[Feedback] Invitations, Abuse, Changes and Possible Changes

[AndyDufresne]

Ahoy Conquer Club Members,

As some of you may know, the invitation system and its current functionality has been a hot topic of discussion on our forums. A number of topics have popped up---like this suggestion topic looking to find solutions to limit abuse or possible abuse of the invitation system---most especially as it relates to Team Games, those who join Team Games, and the experience of said users there within.

After discussing with Team CC (and reviewing the public discussion topics on the material), we have come up with the following.

Two things that will happen (that is, on the To-Do list):

• A fix to the functionality of the Foe List, that makes it so you cannot receive invites from people on your Foe List (currently, the coding is that you cannot invite people on your own Foe List).
  
  
• Automatic deletion of invitations if you drop that game in which you sent invitations.

Proposed solution for Community feedback/voting:

• Eliminating Team Game Opponent invitations for both Public and Private games.
  
  
  • Tournaments and non-Team Game invitations would remain unchanged (save the 'Will Happen' changes).
    
    
  • While some desired a solution that would eliminate Team Game Opponent invitations for only Public Games, there is concern that this would not solve the issue, because the potential for manipulating the system would be barely alleviated. So with this proposed solution, we'd have to give up part of the functionality of the current Invitation system in order to eliminate some of the abuse or possible abuse as it currently is.

--Andy

[oldrisky44]

What about the "to" tag? Could a player still send a message to a "targeted" lower ranked player using the "to" tag to beat the system?

[Dako]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

[AndyDufresne]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

Keep in mind, and make sure to read carefully, this is for both public and private---all Opponent Invitations (Tournaments, Non-Team Games, etc excluded).


--Andy

[Gold Knight]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

Keep in mind, and make sure to read carefully, this is for both public and private---all Opponent Invitations (Tournaments, Non-Team Games, etc excluded).


--Andy

Why cant it be made for just public? A private game should be able to invite whoever, as they made it with the intention of inviting the players one would think. I think the public games are the only ones being absued as far as ive seen.

I agree basically with what Dako said.

[morleyjoe]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

Keep in mind, and make sure to read carefully, this is for both public and private---all Opponent Invitations (Tournaments, Non-Team Games, etc excluded).


--Andy

Why cant it be made for just public? A private game should be able to invite whoever, as they made it with the intention of inviting the players one would think. I think the public games are the only ones being absued as far as ive seen.

I agree basically with what Dako said.

I agree with Dako and Gold Knight - private games should remain as they are, public can be changed to stop any abuse there.

[chemefreak]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

I think what Dako is trying to get to here is that for some of us, especially clan war leaders, the ability to start, invite, and then drop a game once it starts to fill is important. I have not used the clan creation rights yet (they are new) so I am not sure whether or not this will alleviate the need to do this type of thing or now. I think this is why there will be some push back if this is forbidden from private games. Sometimes it is just the easiest way to fill a clan game.

That being said, I have read the threads about the abuse that goes on with the invite system. If it has to be public and private to stop the assholes that misuse the invite system, so be it. Thanks.

[Night Strike]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

I think what Dako is trying to get to here is that for some of us, especially clan war leaders, the ability to start, invite, and then drop a game once it starts to fill is important. I have not used the clan creation rights yet (they are new) so I am not sure whether or not this will alleviate the need to do this type of thing or now. I think this is why there will be some push back if this is forbidden from private games. Sometimes it is just the easiest way to fill a clan game.

That being said, I have read the threads about the abuse that goes on with the invite system. If it has to be public and private to stop the assholes that misuse the invite system, so be it. Thanks.

With clan creation rights you will be able to invite anybody to any spot in the game without being in the game yourself. It works the exact same way as the tournament system (mainly because right now it IS a part of the tournament system).

[bedub1]

If my buddy and I want to play a team game against 2 other people we know, I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to invite them. Just because some people abuse it we all loose the ability?

[phantomzero]

I'm thinking the solution needs to be somewhere between what we have now and what is proposed. What if for private team games only the first person on the opposite team could be invited? Then they could invite their partner?

[afroaction]

i like the way is, but it would be nice to have the option to reserve a spot for teammates in speed games without making it private. I guess have a delay before the game is created to give a chance send an invite to your desired partner and to join or not. It's a real pain in the ass having to go through the game finder, or create the game, post the the game # on your friend's wall or whatever, by that time someone you may not like joins your team, and have to drop the game and create another 1 and so on... Unless there's an easier way to do so, it would be nice to know.

[ender516]

I'm thinking the solution needs to be somewhere between what we have now and what is proposed. What if for private team games only the first person on the opposite team could be invited? Then they could invite their partner?

This might not be bad. The problem we were trying to solve was with the invitation abuser setting up an unbalanced opposing team (one officer, many cooks). If the abuser can't control the entire opposing team lineup, then this is less of an issue. If the creator of the game can invite to all of Team 1 but only Player 1 of the opposing Team(s), then those team leaders can fill their teams as they see fit.

[Dako]

If my buddy and I want to play a team game against 2 other people we know, I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to invite them. Just because some people abuse it we all loose the ability?

If you want to play with specific people - send them a PM with password.

