Conquer Club

Or people could just play sunny games.

squishyg wrote:Or people could just play sunny games.

There are a lot of people in more competitive clans that like playing fog but like to be able to see the board before first turn.

It is about being 'fair' in my opinion.

People that join foggy games and take first turn real quick to take advantage are players that need to take cheap advantages.

You can't just say 'play sunny' they are not the same game style and there is no reason if people want a game option for fog to be allowed to be seen that it can't exist.

After all using your line of reasoning if people made a suggestion for shorter speed games (1-4 minute rounds) you would probably just say "play the five minute and be happy". The fact is though that people like to have different options and styles of game play and having this as an option helps improve fog game play IMO.

As I said before it seems to be a more 'competitive' clan player type of a thing to enjoy/like/respect the fog rule so it may not be something that you have experienced much yet.

If you are truly good enough to beat another team you shouldn't need to take a turn real quick joining the game second and greatly hurting your opponents odds of knowing what you did.

Then play speed fog.

squishyg wrote:Then play speed fog.

Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:Then play speed fog.

Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

I've gone into this at length in past threads, but I have several issues with the fog rule. My main objection as it pertains to this suggestion is that there is an inherent element of chance to this game. You will not always get to go first. Your opponent may get a bonus in the drop. Green could be your unlucky color. The dice suck. The sun was in your eyes.

In addition, if I hear one more person cry about how they didn't get a snapshot of the board I'm going to fling that jar of placenta I always have waiting. If you use BOB, snapshots, or any other game enhancing add-on, you have no right to call me a poor sport or accuse me of having an unfair advantage. I will sign on and take my turn as I damn well please. This is a casual site. The idea that missing one viewing of the board will ruin the game for you is unfathomable to me.

squishyg wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:Then play speed fog.

Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

I've gone into this at length in past threads, but I have several issues with the fog rule. My main objection as it pertains to this suggestion is that there is an inherent element of chance to this game. You will not always get to go first. Your opponent may get a bonus in the drop. Green could be your unlucky color. The dice suck. The sun was in your eyes.

In addition, if I hear one more person cry about how they didn't get a snapshot of the board I'm going to fling that jar of placenta I always have waiting. If you use BOB, snapshots, or any other game enhancing add-on, you have no right to call me a poor sport or accuse me of having an unfair advantage. I will sign on and take my turn as I damn well please. This is a casual site. The idea that missing one viewing of the board will ruin the game for you is unfathomable to me.

I don't think most of us would take it to that extreme, we are just looking for a way to balance out some of the inherent elements of chance that there are in the game already.

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:Then play speed fog.

Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

I've gone into this at length in past threads, but I have several issues with the fog rule. My main objection as it pertains to this suggestion is that there is an inherent element of chance to this game. You will not always get to go first. Your opponent may get a bonus in the drop. Green could be your unlucky color. The dice suck. The sun was in your eyes.

In addition, if I hear one more person cry about how they didn't get a snapshot of the board I'm going to fling that jar of placenta I always have waiting. If you use BOB, snapshots, or any other game enhancing add-on, you have no right to call me a poor sport or accuse me of having an unfair advantage. I will sign on and take my turn as I damn well please. This is a casual site. The idea that missing one viewing of the board will ruin the game for you is unfathomable to me.

I don't think most of us would take it to that extreme, we are just looking for a way to balance out some of the inherent elements of chance that there are in the game already.

My view of this is to side with squishyg in that to "fix" this, what needs to be done is to correct the fog aspect so that it tells you who attacked you and from where (you'd have that information in any sort of real war, after all). In fact, this exact thing has been suggested a number of times, and every time there is a hue and cry about "if you pay attention to the game logs, you can figure everything out". So it seems to me that the right way to handle this is to actually correct the silly implementation of fog as it currently stands so that the "fair" information you're looking for is present, rather than trying to backdoor the fix in this manner.

Woodruff wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:Then play speed fog.

Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

I've gone into this at length in past threads, but I have several issues with the fog rule. My main objection as it pertains to this suggestion is that there is an inherent element of chance to this game. You will not always get to go first. Your opponent may get a bonus in the drop. Green could be your unlucky color. The dice suck. The sun was in your eyes.

In addition, if I hear one more person cry about how they didn't get a snapshot of the board I'm going to fling that jar of placenta I always have waiting. If you use BOB, snapshots, or any other game enhancing add-on, you have no right to call me a poor sport or accuse me of having an unfair advantage. I will sign on and take my turn as I damn well please. This is a casual site. The idea that missing one viewing of the board will ruin the game for you is unfathomable to me.

I don't think most of us would take it to that extreme, we are just looking for a way to balance out some of the inherent elements of chance that there are in the game already.

