Conquer Club

You may or may not be aware that Lack, based on the Community support in this suggestion topic, put in an upper limit of active (waiting to fill and playing) 10 Speed Games so as to reduce the quick-impact of point dumpers and those abusing the scoreboard, points, and various accounts, in this way.

Some of you have expressed 10 being more than enough, others have wished for a higher upper limit, such as the responses in this General Discussion topic. I've created a poll here for your input, should wish to participate.

Feel free to post any additional comments in this topic as you see fit.


--Andy

In that thread, azezzo refers to point dumpers who make multiple games of the same type. However, I am a user who makes about 10-15 games on different maps, so my opponents can choose. I usually drop the rest when several get joined.

I guess I'm the only type of player who gets screwed by this, but still, I hope I'm heard.

Cheers, KP

Is point dumpers really that big of a problem that we have to limit speed games? I think it will just do more harm then it will help.

Point dumpers are really rare, it's happend just a few times. At least i don't feel it's a big enough problems to limit speed games. But then again, i'm not a admin/moderator.

It just feels... strange and unnessecary to me. That's all.

no joke i was just thinking i should try to play 50 1-1's i say take a way of the limit all together you promise us unlimited games fulfill your promise

caymanmew wrote:no joke i was just thinking i should try to play 50 1-1's i say take a way of the limit all together you promise us unlimited games fulfill your promise

To be correct, "Unlimited Games" and "Speed Games" are on separate lines, so limiting the number of speed games in no way affects the unlimited games that you can play. Real-time and simultaneous are not the same thing.

On topic, I have no real opinion on the actual number as I rarely play speed games, and even when I do, 2 at a time is plenty for me.

Night Strike wrote:

caymanmew wrote:no joke i was just thinking i should try to play 50 1-1's i say take a way of the limit all together you promise us unlimited games fulfill your promise

To be correct, "Unlimited Games" and "Speed Games" are on separate lines, so limiting the number of speed games in no way affects the unlimited games that you can play. Real-time and simultaneous are not the same thing.

On topic, I have no real opinion on the actual number as I rarely play speed games, and even when I do, 2 at a time is plenty for me.

that like saying only 10 private games


Speed (5 minutes) is a game option you should have unlimited no matter the game settings

White Moose wrote:Are point dumpers really that big of a problem that we have to limit speed games? I think it will just do more harm then it will help.

Point dumpers are really rare, it's happened just a few times. At least i don't feel it's a big enough problems to limit speed games. But then again, i'm not a admin/moderator.

It just feels... strange and unnessecary to me. That's all.

These are exactly my thoughs.

not entirely cayman. i totally agree with KP's point, however i do agree the whole point dumping issue is a problem...surely something could be put in place to say for instance if a player creates more than 10 games at once, a message or something will be sent to one ofthe active mods , they can then inestigate this and see whether the play is point dumping or just generally playing lots of games.. just a suggestion tha i think would stop people moaning about the limit and stop point dumpers too.

jammyjames wrote:not entirely cayman. i totally agree with KP's point, however i do agree the whole point dumping issue is a problem...surely something could be put in place to say for instance if a player creates more than 10 games at once, a message or something will be sent to one ofthe active mods , they can then inestigate this and see whether the play is point dumping or just generally playing lots of games.. just a suggestion tha i think would stop people moaning about the limit and stop point dumpers too.

The problem with this is different mods do and have access to different things.

On topic, to me this just changes how a user point dumps but I never get even close to playing 10 speed games at once so it doesn't really bother me that this is implemented.

I have to say, i do not get it.
At first i did not get why people were upset about this. So you can create only 10 speed games at a time.. big deal.. Just fill em up and go for it. KP's argument of creating a multitude and the dropping them is also not convincing to me. Don't create em unless you want to play em man..
But then i read again

waiting to fill and playing

AND playing!!! Okay so this is a serious change. I'll be honest with you. I do not get it. Why the change? because its against pointdumpers....?!? They can still dump points, just a bit slower. Although if they take a turn and kill themselves, it can be done with in under 5 minutes. Not really effective in my book, but then, the limitation is only a limit to so few people. 10 speed games at a time? seriously?!?

I dont see how it helps OR hinders much so, i have come to the conclusion that it does not affect me much, but i'd still like to see a proper announcement.

I have voted 21+, cause i am 21+ or 12 + however you'd like to read that... Anyways, there is already a creation limit of 50. Why not cap speed games play AND creating at 50?

admins what was the point of this new limitation? to stop point dumping. how many users point dump per year??

Well, if you are going to complain that there is a limit at 10, then why not complain at a limit of 50? It's still the same thing "hindering your unlimited games"

TheForgivenOne wrote:Well, if you are going to complain that there is a limit at 10, then why not complain at a limit of 50? It's still the same thing "hindering your unlimited games"

A ridiculous and inane comparison...as one would expect from the low quality of mods presently.

Just to make the response simple so even you can understand from your intellectually challenged state, it is well nigh impossible to play 50 speed games at one time, but it is well within the grasp of most of us (except the present mods team perhaps) to play 10+ at a time.

To limit the speed games to 10 is one thing, to limit them and place a very weak reason at the door of the decision is another. A thread was created about this and was locked down immediately, a poor error of judgement once again. The facts are this is a nice way of narrowing bandwidth and using less server space thus cutting costs while doing so under the cover of, apparantly, giving a better service.

This is not an improvement, it is a step backwards, unsurprisingly, and is little more that an assinine con trick by the admin.

