Conquer Club

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Night Strike wrote:Just curious, why would you want lack to spend time coding something that keeps people from playing games rather than coding new options that would enhance the game play?

DM and Night Strike agree.


Now the world will explode.

Night Strike wrote:Just curious, why would you want lack to spend time coding something that keeps people from playing games rather than coding new options that would enhance the game play?

1) The chance of any suggestion being picked up and acted on is remote at best, sadly....

2) by giving the paying players what they want, it's far more likely that they will renew and keep on playing, supporting the site. What is being suggested is a sensible option to keep out freemiums from a small number of games - not many people will use this regularly, but many people might use this occasionally. If u keep ur paying customers happy, they will keep paying and playing.

cowboyz wrote:Private games only allows me to choose who I want to play with, not who I DONT want to play with. It limits me way more than this option.

Finally you got it...

cowboyz wrote:Concise description:

Add a button in the user panel that will block/foe all freemiums from joining my games. It will automatically unblock/unfoe them if they upgrade to premium membership.
Also suggested adding other block features, such as allowing players to block other players using criteria such as ratings, rank, missed turns, comments, clan etc...

Specifics:

This is a good thing and doesn't limit the ability of freemiums to test out the site. They can still play, but only vs other freemiums, AND members who don't want to block freemiums. A foe list is TOO time consuming to manually foe each category of player, adding this feature will only add a convenient way to do what could be otherwise be done manually.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• no more having noobs join my games just to ruin them while they stay an entire 2 weeks on CC before quitting.
• no more having noobs get impatient with slow games and start shouting "SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!1!!" in game chat
• keeps noobs and their noobyness away from me and others who don't like being noobed.
• allows only paying noobs to bother people
• more money for CC since these freemiums must upgrade to play with a wider selection of players

"Freemium" does not in any way indicate "noob".

YoursFalsey wrote:I was thinking more about Mr. Adams suggestion. A newbie quota still seems like a bad idea, but how about a Semi-Private setting? A Public game would be open to anyone. Private would be open only to those invited. Semi-Private (or Semi-Public) games would serve as public games but only to those who met a condition set by the game starting player: certain rank or higher, rank w/in so many points of the starting player, attendance of x% or higher, or premium only. To players who didn't qualify, the game would not even show up on the game finder list. I don't know- this may still be too exclusionary, but it would allow the game starter to be the excluder, rather than stating all games have a newbie quota.

Above posted in following thread
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=90699

Woodruff wrote:

cowboyz wrote:Concise description:

Add a button in the user panel that will block/foe all freemiums from joining my games. It will automatically unblock/unfoe them if they upgrade to premium membership.
Also suggested adding other block features, such as allowing players to block other players using criteria such as ratings, rank, missed turns, comments, clan etc...

Specifics:

This is a good thing and doesn't limit the ability of freemiums to test out the site. They can still play, but only vs other freemiums, AND members who don't want to block freemiums. A foe list is TOO time consuming to manually foe each category of player, adding this feature will only add a convenient way to do what could be otherwise be done manually.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• no more having noobs join my games just to ruin them while they stay an entire 2 weeks on CC before quitting.
• no more having noobs get impatient with slow games and start shouting "SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!1!!" in game chat
• keeps noobs and their noobyness away from me and others who don't like being noobed.
• allows only paying noobs to bother people
• more money for CC since these freemiums must upgrade to play with a wider selection of players

"Freemium" does not in any way indicate "noob".

Awesome, that's your opinion and you don't have to use the block feature.
But you "probably" should stop "using" quotes all over the "place". It's "annoying".

cowboyz wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

cowboyz wrote:Concise description:

Add a button in the user panel that will block/foe all freemiums from joining my games. It will automatically unblock/unfoe them if they upgrade to premium membership.
Also suggested adding other block features, such as allowing players to block other players using criteria such as ratings, rank, missed turns, comments, clan etc...

Specifics:

This is a good thing and doesn't limit the ability of freemiums to test out the site. They can still play, but only vs other freemiums, AND members who don't want to block freemiums. A foe list is TOO time consuming to manually foe each category of player, adding this feature will only add a convenient way to do what could be otherwise be done manually.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• no more having noobs join my games just to ruin them while they stay an entire 2 weeks on CC before quitting.
• no more having noobs get impatient with slow games and start shouting "SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!1!!" in game chat
• keeps noobs and their noobyness away from me and others who don't like being noobed.
• allows only paying noobs to bother people
• more money for CC since these freemiums must upgrade to play with a wider selection of players

"Freemium" does not in any way indicate "noob".

Awesome, that's your opinion and you don't have to use the block feature.

