[Rules] Limit New Recruit for 16 games in settings and maps

[Evil Semp]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

All of the maps.

[Queen_Herpes]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

All of the maps.

Well, all of the maps woul dbe too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

[Doc_Brown]

Well, all of the maps woul dbe too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

Ah. So you're trying to come up with a better list for the first 5 games? I think there's another thread for that somewhere.

[Queen_Herpes]

Well, all of the maps woul dbe too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

Ah. So you're trying to come up with a better list for the first 5 games? I think there's another thread for that somewhere.

Oh, no. Not trying to come up with a different set of maps for the first five. Trying to figure out which maps would be best for the second, third, and fourth groups of maps.

[Evil Semp]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

All of the maps.

Well, all of the maps woul dbe too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

I don't agree that all the maps would be to many. Lack has put some off limits for new players, but as far as after 5 games I think they should be able to play ANY map and any settings that they choose.

[captainwalrus]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

All of the maps.

Well, all of the maps woul dbe too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

I don't agree that all the maps would be to many. Lack has put some off limits for new players, but as far as after 5 games I think they should be able to play ANY map and any settings that they choose.

I agree!

I have posted about this before, but I will say it again; if you limit maps and settings people will just go to one of the many other risk sites that offer better settings and maps to everyone. Even though we have superior maps and gameplay choices, who will know that if they don't get to play it.

[Queen_Herpes]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

All of the maps.

Well, all of the maps woul dbe too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

I don't agree that all the maps would be to many. Lack has put some off limits for new players, but as far as after 5 games I think they should be able to play ANY map and any settings that they choose.

I agree!

I have posted about this before, but I will say it again; if you limit maps and settings people will just go to one of the many other risk sites that offer better settings and maps to everyone. Even though we have superior maps and gameplay choices, who will know that if they don't get to play it.

Unfortunately, lack, optimus, and andy have already set the game up so that new players are limited to playing certain maps. I guess the site is already losing players?

[Doc_Brown]

So, Brick Wall, let me give you my argument about the meaning of life and why you're wrong about it...

[Queen_Herpes]

I'm all ears! Especially if in reference to the purpose regarding allowing players who can only play in four games at a time needing to have access to 150 maps!

[Doc_Brown]

I'm all ears! Especially if in reference to the purpose regarding allowing players who can only play in four games at a time needing to have access to 150 maps!

Asked and answered. (over and over and over...)

[Queen_Herpes]

I'm all ears! Especially if in reference to the purpose regarding allowing players who can only play in four games at a time needing to have access to 150 maps!

Asked and answered. (over and over and over...)

I honestly don't understand. Of all the points, I just don't understand this one. Why not start players out on maps that are on the less frustrating side of things? Lackattack seems to think it is a good idea, why not extend it, say, 5 more games?

[jrh_cardinal]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

All of the maps.

Well, all of the maps woul dbe too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

I don't agree that all the maps would be to many. Lack has put some off limits for new players, but as far as after 5 games I think they should be able to play ANY map and any settings that they choose.

I agree!

I have posted about this before, but I will say it again; if you limit maps and settings people will just go to one of the many other risk sites that offer better settings and maps to everyone. Even though we have superior maps and gameplay choices, who will know that if they don't get to play it.

find a site that has more than twenty maps and post it. I personally have never seen a site besides this with more than 1. I'm sure there are others out there, I stopped looking when I found CC, but still...

There needs to be a middle ground. Queen Herpes may be restricting things a little too much, but you guys are not making much sense either. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play David Hoekstra in a 1v1 on one of the most complicated maps in the site. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play BeckytheBlondie in an 8 man escalating freestyle. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play team games against Blitz, laddida, or many other amazing team players (come to think of it, neither do I, and I've played almost 1000 games).
New players do not know what they want )or don't want). I'm not saying I should make that decision for them, Queen Herpes isn't either. For the first 20-25 games though, new players should play people closer to their own skill level on simpler maps with easier to understand settings. It is a lot more likely that a new player would leave out of confusion and frustration if you allowed them to play everything right away than it is that they will leave because we "don't have enough diversity" or whatever if you just expose them to 20-30 simpler maps and simpler settings for around 20 games.

