Conquer Club

First, I am not sure you have a consensus on those being truly unwritten Rules aside from the deadbeating. Some folks don't like it ... others consider it reasonable strategy. Particularly the suiciding (discussed in several other threads)

Even the deadbeating isn't so much an "unwritten rule" as either rudeness or "real life happens". Oh, and let's not forget the I am losing, so I quit .. poor sports.

Put folks who don't play the way you like on your personal ignore list. Don't expect the "communit" to enforce those "rules".

Suiciding isn't a strategy. It's a sure way to lose. "Strategy" implies a method by which you try to win the game.

Do a search ... there was just a thread on this ... the most recent was something like automatic 2 week suspention for suiciding. I am not saying I agree, but still ... these may be your idea of "rules", but they are not the communty as a whole's ideas.

That's my point.

Keebs2674 wrote:giving away an opponent's position and strength in a fog of war game,

That is fully legal by CC rules so no need to enforce it.

PLAYER57832 wrote:these may be your idea of "rules", but they are not the communty as a whole's ideas.

Sorry, but Player is right here.

This is just an attempt to get the admins to use their powers to force everybody to play the way (and with the strategies/tactics that) you like. If people aren't playing by your own personal made-up rules then ignore-list them; but please don't try to shackle every single other CC player to only doing things the way that you like them done.

EDIT:

Thezzaruz wrote:

Keebs2674 wrote:giving away an opponent's position and strength in a fog of war game,

That is fully legal by CC rules so no need to enforce it.

Indeed, it's an intended gameplay feature. I'm constanty amazed at just how many players don't get that and then waste their time whinging in the forums about how they lost to better players because they didn't understand how to best play the game.

give feedback, that is what it is there for.

that feedback then serves as a warning to like-minded people on how a game should be played to avoid the player.

but expect to get them in return from others who think you don't play the way they think you should.

In general, I think most of the replies are off mark. The replies are correct, but not helpfull. Why is there a need to force an individual to play the "comunity" way (whatever that means? e.g -most ppl I played with consider revealing a position in a FOW game to be an inapropriate play, yet it's aloud under the cc rules, thus becomes the "comunity" way).

In another thread someone else pointed me to another suggestion called "house rules". What was offered is to enable the creator of a game, to attach to a game a list of aditional rules. The offer asked to enforce those rules on the specific game (which is quite impractical).
But, if u take this suggestion one step backward. Ask for "house rules" that may be attached to a game. This set of "house rules" is than applied to the specific game, but without enforcing it. That way, your chances of playing with ppl that are like minded are much bigger.

By the way, the ongoing argument if there are or not "unwritten rules" for the game, pops into the suggestions thread every once in a while (in different shapes). I believe it to be a big problem that should be solved, one way or another.

gp

Thezzaruz wrote:
That is fully legal by CC rules so no need to enforce it.

You obviously don't understand my point or the definition of an "unwritten rule".

There shouldn't be ANY TYPE of unwritten rules... Write them down to everyone knows which rules that goes.
Very simple.. Very good..

White Moose, caller of justice

I'm not talking about the CC mods enforcing rules. I'm talking about the CC Community instituting a set of informal standards that people understand they should try to uphold in their games. I'm not here to set up my standards; I'm trying to suggest there should be some standards and to think about ways the community can informally enforce them.

I understand the point about the CC community not being able to agree on a common set of unwritten rules, but why not give it a shot? I'll bet we could agree on some things.

Keebs2674

Firstly ...

Keebs2674 wrote:

Thezzaruz wrote:That is fully legal by CC rules so no need to enforce it.

You obviously don't understand my point or the definition of an "unwritten rule".

What is your/the definition of an unwritten rule?

And secondly, and I'll admit I can't help myself here ...

Keebs2674 wrote:I'm not talking about the CC mods enforcing rules. I'm talking about the CC Community instituting a set of informal standards that people understand they should try to uphold in their games. I'm not here to set up my standards; I'm trying to suggest there should be some standards and to think about ways the community can informally enforce them.

I understand the point about the CC community not being able to agree on a common set of unwritten rules, but why not give it a shot? I'll bet we could agree on some things.

... having agreed on these things would we write them down ?

Keebs2674 wrote:I'm not talking about the CC mods enforcing rules. I'm talking about the CC Community instituting a set of informal standards that people understand they should try to uphold in their games. I'm not here to set up my standards; I'm trying to suggest there should be some standards and to think about ways the community can informally enforce them.

