Conquer Club

I know it's allowed atm... but it's not right... it's a way of getting around rules, and plain annoying people.

It doesn't annoy the people who do it

max is gr8 wrote:It doesn't annoy the people who do it

that's the dumbest thing ever. of course it doesn't annoy those people, but if they are going to lose, why do they have to be an ass about it and not end the turn? to be spiteful? if so that is very very lame

this is unreal, in game 6170 musicdork19 is one turn away from losing and hes holding his turn just to be obnoxious.

yea and what really pisses me off is if your out but the game isnt over you cant replace it (im not premium yet) This means, just because someone is obnoxious, I have to wait a long time to free up a game. But once I go premium I dont think it will matter.

Game 6666 - doubles holding to get double turns. I hate that.

"Game 6666 - doubles holding to get double turns."

This is exactly what this sucker fishfleas and his partner were doing in game 6439.

See what he wrote in the chat:
2006-03-07 11:35:06 - fishfleas: Red and Green we are going to wait till you guys take your turn....
2006-03-07 11:35:36 - fishfleas: we didn't have a good start so we're just waiting to see which direction to go...
(...)
2006-03-07 12:09:04 - fishfleas: there is nothing wrong with wanting to go last....

And see the game log:
2006-03-07 11:23:05 - fishfleas receives 3 armies for 7 territories
(...)
(...)
(...)
All players playing...
(...)
(...)
2006-03-07 12:14:07 - fishfleas deployed 3 armies on Inner Mongolia

Now, I ask: who was holding? Who this stupid loser think he is tricking?

Dont even play against this guy, because he dont play if he has a bad start. Moahahahahah...

Max. I don't know what you're doing, but you've been sitting on a yellow light in our game for 22 hours. You've posted 3 or 4 times since then, could you pay attention to your games?

Scarus

Oh sorry I sometimes get confused when it's multipul fort

I'm pretty sure this has been brought up before but I though it was valid and seemed to have died and I couldn't find the post. My reasoning is that if two people on one team are playing at the same time they can double turn it by hacing one end and then the other start, which I feel is against the idea of no double turns.

Still sore, KW?

Well, if its not sequential, it will be an injustice anyway. I think (as someone already suggested) that in doubles sequential games, the turn of each team (not player) could last 24 h, and the partners could play freestyle. Less time consuming (maybe less than freestyle, because of holding), fun strategies, it would be really great.

probably not, because we do it all the time

simul-post, mine was meant for TGS

I think that in teams it should be player 1 & 3
and players 2 & 4

max is gr8 wrote:I think that in teams it should be player 1 & 3
and players 2 & 4

Yeah that with sequential would fix the problem.

Hmmmm... sounds familiar.
Oh yeah! I suggested this a month ago (and a poor poll turnout, but those who came out did not like it).

Here is the link.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... highlight=\

I'm still in favour of it.

oh yes, i had taken issue with this several weeks ago after a couple of games with you waffles. i still feel like the 'holding or just waiting to take a double turn per team' is an unfair practice. i have heard several ideas since that would remedy this problem. I believe my favorite is the team split in sequential; team 1, 1 & 3 position team 2, 2& 4 and so on, but just playing sequential would also solve the problem, which we did and you still schooled us pretty well! Have you changed positions on this doubleturn thing since then waffles? If memory serves me correct, you, at that time, where in favor of it, or at least practiced it in freestyle games.

max is gr8 wrote:I think that in teams it should be player 1 & 3
and players 2 & 4

NO because then you could not do games with your friend on your team... unless you were prefect timing

Yes it is true that i did and sometimes still do exactly what I'm preaching against,but I have decided that like holding it offers an unfair advantage to one team and I'm stopping.

FYI your question: choices makes no sense at all. I understood anyways

hotgun wrote:prefect timing

Is this what happens when an alien from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has a stopwatch?

...

...

...

...

Now, I realize it's a perfectly legitimate strategy to hold for a little while...say 15-30 minutes, especially if you're parrying an enemy while they're also fortifying in a fortifications unlimited game...but YOU CAN'T FORTIFY FOR HOURS! There's only so much parrying you can do, and most holders aren't even parrying, they're just wasting people's time, so could we please have a fortifications timer of 30 min. - 1 hours, I mean I realize that there's no rule against holding, but this is a game and games are meant to be fun and playing against a holder is definitely not fun...so please, let's get a timer. Thank you.

I have 2 suggestions. Firstly I would like to see a smaller time limit set to people who prolong fortification in games allowing double turns so they can get the first turn in the next round. Not everyone is this cheap, but there are pleanty who are! Secondly, when you create a game I think you should be able to make a certain type of time game, ie) 24 hr turns, 12 hr turns, 6 hr turns, 3 hr turns and even 1hr turns and so when people want to play a game its one more thing they can look for, single/double/tripple, map, type of play, and time..

Well, we have a name for that sort of behavior here. it's called holding, and it's generally frowned upon. Only thing you can do to avoid it is to play No Double Turns Freestyle, or Sequential, and playing the latter of the two can take weeks. Which brings us to your idea of creating shorter turn limits...

Which is such a good idea, it's been brought up countless times in about 40 different threads before this one.
Which, of course brings us back to square one, pleading with lack to Give us our freaking speed games already!!!