[Evil Semp]

find a site that has more than twenty maps and post it. I personally have never seen a site besides this with more than 1. I'm sure there are others out there, I stopped looking when I found CC, but still...

There needs to be a middle ground. Queen Herpes may be restricting things a little too much, but you guys are not making much sense either. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play David Hoekstra in a 1v1 on one of the most complicated maps in the site. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play BeckytheBlondie in an 8 man escalating freestyle. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play team games against Blitz, laddida, or many other amazing team players (come to think of it, neither do I, and I've played almost 1000 games).
New players do not know what they want )or don't want). I'm not saying I should make that decision for them, Queen Herpes isn't either. For the first 20-25 games though, new players should play people closer to their own skill level on simpler maps with easier to understand settings. It is a lot more likely that a new player would leave out of confusion and frustration if you allowed them to play everything right away than it is that they will leave because we "don't have enough diversity" or whatever if you just expose them to 20-30 simpler maps and simpler settings for around 20 games.

What about the experienced player who finds this site. When I first joined I played quite a few doubles games because that is what I liked. I had played doubles before I got to this site. With the way this suggestion was currently written I wouldn't have been able to play doubles until after I had played 40 games.

Risk is like Monopoly in the fact that it is played so many different ways. Some people learned playing flat rate cards some with escalating. So with the way it is written in this suggestion you are telling someone that they can't play the game the way they learned, same thing with fortifications. We used to play adjacent fortifications, but if you decided not to attack you were allowed 3 fortifications.

[darth emperor]

I remeber when i joined here,that my first games i couldnt use the spoils i had 5 and had to change but never get the optimal choice...i got frustated lol,first playing only without cards then leaving this site,(yes i playued the table game before but many years ago and i was too small to remeber it)luckily i comed back learnt how spoils go and im here.And didnt learn in 5 games...

So if got frustated only with spoils people will get frustated with some complex maps...and i dont think 5 games they could learn all maps easily(there are maps i cant understand after so many years,like Age of merchants,never understood well how bonuses work,probabilly because of my english) but yes you could unlock maps twice or thrice times for examples

till first 10 games you can play 30 maps
till second 10 games another 30 maps
and when you reach to 30 games all maps

of course different number,because Queen_herpes' idea is maybe a little slowly...CC strengh is because of the maps(not only) but if they only see classic or 4,5 maps then some will leave not having reached to the 5 games....

[Queen_Herpes]

Well, all of the maps would be too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

I don't agree that all the maps would be to many. Lack has put some off limits for new players, but as far as after 5 games I think they should be able to play ANY map and any settings that they choose.

I agree!

find a site that has more than twenty maps and post it. I personally have never seen a site besides this with more than 1. I'm sure there are others out there, I stopped looking when I found CC, but still...

There needs to be a middle ground. Queen Herpes may be restricting things a little too much, but you guys are not making much sense either. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play David Hoekstra in a 1v1 on one of the most complicated maps in the site. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play BeckytheBlondie in an 8 man escalating freestyle. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play team games against Blitz, laddida, or many other amazing team players (come to think of it, neither do I, and I've played almost 1000 games).
New players do not know what they want )or don't want). I'm not saying I should make that decision for them, Queen Herpes isn't either. For the first 20-25 games though, new players should play people closer to their own skill level on simpler maps with easier to understand settings. It is a lot more likely that a new player would leave out of confusion and frustration if you allowed them to play everything right away than it is that they will leave because we "don't have enough diversity" or whatever if you just expose them to 20-30 simpler maps and simpler settings for around 20 games.

I agree, JRH CARDINAL, Limiting the new players to specific maps and settings for their first few games is a great idea. As you mentioned, it would be more enjoyable for a new player to play others at their skill level on maps and with settings that don't promote confusion. Great Post!

[AAFitz]

Well, all of the maps would be too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

I don't agree that all the maps would be to many. Lack has put some off limits for new players, but as far as after 5 games I think they should be able to play ANY map and any settings that they choose.

