Conquer Club

Can anyone provide a solid argument as to why this isn't classified as farming? Someone with 2000+ points creates a large amount of 1v1 or Polymorphic games and invites anyone from a Cook to Sergeant 1st Class, but it isn't considered farming simply because they have the choice of accepting the invite.

I don't find that argument satisfactory in the slightest. For any decent player it is actually hard to fall down to being a striper, or below. On that basis, one can assume that a decent player would have the knowledge to join a game they have randomly been invited to on a complicated map with complicated settings. If one assumes stripers and below are not decent players, can one not therefore assume they wouldn't have the knowledge to know that they're being farmed and blindly accept?

Ranching? Is this what you are talking about?

deathcomesrippin wrote: The unofficial term for the particular problem is "Ranching". Simply speaking, it is the case of someone abusing the game by purposefully inviting people who have no experience with certain settings to guarantee a win.

It is extremely tough to prove, since you essentially need to either reach out to all the low ranks or actually witness the invites on the game screen. In certain cases it has been easier, such as the case above. For the most part, unless a group of low ranking players approach us or someone points out it is happening, then it can't be caught.

I will never understand why this is even issue. Its a game guys

iAmCaffeine wrote:If one assumes stripers and below are not decent players, can one not therefore assume they wouldn't have the knowledge to know that they're being farmed and blindly accept?

It's like anything else - if they blindly accept something they don't understand, they deserve what is coming to them: getting fleeced by the Wolves of CC Street. I guess if real money is involved the law needs to protect the sheep from the wolves, but it doesn't really matter here since it is all pretend points and ranks.

That said, if the practice is allowed to flourish we can always wonder if a high-ranked player got his score by engaging in such nefaious practices and isn't, perhaps, as good as his rank indicates. High-ranked players, therefore, have an incentive to put a stop to this.

Anyway, I guess there is a risk to the farmer in that he stands to lose big points if things don't go his way, so perhaps by accepting this risk he "pays" for his farming ("ranching" for Texans).

deathcomesrippin wrote:Ranching? Is this what you are talking about?

deathcomesrippin wrote: The unofficial term for the particular problem is "Ranching". Simply speaking, it is the case of someone abusing the game by purposefully inviting people who have no experience with certain settings to guarantee a win.

It is extremely tough to prove, since you essentially need to either reach out to all the low ranks or actually witness the invites on the game screen. In certain cases it has been easier, such as the case above. For the most part, unless a group of low ranking players approach us or someone points out it is happening, then it can't be caught.

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

AladdinSane wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:If one assumes stripers and below are not decent players, can one not therefore assume they wouldn't have the knowledge to know that they're being farmed and blindly accept?

It's like anything else - if they blindly accept something they don't understand, they deserve what is coming to them: getting fleeced by the Wolves of CC Street. I guess if real money is involved the law needs to protect the sheep from the wolves, but it doesn't really matter here since it is all pretend points and ranks.

That said, if the practice is allowed to flourish we can always wonder if a high-ranked player got his score by engaging in such nefaious practices and isn't, perhaps, as good as his rank indicates. High-ranked players, therefore, have an incentive to put a stop to this.

Anyway, I guess there is a risk to the farmer in that he stands to lose big points if things don't go his way, so perhaps by accepting this risk he "pays" for his farming ("ranching" for Texans).

Except there's very little point risk when you use specialist maps on specialist settings. I could start inviting low rankers to to Galapagos games and my score would inflate rapidly.


@rhp - bub, by that logic you have no problem with multiple accounts or secret diplomacy.

rhp 1 wrote:I will never understand why this is even issue. Its a game guys

Yeah, but points are being gained easily by some people! And I'm not getting those points!!!

BigBallinStalin wrote:

rhp 1 wrote:I will never understand why this is even issue. Its a game guys

Yeah, but points are being gained easily by some people! And I'm not getting those points!!!

Damn BBS, your channelling the spirit and tone of coffee boy that well I'm tempted to fill out a C&A report. Multi!!!!!!!


