Conquer Club

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:02 pm**

greenoaks wrote:
agentcom wrote:I'm not sure how hard it would be to code. My instinct is that it wouldn't be that hard to make a dropdown box that is programmed to have all numbers from 1 to MAX = Number of available starting territs divided by Number of players.

Of course, the game creation page would then have to be dynamic and the dropdown box would have to update when you changed the number of players. A lot of websites have pages like this (think about forms you fill out online where the options on questions below change as you fill out the form). But if you wanted to avoid that, you could just set the dropdown to MAX = number of starting territs divided by 2 and if you ever made an illegal selection, it would take you to the page that it does when you try to make an 8 player trips game.

although i like the idea of choosing the starting terits i would vote against that as an option. it would dilute the demand for games by spreading us out across too many options much like what happened when the extra speed variations were introduced. ONLY WORSE. games will take too long to fill when someone creating 20 Eurasia's with 10 starting terits each would split wannabe players with the guy who created 20 Eurasia's with 9 starting terits and the guy who created them with 11. now consider that sort of variation across every map on this site and i know its not an infinite explosion in choice but it does seem close.

agentcom wrote:Anyway, it looks like you all have come up with a number of interesting options. The most versatile option from the perspective of somebody making games would be to allow a custom number of starting territs determined by the user. The alternatives that have been proposed allow a predetermined number. It sounds like people have proposed Normal, Half and Conquest (cool name greenoaks!).

it wasn't entirely me. just like someone brilliant suggested they drop 'the' from that social networking site, 'The Facebook'. i suggest we drop 'mode' from Fazeem's naming of the 1 starting terit option, Conquest Mode.

i also believe the issue of how it would look has been addressed
Fazeem wrote:
spiesr wrote:How would such an option be displayed on the Join A Game and Game Finder Pages?

I am sure one of the site geniuses would find a spot much like they did with Trench and Fog

this would be a part of Initial Troops - Automatic, Manual or Conquest

I completely support this post :-D

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:41 pm**

Fazeem wrote:
Fazeem wrote:After reading some of the feedback and the ideas in other suggestions I have thought of a what could be a easy varient and even a name for it. Conquest Mode. ...

Sorry, Fazeem. I completely forgot about that. I corrected it in my post.

As to the rest of the conversation, the more I hear from you two (fazeem and greenoaks), the more I agree that limiting the options is a good thing. But I don't think that we should only take it all the way down to 1 ... I like the idea of starting with a few, too. Like the half territ option that was suggested. I think I would play that more than "Conquest," actually.

Posted: **Thu Feb 14, 2013 7:16 pm**

Pretty much what I had in mind greenoaks, except stated better.

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:16 pm**

agentcom wrote:
Fazeem wrote:
Fazeem wrote:After reading some of the feedback and the ideas in other suggestions I have thought of a what could be a easy varient and even a name for it. Conquest Mode. ...

Sorry, Fazeem. I completely forgot about that. I corrected it in my post.

As to the rest of the conversation, the more I hear from you two (fazeem and greenoaks), the more I agree that limiting the options is a good thing. But I don't think that we should only take it all the way down to 1 ... I like the idea of starting with a few, too. Like the half territ option that was suggested. I think I would play that more than "Conquest," actually.

I think a way it could be presented would be as follows:

Conquest = 1 Starting Territ for all Players

Reduced = Half the Regular Starting Territs

Normal = default amount of Starting Territs

This feature could be offered separate from manual and auto deploy or in addition still providing yet more gameplay diversity.

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 9:47 pm**

agentcom wrote:
Fazeem wrote:
Fazeem wrote:After reading some of the feedback and the ideas in other suggestions I have thought of a what could be a easy varient and even a name for it. Conquest Mode. ...

Sorry, Fazeem. I completely forgot about that. I corrected it in my post.

As to the rest of the conversation, the more I hear from you two (fazeem and greenoaks), the more I agree that limiting the options is a good thing. But I don't think that we should only take it all the way down to 1 ... I like the idea of starting with a few, too. Like the half territ option that was suggested. I think I would play that more than "Conquest," actually.

i would be totally against more than 1 additional option, whatever that was.

perhaps Conquest is 3 terits unless you normally get less. perhaps it is only 1. i prefer 1 but would not be against 3. half i will fight against - it doesn't even have a cool name.

what i don't want is a massive expansion to game options. limit them and pick the best. too many options result in games filling slower.

Posted: **Thu Feb 28, 2013 9:50 pm**

I'm also against the half-it seems unnecessary.

Posted: **Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:28 am**

greenoaks wrote:
agentcom wrote:
Fazeem wrote:
Fazeem wrote:After reading some of the feedback and the ideas in other suggestions I have thought of a what could be a easy varient and even a name for it. Conquest Mode. ...

Sorry, Fazeem. I completely forgot about that. I corrected it in my post.

As to the rest of the conversation, the more I hear from you two (fazeem and greenoaks), the more I agree that limiting the options is a good thing. But I don't think that we should only take it all the way down to 1 ... I like the idea of starting with a few, too. Like the half territ option that was suggested. I think I would play that more than "Conquest," actually.

i would be totally against more than 1 additional option, whatever that was.

perhaps Conquest is 3 terits unless you normally get less. perhaps it is only 1. i prefer 1 but would not be against 3. half i will fight against - it doesn't even have a cool name.

what i don't want is a massive expansion to game options. limit them and pick the best. too many options result in games filling slower.

