Moderator: Community Team
jusplay4fun wrote:In recent months, I have had issues with my laptop and been forced to play on 1) my cell phone and 2) my iPad.
The phone is simply too small to deal with all the complexity of the game. I am not sure having a bigger phone (bigger screen) would help much.
I learned to play better on my iPad by understanding and using different icons to switch screens and options. BUT I prefer ALL one on screen and only the computer allows me to do that.
My point is that the complex nature of the game itself is such that a big screen is needed and that a mobile device, i.e., a cell phone, CANNOT (at this time) handle all the features that this site requires. It seems to me that to make this game more user friendly, we need to have a simpler version of the game; it would require "Risk Lite." One feature I could not engage on my iPad is the Panel Interface to see what territories I can attack from my current "choice" or location (territory). As I said before in another thread, young people (such as teens I teach in high school) want immediate response and most do not have the patience and persistence to learn a complex game such as this.
A few more thoughts: 1) I also teach chess in my school chess club. Most players are not willing to put in the time and effort to learn the game and improve their play. Out of 10 players, if I find ONE that will do so is about normal. When I started some 30 years ago, there were fewer gaming options (nearly NONE electronic) and so fewer options meant more willingness and time to devote to a complex game such as chess. Risk, on CC, are complex games.
2) I played Risk online at the website Pogo. Most players there could not handle the complexity of the game. There were used to playing a game to "pop" balloons when there were at least 3 contiguous ones of the same color, or a game where you switch two tokens to get 3 contiguous ones of the same color. They did not or would not learn a game as complex as Risk, with dice, cards, and a map.
3) My point is that Risk and CC is a limited "market" of willing players. Most who check out the site are NOT willing to spend the time to learn the game. When I was growing up (I am 60) board games were "king" when there were NO electronic games. I took time as a child to learn to play chess and risk and card games. How many play board games NOW versus electronic games on their cell phones? NOT many.
4) One more point: I also play Risk for a change of "pace" in my chess club. Often students like the change and enjoy the game. This year that has NOT happened.....YES, I know, limited data anecdotal data.....agreed.
5) I thought I read that board games (of all types) are making a bit of a comeback; sales increased in the past year or so. Maybe a few even purchased the game of Risk (or chess or checkers).
6) Do what you can to encourage your younger relatives (children, nephews & nieces, grandchildren) to play Risk, chess, checkers, and other board games. Play games because it is FUN. Play a few games because one enjoys the mental challenge of something complex.
Mike JP4Fun


Fucking fixed.jmyork82 wrote:Well said JBlombier
If anything, it really is a club now. It's our place to sneak away for a few moments and fuck around on OUR site. I like it here.
edit - wait, did the sight just semi bleep my fuck? What the fuck?
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
-------Lets go over a few things...why....riskllama wrote:why do you pay for premium, then?
JBlombier wrote:I've lurked this thread since it started and there have been a lot of good suggestions, interesting thoughts, thorough analyses and a lot of ignorant posts. So far, so good, because that's how a forum works. Admittedly, I especially enjoyed the capitalized posts from ConfederateSS, because I find it amazing how one can undermine his own message by the use of capital letters and references to 'deplorables' he apparently feels affiliated with.
However, it was clear that this thread had no particular purpose, other than keeping a tight administration of CC's inevitable ending. And hey, we've spent years on this digital battlefield, so a thread like this seems necesarry, if only for legacy's sake.
Then I read jusplay4fun's post and I found it refreshing. No useless suggestions to make CC flourish again, but a positively written post with an underlying acceptation that the world is changing and CC will not fit into as many lives as it has before. There's no harm in that. The userbase will become smaller and eventually fade out, but we've still got some fun years to come, so let's enjoy it, while it lasts.
Mike (jp4fun) has got me appreciating the good time I have on CC now (9 years already, which is absurd, I know...) and has helped me accept the fact that CC is not forever. Who would've thought that this site would one day function as a metaphor for life![]()
- JBlombier
jusplay4fun-quote
jusplay4fun wrote:In recent months, I have had issues with my laptop and been forced to play on 1) my cell phone and 2) my iPad.
The phone is simply too small to deal with all the complexity of the game. I am not sure having a bigger phone (bigger screen) would help much.