I understand the point about the CC community not being able to agree on a common set of unwritten rules, but why not give it a shot? I'll bet we could agree on some things.

Because we do... Try looking up old threads first. Every point you have stated has been run into the ground. Look through the history... Why should we have to have this talk AGAIN when it has clearly been discussed literally hundreds of times before?

Just because you weren't active in the forum doesn't mean we should have to do this again.

gp24176281 wrote:    ... Ask for "house rules" that may be attached to a game. This set of "house rules" is than applied to the specific game, but without enforcing it. That way, your chances of playing with ppl that are like minded are much bigger.       By the way, the ongoing argument if there are or not "unwritten rules" for the game, pops into the suggestions thread every once in a while (in different shapes). I believe it to be a big problem that should be solved, one way or another.

This is what private games and such are for.  Find those who agree to play how you like and go for it ... but don't expect everyone else to agree.

Understand, I don't do any of these things... and would put folks who reveal FOW positions on my ignore list ...as I put those who use offensive language and such. That is appropriate. Asking the mods OR the CC "community" to enforce your particular rules -- no.

As for the individual changes, all of those have been proposed as rules changes in previous threads and rejected. Studying those threads would give you a decent place to start.

Keebs2674 wrote:Suiciding isn't a strategy. It's a sure way to lose. "Strategy" implies a method by which you try to win the game.

It works wonderfully in certain tournament situations. Sort of a "lose the battle, win the war" kind of loss.

PLAYER57832 wrote:This is what private games and such are for.  Find those who agree to play how you like and go for it ... but don't expect everyone else to agree.

Understand, I don't do any of these things... and would put folks who reveal FOW positions on my ignore list ...as I put those who use offensive language and such. That is appropriate. Asking the mods OR the CC "community" to enforce your particular rules -- no.

As for the individual changes, all of those have been proposed as rules changes in previous threads and rejected. Studying those threads would give you a decent place to start.

2 points of reference.

I don't know if I studied all of the rejected "house rule" threads. Those I did, offered an enrorceable house rules and been rejected (although got positive feedbacks) on the basis of "impractical to implement". The fact that they keep apearing as one version or the other, can prove their importance. A set of non-enforceable set can serve as good as.

I saw alot of ppl reffering others to make "private" games or create user groups and such. In my eyes, this is just nonsence.
How many ppl go for callout thread? very few.
What is user group? I been to CC for a yr now and have no clue how to create one (nor where to look for one).

PLAYER57832, I think I remember your name from other threads (on the same or close subjects). I can't understand the base for your objections. Why object to something that will make the game much more enjoyable to some and wouldn't harm u one bit. How can a non formal adition to some of the games hurt u? How can it "force" u? Just, don't join games that offer house rules and walla - My problem is solved and u don't suffer one bit (the truth is - u gain, u don't have to play with ppl that believe the CC rules as they are are not fully ok - so, much less frictions in the games).

gp

gp24176281 wrote:
PLAYER57832, I think I remember your name from other threads (on the same or close subjects). I can't understand the base for your objections. Why object to something that will make the game much more enjoyable to some and wouldn't harm u one bit.
gp

You asked, here is my answer:

Every time a new option is posted, it actually divides the community more. For each choice, you have to decide what to select ... and, because people have their favorites or just want to limit the games they look at when finding games (via game finder), it tends to limit who plays who more.

Right now, you have freestyle versus sequential, various game types, fog versus no fog and, if you are premium, speed versus casual AND you have multiple maps. There are a couple of other ideas floating around already approved, but not yet implemented. (infected nuetrals, for one)

Also, each choice just takes space on the start game/find game screens.

For both these reasons, new types should only be implemented in very cautious, limited fashion when they truly present something UNIQUE that cannot be done in other ways. Your "house rules" can be implemented easily by creating a group of friends who play the way you like. It might take time to establish a big list, but, really, all you have to do is ask folks who you play if they want to join your group.... and then play private games with those folks.

There are other reasons, but I will leave that for the mods.

Ultimately, the only opinion that really matters is Lack ... and, to a point, the mods because I believe they serve as kind of "gatekeepers" for Lack -- advising him when NEW ideas are presented and such.