Naw I digress it does not result in games filling slower with more options. Settings people do not like results in games filling slower there are plenty of setting I use game finder to completely skip over because I cannot stand them. Fight not choice but fight the limiting of it. Freedom to choose settings makes this site great and the variety of choices is why I prefer here to pogo or some other varient site. The more COnquer Club offers the more it further defines itself as it stands head and shoulders above the rest.

All that said I still strongly feel that 1 should be the minimum not 3 the half idea is a compromise to picking specific amount as it will most likely be easier to code and I have founf a number of maps that would benfit from it(Supermax comes to mind 1st) that way the dynamics of play can be tempered with how long it will take to play.

Posted: **Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:55 pm**

Fazeem wrote:Naw I digress it does not result in games filling slower with more options. Settings people do not like results in games filling slower .... Fight not choice but fight the limiting of it. Freedom to choose settings makes this site great and the variety of choices is why I prefer here to pogo or some other varient site. The more COnquer Club offers the more it further defines itself as it stands head and shoulders above the rest.

All that said I still strongly feel that 1 should be the minimum not 3 the half idea is a compromise to picking specific amount as it will most likely be easier to code and I have founf a number of maps that would benfit from it(Supermax comes to mind 1st) that way the dynamics of play can be tempered with how long it will take to play.

QFT on your aside and I agree that 1 territ games would be better than 3.

There is a potentially easy way to code a variation of this that would not result in 1 territ (on most maps). That would be to set up a 3- or more player game and then convert 1 or more of those players to a neutral player.

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:16 am**

Its a good idea.. maybe a way to present it would be let's say classic map is chose it could read... troop count: and have a pull down box saying max(14)and the just have -1 -2 -3 etc if I make any sense at all..

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:28 pm**

Is there a way to change your vote?

Posted: **Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:12 pm**

darth emperor wrote:Is there a way to change your vote?

Only if the OP makes the poll so you can. Also, can we change the poll options to
Yes, 1 starting territory or normal drop only
Yes, 1 starting territory, half drop, or normal drop only
Yes, any number of territories
No, no select # of starting positions

Posted: **Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:48 am**

nicestash wrote:
darth emperor wrote:Is there a way to change your vote?

Only if the OP makes the poll so you can. Also, can we change the poll options to
Yes, 1 starting territory or normal drop only
Yes, 1 starting territory, half drop, or normal drop only
Yes, any number of territories
No, no select # of starting positions

those seems like better questions to vote on

Posted: **Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:54 pm**

who changed the poll? and then why did they not vote after changing it?

Posted: **Sun Mar 31, 2013 6:29 pm**

should Conquest (only 1 starting terit) be split off from this?

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2013 7:44 pm**

greenoaks wrote:should Conquest (only 1 starting terit) be split off from this?

it definitely could or given the amount of suppport it has it could just be the focus for thread as it seems the most likely and easiliy implemented of the varients.

Posted: **Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:28 am**

Fazeem wrote:
greenoaks wrote:should Conquest (only 1 starting terit) be split off from this?

it definitely could or given the amount of suppport it has it could just be the focus for thread as it seems the most likely and easiliy implemented of the varients.

i'd prefer to see it with its own thread.

the discusion would solely be on adding 'Conquest' to Standard and Manual and how we go about it. no side-tracking into 'lets have 3 starting terits' or 'lets have 10'.

Posted: **Mon Apr 08, 2013 11:18 am**

According to the OP, this thread is for selecting a custom number of starting positions, although the poll indicates some flexibility there. If you would like to create a new topic for starting with only 1 territory, feel free and I or someone else will reference it in the OP of this thread. Though you might have to remind me to do so. (Actually, do a search first, as always, to make sure it hasn't been suggested already).

Posted: **Thu Apr 18, 2013 11:44 am**

on it

Posted: **Wed Apr 24, 2013 5:20 pm**

MERGED: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.

Posted: **Wed May 01, 2013 9:01 pm**

spiesr wrote:MERGED: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.

Curious what Neurals means in relation to ConquerClub? It is not a a term I have seen here before so please school me?

Posted: **Wed May 01, 2013 9:13 pm**

Fazeem wrote:
spiesr wrote:MERGED: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.
Curious what Neurals means in relation to ConquerClub? It is not a a term I have seen here before so please school me?

It was a typo (for Neutrals) in the title of a thread I merged into this one.

Posted: **Wed May 01, 2013 9:30 pm**

spiesr wrote:
Fazeem wrote:
spiesr wrote:MERGED: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.
Curious what Neurals means in relation to ConquerClub? It is not a a term I have seen here before so please school me?
It was a typo (for Neutrals) in the title of a thread I merged into this one.

LOL okay I thought it may be some CC Jargon I had not been introduced to yet.

Posted: **Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:22 pm**

This is quite similar to greenoaks' suggestion here: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=189067#p4128860 However, greenoaks preferred they were not merged, because he wanted his suggestion to be just one territory to start and not a choice. Just bringing this up to the top again.

Conquer Club

Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions

Re: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.

Re: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.

Re: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.

Re: Suggestion : Varying numbers of Neurals.

Re: Select Amount of Starting Positions