I learned to play better on my iPad by understanding and using different icons to switch screens and options. BUT I prefer ALL one on screen and only the computer allows me to do that.
My point is that the complex nature of the game itself is such that a big screen is needed and that a mobile device, i.e., a cell phone, CANNOT (at this time) handle all the features that this site requires. It seems to me that to make this game more user friendly, we need to have a simpler version of the game; it would require "Risk Lite." One feature I could not engage on my iPad is the Panel Interface to see what territories I can attack from my current "choice" or location (territory). As I said before in another thread, young people (such as teens I teach in high school) want immediate response and most do not have the patience and persistence to learn a complex game such as this.
A few more thoughts: 1) I also teach chess in my school chess club. Most players are not willing to put in the time and effort to learn the game and improve their play. Out of 10 players, if I find ONE that will do so is about normal. When I started some 30 years ago, there were fewer gaming options (nearly NONE electronic) and so fewer options meant more willingness and time to devote to a complex game such as chess. Risk, on CC, are complex games.
2) I played Risk online at the website Pogo. Most players there could not handle the complexity of the game. There were used to playing a game to "pop" balloons when there were at least 3 contiguous ones of the same color, or a game where you switch two tokens to get 3 contiguous ones of the same color. They did not or would not learn a game as complex as Risk, with dice, cards, and a map.
3) My point is that Risk and CC is a limited "market" of willing players. Most who check out the site are NOT willing to spend the time to learn the game. When I was growing up (I am 60) board games were "king" when there were NO electronic games. I took time as a child to learn to play chess and risk and card games. How many play board games NOW versus electronic games on their cell phones? NOT many.
4) One more point: I also play Risk for a change of "pace" in my chess club. Often students like the change and enjoy the game. This year that has NOT happened.....YES, I know, limited data anecdotal data.....agreed.
5) I thought I read that board games (of all types) are making a bit of a comeback; sales increased in the past year or so. Maybe a few even purchased the game of Risk (or chess or checkers).
6) Do what you can to encourage your younger relatives (children, nephews & nieces, grandchildren) to play Risk, chess, checkers, and other board games. Play games because it is FUN. Play a few games because one enjoys the mental challenge of something complex.
Mike JP4Fun
f*ck yeah!Serbia wrote:Fucking fixed.jmyork82 wrote:Well said JBlombier
If anything, it really is a club now. It's our place to sneak away for a few moments and fuck around on OUR site. I like it here.
edit - wait, did the sight just semi bleep my fuck? What the fuck?
There is one on the phone called Border Siege that is pretty good. If CC were to merge with the group that does that game and could really be a win win for everybody. But I will also say that is all easier said than done.jusplay4fun wrote:
I still want to suggest a version of Risk that can be adapted to cell phones, a kind of Risk "Lite" (or Light or simpler) that may be worth investigating. Conquer Risk, under "Other Games" may be a start in that direction. (I think that is the name of that other game,.....)

Absolutely. I agree 100%. Believe it or not, just keeping the site design current is enough to attract people. People are weird like that. You have a few seconds to catch their interest, so a site needs to look enticing to get them to sign up.Dukasaur wrote:God you are so full of shit it's squirting out of your tear ducts.owenshooter wrote:entire community (almost a full 1/3rd of CC) vanishing almost overnight, and you have to two major factors in CC's
There was never any "vanishing almost overnight." Many people have posted the graph of CC's decline, and it's always been a gradual process, from 2009 to the present. Some years a little steeper, some years a little less, but never any kind of overnight exodus. Always a gradual process.
On CC, as on any game site, the main reason people leave is they're bored. Mainly, it's from not enough new settings, not from too many. You start with a game as inherently dull as Risk, you have to keep adding bells and whistles at a pretty fast clip to prevent boredom. If you look at name-brand Risk, nowadays it has sound effects and actual cavalry galloping across the screen, and even with that they can't stop its slow and gradual decline, because at its core, Risk is a pretty dull game.
Conquer club has done better than anyone else, reaching past the inherent dullness of Risk with interesting new maps and interesting new gameplay options to keep people from getting bored. With those, it's lasted a lot longer than most people thought it would. Still, it's never enough.
fact!Shannon Apple wrote:
If you look at Border Siege that jmyork mentioned, which is not nearly as good as Conquer Club in terms of gameplay...