I think the invite loop hole is directly related to egos. Not allowing people to be invited due to their rank or lack of experience on a map/settings is tantamount to saying they don't have a chance(which probably they don't). Everyone likes to think that given the right luck, dice, drop(even on conquest maps) etc, they could beat anyone on site, even someone that has played a map thousands of times. People like to imagine they are David, to the inviter's Goliath. Taking away the opportunity for an upset, takes away people's dreams.

Restricting ranks from playing each other would make a game like this impossible Game 5564943 we didn't invite anyone to game(not sure whether invite function existed at the time). Was a public game, and if some people got their way the lower ranks wouldn't have been able to join against us. Team 1 was 2generals, a high colonel, and a LT from memory. We(team1) lost 72points. 99.9% of the time we would have won.... Combination of poor dice two pair, and great play from team2 caused an upset.

An objective discussion(rather than trollish posturing, volume over value) of invites has to include rank restriction. Then discussing rank restriction leads to a discussion of rather than rank restriction how about about of completed games as a restrictive factor. Then people try to look at the type of games people have played. By this stage, is needlessly complicated. Keep it simple. Either all can play, or none can play. Keep the 50shades of grey for the spank bank eh?

Perhaps we should have a restriction on who can be invited to games, depending on the difference in points.

You could always just limit invites to private games, that way you can tell if someone is attempting to farm the lower ranks.

deathcomesrippin wrote:You could always just limit invites to private games, that way you can tell if someone is attempting to farm the lower ranks.

Damn man, that is the smartest thing seen in this forum for a long time. Limit 1vs1 games to private.

iAmCaffeine wrote:Can anyone provide a solid argument as to why this isn't classified as farming? Someone with 2000+ points creates a large amount of 1v1 or Polymorphic games and invites anyone from a Cook to Sergeant 1st Class, but it isn't considered farming simply because they have the choice of accepting the invite.

I don't find that argument satisfactory in the slightest. For any decent player it is actually hard to fall down to being a striper, or below. On that basis, one can assume that a decent player would have the knowledge to join a game they have randomly been invited to on a complicated map with complicated settings. If one assumes stripers and below are not decent players, can one not therefore assume they wouldn't have the knowledge to know that they're being farmed and blindly accept?

I ask this with all seriousness, but why is this an issue to you? I can think of two reasons:

(1) You feel bad for lower ranked players who are losing points to higher ranked players.
(2) You feel this allows higher ranked players to gain more points than you in a way that seems gross.

When ranching came up in the past, it came up through posts by higher ranked players. Similarly, you are a higher ranked player. Therefore, I assume that (2) is the reason for your post.

In any event, my point is this - if the ranchers don't care and the stripers don't care, the issue comes down to whether the folks running this site think this is a problem. And frankly, the potential past solutions (e.g. limiting the types of games low-ranked players can play) would be far more problematic than ranching itself. I am a low-ranked player. If the types of games I could play were limited, I would likely not re-up my premium membership because, ultimately, I like that I can play a variety of different games. I care much less if I lose points to a major.

Or make a rank difference restriction for opposition invites.

Think leave it at 1vs1 private. I know when I started playing and was drinking almost professionally I would often go from cadet to colonel and back again playing drunken speed over the space of a few days. Been denied opportunities to play higher ranked people because I was in the drunk tank points toilet would have been grossly unfair. As a cook or cadet, play a major or colonel, lose about 8points, and stand to gain a lot more.

iAmCaffeine wrote:Or make a rank difference restriction for opposition invites.

We pay to be able to invite people. While I play competitively (clans and tournaments) I also play pick up games with RL friends who are not as heavily into / serious and lower ranked. The solution shouldn't restrict people's abilities to play w RL friends on a feature we pay to have.

IcePack wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:Or make a rank difference restriction for opposition invites.

We pay to be able to invite people. While I play competitively (clans and tournaments) I also play pick up games with RL friends who are not as heavily into / serious and lower ranked. The solution shouldn't restrict people's abilities to play w RL friends on a feature we pay to have.

So paying to abuse a system is okay?

What if there was a rank restriction but having a player on your friend list disregarded said restriction?

iAmCaffeine wrote:

IcePack wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:Or make a rank difference restriction for opposition invites.