My view of this is to side with squishyg in that to "fix" this, what needs to be done is to correct the fog aspect so that it tells you who attacked you and from where (you'd have that information in any sort of real war, after all). In fact, this exact thing has been suggested a number of times, and every time there is a hue and cry about "if you pay attention to the game logs, you can figure everything out". So it seems to me that the right way to handle this is to actually correct the silly implementation of fog as it currently stands so that the "fair" information you're looking for is present, rather than trying to backdoor the fix in this manner.

I'd be ok with that approach and makes sense where you are coming from as opposed to the "play sunny" replies.

I'd like to add that the current fog rule should be modified as you laid it out but then also implement the extreme foggy suggestion from the other thread for those who don't want such an informative game log.

patrickaa317 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:Then play speed fog.

Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

I've gone into this at length in past threads, but I have several issues with the fog rule. My main objection as it pertains to this suggestion is that there is an inherent element of chance to this game. You will not always get to go first. Your opponent may get a bonus in the drop. Green could be your unlucky color. The dice suck. The sun was in your eyes.

In addition, if I hear one more person cry about how they didn't get a snapshot of the board I'm going to fling that jar of placenta I always have waiting. If you use BOB, snapshots, or any other game enhancing add-on, you have no right to call me a poor sport or accuse me of having an unfair advantage. I will sign on and take my turn as I damn well please. This is a casual site. The idea that missing one viewing of the board will ruin the game for you is unfathomable to me.

I don't think most of us would take it to that extreme, we are just looking for a way to balance out some of the inherent elements of chance that there are in the game already.

My view of this is to side with squishyg in that to "fix" this, what needs to be done is to correct the fog aspect so that it tells you who attacked you and from where (you'd have that information in any sort of real war, after all). In fact, this exact thing has been suggested a number of times, and every time there is a hue and cry about "if you pay attention to the game logs, you can figure everything out". So it seems to me that the right way to handle this is to actually correct the silly implementation of fog as it currently stands so that the "fair" information you're looking for is present, rather than trying to backdoor the fix in this manner.

I'd be ok with that approach and makes sense where you are coming from as opposed to the "play sunny" replies.

I'd like to add that the current fog rule should be modified as you laid it out but then also implement the extreme foggy suggestion from the other thread for those who don't want such an informative game log.

I'll agree to that.

In the meantime, play sunny.

squishyg wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:
Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

I've gone into this at length in past threads, but I have several issues with the fog rule. My main objection as it pertains to this suggestion is that there is an inherent element of chance to this game. You will not always get to go first. Your opponent may get a bonus in the drop. Green could be your unlucky color. The dice suck. The sun was in your eyes.

In addition, if I hear one more person cry about how they didn't get a snapshot of the board I'm going to fling that jar of placenta I always have waiting. If you use BOB, snapshots, or any other game enhancing add-on, you have no right to call me a poor sport or accuse me of having an unfair advantage. I will sign on and take my turn as I damn well please. This is a casual site. The idea that missing one viewing of the board will ruin the game for you is unfathomable to me.

I don't think most of us would take it to that extreme, we are just looking for a way to balance out some of the inherent elements of chance that there are in the game already.

My view of this is to side with squishyg in that to "fix" this, what needs to be done is to correct the fog aspect so that it tells you who attacked you and from where (you'd have that information in any sort of real war, after all). In fact, this exact thing has been suggested a number of times, and every time there is a hue and cry about "if you pay attention to the game logs, you can figure everything out". So it seems to me that the right way to handle this is to actually correct the silly implementation of fog as it currently stands so that the "fair" information you're looking for is present, rather than trying to backdoor the fix in this manner.

I'd be ok with that approach and makes sense where you are coming from as opposed to the "play sunny" replies.

I'd like to add that the current fog rule should be modified as you laid it out but then also implement the extreme foggy suggestion from the other thread for those who don't want such an informative game log.

I'll agree to that.

In the meantime, play sunny.

patrickaa317 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

squishyg wrote:Then play speed fog.

Why are you so against this and continue to tell others to deal with it as it stands? If you don't like the thought of the option getting implemented, you can just close your eyes when you hit the Activate button so that you don't get a fair chance to see the board.

I've gone into this at length in past threads, but I have several issues with the fog rule. My main objection as it pertains to this suggestion is that there is an inherent element of chance to this game. You will not always get to go first. Your opponent may get a bonus in the drop. Green could be your unlucky color. The dice suck. The sun was in your eyes.