I agree!

find a site that has more than twenty maps and post it. I personally have never seen a site besides this with more than 1. I'm sure there are others out there, I stopped looking when I found CC, but still...

There needs to be a middle ground. Queen Herpes may be restricting things a little too much, but you guys are not making much sense either. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play David Hoekstra in a 1v1 on one of the most complicated maps in the site. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play BeckytheBlondie in an 8 man escalating freestyle. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play team games against Blitz, laddida, or many other amazing team players (come to think of it, neither do I, and I've played almost 1000 games).
New players do not know what they want )or don't want). I'm not saying I should make that decision for them, Queen Herpes isn't either. For the first 20-25 games though, new players should play people closer to their own skill level on simpler maps with easier to understand settings. It is a lot more likely that a new player would leave out of confusion and frustration if you allowed them to play everything right away than it is that they will leave because we "don't have enough diversity" or whatever if you just expose them to 20-30 simpler maps and simpler settings for around 20 games.

I agree, JRH CARDINAL, Limiting the new players to specific maps and settings for their first few games is a great idea. As you mentioned, it would be more enjoyable for a new player to play others at their skill level on maps and with settings that don't promote confusion. Great Post!

Actually, many things are assumed, especially where it says a new player doesnt want to play the best player on the site on a particular setting. This is just wrong. The best way to learn a map is from these players.

They deserve the opportunity to try. What they do need however, is the knowledge about the map, and they need to know it is a difficult setting going in, so they can make an informed decision. Once the maps are labeled for difficulty, there is simply no need to restrict them, especially if the goal is to retain them.

Some of those maps listed last are some of the best maps on the site, and may be the very reason many stay...its ridiculous to block them, hoping the player may play enough maps they dont love, hoping they will wait to play the one they do....

Instead, label them so every player understands the difficulty level, and give them the freedom to try the site out as they please. If the goal is to keep new players, restricting maps is simply not the way to do it. Which is why so many are 100% against this suggestion, and why the queen is bumping this so repeatedly.

As sempy mentioned, I too on my first days here at CC, in my first 25 games or so, played 13 different maps. I played some classic mixed in, but clearly it was the new ones I wanted to try out and did so on nearly every new game. Its crazy to remove this opportunity from players. The new maps are CCs biggest advantage, and as the posted mentioned, other sites dont offer as many...why in Gods name would CC want to follow the example of the lesser sites who restrict players more....the only answer would really be to make them, not CC more competitive, which is exactly what this option would do...and what I actually may even be the rationale behind the original suggestion at this point.

Herpes herself, on her first 10 games, played 7 different types of maps, and only 2 on classic. And dont tell me youd have had more fun, being forced to not try those other maps, because those other maps were all awesome, and unique, and the reason why CC is so great.

Being limited to only Classic would be the biggest mistake CC could ever make. Thankfully, its always been the best site with the most options so it wont.

[Evil Semp]

Well, all of the maps would be too many. As you probably don't know, lackattack limits access to the maps for the first 5 games that new players play.

I don't agree that all the maps would be to many. Lack has put some off limits for new players, but as far as after 5 games I think they should be able to play ANY map and any settings that they choose.

I agree!

find a site that has more than twenty maps and post it. I personally have never seen a site besides this with more than 1. I'm sure there are others out there, I stopped looking when I found CC, but still...

There needs to be a middle ground. Queen Herpes may be restricting things a little too much, but you guys are not making much sense either. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play David Hoekstra in a 1v1 on one of the most complicated maps in the site. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play BeckytheBlondie in an 8 man escalating freestyle. Somebody with 6 games does not want to play team games against Blitz, laddida, or many other amazing team players (come to think of it, neither do I, and I've played almost 1000 games).
New players do not know what they want )or don't want). I'm not saying I should make that decision for them, Queen Herpes isn't either. For the first 20-25 games though, new players should play people closer to their own skill level on simpler maps with easier to understand settings. It is a lot more likely that a new player would leave out of confusion and frustration if you allowed them to play everything right away than it is that they will leave because we "don't have enough diversity" or whatever if you just expose them to 20-30 simpler maps and simpler settings for around 20 games.

