Disable Game Chat: No Diplomacy or Fog Reveals

[roelbianca]

Concise description:
Option when you're creating a game to disable game chat or limit it to a few pre-programmed phrases such as "good luck," "good game"

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• ends the debate if it's okay to reveal fog of war information
• basically it's a "turn off diplomacy" button
• sometimes you get tired of hearing noobs complain that they're under attack

MOD EDIT: Copied OP
[spoiler]Hello conquerclub

It's just suggestion, maybe if you start your own game you can make a choise of using the game chat or not. I think it's much more fairplay.
Than the players who want no diplomacy can choose for it.
I hope you consider this.


roel[/spoiler]

[KoolBak]

First off, i enjoy chatting with my friends as much as the play....second, if you are playing with the kind of SCUM that tend to make alliances in singles games anyway, the lack of chat will simply make them do it via pm / other venues and you will still be hosed.....

My take on it......

[RobinJ]

First off, i enjoy chatting with my friends as much as the play....second, if you are playing with the kind of SCUM that tend to make alliances in singles games anyway, the lack of chat will simply make them do it via pm / other venues and you will still be hosed.....

I agree - if you really don't want game chat, there could be an option so that it doesn't come up on your screen but I think it is unfair to the other players to get rid of it completely

[Sammy gags]

all alliances would be secret alliances without it

[KoolBak]

Like that makes a difference......all bad in my book ( I know I know...I'll shut up).

[dcc1220]

* Suggestion Idea:

A Silent Option which makes the chat box disappear.

* Specifics:

Allow players to eliminate the chat box in standard or termination games so that they do not have to read comments made by opposing players. How often are players manipulated or verbally scolded (sometimes abused) for their moves in the chat box? This is sometimes sound strategy by those typing, but it would be nice to be able to eliminate it as a factor if a player wishes.


* Why it is needed:

Simliar to playing poker online, allow players an option to ignore all other players' complaints or suggestions so that they are not manipulated into moves they would not normally make. Also, it would be a nice feature considering that some chat is not appropriate between different aged players. (This feature would also help some of us who put our foot in our own mouths when we respond when upset about an opponents' move )

[Mr Unbeatable]

I agree that it could be used as an option but i have hardly ever seen someone lose a game because of what has been said in chat.

But would make for a nice option none the less.

[the_fatty]

no because wat about team games?

[Kotaro]

Concise description:

• Before starting a game, you can choose whether or not to disable chat

Specifics:

• Put it right under the Fog of War settings. Simply: Game Chat, two boxes, yes or no, have to choose one

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• It will allow Fog games to go without the possibility of someone breaking the fog by giving out intel.
• We all have our days when we'd rather just play the game and not communicate. This will allow for such silent games

[The Neon Peon]

I think this will increase secret diplomacy a lot:

3 person game. Red has a 50 troop bonus, Green and Blue are a lot weaker. Only Green can see where Red's Bonus is... I think that in situations like these, players will exchange info in PMs if you disable chat.

It will allow Fog games to go without the possibility of someone breaking the fog by giving out intel.

I think this is done by the Fog of War changes idea, which there have been no major objections to. It does this very well, and I suggest you look it up.

It make fog of war much more realistic, seeing as you are not able to know there is a bonus since you can't see all the territories in the country, you also do not know a lot more things. This pretty much takes out most of the intelligence people complain that others share in chat.

As for the second part about those days where you want a silent game... don't scroll down? You have to perform an action to see the chat in the first place, so definitely not necessary.

[Charles_IV]

Kotaro, one of our three ratings is based largely on how well we chat with our fellow players in a game, and that friendly conversation and trash-talking, etc., is a really enjoyable part of the game to me.

In fog-of-war games, I often tell players with whom I am in direct contact information known to my forces that may not be known to them. Of course, it is my option to be honest or not in these communications of intelligence, but I'm honest and open whenever it's to my advantage. I don't consider this unfair. Perhaps adjacency should not be the criteria for revealing what is in a territory. Instead, we should only know what forces are in a territory when we attack it or are attacked by (forces from within) it. This would make for a denser fog.

Of course, in a real fog-of-war environment, you would not see the field or even your own forces directly. You would see only a map indicating the current status of your military intelligence...your spy reports, your scouts and patrols, your pickets and territorial outposts. I'd love to play a game where field and staff commanders really knew only what tactical and strategic intelligence is actually available in warfare of the period.

Anyway, I believe in letting all options be available that are reasonably desired by a number of players. If I don't want to play in a silent game, I don't have to join it. So I say YES to your chat/no chat option.

[JoseFlang]

hi all I would like too see a option for no chat box on game creation i am sick of table talk we dont allow it in our friendly games and it would be nice to have the option to take it off

[Pacohell]

Under 'Start a Game' add the option 'no dealmaking'. What will happen is the gamechat is turned off except for teamchat.:

Why? Some players love dealmaking, some hate it. Dealmaking sometimes kills the strategic part of the game. Also it causes friction between players. So why not make it an optional when the game is setup

Kind regards,

Paco

[JoshyBoy]

Interesting, but I fully oppose this idea. It would ruin the experience.

I know this is being suggested as an option, but I would demand a warning. Something like a message coming up when you click on "Join", which says "This game is a 'no deal making' game, are you sure you want to join?"

[jeraado]

I disagree also. If you shut down game chat how will sitters notify? I also think it would just encourage secret diplomacy

[IcePack]

I disagree also. If you shut down game chat how will sitters notify? I also think it would just encourage secret diplomacy

x2

[tkr4lf]

Yeah, bad idea. If you really don't like "deals", then there are a couple (that I know of) usergroups that are set up solely for people who want to play "no deal" games. Try joining one of those. The two I can think of are The Lone Wolves (or Rangers, or something like that) and Xi Games.

[JoshyBoy]

Hey! TFO! Get this moved to Rejected!

[Metsfanmax]

I disagree also. If you shut down game chat how will sitters notify? I also think it would just encourage secret diplomacy

Why is it such a big deal that sitters identify themselves anyway?

[JoshyBoy]

Why is it such a big deal that sitters identify themselves anyway?

You're joking right? Right?!?

[mybad]

deals are part of the game. how are you going to stop it? just protest deals.

[natty dread]

If you want to play "no truce" games, you can always post in callouts. I'm sure you'll find lots of other players who are willing to play games without truces.

As for turning off the game chat, that's a lousy idea. Game chat is the soul of the game.


Question to op: would you enjoy playing a game of risk (the boardgame) with your friends, where each of you would have to duct-tape your mouths for the duration of the game?

I don't think you would.

[TheForgivenOne]

Question to op: would you enjoy playing a game of risk (the boardgame) with your friends, where each of you would have to duct-tape your mouths for the duration of the game?

I don't think you would.

I know it wasn't directed at me, but I know I would. But I'm special in that kind of way.


This idea has been suggested before, and has been rejected before. Main reasoning is that players would be more inclined to make a deal via PM's or wall's, or even send the player an email to get a truce, another being that sitters are meant to announce in chat that if they are taking somebodies turn. Truth be told, in most of my games, I never see truces. Very few are made.

So I will be moving this to Rejected.

[Pacohell]

Okidoki...Couldnt find it in the mountain of suggestions : )
So the general notion is the chat always stays on.

Topic closed.

[Pacohell]

Question to op: would you enjoy playing a game of risk (the boardgame) with your friends, where each of you would have to duct-tape your mouths for the duration of the game?

How did you know how i like to play! Duct-tape Risk is a classic!