Conquer Club

lackattack wrote:premium only

So, non premium are obligated to have a premium partner or play with random teams?????

that's what i'm proposing...

we have time to debate it first.

lackattack wrote:Then we wouldn't need to transform private games to public games.

YES, how about for failed RT games.
Fircoal makes pritave game in hope of RT
One person joins.
1 spot left.
Fircoal and other person want to make it public so they can just play.

lackattack wrote:that's what i'm proposing...

we have time to debate it first.

I don't like that idea. Unlike you Lackattack, I like options.
So, I'd want this to be an options.

Just because some one isn't premium they don't get to be resevred a spot. NOt a good idea.

I guess then you'd either have to make friends or get premium!

wicked wrote:I guess then you'd either have to make friends or get premium!

I have premium. I just think it's unfair for those who don't.

Hold on Firecoal, what if you need premium to reserve spots but you can reserve a spot for premiums or freemiums? Isn't that the same thing as what we have now with private games?

So there would be 4 game types then....

Public
Private
Tourny
and Reserved

Reserved wouldnt need its own join page though.

and if u rly wanna reserve spots for friends but dont have premi u will buy it thus sending more money 2 lack getting him closer 2 his goal of quitin his job and workin on his to do list at conquer club

Fircoal wrote:I have premium. I just think it's unfair for those who don't.

I agree! 2 non premiuns cant form a team, this way...
Are the player that create the game supposed to dont play if he chooses so? Can he reserve slots to others without a slot to himself? Or will the game disappear like the private games? If so, know a friendly premium member doesnt help, you need PLAY with him! Like I said, 2 non premiums cant have a team, and I dislike it.

By the way, random teams by default sucks!

If we go with reservations, then the premium member definitely needs to be in the game, otherwise i might as well make it free. Instead of another tab, we can use the existing ones and instead of --empty-- it could say --reserved--. The person who has a spot can receive a pm with accept/decline links.

As for teams (the subject of this thread), I gave it some thought and I think random teams might have to be a separate option. Otherwise someone joining as player 3 would have no cue to tell if 1 and 2 are set teammates or random players.

This would avoid the issues of freemiums unable to be on the same team and premiums having a score advantage by preying on un-organized teams

The plus side of course is that people will be able to join random team games without worrying about getting screwed.

"lackattack", you've made the right decision. I fully agree with you now.

I figured this would be an obvious suggestion but I did a search and didn't find anything, so here ya go

- allow a new game type that shuffles the teams on start so you don't know exactly who you'll be paired with. Good for single players who don't want to be paired with a ? against people who've played 200 games together.

Thanks for reading!

AlexTheGreat2 wrote:I figured this would be an obvious suggestion but I did a search and didn't find anything, so here ya go

- allow a new game type that shuffles the teams on start so you don't know exactly who you'll be paired with. Good for single players who don't want to be paired with a ? against people who've played 200 games together.

Thanks for reading!

Ohhh…. Yes? So you honestly think that two players having played 200 games together would sign up for games with this setting?

alstergren wrote:
Ohhh…. Yes? So you honestly think that two players having played 200 games together would sign up for games with this setting?

Well, no of course they wouldn't, that's the point - it's an additional setting so people who wanted to play against long time teammates could do the regular game, and people don't want to could do random teams.

AlexTheGreat2 wrote:Well, no of course they wouldn't, that's the point - it's an additional setting so people who wanted to play against long time teammates could do the regular game, and people don't want to could do random teams.

Ok. But then, what was the point with this?

AlexTheGreat2 wrote:Good for single players who don't want to be paired with a ? against people who've played 200 games together.

Then this won't happen, will it?

I think I'm being misunderstood...

Look at it this way, under the current system If I want to play a 6 player doubles game, I start the game and eventually a person I don't know joins my game. Next a group of 2 players who play together all the time joins and then maybe if I'm lucky 2 more single people joins or if I'm unlucky another group joins.

This puts me at a huge disadvantage because my partner is much more likely to not know how to play or to deadbeat. It really makes it tough for new players as doubles games are a good way to learn if you get a decent partner.

With a random teams option, people who don't have a steady partner wouldn't be at such a disadvantage, while people with steady partners would still be able to use the regular option.

I know what you mean - this would still allow friends to play with each other in the regular settings but would mean that those who didn't want to come up against them could start different games with this shuffle thing.

A good idea but definitely not much of a priority

AlexTheGreat2 wrote:I think I'm being misunderstood...

Look at it this way, under the current system If I want to play a 6 player doubles game, I start the game and eventually a person I don't know joins my game. Next a group of 2 players who play together all the time joins and then maybe if I'm lucky 2 more single people joins or if I'm unlucky another group joins.

This puts me at a huge disadvantage because my partner is much more likely to not know how to play or to deadbeat. It really makes it tough for new players as doubles games are a good way to learn if you get a decent partner.

With a random teams option, people who don't have a steady partner wouldn't be at such a disadvantage, while people with steady partners would still be able to use the regular option.

I can assure you that I’m doing my best not to misunderstand you.

My point is this: Regular teams (i.e. two people that usually plays together) will no join this kind of setting. The only players you’ll get in the game will be people without a regular partner. Now, of course this may have the effect of these games being filled with low-ranked players. It’s true. But it seems like a lot of effort for such a side-effect. Instead, why don’t you join games already having been filled up by 4-5 people you believe does not belong to regular teams?

alstergren wrote:I can assure you that I’m doing my best not to misunderstand you.

My point is this: Regular teams (i.e. two people that usually plays together) will no join this kind of setting. The only players you’ll get in the game will be people without a regular partner. Now, of course this may have the effect of these games being filled with low-ranked players. It’s true. But it seems like a lot of effort for such a side-effect. Instead, why don’t you join games already having been filled up by 4-5 people you believe does not belong to regular teams?

Well, it's hard to find those games and it requires a lot of research, by the time I've figured it out I've lost the spot

It doesn't seem like it would be a lot of work (of course only the developer can really give an opinion on that ) and it would make things a lot easier for new people.

Well, why not? There have been a lot of suggestions for new settings. Guess this one may be a possible setting as well. Personally I approve of all new settings being added. The more of a smorgasbord CC becomes, the funnier and more challenging it will be.

dude i know where you're coming from but unfortunately i don't think seasoned doubles players would play this sort of game. its a nice idea tho and possibly one worth doing.

1 that i think could be implemented is shuffling the order in singles....

^
How do you mean?

Like people have said this would not work for doubles pairs that like to stick together. However I know i would use it.

I have at least 3 other people i would like to play with. We can join a 2v2 random teams and be drawn up against one another, as currently it takes ages to decide who will partner who.

Alternatively it could be added that instead of random, it tries to match the teams up to similar point levels, thus making for closer games.