AAFitz wrote:just plan for it...or skip a turn...there is no real advantage to skipping...it usually is a disadvantage....its set up for those who get tied up unexpectedly...and is perfectly reasonable..and easy to plan for...if you assume they are deadbeating, and they dont...its on you...not them
It makes a huge difference if your opponent misses a turn and you are facing 40 armies instead of 20.
And it is impossible to tell if your opponent who missed 2 turns is deadbeating or you will face 2X his armies in the next turn.
This rule needs to be changed. It is grossly unfair to players who make their moves at least once in 24 hours
I'll never pay for another Premium on ConquerClub.
thats why he game is called Risk. If you have seen someone deadbeating then you adjust to that...If you arent able to then what kind of player are you!!!
I was recently in hospital for 2 days and with 20 games on the go i deadbeated in most games once if not twice. Should i be penalised for that??
hulmey wrote:thats why he game is called Risk. If you have seen someone deadbeating then you adjust to that...If you arent able to then what kind of player are you!!!
I was recently in hospital for 2 days and with 20 games on the go i deadbeated in most games once if not twice. Should i be penalised for that??
Player should not be able to keep missing turns during the game, without a penalty. You miss your turn, you lose your armies or that turn.
You do not take a turn, you do not receive any armies for that turn.
Tactics that I can use to 'adjust to' are different/opposite for player who will miss turn or two and than turn up with double/triple armies, compared to a player who missed two turns and will miss third turn.
I had players in my games who have missed more than 3 turns, and are still playing, and quite happily missing another turn or two when it suits them.
I'll never pay for another Premium on ConquerClub.
I am seeing it happen more and more frequently.... typically among the lower ranked players. The abuse appears to be becoming more widespread and my ignore list is growing at an alarming rate. I really hope something positive comes out of all of this. I don't mind losing a game if I get OUTPLAYED (which is infrequent ). But for somebody to miss turns and then be able to drop something like 12 guys all of the sudden in one spot is just disappointing. I just can't respect that "tactic".
While I agree that if you see someone missing turns you should try to prepare yourself for the probability of facing multiplied armies, but more often then not, you are having to spend your time worrying about the up to 4 other ACTIVE players who are making moves and playing every round. You don't really have the luxury of focusing your attention against the person who IMO is abusing the game, disrespecting other players, and substituting a flawed policy for sound strategy. I think that if you miss turns you should lose your troops for that round... why punish the people who take the time to actually show up? If somebody has a legititmate reason for missing turns, well, that's all good and fine, I'm sorry you lost those troops for those rounds - better luck next time. I've also heard the argument that giving those troops to people who've missed turns will keep them coming back so they don't give up.... really, what's the difference... they are still MISSING TURNS.... BOOT THEM! Three strikes and you're outta there! We are still waiting the same amount of time for them to play but the active players are the ones who are being penalized! Boot the players who aren't playing and let the real competitors get back to doing what they do best - slugging it out! But that's just my two cents.... I love CC and will keep playing anyway.
I suggested an Attendance % to be included in our profile!
It got some but not much support.
I think that it would get around the abuse of the existing system without changing it's essence. (multiplying troops is necessary for those times when you can't avoid missing)
If you were to see a percentage rating of less than 50% i would not play the begger as it would imply that they were either unreliable or that they used missed turns as a tactic.
The problem is that missing turns at the start of the game can really give and advantage.
Missing turns during a game less so.
For instance it allows you to see where others have placed their armies and so set up a counter attack.
For instance someone gains oceania and you have 3 on india. Turn 3 comes and you plant 9 armies on india. and attack. Now how can the other player predict this and would you have built up a 9 army attack force on India over 4 turns, had you done so then perhaps the owner of oceania would have attacked you before you got to 12 armies. It really is an unfair system.
I think it should be limited to 1 turn, after that you get no extra armies.
I don't completely agree. Although this tactic is one of the most annoying to me not everyone can be here all the time.
this game does enslave you a little and you need to be able to go away for an inpromtu 48 hours once in while without being put at a complete disadvantage.
No war isn't fair, but games usually are and last time I checked this was a game not a war. It bears as much resemblance to a war as a goat does to a tractor.
The more you know the more you know you don't know what you know stone's throw left to go bad weather hell for leather now and zen you goof again you never blow your trip forever.
It's a topic that seems to come up often and usually has the same comments regarding whether the rule should be left in or taken out. I don't know if it's even possible to arrive at a conclusion that will satisfy everyone.
We are all subject to those times when we might not be able to meet our committment to the games, because of illness, jobs or family situations, so the chances are good that we might be the one looking for a little understanding and patience.
I've had a few games where someone has missed turns and been granted the extra armies. If there was a satisfactory explanation given, no problem.. If there was not even an offer of explanation given, I have asked for one..
If it happens more than once in a game, chances are, I will just push the 'ignore' button.
I have said this other places but will repeat it here because I've found it's what works best for me..
Mostly, I play games from the 'private games' section.
Before joining any games with players already committed, (that I am not familiar with), I will review first, their 'feedback', then the actual games they have played to see if they habitually 'miss' turns, then the 'game chat' to see how they treat other players.
For the most part, I won't join games in the 'open' section unless I'm the last player to join and I can review everyones games.
I have been called a 'snob', (among other things), because of this, and this may be true.. but that, as they say, is 'like water off the ducks back'.
My point is that by doing my own 'police work', I think I miss a lot of the frustrations that lead to threads like this one.
Quote to my grandson, "if the game isn't fun, we put it away"
"Aspire to inspire before you expire."
"And he went forth conquering and to conquer". Rev. 6:2
No war isn't fair, but games usually are and last time I checked this was a game not a war. It bears as much resemblance to a war as a goat does to a tractor.
3seven1 wrote:Who's idea was it to multiply armies for missed turns?
It's "Whose" not "who's" assclown.
Whoa, I thought this was Conquer Club. It looks like I've logged into "Needlessly Abusive Pedants on-line" by mistake.
The more you know the more you know you don't know what you know stone's throw left to go bad weather hell for leather now and zen you goof again you never blow your trip forever.
Frankly, if I missed one turn by accident and didn't get the armies multiplied, I'd probably purposefully deadbeat from that game.
May as well make it miss a turn and be eliminated if your going to start crippling peoples positions.
No war isn't fair, but games usually are and last time I checked this was a game not a war. It bears as much resemblance to a war as a goat does to a tractor.
Then why do you play it? The game is a war emulator. Random factors tip the scales, so no....it's not fair. The mods should cut out the double armies factor period. You missed a turn? Tough. You had to work? Tough. You were in the hospital? To bad. That shits going to happen to everybody at some time or another.
Johnny Rocket (Fingers)
No relation to what's his face...........
Johnny Rockets wrote:No war isn't fair, but games usually are and last time I checked this was a game not a war. It bears as much resemblance to a war as a goat does to a tractor.
Then why do you play it? The game is a war emulator. Random factors tip the scales, so no....it's not fair. The mods should cut out the double armies factor period. You missed a turn? Tough. You had to work? Tough. You were in the hospital? To bad. That shits going to happen to everybody at some time or another.
Johnny Rocket (Fingers) No relation to what's his face...........
I play it because it's fun.
No it isn't a war emulator it's a dice game, as close to being a simulation of war as monopoly is to a simulation of business or ludo is to running a marathon.
I just don't like people comparing a board game to a war. That's just bullshit, no-one gets killed and no-one gets hurt. Moreover the tactics and strategies involved aren't even remotely similar.
The more you know the more you know you don't know what you know stone's throw left to go bad weather hell for leather now and zen you goof again you never blow your trip forever.
In the vast majority of situations missing turns is detrimental. You'll miss out on getting a card and or get your bonuses broken resulting in overall less armies than if you had made the turn. The chance for tactical advantage, which isn't always available, most definitely does not outweigh the damage that missed turns should cause. If someone misses a turn and is in a position to threaten you, you should damage them so when they get their armies next turn they will have an overall disadvantage on troop numbers, and possibly end up in a worse tactical position despite their ability to place more armies simultaneously. After two turns missed you should probably ignore them, but don't remove your defenses from their borders until they miss their third turn.
Taking away the army multiplier will often put people who have to miss turns in such a bad situation that there is no realistic chance of winning and encourages them to simply deadbeat out of the game instead of re-joining.
How about setting multiplier to subtract one from missed turns by default...
NOW:
Miss no turns = 3 armies
Miss 1 turns = 3 armies * 2
Miss 2 turns = 3 armies * 3
MY IDEA:
Miss no turns = 3 armies
Miss 1 turns = 3 armies (turns missed - 1)
Miss 2 turns = 3 armies * 2 (turns missed - 1)
This would mean if you wait two full turns, you only benefit with 3 extra armies, and if you LAST two turns you only get 6 instead of 9... you are not helping yourself by waiting because you are delayed an extra missed turn before you start receiving back-armies and even then they're smaller because it's longer to start accruing...
). But for somebody to miss turns and then be able to drop something like 12 guys all of the sudden in one spot is just disappointing. I just can't respect that "tactic".
