We are opening up Round 3 of the Guaranteed Suggestions Implementation process. Because of the insane popularity last time, we will have to run some things a bit differently later on, and we will let you know when that happens.
For those of you who don't know what this is, we are taking nominations for features you would like to see incorporated into the site,. After the nominations window is complete, an official poll will be made as an announcement. A small list from past nominations is posted below, and will be updated with nominations as they come in. Please make sure to check the list before nominating, as your feature may already be on there. After the poll is finished, we will send the results to the big guy for implementation, and you will have a better Conquer Club experience!
PLEASE make sure that you are citing existing suggestions. Make a new thread if you would like, and post the link in this thread as a nomination. I have no way of linking a suggestion for others that doesn't exist.
bigWham wrote:I've filtered some per below. The filtered ones are either way more difficult than they are worth, run counter to development strategy, and/or have the potential to cause many problems.
kuma32478 wrote:Concise description: Add a Watch this game feature where a user may bookmark games he/she is interested in following the result.
Specifics/Details: It would function as a tab on the central command home screen and games that would be bookmarked by a user would then be added to the tab. Games could also be removed when a user no longer wanted to monitor them. It would function the way the script originally created by Dako functioned. (Link - viewtopic.php?f=59&t=97965)
How this will benefit the site and/or other comments: It's no secret that the user created tournaments are dying, which saddens me. It was what drew me to the site and caused me to buy premium. As you can see on the tournament organizer leader board, I've created my share, but I've stopped. CC does not make it easy to monitor games easily anymore. In addition, as a clan leader, it was nice to be able to subscribe to our war games to know if there was one in danger of a missed turn. It also allowed us to keep scoreboards in the war threads and tournaments updated quickly, which makes for a better experience.
Colonel ZawBanjito wrote: I like to watch games that include people I know, and also some that include my current opponents, in a futile attempt to discern patterns in their play. I suspect when we do get championships, or similar, I'll want to watch those too. It's frustrating to scroll through the ever-lengthening list everytime, having to remember all those numbers... so maybe an option to add games to watch list in the "My Games" section?
Silly Knig-it wrote:
sempaispellcheck wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:I have no idea what people see in this.
That doesn't mean they don't see it. A lot of people didn't see the value of BOB, but that got implemented. A lot of people don't use Map Rank, but I've heard rumors that that's going to be implemented as well (though I won't be surprised if that doesn't happen for a while or at all).
A lot of TO's (including myself) swear by Watch This Game because it allows us to keep live scores for tournaments without scoring games twice - we watch games when they are created, then unwatch them as we score them. Loads easier and much less time-consuming than having to score 200 games at once. It also makes it easy to keep track of things in private tournaments and things like the FCCFP - because they're not in the tournament database, games can't be found the same way using Game Finder and Tour Stats won't work.
sempai
I so echo sempai. I it is becoming more and more difficult to run a tournament with any kind of complexity. Compliments to those who run single eliminations and tournaments where no one cares what the running score is, but some of us like to run and play in more complicated formats.
I just started a tournament where I currently have close to 200 games going and expect to top 300 for most of the tournament. I have found a cobbled together method using WTG in Chrome, create games in Firefox and spreadsheets in Safari. This means I only have to check to see it'd I posted a game 6 or 7 times to try and keep a running score. After all, what fun is head to head if you can't see how your opponent is doing.
I had Duk try to explain how he does things and I still don't get it. I appreciate his taking the time to try and explain it.
If I can't have Watch This Game, could I please have a way to flag games, like colors or markers on email. And a way to sort for my marker. I, and I am sure others have good ideas for tournaments but with RL are not going to make a commitment of hours and hours of work that could be made so easy. Really, anything I can use and search for.
If I am putting this in the wrong place, please move it and/or let me know and I will move it.
I'd like to suggest reducing the restrictions on Battle Royales, either reducing the wait time from 30 days down to much less -- 10, say -- or removing it altogether.
I'd also like to suggest featuring casual Battle Royales much more often as part of special events.
Add a statement/pop up box with a check mark when new accounts are being created that if the player is a returning player from past years and has an old account which is not accessible then DO NOT create a new account. Be clear that it will be considered playing with multiple accounts and can lead to a suspension. Give instructions on the procedure returning players should follow.
Specifics/Details: Seems a common theme where past players return and have no access to their old email or log in credentials so they create a new account. It is quite often not where a person wants to have multiple accounts, they just don't realize it is not permitted.
How this will benefit the site and/or other comments: Won't piss off returning players who get busted for multi accounts. The majority have no intention of using multiple accounts, they just cant access their original account.
For Round 4 can I request anything similar to maprank that seems feasible to the admins. We've had a working maprank before so I'm unsure how a game analyzer of some kind would be impossible. It doesn't have to be the exact same. As we saw with clan turns the admins can find a creative way to make something that does essentially the same thing.
Last thing we need is that annoying autorefresh to start in casual games. You're scrolling down to pick how many troops to advance and boom! it refreshes and takes it back to 1, and you can start scrolling again.
“Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” ― Voltaire
Last thing we need is that annoying autorefresh to start in casual games. You're scrolling down to pick how many troops to advance and boom! it refreshes and takes it back to 1, and you can start scrolling again.
That has never happened to me in a speed game. When your waiting to play turn it refresh/updates every 5 secs I think. Does not effect when you take your turn.
Last thing we need is that annoying autorefresh to start in casual games. You're scrolling down to pick how many troops to advance and boom! it refreshes and takes it back to 1, and you can start scrolling again.
That has never happened to me in a speed game. When your waiting to play turn it refresh/updates every 5 secs I think. Does not effect when you take your turn.
Happens to me constantly. Continues to refresh while I'm playing. I'll be scrolling through the number of troops, get halfway down, and boom, it refreshes, and I'm back to 1.
“Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” ― Voltaire
Zombie parachute medals. gamefinder polly slots added. and start delay for fog games that currently exists with freestyle games.getting sick of explaining there is no fog rule.
This suggestion in the category of reducing luck. I know next to nothing about programming, so have no idea if this is more trouble than it is worth, but as a new member, having played another game (Weewar) previously that depended much less on luck, I feel the outcomes of this game are too luck dependent.
The biggest element I would suggest to change would be the individual battles. Rather than make them a result of dice rolls make them the result of strength. If a 7 attacks a 3 the 7 always wins while losing 3 units. A 9 attacking a 5 wins while losing 5, etc. I realize this would change game-play tremendously and would be a significant departure from the Risk board game on which it is modeled, but it would make the game-play much more fair in my estimation.
Another change I would suggest to reduce the luck element would be to have only one color of spoils and when you get three of them you can use them. You don't have to wait for the right combination of colors and hope you get them before your opponent does.
