Moderator: Community Team
1) Certainly I can do this. This is also a good argument for those players who are opposed to adding more game options.Woodruff wrote:1) If you want another map to look forward to for yourself, you can manually limit yourself from playing that map except when you consider it seasonal. By doing so, you will be able to more "look forward to" the map and yet the rest of us won't be kept from playing it..
2) You believe that making a map LESS playable will cause mapmakers to want to make more of them? I can't say that I follow your logic there.
If a map isn't getting played...then pushing it to seasonal can't hurt it. The buzz created by moving it to seasonal will be enough to generate interest, then there will be a frenzy of playing that happens when the map is "active" during its "season." I firmly believe that many of the lesser-played maps will get more play (total number of games played on that map) in a one or two month "season" than it will being left to collect dust on the "always-available" map list. I'm not sure what the plan is for the maps that no one plays. Will they eventually be shelved forever? By moving a lesser-played map to seasonal, if no buzz is created, and no one cares that it isn't available, that might mean the map could be put away forever or until more interest is generated in seeing it an active map again.Doc_Brown wrote:QH: You're clearly not getting much support on this idea. I'd have to side with those that feel that restricting access does not increase enjoyability (as I've said in the threads about some of your other suggestions). That said, I follow your point. There are maps on the site that are probably far less popular, and because they remain relatively obscure, people can't find many games on those maps. Instead of restricting maps to certain times of the year, why not have a "map of the month" event that highlights a specific unpopular map (maybe one from the bottom 1/3 in terms of recent games started). I'm not sure exactly how this could work, though you've got the creativity to come up with a full concept for how this might play out. Perhaps it could include contests (though with 12 additional contests per year, it might devalue the contest winner medal, but there might be other rewards that would be suitable), special interview with the map creator, etc... I think that would create at least as much buzz about the unpopular maps as would restricting access to them, and that excitement would carry over for some time after the event (much like the World Cup map is still fairly popular).
But the point is, you do not have the consent of the mapmaker to make this map a seasonal map. Since you already started up a new thread for Map of the day/Month, i will be moving this to Rejected.Queen_Herpes wrote:If a map isn't getting played...then pushing it to seasonal can't hurt it. The buzz created by moving it to seasonal will be enough to generate interest, then there will be a frenzy of playing that happens when the map is "active" during its "season." I firmly believe that many of the lesser-played maps will get more play (total number of games played on that map) in a one or two month "season" than it will being left to collect dust on the "always-available" map list. I'm not sure what the plan is for the maps that no one plays. Will they eventually be shelved forever? By moving a lesser-played map to seasonal, if no buzz is created, and no one cares that it isn't available, that might mean the map could be put away forever or until more interest is generated in seeing it an active map again.Doc_Brown wrote:QH: You're clearly not getting much support on this idea. I'd have to side with those that feel that restricting access does not increase enjoyability (as I've said in the threads about some of your other suggestions). That said, I follow your point. There are maps on the site that are probably far less popular, and because they remain relatively obscure, people can't find many games on those maps. Instead of restricting maps to certain times of the year, why not have a "map of the month" event that highlights a specific unpopular map (maybe one from the bottom 1/3 in terms of recent games started). I'm not sure exactly how this could work, though you've got the creativity to come up with a full concept for how this might play out. Perhaps it could include contests (though with 12 additional contests per year, it might devalue the contest winner medal, but there might be other rewards that would be suitable), special interview with the map creator, etc... I think that would create at least as much buzz about the unpopular maps as would restricting access to them, and that excitement would carry over for some time after the event (much like the World Cup map is still fairly popular).
I was led here by your comment on my new suggestion about map-of-the-day. Not sure who posted first, but I'd been tossing this idea around for a few weeks. I like the idea of contests associated with map-of-the-day and might incorporate that into my suggestion. The point is to create buzz and help pick up maps that have fallen off.
