Conquer Club

AAFitz wrote:

wicked wrote:

AAFitz wrote:seriously...who the hell mad you a mod, newbie

uhh, no one?

mod, multi hunter, tourney director, director of arts and crafts..theyre all the same to us...ie mods

I asked AK if I could be a tourney director once. I was just trying to get tourny creating priveleges, but I asked for his job

ABSOLUTE_MASTER wrote:

Sparqs wrote:I agree that this reviewer sounds biased against CC, but there are some valid points:

1) Map: CC has some of the most gorgeous maps, no doubt, but the Classic map is one of the 5 that I won't play because I can't bear to look at it. If you are basing your review on what the RISK map looks like, CC takes a valid hit. (No offense meant to the artist here, it's just too bright and difficult for me to read.)

2) Army Display: The reason I found the CC greasemonkey scripts is because I was desperately looking for something to make the numbers more readable. It turns out that there are scripts that make this site a joy to use, but it is a valid complaint that the built-in interface (as any non-Firefox user will encounter) is lack-ing. <rim-shot>

I understand that there is always an endless to-do list, and Lack is reasonably concentrating on other things since there are greasemonkey scripts to handle UI, but it's not shocking that a reviewer would note the issues.

There is a space for people to comment on the reviews, and I think we should add a well-crafted, polite correction.

You joined 3 days ago.... :roll:

That's true. But perhaps fresh eyes are needed in order to remind folks of a newcomer's experience with this site. If you are used to the greasemonkey scripts, interface complaints are just noobs being noobs. But if you are a gamer/potential-paying-customer who is looking at reviews and making limited checks of sites to see which one feels better, these are real issues.

As I suggested, someone should post a response to the review. I'd be happy to help craft it, or watch as veterans do so, but I didn't want to join their site in order to respond.

I don't care if you joined 3 days ago, you are a great (and welcome) poster!

sparqs, a response was already written that addressed the issues they noted. Welcome to the site!

sully800 wrote:I don't care if you joined 3 days ago, you are a great (and welcome) poster!

Aw, thank you. Now I'll have to use one of those new-fangled animated-smilie things:

wicked wrote:sparqs, a response was already written that addressed the issues they noted. Welcome to the site!

Great! And thanks!

wicked wrote:ooh we do need a new arts and crafts guy... you applying?

I'll do it

reverend_kyle for mod 07
fingerpainting lemon parties all around

lol, i never knew there was a topic before mine about this website, and we posted on the same day!

anyway, the polls on there suggests CC rocks.

"Best AI - Conquer Club"

Lol, do we have any AI

I am the author of Total Diplomacy and I think there are some misunderstandings that I need to clarify.

First of all, I am not connected to Grand Strategy (GS). I am independent and I wrote my personal understanding of the games.

There seems to have been some negative feelings about the review I have written. First, there is no point in flaming me for it. If you see something wrong, just mention it politely and I will set it straight. That’s why there is a comment section. If you think I said something wrong, then correct it (and I am glad some have). It is usual for these Risk game sites to have features added to them over time. The comment section can reflect the changes as well.

Now, I need to tell you of other remarks you may not be aware of. I have already shown the review to Brian Lack before you found about it on my site. He assured me that he appreciates my critic in regard with the graphics of classic map and that he plans to update this in the near future. In my review, all I have said is that the classic map in CC doesn’t look as clear as the GS. This is still true. Anyone who disagrees with this hasn’t really seen the maps. I greatly appreciate Brian’s effort on CC and look forward for its future.

However, a game doesn’t become great just because it has an eye-pleasing map, nor does it become a total failure if the map is not easy to read. These are just features, and the review just tries to reflect this. If we, as the Risk community, flag these issues for the developers, they will see our needs and update the system. That’s all. No need to bring anything down.

I haven’t been paid to do any reviews and I am not planning to either. Just because I found a problem in a Risk online game, doesn’t mean that I am paid by its competitor. So please think about it next time before you make a hostile (and sometimes rude comments).

Another tip for those who feel strongly is not to bring down every other game, just because you are a fan of one. It’s natural to feel strong about what you own and believe it is the best, simply because you are most familiar with it. Give others a chance as well.

I am glad at least one user (sparqs) understood what I really meant.

I wasn’t aware of Greasemonkey scripts, because it wasn’t obvious. I used the CC standard browser interface and I still don’t see any stats. I understand that there are Greasemonkey scripts, but you cant expect half the new users even to understand what that really means, let aside use it. It might be obvious to you, but it may not be obvious to others.

