3651

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Gilligan on Mon May 26, 2014 9:15 pm

zips5000 wrote:
Wingnut 16ga wrote:Tviorr,

I take offense to your comment "(simple) effort (i.e. joining vast amount of games and playing them with reasonable effort)". Do you think it's easy playing 300 active games, not missing a turn, and playing with the desire to win?

I find it amusing that so many find something wrong with a new format. So what if this months challenge is based on games played + plus wins...not everyone thinks every challenge should be the same. And it is just this months challenge I'm sure June will bring something different also.

Wingnut 16ga


Not trying to be mean, but I completely disagree. There are many people here could play that many games if they wanted to - its not that hard to do.


It's also asking a lot for someone that has a job or is taking classes to play so many games. There will always be one that has a ton of free time and can do this, but most cannot. Limiting the number of points from joining games would make it fairer, IMO.
Image
User avatar
Major Gilligan
 
Posts: 12478
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Wingnut 16ga on Tue May 27, 2014 11:20 am

You missed the point entirely. Why do all challenges have to be the same? This one was different so why is that bad? Is it bad only because you are not playing enough games to be competitive in the challenge? If you don't like the format then don't participate. Just because you don't like the format is not reason for you to down grade the challenge and the players that choose to participate. A challenge is just that a challenge this one happens to be a challenge that requires you play an ass load of games to have a shot at the green star. Don't be negative toward the players that have decided to give it a shot. And Tviorr if you think it's easy why complain just join us. Hmmm let me guess scared of loosing some points?
User avatar
Cook Wingnut 16ga
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:49 am
Location: 1st floor of a 2 story out house
4

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby kizkiz on Tue May 27, 2014 12:03 pm

Am i the only one that alchemistry has foed in this comp or is it some tactic of his to try and stop the opposition? lol
User avatar
Major kizkiz
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:28 pm

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Gilligan on Tue May 27, 2014 12:22 pm

Wingnut 16ga wrote:You missed the point entirely. Why do all challenges have to be the same? This one was different so why is that bad? Is it bad only because you are not playing enough games to be competitive in the challenge? If you don't like the format then don't participate. Just because you don't like the format is not reason for you to down grade the challenge and the players that choose to participate. A challenge is just that a challenge this one happens to be a challenge that requires you play an ass load of games to have a shot at the green star. Don't be negative toward the players that have decided to give it a shot. And Tviorr if you think it's easy why complain just join us. Hmmm let me guess scared of loosing some points?


Well, all challenges have been the same so far. There has never been a cap on game limits, so you could have done this in every challenge to date.
Image
User avatar
Major Gilligan
 
Posts: 12478
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Wingnut 16ga on Tue May 27, 2014 2:06 pm

Gilligan,
Again you missed the point. I'm not the one complaining about the challenge. The earlier posts seemed to have issue with the format. I'm only saying if you don't like the format don't play! There will be more challenges that suit your taste. So don't find fault in the players that are playing this format and not complaining.
User avatar
Cook Wingnut 16ga
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:49 am
Location: 1st floor of a 2 story out house
4

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Wingnut 16ga on Tue May 27, 2014 2:07 pm

KizKiz,

He has foed me also, and others that he has been unsuccessful against.
User avatar
Cook Wingnut 16ga
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 8:49 am
Location: 1st floor of a 2 story out house
4

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Tviorr on Fri May 30, 2014 5:16 pm

Wingnut 16ga wrote:Tviorr,

I take offense to your comment "(simple) effort (i.e. joining vast amount of games and playing them with reasonable effort)". Do you think it's easy playing 300 active games, not missing a turn, and playing with the desire to win?

I find it amusing that so many find something wrong with a new format. So what if this months challenge is based on games played + plus wins...not everyone thinks every challenge should be the same. And it is just this months challenge I'm sure June will bring something different also.

Wingnut 16ga



Eh. What...

1) You take offense... of what?