As for having checked the forum ... don't just check "house rules", but look for threads on the individual ideas. Your complaint about suiciding was addressed just a couple of days ago. (in the thread something like 2 week suspension for suiciders).

marvellous post player.

this site has given everyone the ability to create their own user groups based on anything they pretty much like. make use of it gp.

i was a part of one about a month ago that was based on the AoR: Magic map where players of similar rank would play each other. unfortunately my score dropped too low and i had to drop out. it is back up again, hello are you out there, you can send me the password.

anyway that group was formed because one guy noticed a few of us in his games had similar interests and pm'd us to see if we want to take part. so read those other threads on the topics that interest you, pm those that post favourably and you're off and running.

cicero wrote:Keebs2674

Firstly ...

Keebs2674 wrote:

Thezzaruz wrote:That is fully legal by CC rules so no need to enforce it.

You obviously don't understand my point or the definition of an "unwritten rule".

What is your/the definition of an unwritten rule?

It's a rule that's not among the CC rules as laid down by the Administrators. Thezzaruz's philosphy is that anything goes if it's not against the official rules. I'm arguing that that shouldn't be the case.

cicero wrote:And secondly, and I'll admit I can't help myself here ...

Keebs2674 wrote:I'm not talking about the CC mods enforcing rules. I'm talking about the CC Community instituting a set of informal standards that people understand they should try to uphold in their games. I'm not here to set up my standards; I'm trying to suggest there should be some standards and to think about ways the community can informally enforce them.

I understand the point about the CC community not being able to agree on a common set of unwritten rules, but why not give it a shot? I'll bet we could agree on some things.

... having agreed on these things would we write them down ?

They'd be discussed in the forum, so they'd be "written down" like any other discussion here is. The record would be something we could all point to when someone does something like reveal positions in FOW and say "Look, the vast majority of CC players think what you did is poor form, so don't do it again." Another commenter makes a good point that some of the things I've suggested have already been discussed; I'll go check on them.

Anarkistsdream wrote:Because we do... Try looking up old threads first. Every point you have stated has been run into the ground. Look through the history... Why should we have to have this talk AGAIN when it has clearly been discussed literally hundreds of times before?

Just because you weren't active in the forum doesn't mean we should have to do this again.

I'll check for old threads, thanks. But no one is asking you to do anything. You don't have to participate.

Keebs2674 wrote:

Thezzaruz wrote:That is fully legal by CC rules so no need to enforce it.

It's a rule that's not among the CC rules as laid down by the Administrators. Thezzaruz's philosphy is that anything goes if it's not against the official rules. I'm arguing that that shouldn't be the case.

So it is legal but you don't like it and hence it should be stopped? What's next, you want to decide how I deploy my troops?


If you want to change a current rule then by all means have a go at it, make a thread, make a poll and argue for your opinion. But don't come here and try to force it on anyone as long as it still is legal.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

gp24176281 wrote:
PLAYER57832, I think I remember your name from other threads (on the same or close subjects). I can't understand the base for your objections. Why object to something that will make the game much more enjoyable to some and wouldn't harm u one bit.
gp

You asked, here is my answer:

Every time a new option is posted, it actually divides the community more. For each choice, you have to decide what to select ... and, because people have their favorites or just want to limit the games they look at when finding games (via game finder), it tends to limit who plays who more.

Right now, you have freestyle versus sequential, various game types, fog versus no fog and, if you are premium, speed versus casual AND you have multiple maps. There are a couple of other ideas floating around already approved, but not yet implemented. (infected nuetrals, for one)

Also, each choice just takes space on the start game/find game screens.

For both these reasons, new types should only be implemented in very cautious, limited fashion when they truly present something UNIQUE that cannot be done in other ways. Your "house rules" can be implemented easily by creating a group of friends who play the way you like. It might take time to establish a big list, but, really, all you have to do is ask folks who you play if they want to join your group.... and then play private games with those folks.

There are other reasons, but I will leave that for the mods.

Ultimately, the only opinion that really matters is Lack ... and, to a point, the mods because I believe they serve as kind of "gatekeepers" for Lack -- advising him when NEW ideas are presented and such.

As for having checked the forum ... don't just check "house rules", but look for threads on the individual ideas. Your complaint about suiciding was addressed just a couple of days ago. (in the thread something like 2 week suspension for suiciders).

Thx player,
I do not agree (as u already understand). I would like the games I play to be available to as large a group as possible (don't like playing the same ppl over and over again). But, I got a very good explanation for your point of view and I respect it.

Cheers,
gp