It's NOT just my opinion. It is a fact. There are MANY, MANY freemiums on this site that can't in any way be regarded as noobs.

cowboyz wrote:But you "probably" should stop "using" quotes all over the "place". It's "annoying".

This, on the other hand, IS just an opinion.

Woodruff wrote:

cowboyz wrote:But you "probably" should stop "using" quotes all over the "place". It's "annoying".

This, on the other hand, IS just an opinion.

Can't be sure though. Clearly couldn't understand the concept of quotes so assuming he understands opinions is a bit of a leap tbf.

Thezzaruz wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

cowboyz wrote:But you "probably" should stop "using" quotes all over the "place". It's "annoying".

This, on the other hand, IS just an opinion.

Can't be sure though. Clearly couldn't understand the concept of quotes so assuming he understands opinions is a bit of a leap tbf.

Be quiet, you freemium noob. <laughing>

This isn't a debate about the noobiness of freemiums. If I think they are noobs, they are to me...it's all relative. If you don't like the suggestion, state why. If you want to have a discussion on how awesome freemiums are, please do, but not in this post.

cowboyz wrote:

Night Strike wrote:Just curious, why would you want lack to spend time coding something that keeps people from playing games rather than coding new options that would enhance the game play?

But it does enhance game play. It enhances the game experience for many PREMIUM who spend money on this site by allowing them to filter out who and who not to play with, thus enhancing their games. The advanced filter options help freemium as well. As stated, the foe list can achieve some of this, but is inadequate to filter/block some categories, and too time consuming to block the others.

Except very, very few people start out paying. They find the site, play a few games and then only after getting "hooked" do they decide to pay.

So, CC wants people to be NICE to new folks, to encourage them to become premiums at some point. That's why this suggestion has been rejected the last .. oh, 100 times it was suggested.

cowboyz wrote:This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• no more having noobs join my games just to ruin them while they stay an entire 2 weeks on CC before quitting.
• no more having noobs get impatient with slow games and start shouting "SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!1!!" in game chat
• keeps noobs and their noobyness away from me and others who don't like being noobed.
• allows only paying noobs to bother people
• more money for CC since these freemiums must upgrade to play with a wider selection of players

You can achieve the same result with creating private games where you can control who joins by handing out the password to a select few, only a premium can do this.

Now, stop being so lazy and use your premium purchased privileges to make some.

In case there is any lingering ambiguity in my post, I voted this one down[the lavatory].

EDIT: I forgot to mention that Callouts is a good place to start when setting up private games.

I would be all for the autofoe low rank option
But foeing freemiums is going a bit to far

Since my idea for Semi-Private games was quoted here, I add these comments:

I was freemium for about a year, before making the switch- I understand the business model- make sure the freemiums have fun so they want to upgrade. My semi private suggestion is not to pick on the freemiums, but to allow players to seek the type of opponent they want rather then set up a private game w/ specific players. E.g. I would like to focus on opponents in the 1000-1500 ranking range- my own rank tends to swing between 900 and 1200 and I think I will learn most from playing opponents who are slightly higher than me in rank.

Tournament organizers are given leeway to screen who they allow into their tourneys- my suggestions for possible filters were based on the filters I've seen for tournament sign up. If one can organize a bunch of games with a given filter, it is not particularly unreasonable to say that one can organize a single game with a given filter. Of the filters I suggested, I admit No Freemiums is the filter w/ the weakest case for it- for a tournament, number of games is a real concern, less so for a single game. Likewise, I realize the exisitance of Newbie farmers makes the ability to set a max ranking a dubious asset, but asking for a minimum foe rank or for foes w/in 250 pts ranking wise of yourself doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Ultimately, I don't know enough people here to pick 6 specific people for a private game- semi private games was my suggestion for how I could look for those people I don't know by generalities since I don't know them by specific name.

i am not a gold member, so how can i avoid playing cooks?

6evil9 wrote:i am not a gold member, so how can i avoid playing cooks?

$25

Artimis wrote:*YAWN*
Another thread created that is redundant and repeats an identical suggestion already made in another thread. The OP could have avoided this with a couple of forum searches. The sensible advice is to make private games and only give passwords to respondents in callouts that meet your 'rank criteria'.

Subject: Blocking System

Artimis wrote:This suggestion has already been made in a variety of reworded guises, to name but a few:

Choosing ranks that may enter your games?????
Set Rank Limits for starting games.
cap on ranks
Minimum rank to join games option
Limiting Experience level of players in a new game.
Score Limit for joining a game *previously rejected*

One of them has already been marked *previously rejected*, you guys really need to do a post search before making a suggestion. Otherwise you end up with epic duplication like this.

If this gets brought up multiple times a month maybe there is something to it?
I say awesome idea. Bring it on.