I agree, JRH CARDINAL, Limiting the new players to specific maps and settings for their first few games is a great idea. As you mentioned, it would be more enjoyable for a new player to play others at their skill level on maps and with settings that don't promote confusion. Great Post!

Actually, many things are assumed, especially where it says a new player doesnt want to play the best player on the site on a particular setting. This is just wrong. The best way to learn a map is from these players.

They deserve the opportunity to try. What they do need however, is the knowledge about the map, and they need to know it is a difficult setting going in, so they can make an informed decision. Once the maps are labeled for difficulty, there is simply no need to restrict them, especially if the goal is to retain them.

Some of those maps listed last are some of the best maps on the site, and may be the very reason many stay...its ridiculous to block them, hoping the player may play enough maps they dont love, hoping they will wait to play the one they do....

Instead, label them so every player understands the difficulty level, and give them the freedom to try the site out as they please. If the goal is to keep new players, restricting maps is simply not the way to do it. Which is why so many are 100% against this suggestion, and why the queen is bumping this so repeatedly.

As sempy mentioned, I too on my first days here at CC, in my first 25 games or so, played 13 different maps. I played some classic mixed in, but clearly it was the new ones I wanted to try out and did so on nearly every new game. Its crazy to remove this opportunity from players. The new maps are CCs biggest advantage, and as the posted mentioned, other sites dont offer as many...why in Gods name would CC want to follow the example of the lesser sites who restrict players more....the only answer would really be to make them, not CC more competitive, which is exactly what this option would do...and what I actually may even be the rationale behind the original suggestion at this point.

Herpes herself, on her first 10 games, played 7 different types of maps, and only 2 on classic. And dont tell me youd have had more fun, being forced to not try those other maps, because those other maps were all awesome, and unique, and the reason why CC is so great.

Being limited to only Classic would be the biggest mistake CC could ever make. Thankfully, its always been the best site with the most options so it wont.

You forgot to mention the different settings that she was allowed to play when she first joined that new players won't be allowed to play if her suggestion were to be implemented.

[Doc_Brown]

You forgot to mention the different settings that she was allowed to play when she first joined that new players won't be allowed to play if her suggestion were to be implemented.

Actually, I think QH bought premium as soon as she joined, and she's written this suggestion so that the restrictions are lifted if you buy premium. In other words, this never would have applied to her.

[Queen_Herpes]

You forgot to mention the different settings that she was allowed to play when she first joined that new players won't be allowed to play if her suggestion were to be implemented.

Actually, I think QH bought premium as soon as she joined, and she's written this suggestion so that the restrictions are lifted if you buy premium. In other words, this never would have applied to her.

I'm not lost on that fact, but you both appear to be. Wouldn't ANY suggestion bring about a change that wasn't present previously on the site?

I certainly respect the issues raised by AAFitz, Doc_Brown, and Evil Semp. I have read them, time and time again. This is not to say that they are simply posting the same information over and over again, simply that I've heard their concerns. I have also read the concerns of other members (too numerous to list) who have some level of support for this suggestion.

Ultimately, the suggestion is simple:
-make the site more user-friendly for new users,
-prevent farmers and multis from reigning over the site,
-allow a learning opportunity for new users that encourages them to continue playing

[natty dread]

Inform, don't enforce.

[Queen_Herpes]

Inform, don't enforce.

Exactly. There needs to be more information first. New players (whatever the inherent skill level) should be informed of the options, possibilities, exceptions, pitfalls, etc. when they join and when they reach certain milestones.

[AAFitz]

Inform, don't enforce.

Exactly. There needs to be more information first. New players (whatever the inherent skill level) should be informed of the options, possibilities, exceptions, pitfalls, etc. when they join and when they reach certain milestones.

By exactly, you are agreeing that the maps should not be locked, which is great to see finally.