In addition, if I hear one more person cry about how they didn't get a snapshot of the board I'm going to fling that jar of placenta I always have waiting. If you use BOB, snapshots, or any other game enhancing add-on, you have no right to call me a poor sport or accuse me of having an unfair advantage. I will sign on and take my turn as I damn well please. This is a casual site. The idea that missing one viewing of the board will ruin the game for you is unfathomable to me.

I don't think most of us would take it to that extreme, we are just looking for a way to balance out some of the inherent elements of chance that there are in the game already.

My view of this is to side with squishyg in that to "fix" this, what needs to be done is to correct the fog aspect so that it tells you who attacked you and from where (you'd have that information in any sort of real war, after all). In fact, this exact thing has been suggested a number of times, and every time there is a hue and cry about "if you pay attention to the game logs, you can figure everything out". So it seems to me that the right way to handle this is to actually correct the silly implementation of fog as it currently stands so that the "fair" information you're looking for is present, rather than trying to backdoor the fix in this manner.

I'd be ok with that approach and makes sense where you are coming from as opposed to the "play sunny" replies.

I'd like to add that the current fog rule should be modified as you laid it out but then also implement the extreme foggy suggestion from the other thread for those who don't want such an informative game log.

Sadly, that basic suggestion has been rejected several times.

what if no one presses the activate button ?

HardAttack wrote:what if no one presses the activate button ?

The site implodes.

I imagine the game would just start.

HardAttack wrote:what if no one presses the activate button ?

It auto-activates at 24 hours

HardAttack wrote:what if no one presses the activate button ?

A burst of energy is released and a plane crashes. Just ask the people in Lost.

patrickaa317 wrote:

HardAttack wrote:what if no one presses the activate button ?

It auto-activates at 24 hours

And it should count as a missed turn. Just like normal. If they've made preliminary rounds part of the game for manual deployment, I don't see how this would be any different.

In manual deploy, you get to deploy but not attack or fort. This would simply remove another element of functionality.

As for those of you that just say "play sunny" I say "Only read suggestions that you approve of" See ya

agentcom wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

HardAttack wrote:what if no one presses the activate button ?

It auto-activates at 24 hours

And it should count as a missed turn. Just like normal. If they've made preliminary rounds part of the game for manual deployment, I don't see how this would be any different.

In manual deploy, you get to deploy but not attack or fort. This would simply remove another element of functionality.

As for those of you that just say "play sunny" I say "Only read suggestions that you approve of" See ya

How will I know if I approve of the suggestion unless I read it?

Silly goose, dissent is good for democracy

Squishy, I have no problem with dissent. I just don't think anything productive is happening when people say "just go play sunny." Obviously, that is a different type of gameplay. These people want to play foggy. They just want the fog to be equally foggy to all. Equality is also good for democracy.

Concise description:
After the second player joins a 1v1 fog game, the play is frozen until the first player gets a chance to view the game and take a snapshot.

Specifics/Details:
Change the game so that no moves are possible until all players have entered the game.
The time limit for viewing the game is the same as the time allowed for one turn.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
As it is now, the 2nd player joining a game has an advantage because he gets to view the map and, (if its his turn to play), take his turn before the first player sees the map. This leads to long delays in joining tournament games as each player tries to join the game last. It also leads to hard feelings when a player takes a turn before his opponent sees the map.

This could also apply to multi-player games but it has the most effect on 1v1.

This has been suggested before, but for all games that are foggy. I don't mind the suggestion, but I think it should have a timer or something.

Why not just have the game automatically take a snapshot?

nicestash wrote:Why not just have the game automatically take a snapshot?

It's a different snapshot for each person.

And I think it's probably easier to code a new round at the beginning of the game where people can take snaps if they want than to actually take the snaps.

Does anybody object to this idea?

I don't. I've indicated my support for it in the past. And my preferred method is the one that chap indicates: Another round (similar to manual), where both players have the chance to "play" a limited turn. In the case of manual, you only get the deploy phase. In the case of this setting, you wouldn't even get that. You'd probably click "Start Turn" and (just like after you make a fort in a chained/adjacent game or after you've deployed all your troops in a manual game), your turn ends.

An interesting situation would occur in foggy manual games, as you would have 2 rounds of this type of "non-turn." Two considerations arise from this. First, the "fog/view/snap" turn should come after the "manual/deploy" turn. Second, in a 20 round limit game, you have now decreased the amount of playable rounds to 18, rather than 19 or 20.

Finally, my preferred solution would be to allow for "Round 0" coding in these games, but I have a feeling that is more difficult to code based on my limited knowledge of coding.

Mod hat on: I'll probably be merging this with similar subject matter at some point.

So how does this work? A suggestion was made, people seem to like it and nobody objects. Does it get implemented or are we just wasting our time here?