AAFitz wrote:

6evil9 wrote:i am not a gold member, so how can i avoid playing cooks?

$25

He could find a premium friend that starts passworded games too.

cowboyz wrote:If this gets brought up multiple times a month maybe there is something to it?

A poor and/or unwanted idea doesn't get any better/wanted just because it is repeatedly suggested.
Rank discrimination is still possible, CC just don't want to make it too easily done.

Though I think that TotoroHat's suggestion have some merit to it.

cowboyz wrote:If this gets brought up multiple times a month maybe there is something to it?
I say awesome idea. Bring it on.

O'RLY?

Well Thezzaruz beat me to it with this concise one liner here:

Thezzaruz wrote:A poor and/or unwanted idea doesn't get any better/wanted just because it is repeatedly suggested.

Here are all the previous suggestions that basically amount to the same thing as this thread and your own thread on the subject also(make sure to note the one that is marked *previously rejected*):
Score Limit for joining a game *previously rejected*
Blocking System
Choosing ranks that may enter your games?????
Set Rank Limits for starting games.
cap on ranks
Minimum rank to join games option
Limiting Experience level of players in a new game.
Suggestion: "Block Freemium" option <==== cowboyz thread.



My advice still stands, in case you neglected to read through all the replies to your thread, here it is again:
Subject: Suggestion: "Block Freemium" option

Artimis wrote:Stop being so lazy and use your premium purchased privileges to make some private games!

[Mod edit: The above cited posts have been MERGED into this one - agentcom]

Accept the fact that it isn't going to happen, however I also think there is some merit to the suggestion.

Why?

Because currently we have two options:

1. Make a public game and (say an 8 man singles) and Risk having one or two REALLY bad players joining. This can sod up the game.
2. Make a private game and set the players exactly.

I've ended up making private games, but this ruins the opportunity to encounter MORE good players...I end up playing the same chaps over and over again. I built up (my rather excellent ) friends list from playing public games, but now I meet far fewer good players to add to it.

So yes, I am in favour of setting fairly broad rank restrictions (1300+ for example) for public games.

Love this idea, nothing worse than setting up a public escalating game, because you want it filled quickly and not left to wither and rot as many officers mess games do, and having some cook/cadet come in and start attacking constantly to try to capture some large bonus he/she can not possibly hold, henceforth ruining said game for the unfortunate player who happened to be in this overexuburant player's way.

This is an excellent idea that is long overdue.

Everybody keep on listing the links, but refuses to answer the main question:

WHY it was refused?

I've checked some of those links, there seemed to be a lot of people who liked the idea (including me).

That would deal with farming and multies once and for all.

That will remove the agitation of playing a standard game with a bunch of loonies in them.

That will add more competition to the site, cause now there are several level to achieve; as result will increase the longevity of the player existence on the site.

Now give me a ONE good reason why there should NOT be a barrier.

The why is simple: lack says no.

AndrewB wrote:That would deal with farming and multies once and for all.

Not true, in fact it wouldn't have the slightest effect on those.

AndrewB wrote:That will remove the agitation of playing a standard game with a bunch of loonies in them.

And that is why you have private games...

AndrewB wrote:Now give me a ONE good reason why there should NOT be a barrier.

Just read the threads and you'll find several, the main one is that CC doesn't want to promote rank discrimination.

Thezzaruz wrote:

AndrewB wrote:That would deal with farming and multies once and for all.

Not true, in fact it wouldn't have the slightest effect on those.

How is that not true? 99.9% of farming happens between the high ranks and low ranks. Remove the ability to play between those ranks - remove 99.9% of the source of farming...

Thezzaruz wrote:[

AndrewB wrote:That will remove the agitation of playing a standard game with a bunch of loonies in them.

And that is why you have private games...

In order to play private game, you need to invite the people you know.

I want to meet new people playing standard games, but I want them to be smart enough not to screw the game.

Thezzaruz wrote:[

AndrewB wrote:Now give me a ONE good reason why there should NOT be a barrier.

Just read the threads and you'll find several, the main one is that CC doesn't want to promote rank discrimination.

I read them, not a single reason, just general words like: "I really dont like the idea"...

And in almost every other game has rank's separation: chess, soccer, bridge etc. You don't have to view this as RANK discrimination but as a RANK progression: you start in city league, then progress to the regional level, and then go to the nationals. Do you ever see David Backham playing against some city soccer team?

For some special events, like BR or some Tournaments (at the organizer discretion) this rank barrier can be removed.

Kotaro wrote:The why is simple: lack says no.

Well, he shoudl listen to community and make a reasonable arguments to support his point, otherwise it is just a dictatorship