We pay to be able to invite people. While I play competitively (clans and tournaments) I also play pick up games with RL friends who are not as heavily into / serious and lower ranked. The solution shouldn't restrict people's abilities to play w RL friends on a feature we pay to have.

So paying to abuse a system is okay?

What if there was a rank restriction but having a player on your friend list disregarded said restriction?

you often say things such as this... "abuse, unfair, obviously wrong" etc etc etc... it's not self-evident to everyone (raises hand) that "ranching, farming" etc are abusing the system... imo, it's highly unfortunate that these SUBJECTIVE "abuses" have been made into rules and accepted by so many as OBJECTIVE fact and just business as usual here in CC land... honestly? I think it's silly.. the only argument I can truly see FOR "ranching and farming" legislation, is that if they are "farmed" or "ranched" it may discourage new players and encourage them to leave the site.. I've never seen evidence of this "fact", nor would I assert, have any of you... and any argument talking about trying to keep the scoreboard "legitimate" is dismissed out of hand, as that is ridiculous these days...

and the whole idea of point differential? lol.. so lemme get this straight.. if someone is around 3000 points, they shouldn't be allowed to invite me to a game or be accused of farming? haha... I realize this isn't a fair analogy, and not what Mets was referring to, but funny to think about...

it always comes down to one fact for me. if one is able to make independent decisions about their own life in general, they certainly shouldn't need a gaming site to legislate rules that will help them keep their e-points... it's really quite silly when I think about it..

iAmCaffeine wrote:What if there was a rank restriction but having a player on your friend list disregarded said restriction?

Yes, that is one requirement for such a system, so that you can play with your RL friends.

Metsfanmax wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:What if there was a rank restriction but having a player on your friend list disregarded said restriction?

Yes, that is one requirement for such a system, so that you can play with your RL friends.

Except it doesn't stop someone from temp add to friend list, invite, then drop.

So paying to abuse a system is ok?

Where did I say that? I said any solution needs to not interfere with paying customers few privs.

IcePack wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:What if there was a rank restriction but having a player on your friend list disregarded said restriction?

Yes, that is one requirement for such a system, so that you can play with your RL friends.

Except it doesn't stop someone from temp add to friend list, invite, then drop.

No, it works in reverse. You can only be invited to a game by someone you have marked as a friend.

Metsfanmax wrote:

IcePack wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:What if there was a rank restriction but having a player on your friend list disregarded said restriction?

Yes, that is one requirement for such a system, so that you can play with your RL friends.

Except it doesn't stop someone from temp add to friend list, invite, then drop.

No, it works in reverse. You can only be invited to a game by someone you have marked as a friend.

So if my RL friend hasn't added me I can't invite him? Not sure that's a good solution either but ok...
I know most of my RL friends don't vermin have me on their list cuz thry spend very little time I site / caring, just enough time to accept the invites and play a quick turn

IcePack wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:What if there was a rank restriction but having a player on your friend list disregarded said restriction?

Yes, that is one requirement for such a system, so that you can play with your RL friends.

Except it doesn't stop someone from temp add to friend list, invite, then drop.

So paying to abuse a system is ok?

Where did I say that? I said any solution needs to not interfere with paying customers few privs.

Like Mets said, work it in reverse. I don't even think this is possible but it gets discussion going.

You never said paying makes abuse okay, but it was something I pulled up to generate more thoughts and discussion, which worked.

@rhp5 - I have seen people leave because they get farmed.

oh they been letting people johnny rocket their way to high win % and high medal stats for years, why change it now...

as long as you sprinkle in some higher ranked games via tournaments you can join or invite whatever new recruits or shitty players you want...


http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?mode=find&submit=Search&p1=JOHNNYROCKET24&so=D

KraphtOne wrote:oh they been letting people johnny rocket their way to high win % and high medal stats for years, why change it now...

as long as you sprinkle in some higher ranked games via tournaments you can join or invite whatever new recruits or shitty players you want...


http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?mode=find&submit=Search&p1=JOHNNYROCKET24&so=D

Lol

How about we just boooo ranchers? No one takes them seriously anyway.

betiko wrote:How about we just boooo ranchers? No one takes them seriously anyway.

sounds good... and sorta makes my point...