May be following this discussion, Greasemonkey scripts have now become clear to many. That’s what it is all about. I am a Risk fan. I love the game, and I guess many of you too. All I want is to see which kind of game plays better for my style. Once I find such a game, I won’t hesitate to pay for it. I like others to think of Risk as a great game. The reviews intend to show how different versions compare to each other. That’s all. If you like one, why don’t you help the new players looking for online games to join your preferred choice. Just help them out.

In any case, I apologise if I haven’t given a review that can satisfy everyone. I will reflect on this conversation and will update the review based on your remarks.

For those who are interested to play a better game, Total Diplomacy intends to show you how you can use real-life skills in Risk and also how you can use Risk to prepare yourself for everyday situations, such as negotiations, politics, diplomacy and strategic thinking. Of course the article should also help you to get better at winning Risk.

If you think what I said on my site (or my book) didn’t make sense, or that it is outright wrong, then please let me know. It is not my intention to miss-represent anything. Feel free to comment on my site for further discussions.

Regards
Ehsan Honary
http://www.totaldiplomacy.com

Somre risk expert you are...Played 2 lost 2 against cooks and corporal's....Stick your book up your arse and whistle daisy....Oh welcome to CC

hulmey wrote:Somre risk expert you are...Played 2 lost 2 against cooks and corporal's....Stick your book up your arse and whistle daisy....Oh welcome to CC

he deadbeated one of his game too.

But even he has to love the kindness shown by CCers to anyone who says CC is in the slightest bit bad

AK_iceman wrote:

Conquer Club. This is a browser-based Risk game similar to Grand Strategy.

Didn't the creator of Grand Strategy start his site and steal our maps and idea's from the to-do list? I agree, someone needs to register there and set them straight.

GS had tabs separating games into active, awaiting players like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS had two player games with 1/3 of countries as neutral like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS has maps with hundreds of territories that make CC maps look like kid toys.

http://www.denizengames.com

if it is so much better how come we have so many more players even though we are newer. Look on the bottem of our page or chek the graphs on this fourn

I made an account to check GS out, and there are more than a couple maps on GS that look copied from CC.

arguing on CC forums is like playing in the special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

just go to a elementary school and and try telling them which transformer is tougher, you'll get the same reaction.

spline wrote:I am the author of Total Diplomacy and I think there are some misunderstandings that I need to clarify.

First of all, I am not connected to Grand Strategy (GS). I am independent and I wrote my personal understanding of the games.

There seems to have been some negative feelings about the review I have written. First, there is no point in flaming me for it. If you see something wrong, just mention it politely and I will set it straight. That’s why there is a comment section. If you think I said something wrong, then correct it (and I am glad some have). It is usual for these Risk game sites to have features added to them over time. The comment section can reflect the changes as well.

Now, I need to tell you of other remarks you may not be aware of. I have already shown the review to Brian Lack before you found about it on my site. He assured me that he appreciates my critic in regard with the graphics of classic map and that he plans to update this in the near future. In my review, all I have said is that the classic map in CC doesn’t look as clear as the GS. This is still true. Anyone who disagrees with this hasn’t really seen the maps. I greatly appreciate Brian’s effort on CC and look forward for its future.

However, a game doesn’t become great just because it has an eye-pleasing map, nor does it become a total failure if the map is not easy to read. These are just features, and the review just tries to reflect this. If we, as the Risk community, flag these issues for the developers, they will see our needs and update the system. That’s all. No need to bring anything down.

I haven’t been paid to do any reviews and I am not planning to either. Just because I found a problem in a Risk online game, doesn’t mean that I am paid by its competitor. So please think about it next time before you make a hostile (and sometimes rude comments).

Another tip for those who feel strongly is not to bring down every other game, just because you are a fan of one. It’s natural to feel strong about what you own and believe it is the best, simply because you are most familiar with it. Give others a chance as well.

I am glad at least one user (sparqs) understood what I really meant.

I wasn’t aware of Greasemonkey scripts, because it wasn’t obvious. I used the CC standard browser interface and I still don’t see any stats. I understand that there are Greasemonkey scripts, but you cant expect half the new users even to understand what that really means, let aside use it. It might be obvious to you, but it may not be obvious to others.