I do absolutely agree with you here that the maps need to be labeled and grouped according to relative difficulty/gameplay however, and really think it should have been done already.

At the same time, I would not be surprised to see it very soon. Im almost certain it just has to be being worked on.

[AAFitz]

You forgot to mention the different settings that she was allowed to play when she first joined that new players won't be allowed to play if her suggestion were to be implemented.

Actually, I think QH bought premium as soon as she joined, and she's written this suggestion so that the restrictions are lifted if you buy premium. In other words, this never would have applied to her.

I'm not lost on that fact, but you both appear to be. Wouldn't ANY suggestion bring about a change that wasn't present previously on the site?

I certainly respect the issues raised by AAFitz, Doc_Brown, and Evil Semp. I have read them, time and time again. This is not to say that they are simply posting the same information over and over again, simply that I've heard their concerns. I have also read the concerns of other members (too numerous to list) who have some level of support for this suggestion.

Ultimately, the suggestion is simple:
-make the site more user-friendly for new users,
-prevent farmers and multis from reigning over the site,
-allow a learning opportunity for new users that encourages them to continue playing

Those are not suggestions, those are objectives, and as objectives they are great.

The problem is, your suggestion will not achieve those objectives, and they can be achieved much easier without compromising the biggest advantage of CC over every other risklike gaming site, which are its unique maps.

What you do fail to address is how in any way blocking them will encourage someone to continue playing. You are not creating a learning opportunity for new users in any way...you are stripping them of it.

Blocking maps simply is not necessary in any way whatsoever, as long as players are told which maps and settings are tricky. Once player know which maps are tough, they can then decide for themselves which they are ready to try, or even arent ready to try, but will be able to learn from. But your suggestion, limits all learning, and opportunity by forcing them to play one map, that quite frankly, is not even remotely indicative of CC at this point.

You have not addressed these factors, you have simply ignored them, in hopes of getting your idea instituted, and quite clearly, that is the only real objective...because if your objective was to make CC better, and keep new players, you would simply not have a 4.5 rating and treat new players so harshly. This is clear to many at this point that this has nothing to do with achieving any objective, except your own, which is probably as much trolling as anything else.

Again I point out the respect for the work youve put in, but since youve completely ignored the possible real harm that it could cause to CC by removing its single best attribute and have not addressed it an any way at all...not once...it makes it clear your concern is not for CC, but only for Your suggestion...which are two things entirely. The silly bumps by you and yours after weeks of disinterest are the only reason this thread persists anyways. The vast majority understand the problems with this suggestion at first glance. I simply continue to point them out, as do others, because you really have chosen to just ignore them.

[Evil Semp]

You forgot to mention the different settings that she was allowed to play when she first joined that new players won't be allowed to play if her suggestion were to be implemented.

Actually, I think QH bought premium as soon as she joined, and she's written this suggestion so that the restrictions are lifted if you buy premium. In other words, this never would have applied to her.

I'm not lost on that fact, but you both appear to be. Wouldn't ANY suggestion bring about a change that wasn't present previously on the site?

That fact isn't lost on me. The fact that you had the choices and made choices that you are trying to take away from new members. And some of those choices they wouldn't have until they played 40 games. I don't see that as an improvement.

[Queen_Herpes]

You forgot to mention the different settings that she was allowed to play when she first joined that new players won't be allowed to play if her suggestion were to be implemented.

Actually, I think QH bought premium as soon as she joined, and she's written this suggestion so that the restrictions are lifted if you buy premium. In other words, this never would have applied to her.

I'm not lost on that fact, but you both appear to be. Wouldn't ANY suggestion bring about a change that wasn't present previously on the site?

That fact isn't lost on me. The fact that you had the choices and made choices that you are trying to take away from new members. And some of those choices they wouldn't have until they played 40 games. I don't see that as an improvement.

I know, crazy right? I'm on the side of the site owner here. He, lackattack, chose to limit new players to certain maps. This happened after lackattack joined the site. So, he limited new members to choices that he formerly was allowed to hold, now those new players don't have the same choices that lackattack had. Bummer.