TheForgivenOne wrote:But the point is, you do not have the consent of the mapmaker to make this map a seasonal map. Since you already started up a new thread for Map of the day/Month, i will be moving this to Rejected.Queen_Herpes wrote:If a map isn't getting played...then pushing it to seasonal can't hurt it. The buzz created by moving it to seasonal will be enough to generate interest, then there will be a frenzy of playing that happens when the map is "active" during its "season." I firmly believe that many of the lesser-played maps will get more play (total number of games played on that map) in a one or two month "season" than it will being left to collect dust on the "always-available" map list. I'm not sure what the plan is for the maps that no one plays. Will they eventually be shelved forever? By moving a lesser-played map to seasonal, if no buzz is created, and no one cares that it isn't available, that might mean the map could be put away forever or until more interest is generated in seeing it an active map again.Doc_Brown wrote:QH: You're clearly not getting much support on this idea. I'd have to side with those that feel that restricting access does not increase enjoyability (as I've said in the threads about some of your other suggestions). That said, I follow your point. There are maps on the site that are probably far less popular, and because they remain relatively obscure, people can't find many games on those maps. Instead of restricting maps to certain times of the year, why not have a "map of the month" event that highlights a specific unpopular map (maybe one from the bottom 1/3 in terms of recent games started). I'm not sure exactly how this could work, though you've got the creativity to come up with a full concept for how this might play out. Perhaps it could include contests (though with 12 additional contests per year, it might devalue the contest winner medal, but there might be other rewards that would be suitable), special interview with the map creator, etc... I think that would create at least as much buzz about the unpopular maps as would restricting access to them, and that excitement would carry over for some time after the event (much like the World Cup map is still fairly popular).
I was led here by your comment on my new suggestion about map-of-the-day. Not sure who posted first, but I'd been tossing this idea around for a few weeks. I like the idea of contests associated with map-of-the-day and might incorporate that into my suggestion. The point is to create buzz and help pick up maps that have fallen off.
First post 3 days ago. There are many more suggestions out there that haven't been sent to rejected on the whim of a moderator and are languishing in the pages and pages of suggestions. It is the right thing to do to put a 3-day-old suggestion back out for review. Or are all suggestions that go without comment for 3 days, now dead?TheForgivenOne wrote:And you clearly don't have much support for this thread. I've seen threads asking for all Seasonal maps become full time maps. So i am pretty sure you won't be getting enough support for this to happen. As i saw way more support in the thread asking all seasonal maps become open all year round.
Thank you for moving it back out. Now, I'm thinking that the "complaining about maps that are seasonal" is enough to start this whole buzz thing. While people are complaining about choice, yes, I understand that; however, there are maps (like Halloween Hallows) that hardly anyone plays. Ever since I posted this thread, there have been 3 games started on this map. And that is just a guess, I will need to look to check the dates the games were started, I just guessed based on the game numbers. I know I've played it recently, but there are hardly a lot of players out there like me who play just about every map as much as possible. Most players stick to the same maps. Since all the maps are available (except St. Patrick's and World Cup) I can scarely understand the concern over a "lack of choice."TheForgivenOne wrote:I'll move it back out, but here's my view. People are already complaining enough about maps that are seasonal. I've seen people harp and complain so much about when the St. Patty's day went back down, and now people were doing it when the World Cup map went down. Now all this is going to do is get more people complaining about this map if it is moved to a seasonal. PLUS CC already used this map with Halloween last year, so more than likely they will do it again. So i don't see a reason as to why we should move it to be a Seasonal. And about moving more maps like the WW maps, i don't agree with that either. People are arguing more and more that they want more choice. Well this will hinder their choice of maps.
Queen_Herpes.Queen_Herpes wrote:...
Hold your horses there tiger. Go ahead and move it on back...You haven't read the following post regarding copyright:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 7&t=122416
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 7&t=122416
While I respect the perspective of the mapmaker, ultimately it is a conquerclub decision to use the map how it chooses.
So, thank you for moving it back to active suggestions...
The phrase "the author retains copyright on their work, and gives Conquer Club permission to use the imagery free of charge, for as long as Conquer Club sees fit on the Conquer Club website" does not mean or imply that CC can do what they want with it.Copyright
While many people contribute towards development of a map, it is the graphical artist who has recognised ownership of the map imagery, and must agree to the the following copyright agreement upon quenching:
The author retains copyright on their work, and gives Conquer Club permission to use the imagery free of charge, for as long as Conquer Club sees fit on the Conquer Club website. Conquer Club cannot sell, lease, or lend the right to use the images to anyone else. The author swears that their map is their own work, or a legal derivative work and by submitting it, do hereby claim all responsibility for that being true.

I'll address the "incentive to make more maps" part of your comment:Denise wrote:Nah, this map and all maps meant for all year play should be left as is. The large choice of maps adds to the enjoyment of the game, and taking away those choices, even temporarily, will detract from it. The mapmakers wishes should be taken into consideration, in fact he/she should be given last word on the matter. Otherwise, why would he have the incentive to make more maps?