May be following this discussion, Greasemonkey scripts have now become clear to many. That’s what it is all about. I am a Risk fan. I love the game, and I guess many of you too. All I want is to see which kind of game plays better for my style. Once I find such a game, I won’t hesitate to pay for it. I like others to think of Risk as a great game. The reviews intend to show how different versions compare to each other. That’s all. If you like one, why don’t you help the new players looking for online games to join your preferred choice. Just help them out.

In any case, I apologise if I haven’t given a review that can satisfy everyone. I will reflect on this conversation and will update the review based on your remarks.

For those who are interested to play a better game, Total Diplomacy intends to show you how you can use real-life skills in Risk and also how you can use Risk to prepare yourself for everyday situations, such as negotiations, politics, diplomacy and strategic thinking. Of course the article should also help you to get better at winning Risk.

If you think what I said on my site (or my book) didn’t make sense, or that it is outright wrong, then please let me know. It is not my intention to miss-represent anything. Feel free to comment on my site for further discussions.

Regards
Ehsan Honary
http://www.totaldiplomacy.com

thanks for having the gut to come on here, I apologise if I was being rude in anyway, it's just that GS completely copied us and they had the better review. P.S. please ignore the comment from "blitzaholic" made after the CC review, it was just some wannabe pretending to be someone else.

sashab wrote:

AK_iceman wrote:

Conquer Club. This is a browser-based Risk game similar to Grand Strategy.

Didn't the creator of Grand Strategy start his site and steal our maps and idea's from the to-do list? I agree, someone needs to register there and set them straight.

GS had tabs separating games into active, awaiting players like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS had two player games with 1/3 of countries as neutral like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS has maps with hundreds of territories that make CC maps look like kid toys.

http://www.denizengames.com

I can't believe I'm hearing this. All those features were on the to-do list before GS were even born. And yes, we do have World 2.1 with over a hundred territories, and I'm pretty sure there are a couple in the making in the Map Foundry.

This is a list of what I think you copied off us -
Chat Boxes
Unlimited Fortifications
"Connected" Fortification (a.k.a. Chained)
Premium Membership
Many Maps Including Tamriel, Middle Earth..
Live chat
RSS Feed
Tourny Games
Similar Search Options
Terminator
Take points from deadbeats

and of course, they will be many others to come. Of course, you are unique in one way, you have adverts all over your front page, great


domination, we were made over half a year before GS was made, they are just copied everything about CC.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3120

sashab wrote:

AK_iceman wrote:

Conquer Club. This is a browser-based Risk game similar to Grand Strategy.

Didn't the creator of Grand Strategy start his site and steal our maps and idea's from the to-do list? I agree, someone needs to register there and set them straight.

GS had tabs separating games into active, awaiting players like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS had two player games with 1/3 of countries as neutral like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS has maps with hundreds of territories that make CC maps look like kid toys.

http://www.denizengames.com

Lol, really?

Breakdown of GS maps:

Africa:Stolen directly from CC
Asia:Based off CC's map with a few changes, but not many.
British Isles:Stolen directly from CC
Brooklyn: Might be original but limited to premium members
Classic: Stolen from Risk 2
Same with variant
Europe: Based off CC's map with few changes but not many.
Germany: Stolen directly from CC
Italy 13th Century: Might be original
Middle East: Based directly off CC's no changes.
Montreal: Stolen directly from CC
Norman Invasion: Might be original
North America: Stolen directly from CC
Sumerian City States:Stolen from Lux
Tamriel: based directly off CC's no changes.
Vietnam War: Stolen from American history lux
Xulonia: Might be original

Bolded are the 4 maps that are GS originals.

Phobia wrote:

spline wrote:I am the author of Total Diplomacy and I think there are some misunderstandings that I need to clarify.

First of all, I am not connected to Grand Strategy (GS). I am independent and I wrote my personal understanding of the games.

There seems to have been some negative feelings about the review I have written. First, there is no point in flaming me for it. If you see something wrong, just mention it politely and I will set it straight. That’s why there is a comment section. If you think I said something wrong, then correct it (and I am glad some have). It is usual for these Risk game sites to have features added to them over time. The comment section can reflect the changes as well.

Now, I need to tell you of other remarks you may not be aware of. I have already shown the review to Brian Lack before you found about it on my site. He assured me that he appreciates my critic in regard with the graphics of classic map and that he plans to update this in the near future. In my review, all I have said is that the classic map in CC doesn’t look as clear as the GS. This is still true. Anyone who disagrees with this hasn’t really seen the maps. I greatly appreciate Brian’s effort on CC and look forward for its future.