I agree, it's the worst. But with all the settings that CC has and that I enjoy playing, I find it hard to believe it's possible to make it great for a phone. The phone's just too small and the possibilities are close to limitless.riskllama wrote:CC on a smartphone is unbearable. i only do it unless absolutely necessary.
Risk Lite seems like the only way to go if we're talking smartphones, a game with a more straight forward gameplay. That kind of game should take far less strategy than a quadruples, trench, fog, unlimited, etc. setting, because a clean and simple game is the only way new people are able to enjoy playing Risk on a phone in my opinion. Some of those people might even decide to check out the old-fashioned website, if only for the nostalgic warm and fuzzy feeling coming from the current layout.jusplay4fun wrote:I still want to suggest a version of Risk that can be adapted to cell phones, a kind of Risk "Lite" (or Light or simpler) that may be worth investigating. Conquer Risk, under "Other Games" may be a start in that direction. (I think that is the name of that other game,.....)

Letsplayriskonline claims to be "independent" but I've heard they are owned by the owners of MajCom. I don't know for sure if this is true, but a quick look at their site tends to confirm it. Not only does MajCom get the highest ratings, but it is mentioned in everybody else's ratings as well, There seems to be almost one mention of MajCom worked into every paragraph of CC's review!Beast Of Burson wrote:This is sad
https://www.letsplayriskonline.com/
Top 6 Risk sites, CC sits in 5th and has a 4 rating and says "poor".
Much better sites out there that people find more appealing then this antiquated dinosaur that has needed a face lift for a loooong time.
Until changes are made, surely it will get worse. It's all about the money not giving the people what they are complaining need to be changed.
If you don't change with the times you get left behind
Something is mentioned in the review and I think to be consider (highlighted in red below):Dukasaur wrote:Letsplayriskonline claims to be "independent" but I've heard they are owned by the owners of MajCom. I don't know for sure if this is true, but a quick look at their site tends to confirm it. Not only does MajCom get the highest ratings, but it is mentioned in everybody else's ratings as well, There seems to be almost one mention of MajCom worked into every paragraph of CC's review!Beast Of Burson wrote:This is sad
https://www.letsplayriskonline.com/
Top 6 Risk sites, CC sits in 5th and has a 4 rating and says "poor".
Much better sites out there that people find more appealing then this antiquated dinosaur that has needed a face lift for a loooong time.
Until changes are made, surely it will get worse. It's all about the money not giving the people what they are complaining need to be changed.
If you don't change with the times you get left behind
Their article slams CC maps as being simplistic crap, and as evidence it cherry picks King of the Mountains, which admittedly is one of CC's crappier maps. There's no mention of all amazingly beautiful and complex maps like Rorke's Drift, Northwest Passage, Stalingrad, and Conquer Rome.
That is something I agree 100% with but hey we have a "Trash Can" nowConquer Club is the oldest site to play Risk online, but it is by far not the best. Conquer Club has been around for a long time and it shows. It's built up a large pool of game players and maps, but not much else. The gaming interface is cumbersome and outdated, and the actual maps are pretty unappealing to look at. Conquer Club hasn't seen a face-lift since it started in 2006, and it is not easy to navigate. This online Risk site has seen better days. The community is still strong, but out of control discussions about politics and religion plague the forums and the concept of playing Risk online has been forgotten. Not surprisingly the active user base have been trending downwards for a couple years.