You haven't really told us why "breathing new life" into maps is desirable. If people want to play these maps they will, and if they don't want to, then they won't. The only thing taking it away does, is to hurt the people who do play them on a regular basis.Queen_Herpes wrote:TFO, your responses have been identical. I see the attention given to support Cairnswk's perspective about keeping Halloween Hallows year-round, but the debate (from my perspective) is to find a way to breathe new life into maps that aren't being played. In addition, ultimately, we can unclutter the available maps page. I will edit the original post to reflect more ideas, but may take two days (which I know seems to be an eternity on this forum) so please be patient.
You're missing some key facts with those numbers. Gilgamesh was was quenched in October 2009. The game number at that time was around 5709000, which means there have only been 501390 games played since Gilgamesh was an option. Of those, Gilgamesh has been played 3117 times based on your numbers, which works out to 0.62%. With 162 maps on the site, each one should be played 0.62% of the time on average. Looks like Gilgamesh is played exactly as often as the average map.Queen_Herpes wrote: Here is an example of a map that I really like and I try to make sure I start speed games on:
Gilgamesh
Total games: 3117
% of Total games played on site: 3117/6210390 = .05% of all games ever played
Total maps on the site: 162 (including betas)
If all things were equal and all maps came out at the same time each map would be played in 6210390 total games 38,335 times for a percentage of .62%
Remove Classic from the mix (1618881 games) and out of 4591509 games each map would be played 28,1518 times for a percentage of 1.76%
Gilgamesh is played considerably less than the ideal average game. The map has only been around for about one year. It has been played in roughly 10 games per day. Gilgamesh has a low "seasonability" from my perspective because there isn't a "season" of the year that correlates to Gilgamesh. While Gilgamesh could really benefit from some additional marketing and attention, I'm not sure how to make that happen.
Thank you, I knew I had missed something. I will apply that logic to looking at some other maps in an attempt to find maps that are not played often.Doc_Brown wrote:You're missing some key facts with those numbers. Gilgamesh was was quenched in October 2009. The game number at that time was around 5709000, which means there have only been 501390 games played since Gilgamesh was an option. Of those, Gilgamesh has been played 3117 times based on your numbers, which works out to 0.62%. With 162 maps on the site, each one should be played 0.62% of the time on average. Looks like Gilgamesh is played exactly as often as the average map.Queen_Herpes wrote: Here is an example of a map that I really like and I try to make sure I start speed games on:
Gilgamesh
Total games: 3117
% of Total games played on site: 3117/6210390 = .05% of all games ever played
Total maps on the site: 162 (including betas)
If all things were equal and all maps came out at the same time each map would be played in 6210390 total games 38,335 times for a percentage of .62%
Remove Classic from the mix (1618881 games) and out of 4591509 games each map would be played 28,1518 times for a percentage of 1.76%
Gilgamesh is played considerably less than the ideal average game. The map has only been around for about one year. It has been played in roughly 10 games per day. Gilgamesh has a low "seasonability" from my perspective because there isn't a "season" of the year that correlates to Gilgamesh. While Gilgamesh could really benefit from some additional marketing and attention, I'm not sure how to make that happen.
Seasons does not mean "1 week." Could be 100 days if there was a "100 days war map." Could be 3 months if there was a "springtime" map. And, you're right, Cutesy club was not a great promotion from a desirability perspective. I'd be interested to see how it functioned as an internal marketing strategy.TheForgivenOne wrote:If you make these seasonal maps, it isn't going to bring more attention to them, all it's going to do is narrow all the games played on it into 1 week. "OH wow, that map had well over 1000 games started on it in 1 week". Yeah, well, would it make a difference if it had 1000 started in 1 year span? Not really. It won't make them more desirable if people can only play them in one week. You are just narrowing how many were played in that 1 year, into 1 week. Then it's gone for another 358 days. Just because something is seasonal, does not make it enjoyable. Take Cutesy Club for instance.
Perhaps instead of someone being banned from the forums, the site turns into Cutesy ClubQueen_Herpes wrote:Seasons does not mean "1 week." Could be 100 days if there was a "100 days war map." Could be 3 months if there was a "springtime" map. And, you're right, Cutesy club was not a great promotion from a desirability perspective. I'd be interested to see how it functioned as an internal marketing strategy.TheForgivenOne wrote:If you make these seasonal maps, it isn't going to bring more attention to them, all it's going to do is narrow all the games played on it into 1 week. "OH wow, that map had well over 1000 games started on it in 1 week". Yeah, well, would it make a difference if it had 1000 started in 1 year span? Not really. It won't make them more desirable if people can only play them in one week. You are just narrowing how many were played in that 1 year, into 1 week. Then it's gone for another 358 days. Just because something is seasonal, does not make it enjoyable. Take Cutesy Club for instance.