However, a game doesn’t become great just because it has an eye-pleasing map, nor does it become a total failure if the map is not easy to read. These are just features, and the review just tries to reflect this. If we, as the Risk community, flag these issues for the developers, they will see our needs and update the system. That’s all. No need to bring anything down.

I haven’t been paid to do any reviews and I am not planning to either. Just because I found a problem in a Risk online game, doesn’t mean that I am paid by its competitor. So please think about it next time before you make a hostile (and sometimes rude comments).

Another tip for those who feel strongly is not to bring down every other game, just because you are a fan of one. It’s natural to feel strong about what you own and believe it is the best, simply because you are most familiar with it. Give others a chance as well.

I am glad at least one user (sparqs) understood what I really meant.

I wasn’t aware of Greasemonkey scripts, because it wasn’t obvious. I used the CC standard browser interface and I still don’t see any stats. I understand that there are Greasemonkey scripts, but you cant expect half the new users even to understand what that really means, let aside use it. It might be obvious to you, but it may not be obvious to others.

May be following this discussion, Greasemonkey scripts have now become clear to many. That’s what it is all about. I am a Risk fan. I love the game, and I guess many of you too. All I want is to see which kind of game plays better for my style. Once I find such a game, I won’t hesitate to pay for it. I like others to think of Risk as a great game. The reviews intend to show how different versions compare to each other. That’s all. If you like one, why don’t you help the new players looking for online games to join your preferred choice. Just help them out.

In any case, I apologise if I haven’t given a review that can satisfy everyone. I will reflect on this conversation and will update the review based on your remarks.

For those who are interested to play a better game, Total Diplomacy intends to show you how you can use real-life skills in Risk and also how you can use Risk to prepare yourself for everyday situations, such as negotiations, politics, diplomacy and strategic thinking. Of course the article should also help you to get better at winning Risk.

If you think what I said on my site (or my book) didn’t make sense, or that it is outright wrong, then please let me know. It is not my intention to miss-represent anything. Feel free to comment on my site for further discussions.

Regards
Ehsan Honary
http://www.totaldiplomacy.com

thanks for having the gut to come on here, I apologise if I was being rude in anyway, it's just that GS completely copied us and they had the better review. P.S. please ignore the comment from "blitzaholic" made after the CC review, it was just some wannabe pretending to be someone else.

sashab wrote:

AK_iceman wrote:

Conquer Club. This is a browser-based Risk game similar to Grand Strategy.

Didn't the creator of Grand Strategy start his site and steal our maps and idea's from the to-do list? I agree, someone needs to register there and set them straight.

GS had tabs separating games into active, awaiting players like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS had two player games with 1/3 of countries as neutral like 6 months ago.

When did CC copy that feature?

GS has maps with hundreds of territories that make CC maps look like kid toys.

http://www.denizengames.com

I can't believe I'm hearing this. All those features were on the to-do list before GS were even born. And yes, we do have World 2.1 with over a hundred territories, and I'm pretty sure there are a couple in the making in the Map Foundry.

This is a list of what I think you copied off us -
Chat Boxes
Unlimited Fortifications
"Connected" Fortification (a.k.a. Chained)
Premium Membership
Many Maps Including Tamriel, Middle Earth..
Live chat
RSS Feed
Tourny Games
Similar Search Options
Terminator
Take points from deadbeats

and of course, they will be many others to come. Of course, you are unique in one way, you have adverts all over your front page, great


domination, we were made over half a year before GS was made, they are just copied everything about CC.
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3120

I dont think that you understood me. WE is considered conquerclub and they is gs

Yeah, and he corrected you because you said we are newer. That's incorrect, because CC was created and then bryanbr ripped the site off a few months later. Other than that, CC is the newest risk variant around as far as I know.

reverend_kyle wrote:Breakdown of GS maps:

Africa:Stolen directly from CC
Asia:Based off CC's map with a few changes, but not many.
British Isles:Stolen directly from CC
Brooklyn: Might be original but limited to premium members
Classic: Stolen from Risk 2
Same with variant
Europe: Based off CC's map with few changes but not many.
Germany: Stolen directly from CC
Italy 13th Century: Might be original
Middle East: Based directly off CC's no changes.
Montreal: Stolen directly from CC
Norman Invasion: Might be original
North America: Stolen directly from CC
Sumerian City States:Stolen from Lux
Tamriel: based directly off CC's no changes.
Vietnam War: Stolen from American history lux
Xulonia: Might be original

Bolded are the 4 maps that are GS originals.