Im simply putting in a suggestion for a changed setup in a discussion thread. Not sure why you would take offense at that or what could possibly be wrong with that. I believe everything was phrased in a polite and sober way.

2) No I dont think its easy playing 300 games and trying to win. - However my suggestion does in fact not prohibit you from doing that. - It simply limits the number of points you get from playing and requires you to gather most of the points required for medals - or for that matter challenge wins through actually winning games.

3) Im not sure which part you find amusing. Im not exactly fault finding as such in any case. The current format works. I dont believe Ive stated otherwise. - What I write is simply a suggestion/suggestions towards a setup that I would like better. - Apparently its not currently possible without a change of programming, so for the foreseeable future its just something to consider for the game makers and challenge makers. - If it doesnt happen, it doesnt happen, and Ill still enjoy the challenges.

4) No, I dont believe every challenge should be the same either. - But as far as I can see, the norm of the setups so far does reward participation to the point that winning games is somewhat secondary. - Again, this isnt a wrong format and its not a fault. - I would simply prefer that winning was the primary source of points. - Not neccessarily for all challenges, but personally I would consider it more challenging to gain points by winning rather than participating.


Again, no offense was intended, and to be frank, I dont really see how I could have caused any.

Regards, Tviorr
PM me for an invite to Ikariam, a balanced strategy MMORPG centered on a city-based empire. Help and extra resources from me and an extra tradships and a small science bonus to both of us if you do :-)
Major Tviorr
 
Posts: 335
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:19 am
Location: 3 clicks beyond madness. - or in Ikariam - eta server. Write me for an invite and startup help.

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby umbrellaman on Fri May 30, 2014 8:08 pm

Wingnut 16ga wrote:You missed the point entirely. Why do all challenges have to be the same? This one was different so why is that bad? Is it bad only because you are not playing enough games to be competitive in the challenge? If you don't like the format then don't participate. Just because you don't like the format is not reason for you to down grade the challenge and the players that choose to participate. A challenge is just that a challenge this one happens to be a challenge that requires you play an ass load of games to have a shot at the green star. Don't be negative toward the players that have decided to give it a shot. And Tviorr if you think it's easy why complain just join us. Hmmm let me guess scared of loosing some points?



Don't like the format...expressed my opinion in the beginning...didn't participate. If you keep excluding people that can't run 300 games at once because they have other stuff to do you'll end up with less players going for the challenge. As more and more people drop out of the challenges because it is unobtainable for most, the challenge will become obsolete. Give a reward for the player that gets the most points like a general achievement medal or some star but the challenge medal should go to the players who meet a reasonable goal. April's challenge format was perfect. Hope next month is different.
Image
User avatar
Major umbrellaman
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 3:54 pm
Location: Dirty Jersey

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby kizkiz on Sat May 31, 2014 1:48 am

Has anyone mentioned kahunah deadbeating in a few games yet?
User avatar
Major kizkiz
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:28 pm

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby DoomYoshi on Sat May 31, 2014 9:52 pm

kizkiz wrote:Has anyone mentioned kahunah deadbeating in a few games yet?


No, thank you for letting me know. Do you have game #s?
Hunter S. Thompson wrote:The Edge... There is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over..
User avatar
Major DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10584
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Al Fashir, Sudan

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby DoomYoshi on Sat May 31, 2014 9:55 pm

kizkiz wrote:Am i the only one that alchemistry has foed in this comp or is it some tactic of his to try and stop the opposition? lol


You are not the only one.
Hunter S. Thompson wrote:The Edge... There is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over..
User avatar
Major DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10584
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Al Fashir, Sudan

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby kizkiz on Sun Jun 01, 2014 12:47 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:
kizkiz wrote:Has anyone mentioned kahunah deadbeating in a few games yet?


No, thank you for letting me know. Do you have game #s?