Guess i should have made myself more clear, i never seem to do that. I see people complaining about the Speed limit at 10. how come nobody complains about the 50 casual pending limit then? I can clearly see why people would be upset at a limit of 10 Speed games. If i was actually an avid Speed player, i'd be just as ticked as anyone else, but since i join possibly 1-2 speed games per day, i'm not mad about it. I guess the fact that i don't play a ton of speed games is hindering my perspective. Just playing 15 speed games at once seems like a hassle to me. But to each their own.

this is a really stupid update , what we were promised when we bought a premium is suddenly being revoked.

im betting most players that voted 10 or less or even 10 speed games dont even play speed games that often.

TheForgivenOne wrote:I guess the fact that i don't play a ton of speed games is hindering my perspective. Just playing 15 speed games at once seems like a hassle to me. .

this is the problem ,people who dont play speed regurly are making decisions that effect the players who do play a lot of speed games.

TheForgivenOne wrote:I guess the fact that i don't play a ton of speed games is hindering my perspective.

Yes

TheForgivenOne wrote:how come nobody complains about the 50 casual pending limit then?

Since you seem stuck on this: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=535&t=110810
Although, since AoN is gone, I doubt there will be much more support for that.



Anyway... is there any way we can we get this thread merged with King Konquer's stuff? I know it has a different title and all, but it's basically about the same thing.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=121234
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=121195

Sniper08 wrote:im betting most players that voted 10 or less or even 10 speed games dont even play speed games that often.

TheForgivenOne wrote:I guess the fact that i don't play a ton of speed games is hindering my perspective. Just playing 15 speed games at once seems like a hassle to me. .

this is the problem ,people who dont play speed regurly are making decisions that effect the players who do play a lot of speed games.

I haven't played any speed games recently, but usually do when I'm out on field work and don't want to be attached to a computer for days so they are perfect.

The most I have ever been able to handle at once with no missed turns is 7, so I can see how the faster players play 10+, but don't understand why you would need to.

I voted 10 or less simply because it gets annoying trying to fill 4+ player games in the speed section when so many games are spammed by the same people. There's always multiple Doodle Assassin games posted and usually enough people join them to play them, but are scattered across many games so each is jammed at 4 players rather than having one playing.

Sniper08 wrote:this is a really stupid update , what we were promised when we bought a premium is suddenly being revoked.

I really fail to see your point here:

A) The wording in the Premium Membership page is ambiguous, but we all know that the meaning of "simultaneous games" is that you can play as many casual games as you'd like.
B) You, as a customer, are required to use the service as it is offered by Conquer Club, the service provider. It's entirely up to them to make the rules and change them as they see fit, and you are welcome to stop using their service at any time, or take advantage of the free service they supply.

If the upper limit was raised to 15, would that be sufficient to end 'the world is ending, yowzers oh no?!' ?


--Andy

I think 10 active speed games is enough, but perhaps 20+ waiting speed games as well. Or maybe a compromise at 15-20 total. This would limit the amount of dumping, but dumping can still always happen.

AndyDufresne wrote:If the upper limit was raised to 15, would that be sufficient to end 'the world is ending, yowzers oh no?!' ?


--Andy

i believe setting it to 15 is best, 20 would be better but if we must compromise, then 15 would be nice, i only play around 2 or 3 speed games at one time, but i know other guys who can handle over 10 with no problems.. i understand why this limit has been put in place, and i also find it a bit unnecessary, for the 2 years ive been playing, i have only seen about 4 guys point dumping with speed games, so that excuse is kinda lame.. i think this is just a power grab.. much like Obama is doing in the US haha LOL well thats my 3 1/2 cents

If you can do it, then i would add some line of text where the total number of sequential speed games cannot exceed 2 games live and 2 more waiting to fill.

i think 15 would be perfect, i really do. 3 minute turns in speed would also be a huge improvement to the players who wait until 15 seconds left to deploy, or those who miss their turns. it would also compliment the 15 games limit , due to then they could not , or most should not be able to join all 15 at 1 time as well. so then this would keep the waiting speed game counts lower and also free up the server of all those wasted minutes for me to have to keep hitting "R"

phantomzero wrote:I think 10 active speed games is enough, but perhaps 20+ waiting speed games as well. Or maybe a compromise at 15-20 total. This would limit the amount of dumping, but dumping can still always happen.

Active and Waiting must be grouped together. If you're in 10 active games and 20 waiting, what happens if one of your 20 waiting fills before one of your active games ends?

denominator wrote:

phantomzero wrote:I think 10 active speed games is enough, but perhaps 20+ waiting speed games as well. Or maybe a compromise at 15-20 total. This would limit the amount of dumping, but dumping can still always happen.

Active and Waiting must be grouped together. If you're in 10 active games and 20 waiting, what happens if one of your 20 waiting fills before one of your active games ends?

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=121261 is how it should be imo

ljex wrote:

denominator wrote:

phantomzero wrote:I think 10 active speed games is enough, but perhaps 20+ waiting speed games as well. Or maybe a compromise at 15-20 total. This would limit the amount of dumping, but dumping can still always happen.

Active and Waiting must be grouped together. If you're in 10 active games and 20 waiting, what happens if one of your 20 waiting fills before one of your active games ends?

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=121261 is how it should be imo

That will only make this issue worse:

denominator wrote:I voted 10 or less simply because it gets annoying trying to fill 4+ player games in the speed section when so many games are spammed by the same people. There's always multiple Doodle Assassin games posted and usually enough people join them to play them, but are scattered across many games so each is jammed at 4 players rather than having one playing.