That's so true… Makes me think whether or not CC took those maps from somewhere else, or if GS blatantly took them from CC, and, for whatever reason, lack hasn't done/can't do anything about it.

Jesus Christ - Even a MOD cant speak friggin English.....Shame on You.

ITs we are OLDER

hecter wrote:

reverend_kyle wrote:Breakdown of GS maps:

Africa:Stolen directly from CC
Asia:Based off CC's map with a few changes, but not many.
British Isles:Stolen directly from CC
Brooklyn: Might be original but limited to premium members
Classic: Stolen from Risk 2
Same with variant
Europe: Based off CC's map with few changes but not many.
Germany: Stolen directly from CC
Italy 13th Century: Might be original
Middle East: Based directly off CC's no changes.
Montreal: Stolen directly from CC
Norman Invasion: Might be original
North America: Stolen directly from CC
Sumerian City States:Stolen from Lux
Tamriel: based directly off CC's no changes.
Vietnam War: Stolen from American history lux
Xulonia: Might be original

Bolded are the 4 maps that are GS originals.

That's so true… Makes me think whether or not CC took those maps from somewhere else, or if GS blatantly took them from CC, and, for whatever reason, lack hasn't done/can't do anything about it.

Haha, hecter, I forget you are a noob because of how much you post, but you are fairly new.


Those are all maps that were made for CC and not taken anywhere else, but all developed in the foundry. Grand Strategy did get the mapmakers permission to use them, but they can't really say that their maps are better when they took all the maps from CC, and GS did blatantly take them from CC. It was a big controversy way back when and brianbr used CC's forum for advertising and created a bunch of threads about how much better his site was. You weren't around then, but now you know.

reverend_kyle wrote:

hecter wrote:

reverend_kyle wrote:Breakdown of GS maps:

Africa:Stolen directly from CC
Asia:Based off CC's map with a few changes, but not many.
British Isles:Stolen directly from CC
Brooklyn: Might be original but limited to premium members
Classic: Stolen from Risk 2
Same with variant
Europe: Based off CC's map with few changes but not many.
Germany: Stolen directly from CC
Italy 13th Century: Might be original
Middle East: Based directly off CC's no changes.
Montreal: Stolen directly from CC
Norman Invasion: Might be original
North America: Stolen directly from CC
Sumerian City States:Stolen from Lux
Tamriel: based directly off CC's no changes.
Vietnam War: Stolen from American history lux
Xulonia: Might be original

Bolded are the 4 maps that are GS originals.

That's so true… Makes me think whether or not CC took those maps from somewhere else, or if GS blatantly took them from CC, and, for whatever reason, lack hasn't done/can't do anything about it.

Haha, hecter, I forget you are a noob because of how much you post, but you are fairly new.


Those are all maps that were made for CC and not taken anywhere else, but all developed in the foundry. Grand Strategy did get the mapmakers permission to use them, but they can't really say that their maps are better when they took all the maps from CC, and GS did blatantly take them from CC. It was a big controversy way back when and brianbr used CC's forum for advertising and created a bunch of threads about how much better his site was. You weren't around then, but now you know.

If this is the case then why can't we do anything about it? Can we file some sort of lawsuit?

RobinJ wrote:If this is the case then why can't we do anything about it? Can we file some sort of lawsuit?

reverend_kyle wrote:Grand Strategy did get the mapmakers permission to use them

I would assume not?

Genghis Khan CA wrote:

RobinJ wrote:If this is the case then why can't we do anything about it? Can we file some sort of lawsuit?

reverend_kyle wrote:Grand Strategy did get the mapmakers permission to use them

I would assume not?

You might be able to sue for something like defamation or something I suppose, but not for copying the maps just on it's own.

Suing an online risk website is a bit much though, even if it is a competitor.

The1exile wrote:

Genghis Khan CA wrote:

RobinJ wrote:If this is the case then why can't we do anything about it? Can we file some sort of lawsuit?

reverend_kyle wrote:Grand Strategy did get the mapmakers permission to use them

I would assume not?

You might be able to sue for something like defamation or something I suppose, but not for copying the maps just on it's own.

Suing an online risk website is a bit much though, even if it is a competitor.

How would you be able to sue someone for copying something of yours with your permission?

And I don't see how it could possibly be defamation, do you know what defamation means? It is "The expression of injurious, malicious statements about someone", a definition which fails to capture the use of maps created by another party with their permission.