Game 14413977
Game 14413967
Game 14413963
Game 14413962
Game 14413959
Game 14413422
Game 14413421
Game 14413420
Game 14413419
Game 14413418
Game 14413412
Game 14413411
Game 14413410
Game 14413409
Game 14413408
Game 14413406
Game 14413403
Game 14413193
Game 14412957

that's 19/26 games i've played with him that he has deadbeated in. The ones he didn't were only because he was already knocked out generally
User avatar
Major kizkiz
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:28 pm

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby hwhrhett on Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:08 pm

Gilligan wrote:
zips5000 wrote:
Wingnut 16ga wrote:Tviorr,

I take offense to your comment "(simple) effort (i.e. joining vast amount of games and playing them with reasonable effort)". Do you think it's easy playing 300 active games, not missing a turn, and playing with the desire to win?

I find it amusing that so many find something wrong with a new format. So what if this months challenge is based on games played + plus wins...not everyone thinks every challenge should be the same. And it is just this months challenge I'm sure June will bring something different also.

Wingnut 16ga


Not trying to be mean, but I completely disagree. There are many people here could play that many games if they wanted to - its not that hard to do.


It's also asking a lot for someone that has a job or is taking classes to play so many games. There will always be one that has a ton of free time and can do this, but most cannot. Limiting the number of points from joining games would make it fairer, IMO.


most medals have always required a heavy game load, i dont think anybody got any of the normal platinum medals without playing a thousand games... is this really any different?
Image
User avatar
Cook hwhrhett
 
Posts: 3120
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:55 pm
Location: TEXAS --- The Imperial Dragoons

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Gilligan on Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:41 pm

hwhrhett wrote:
Gilligan wrote:
zips5000 wrote:
Wingnut 16ga wrote:Tviorr,

I take offense to your comment "(simple) effort (i.e. joining vast amount of games and playing them with reasonable effort)". Do you think it's easy playing 300 active games, not missing a turn, and playing with the desire to win?

I find it amusing that so many find something wrong with a new format. So what if this months challenge is based on games played + plus wins...not everyone thinks every challenge should be the same. And it is just this months challenge I'm sure June will bring something different also.

Wingnut 16ga


Not trying to be mean, but I completely disagree. There are many people here could play that many games if they wanted to - its not that hard to do.


It's also asking a lot for someone that has a job or is taking classes to play so many games. There will always be one that has a ton of free time and can do this, but most cannot. Limiting the number of points from joining games would make it fairer, IMO.


most medals have always required a heavy game load, i dont think anybody got any of the normal platinum medals without playing a thousand games... is this really any different?


That's over a course of many months, though. And all 80 games aren't the same settings
Image
User avatar
Major Gilligan
 
Posts: 12478
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Providence, RI

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby ElricTheGreat on Mon Jun 30, 2014 11:28 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:Scoreboard


This link takes us to the July Banner ... not the May Scoreboard
Image
Stormbringer is thirsty --- Thursting for YOUR Soul!
User avatar
Captain ElricTheGreat
SoC Training Instructor
SoC Training Instructor
 
Posts: 3349
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:37 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby ooge on Tue Jul 01, 2014 10:17 pm

For all you players who thought you were getting 2 medals 50 for a ga medal 150 for a challenge medal..to bad!
Image
User avatar
Captain ooge
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 2:31 am
Location: under a bridge

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby Dukasaur on Fri Jul 04, 2014 12:12 am

ElricTheGreat wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:Scoreboard


This link takes us to the July Banner ... not the May Scoreboard

fixed.
Image
User avatar
Captain Dukasaur
Community Team
Community Team
 
Posts: 25031
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
22

Re: May Challenge: Quebec Act, 1774

Postby DoomYoshi on Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:39 pm

ooge wrote:For all you players who thought you were getting 2 medals 50 for a ga medal 150 for a challenge medal..to bad!


I will issue GA Medals to those who should have got 2. I have been doing some thinking on this. Give me a few days though, since I am busy with CCO right now.
Hunter S. Thompson wrote:The Edge... There is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over..
User avatar
Major DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10584
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Al Fashir, Sudan

Previous

Return to Monthly Challenges

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron