Conquer Club

CryWolf wrote:lol, if I make private games, then only people that I tell about the game can join... not really the point of the suggestion

Callouts forum is your friend.

I'm new to CC but am very interested in getting some experience under my belt. I have created games but I find myself facing some high level competition. I love the challenge but am looking for a way to limit who can enter my games. This would keep it fun while the basics of the game and/or map is learned.

So my suggestion is a rating limitation(s) option in the create a game stage.

When a game is set up, we could check boxes for the level of opponents that are allowed to join the game. This is an option in many other types of online gaming. You would can either limit weak competition from ruining a good game or limit seasoned veterans from running through a few newbies.

This would help almost any level of player in my opinion. It may also keep the games pure.

An example off the top of my head....
Check the boxes for the players allowed in this game
Box 1: New Recruits
Box 2: Cadets
Box 3: Privates
Box 4: Corporals/Sergeants
Box 5: Lieutenants thru Majors
Box 6: Colonel +
Or Allow All players to join

Since you're new, I welcome you to CC. But, you really should browse this forum and use the Search option more. Your idea is pretty organized, but any and all types of rank restrictions have been rejected many times over. It would just lead to blatant rank discrimination.

What if this applied to experience not score?


Then it would not discriminate against rank. But it would limit someone who has played 500 games to playing someone who is on their first.
Maybe the option could be...

Check box for new players:
Less than 25 games completed

Otherwise anyone can play.


This would keep the new players playing equal competion or experience if they choose.

iLflankU wrote:What if this applied to experience not score?


Then it would not discriminate against rank. But it would limit someone who has played 500 games to playing someone who is on their first.
Maybe the option could be...

Check box for new players:
Less than 25 games completed

Otherwise anyone can play.


This would keep the new players playing equal competion or experience if they choose.

Some people would check that box all day long, some people who simply leave it unchecked, so they could prey on them.
Simply put- manage your own games, if you don't want someone playing in them, then drop the game when they join.

Thanks,
-John

Why was this idea rejected?

I pay for the privilege of playing on this site, and I would like the ability to restrict who joins games I host.

I searched for a topic on this but couldn't find anything, so I would like to know what your reasons on for not implementing this,
or at least an option similar to that of many RTS games' online gaming sites,
where the game can only start when the host clicks "Launch game",
and also has the ability to kick out players before launching.

This might discourage people from being rude or obnoxious,
since with the current system it doesn't matter if your feedback rating is 1-50,
if you're the last to join the game.
Or similarly, if your rating is 420 and your sheer cluelessness in the game might cost one of your opponents a chance at winning along with your own.

Anyway, like I said, what is the reasoning behind this?

You have the ability to restrict who joins your games...

C.

_big_easy_ wrote:Why was this idea rejected?

I pay for the privilege of playing on this site, and I would like the ability to restrict who joins games I host.

I searched for a topic on this but couldn't find anything, so I would like to know what your reasons on for not implementing this,
or at least an option similar to that of many RTS games' online gaming sites,
where the game can only start when the host clicks "Launch game",
and also has the ability to kick out players before launching.

This might discourage people from being rude or obnoxious,
since with the current system it doesn't matter if your feedback rating is 1-50,
if you're the last to join the game.
Or similarly, if your rating is 420 and your sheer cluelessness in the game might cost one of your opponents a chance at winning along with your own.

Anyway, like I said, what is the reasoning behind this?

That option in bold isn't that bad actually. Kind of like "Semi-private games".

Anyway, the reason it was turned down is because there is already a rampant problem of higher ranks not playing lower ranks. It contributes to class segregation and, thus, point inflation. Having a restriction on rank will only make segregation.

If its already happening there is a demand for it obviously. It is a pain in the ass and harder to put together games for ranks thru private games. I like the semi-private idea. I think this is the only gaming site that doesnt allow this type of option. This option is so common in card games, chess, etc, etc.

Optimus Prime wrote:This has been rejected more times than I can count.

Only because its been suggested more times than we can count, haha.

Optimus Prime wrote:This has been rejected more times than I can count.

Only because its been suggested more times than we can count, haha.

Optimus Prime wrote:This has been rejected more times than I can count.

Only because its been suggested more times than we can count, haha.

hecter wrote:If you can't beat the lower ranks along with the higher ranks, you don't deserve your points. If you really want to play with those of your rank, just play private games. There are "Leagues" of all ranks over in the Callouts forum, why don't you hop on over there and ask for the password for your rank?

its not just about the points its about the quality of game play among different types of players.

But it sucks for Freestyle...

I know at the moment it sucks that last to join gets to go first - but this way it means the host can always start...

Unless the button starts the game in 2 hours or something?!

C.

There are plenty of option for controlling who joins your games. There are multiple threads in Callouts for private games with a score requirement; you just PM someone in the thread to ask for the standing password. You can also join a clan/usergroup with similarly ranked people. And of course, you can always create your own private games with a standing password and just inform people of certain ranks who you enjoy playing. Since there are always these options, that's why this idea is rejected.

wicked wrote:There are plenty of option for controlling who joins your games. There are multiple threads in Callouts for private games with a score requirement; you just PM someone in the thread to ask for the standing password. You can also join a clan/usergroup with similarly ranked people. And of course, you can always create your own private games with a standing password and just inform people of certain ranks who you enjoy playing. Since there are always these options, that's why this idea is rejected.

not only that but it discriminates between ranks...

insomniacdude wrote:Anyway, the reason it was turned down is because there is already a rampant problem of higher ranks not playing lower ranks. It contributes to class segregation and, thus, point inflation. Having a restriction on rank will only make segregation.

that makes no sense, surely if the high ranks only play themselves then they will just swap points and more people will become higher ranked rather than higher ranks, i have the view that the way points are injected, if you like, into the top players is via high ranked guys that play team games and then pass the points on via standard games to the other high rankers.

ive also come to the conclusion it really isnt that difficult to run up at least 500 points from when you start as you really dont need to win a high % of games so ive found there is little skill difference between most people under 2000 and those with only 900 points.........

therefore i dont think this needs to be implemented.

FiveCardArmy wrote:

hecter wrote:If you can't beat the lower ranks along with the higher ranks, you don't deserve your points. If you really want to play with those of your rank, just play private games. There are "Leagues" of all ranks over in the Callouts forum, why don't you hop on over there and ask for the password for your rank?

its not just about the points its about the quality of game play among different types of players.

I love playing with players at about my level. It's much more intense that way. Players who are far better than I am or much worse than I am provide really boring games most of the time.

FiveCardArmy wrote:THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN, RESISTANCE IS FUTILE

what PEOPLE? theres like 5 of you

klupar wrote:

FiveCardArmy wrote:After being suicided against multiple times and dealing with newbie deadbeats, I find my self wishing there was a button that allowed you to block players who were at least one rank below you. Maybe limit this to the premium users, doesnt prevent high ranked players from joining, but rather players that are ranked much lower than you are. I think its a good idea. Thoughts...

I am used to having this option when playing online chess, just thought it would be nice to have here.

perhaps not just 1 rank below you but a only allow {rank} selection in start a game

I agree 100%. In fact, if this isn't done by time my membership is due I will not be participating at Conquer Club any longer. That's how strongly I feel about this.

hecter wrote:If you can't beat the lower ranks along with the higher ranks, you don't deserve your points. If you really want to play with those of your rank, just play private games. There are "Leagues" of all ranks over in the Callouts forum, why don't you hop on over there and ask for the password for your rank?

Bad answer. That's a hassle.

well, I read some FAQ and saw their opinion regarding this. Well, alright, callouts it is. Make it more difficult for the paying customers... nice

because it will only be used for the high ranks to keep their points high, that shouldn't be right


A noob should at least get the chance to beat a high rank

I've played a number of games with people who are not very skilled.(Not saying I'm uber). Usually when I go to the game finder to join a new game look through peoples skill levels and their feedback before joining a game. More times then I'd like I've later had people join the game who have horrible feedback or are a very low skill level(the later doesn't mean they are a bad player, but it does increase the odds to some extent)

I keep thinking it would be awesome if when a game was created you could specify what sort of game rating( >1100 if your looking for more skilled opponents or >800 <1000 if your new and are hoping for less skilled opponents.)

Also be nice if you could do something like <5 negatives or specify a difference in feedback(aka. 20 pos and 2 neg would be a +18) since not all negative feedback is valid.

Any thoughts???? Mods????