compliments and suggestions from a first time poster

[calkid]

i read through the to-do lists(pending and regected) and i must say it was pretty well organized.

the two things that i feel definately need to be implimented first would be to be able to see who is online in your games so you don't wait around for someone to play their turn who isn't there. also, the creator should definately be able to set a time frame for each turn. i like 12 hours as standard but can be adjusted up or down.

i don't know if this has been suggested, but i would like to see a partial randomizer. i've played too many games where certain players have a distict advantage at the begining when they have either the whole territory or all but 1 country in a territory. i call it a partial randomizer so that there would be a ratio of countries per territory that a player can hold. i like no more than .5 or 50%

rt games are popular. i player a couple myself but they are hard to regulate. i would like to offer a suggestion to add rt as a game option that will show on the games list so there is no mistaking those who want to play rt. also, in the specific rt games, a player who exceeds their time limit once should be considered a deadbeat in an rt game and ejected. to protect points and cheaters, i would say that if any player in an rt game is ejected, it will be a "no points" game. the fun of just playing rt is still there.

i think the feedback feature is great! i would also suggest though that there be a system that someone can challenge negative feedback and mods are available to review the game, what was said in feedback, and the argument in the challenge. it's too easy for anyone to leave frivilous negative feedback.

i would like to see a feature in the future where you can play against ghost players for no points. this will allow rt games and will also allow for practice games on new maps or maps people haven't played on and would like to see if it's for them in the real games for points.

i am going to have to kill myself later for suggesting this. i like being able to play 4 games at once for free, but i have been here long enough and played enough games to suggest that you decease it by 1 or two games(to 2-3). it will encourage more players to pay. i say this because i love the game of risk and i was lucky to have found you guys. i feel $20 a month is more than fair to have fun for a year. i want to see people who use this system to consider paying for premium membership as i am. for those who can't afford it or are too cheap or like to just get things for free without giving, they still can play a couple games at a time. also, by decreasing the total games one can play at once, you decrease the number of deadbeat players playing. you would also decrease the ratio since you are increasing the ratio of premium membership games. the games that will hold less deadbeat players.

another suggestion on memberships, i would like to see 1 free week of premium membership for those who have "qualified" as a non deadbeat. it will let them see what is offered and i believe after that trial is over, there will be an increase in paid premium memberships.

last but not least, i love your site! everyone has something in common here and i sense sometimes a feel of a community. way to go! after playing for a while, i finally decided to browse the site more thouroughly and decided to give my time and input. the only real negative thing about this site is that it takes away your time to do more important things in real life hahah. i'm serious when i say i have to sneak away behind my wife's back just to play sometimes she just has to accept that i am married to conquer club too now.

p.s.- if you need more help overlooking games and feedback, lemme know what i can do in my spare time to do my part to make this place even better(if that's possible). or even to just brainstorm for more ideas....

[Chad22342]

Hello and welcome to CC. I'm Chad and everything you wrote sounds very practical and quite nice.

[s.xkitten]

i read the first sentence...and got lost...

but welcome to CC in any case

[magneticgoop]

yeah good ideas except the limit on free games with only 4 games going you dont get enough play time as it is. but very good otherwise.

[mrhuhn]

Welcome to CC i agree that 4 games is fine as it is for now but your other ideas sound nice also you said permium was $20 a month, in fact its less then that at $20 a YEAR

[calkid]

i just responded to a deadbeat issue in another thread and want to make another suggestion.

there is a 24 hour clock in every game for a reason. that reason is to ensure everyone has enough time to take their turn. i think this is a PERFECT time limit because it compromises on both sides....can't have the standard 12 hours in case someone works 12 hour shifts or just wants to work an 8 hour day and go to sleep. can't make it 48 hours because 24 hours is still too long for most of us. so 24 hours is perfect to allow everyone to take their turn.

SO! my question is, when you already allow enough time for someone to take their turn who wants to play, you don't need the three missed turns idea. it defeats the purpose of setting a 24 hour time limit.

so my suggestion is to decide what's most important. if 24 hours is most important to ensure everyone has enough time, then initiate a 2 TOTAL strikes rule. don't keep a 3 in a row strike rule because someone who is doing it intentionally can litterally miss 10 turns in a game. IF! keeping the 3 strikes in a row rule is more important, then lower the game time to 12 hours so the others still have fun without being as frustrated AND the people missing their turns because it's 12 hours between turns still have a safety net with the 3 strikes rule. this is a good compromise to what is already in place to protect people from missing their turns.

in my opinion, if someone can't play a turn within 24 hours, then they shouldn't be playing at all. this site is for players and it's the players that will ultimately pay for premium.

ALSO! i think premium members should have a say in voting for what changes happen on this site. this will encourage others to PAY if they want to be a part of the difference. if it wasn't for membership, it would be harder for this site to stay up and running. obviouly the majority should rule, but what should rule are the people who care about this site the most.

[wcaclimbing]

SO! my question is, when you already allow enough time for someone to take their turn who wants to play, you don't need the three missed turns idea. it defeats the purpose of setting a 24 hour time limit.

so my suggestion is to decide what's most important. if 24 hours is most important to ensure everyone has enough time, then initiate a 2 TOTAL strikes rule. don't keep a 3 in a row strike rule because someone who is doing it intentionally can litterally miss 10 turns in a game. IF! keeping the 3 strikes in a row rule is more important, then lower the game time to 12 hours so the others still have fun without being as frustrated AND the people missing their turns because it's 12 hours between turns still have a safety net with the 3 strikes rule. this is a good compromise to what is already in place to protect people from missing their turns.

the 3 IN A ROW rule is in place because there are so many games that go for such a long time. in a game with 100+ turns, missing 3 turns indavidually, not in a row, isnt that big a of a deal.

And with the part about changing the limit to 12 hours, that will never happen. Many people here only play their turns once a day, like, before work or after school. a 12 hour limit would mean that every person that is only able to play once a day will be missing 1 turn EVERY day. That would never get added because then the people that are able to play more than once a day will have a huge advantage.

[calkid]

100+ turns?!?! i must be playign the wrong games. i've played 50+ games and i don't think any of them lasted over 15 rounds. those games sound like fun.

what i was suggesting was only if the deadbeater issue was more important than the other issues. i agree that 12 hours is too soon and that 24 hours is probably a perfect compromise.

but if a game has gone on longer than 100 rounds, and the issue to protect those games is more important, then we should allow more missed turns. nobody what's to win those games by default. those are somewhat hall of fame games in my opinion.

well, i personally don't like people missing turns, but i understand that's part of the game....and heck....sometimes war. sometimes it's good strategy so i live with it.

why i suggested up above to allow an option to change a 24 hour turn limit to 12....or even 8 or for a great rt game, 10 minutes. like i said. i don't think the "deadbeater" issue is about people missing turns but the wait time for others to take their own turns.