Arguing about religion and politics is plenty of fun for some people. Those who don't like it are not forced to participate.Mad777 wrote: Something is mentioned in the review and I think to be consider (highlighted in red below):
That is something I agree 100% with but hey we have a "Trash Can" nowConquer Club is the oldest site to play Risk online, but it is by far not the best. Conquer Club has been around for a long time and it shows. It's built up a large pool of game players and maps, but not much else. The gaming interface is cumbersome and outdated, and the actual maps are pretty unappealing to look at. Conquer Club hasn't seen a face-lift since it started in 2006, and it is not easy to navigate. This online Risk site has seen better days. The community is still strong, but out of control discussions about politics and religion plague the forums and the concept of playing Risk online has been forgotten. Not surprisingly the active user base have been trending downwards for a couple years.![]()
....the other comments are not so relevant but surely to be work out at some point
This is not the point Duke, I meant that there is many place in the web where that kind of stuff can take place...tell me what is the point to have this in a Playing platform? Most of the online game site I've been and I'm still does have Forum but the members are kind enough to make topic in relation of the purpose of the site, plus some fun place to have sharing funny discussions...not that crap we can read every day here...if some wants to bring shit then the mods shut it up right away....trust me, this kind of moderation (in the other game site) is not what makes members quiting, it's making the trouble maker being ignored and eventually leaving the site or at least not posting BS at it's extreme anymore....those who quit here are those getting tired to see what is happening in an open Forum like this we have in Conquer Club...Dukasaur wrote:Arguing about religion and politics is plenty of fun for some people. Those who don't like it are not forced to participate.Mad777 wrote: Something is mentioned in the review and I think to be consider (highlighted in red below):
That is something I agree 100% with but hey we have a "Trash Can" nowConquer Club is the oldest site to play Risk online, but it is by far not the best. Conquer Club has been around for a long time and it shows. It's built up a large pool of game players and maps, but not much else. The gaming interface is cumbersome and outdated, and the actual maps are pretty unappealing to look at. Conquer Club hasn't seen a face-lift since it started in 2006, and it is not easy to navigate. This online Risk site has seen better days. The community is still strong, but out of control discussions about politics and religion plague the forums and the concept of playing Risk online has been forgotten. Not surprisingly the active user base have been trending downwards for a couple years.![]()
....the other comments are not so relevant but surely to be work out at some point
Mad777 wrote:This is not the point Duke, I meant that there is many place in the web where that kind of stuff can take place...tell me what is the point to have this in a Playing platform? Most of the online game site I've been and I'm still does have Forum but the members are kind enough to make topic in relation of the purpose of the site, plus some fun place to have sharing funny discussions...not that crap we can read every day here...if some wants to bring shit then the mods shut it up right away....trust me, this kind of moderation (in the other game site) is not what makes members quiting, it's making the trouble maker being ignored and eventually leaving the site or at least not posting BS at it's extreme anymore....those who quit here are those getting tired to see what is happening in an open Forum like this we have in Conquer Club...Dukasaur wrote:Arguing about religion and politics is plenty of fun for some people. Those who don't like it are not forced to participate.Mad777 wrote: Something is mentioned in the review and I think to be consider (highlighted in red below):
That is something I agree 100% with but hey we have a "Trash Can" nowConquer Club is the oldest site to play Risk online, but it is by far not the best. Conquer Club has been around for a long time and it shows. It's built up a large pool of game players and maps, but not much else. The gaming interface is cumbersome and outdated, and the actual maps are pretty unappealing to look at. Conquer Club hasn't seen a face-lift since it started in 2006, and it is not easy to navigate. This online Risk site has seen better days. The community is still strong, but out of control discussions about politics and religion plague the forums and the concept of playing Risk online has been forgotten. Not surprisingly the active user base have been trending downwards for a couple years.![]()
....the other comments are not so relevant but surely to be work out at some point

It's hilarious how you can argue both sides of the same coin. In the same paragraph you complain about too much moderation and not enough moderation.owenshooter wrote: Really? What about the members that were permabanned and pushed out by the heavy handed moderation and sanitizing of the site for that alleged purchase by HASBRO? That was when we lost the community, Team CC OPENLY ENGAGED AND KILLED IT... They are trying to bring it back now, well were. But with the open acceptance of racism/bigotry within the forums, more will leave the forums... Sad days around here, but at least you can finally call someone the most vile insult on the planet and get away with it!!!-Jn
Too much moderation? Or too little moderation? Now which one will it be? Ah, hell, let's complain about both in the same breath!The lawyer then went on,
These very simpIe guidelines
You can rely upon:
You're gouging on your prices if
You charge more than the rest.
But it's unfair competition
If you think you can charge less.
A second point that we would make
To help avoid confusion:
Don't try to charge the same amount:
That would be collusion!
You must compete. But not too much,
For if you do, you see,
Then the market would be yours
And that's monopoly!"
Price too high? Or price too low?
Now, which charge did they make?
Well, they weren't loath to charging both
With Public Good at stake!
In fact, they went one better
They charged "monopoly!"
No muss, no fuss, oh woe is us,
Egad, they charged all three!