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

Keep in mind, and make sure to read carefully, this is for both public and private---all Opponent Invitations (Tournaments, Non-Team Games, etc excluded).


--Andy

I think it is wrong to make it for both public and private. Leave private games as they are - limit invites in public games only. I can read - that is why I pointed that segregation of games can be good.

[stahrgazer]

I don't understand why inviting an opponent is an abuse, public or private. Just because an invite is sent, does not mean the player has to accept the invite.

So what if that means someone's inviting players he thinks he can beat in team games? Unless it's consistently new recruits, mods have made consistent rulings that inviting cooks, cadets, and inexperienced players to certain maps isn't "farming," isn't "abuse," no matter how much the tactic may be frowned on.

If it's bad enough that you're considering having to reprogram the system, making it more difficult for legitimate invites, in order to eliminate the potential LEGAL 'abuse' - then make these types of opponent-recruitment tactics illegal for single, multi, and team games, and discipline those who are then abusing the system.

[Dako]

How can abuse be legal? It doesn't make sense.

[L M S]

Now that TO's and clan leaders have expanded privileges why do we need the invite system for public games at all? For private games just PM the password. The big stumbling block was clan wars...that problem has been solved.
I for one, would like to see the public games go back to the old way before invites were available, we all got along fine and our 'regular' teams still found a way to play together then and they will again...bring back the open competition it fostered.

Locks only keep out honest people.
The cheaters and abusers will find a way no matter what, at the very least we should make that kind of mentality/modus operandi as "inconvenient" as possible.

[Landain]

I like the current invitation system. Leave it alone. Anyone who doesn't want to accept an invitation has the right to decline.

[Robespierre__]

Robitussin is legal but you can abuse it. People can follow the letter of the law but not the spirit. That said, it seems to me that limiting it only in public games makes sense to me.

Also, it would be nice if you join a game and invite a friend, if the friend fails to join in 24 hours, that you are also kicked out of the game. That way you are not stuck playing with some random person when you did not intend to do so.

[jmyork82]

what happens when you want to to play against a specific team. why cant team 1 invite team 2 to play against them?

[stahrgazer]

How can abuse be legal? It doesn't make sense.

They're calling it abuse, but so far, I've seen no disciplinary actions taken against people who invite anyone other than new recruits, consistently, to games (team or otherwise)... so if inviting people to games is abuse, but it's not being punished, then it's "legal abuse".

If it's legal, don't change it. If it's not legal, punish it.

Either eay, leave the invite system as is, rather than punish 'non abusers' by making invites harder.

[danfrank]

I am curious as to how this affects any one of us ? i can honestly careless if a person farms , invites cooks and ? marks to there games and so forth and so on. Its none of my business. The invited does not have to except the invitation


I voted no.. Deadlocked at 37 .. It seems the issue doesnt have enough support either way..


On a positive note and way off topic.. I have to say i love these dancing blue dude and would like to THANK whoever created him ..




And 1 more thing nothing is perfect on this site , from the erratic dice, to the seriously flawed rating system to the scoring system ( some say ) . Were here to have fun,the maps and the connectivity for speed games are unmatched by imitators. Why worry about who is inviting who. There is always going to be someone who tries to exploit the system no matter what is put in place..

[danfrank]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

Keep in mind, and make sure to read carefully, this is for both public and private---all Opponent Invitations (Tournaments, Non-Team Games, etc excluded).


--Andy

Why cant it be made for just public? A private game should be able to invite whoever, as they made it with the intention of inviting the players one would think. I think the public games are the only ones being absued as far as ive seen.

I agree basically with what Dako said.

I agree with Dako and Gold Knight - private games should remain as they are, public can be changed to stop any abuse there.

A private game can still be abused by PMing a password before the invite...

[Nephilim]

i like the current system. i don't think the vast majority of legitimate players should have to suffer because of a few assholes. plus, as someone has mentioned, if those being "invite-farmed" don't wanna join, they don't have to. you can't cure stupid...

bottom line, i really don't care if some jerks get their points in unethical ways. they are jerks, that's what they do. don't mess with my gameplay experience over it!

unless, of course, you really think this is a business decision and that "invite-farming" is driving away potential long-term customers. THAT'S what you really need to determine, and none of our opinions matter on that score!

(if you have to do something, i agree with dako: leave private invites as they are, it is nice and convenient. trash the public invites only)

peace

[Bruceswar]

what happens when you want to to play against a specific team. why cant team 1 invite team 2 to play against them?

Make a private game and send them the game number and password. Gives them more than 24 hours to except, and also keeps anybody else from joining. Works out simple.

[Bruceswar]

Yes, I think public games should be limited to invites at your own team only.

Private is ok I think.

Keep in mind, and make sure to read carefully, this is for both public and private---all Opponent Invitations (Tournaments, Non-Team Games, etc excluded).


--Andy

Why cant it be made for just public? A private game should be able to invite whoever, as they made it with the intention of inviting the players one would think. I think the public games are the only ones being absued as far as ive seen.

I agree basically with what Dako said.

I agree with Dako and Gold Knight - private games should remain as they are, public can be changed to stop any abuse there.

If we were to make it so private games are not the same as public games the abusers would just make them private and invite people till they fill up.