Conquer Club

[GO] [Rules] Rank Restricted Games

Have any bright ideas? Share and discuss them with the community

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

And don't forget to search for previously suggested ideas first!

Deadbeats...again

Postby Villains on Sat May 13, 2006 6:11 am

This might have been asked already, but I couldn't see it on the forum.

Would it be possible that when you're starting up a game an option could be included that you could choose to only allow ranked players(private & above) to join?

The vast majority of deadbeats seem to be noobs.

I realise it may seem unfair to future members who wouldn't forget about games and wouldn't go deadbeat but they would only have to complete 3 games to get a private rank.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Villains
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:22 am
Location: Ireland

Postby wacicha on Sat May 13, 2006 6:39 am

they only way would be to start a private game and post it in the callout section then give the password to who you feel is not a deadbeat
Image
User avatar
Major wacicha
 
Posts: 3988
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:51 pm

Postby Villains on Sat May 13, 2006 9:48 am

ok, thanks
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Villains
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:22 am
Location: Ireland

rank requirements

Postby craig84 on Fri Jun 30, 2006 2:09 am

such as in socom online i purpose that u can have a rank requirement for a game u start, such as im a captain so i can have only captains and higher etc.., this might take care of deadbeats that are questions marks and privates.

tell me what u think good idea or a bad idea?
User avatar
Lieutenant craig84
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 12:48 am

BE CAREFULL THOUGH

Postby kwolff on Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:37 am

The only problem is that then noob's might get caught up in more of those games resulting in new players leaving .......I know if i signed up for four games and they all had a deadbeat or two i wouldnt have stayed.....
User avatar
Major kwolff
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: pittsburgh PA

Postby Marvaddin on Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:03 am

This IS a good idea, but discussed already... the new players thing is the bad side of it. Maybe it should be another type of game, we could have public games, private games, and ranking games, and these only should only be created by premium, too, to make sure we would always have some public games with players.
Image
User avatar
Major Marvaddin
 
Posts: 2545
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:06 pm
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Postby eddymush on Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:02 pm

i like marvs idea
Image
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class eddymush
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:58 am
Location: columbus, ohio

Rank/Score Limits for Joining Games *Rejected*

Postby General Mayhem on Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:02 am

Although the new deadbeat losing points system should help, people with zombie/deadbeat accounts can still ruin a game or cause serious disadvantage to the opposition, until they get their point under the new system.

The existing problems are still:

a) the other team can still get into a winning position within 3 rounds of your team mate deadbeating.

b) a zombie player with a low score can deadbeat and ruin the scoring in a game.

c) a zombie player with a purposefully low score can play to win and f*ck up anyone with a normal to high score

My thoughts (if it were possible) are:

Rather than having to set up private games and invite chosen players why not limit the rank or score of players that can join your public game?

A player with a half decent score/rank is less likely to deadbeat period.
You get to play decent honest player of your preferred minimum ranks.

the lower ranks and recruits can still play their own level players in order to advance.
"There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is ENGLAND."
User avatar
Colonel General Mayhem
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 6:29 am
Location: Leeds, England, UK

I think.....

Postby kwolff on Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:22 am

I think you can do that already by doing the private games so I dont see why it has to be put in as an option...........
User avatar
Major kwolff
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: pittsburgh PA

Postby AK_iceman on Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:23 am

it shouldnt be the standard, but i would like it as an option.
I do enjoy playing higher ranked players, but if this were the standard it would make it impossible for me to steal points from newbs. :wink:
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class AK_iceman
 
Posts: 5704
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 10:39 pm

Re: I think.....

Postby AK_iceman on Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:25 am

kwolff wrote:I think you can do that already by doing the private games so I dont see why it has to be put in as an option...........

The difference is you dont have to send a pm with a password to every high ranked player in order to start a game.
They would simply be the only ones who could join.
There should also be a new name for this type of game so you could search for them with game finder.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class AK_iceman
 
Posts: 5704
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 10:39 pm

I stand corrected

Postby kwolff on Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:42 am

yes as an option I see your point , it would be very handy .....It would go along the lines of also maybe putting tabs on the join game so you dont have to look at everyone elses singles games when you are trying to find a team game ......
User avatar
Major kwolff
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: pittsburgh PA

Postby lackattack on Tue Jul 11, 2006 6:56 am

I don't like this idea. What if it became popular? New recruits would have trouble finding games. They would be stuck in games with other new recruits and their first CC experience would be full of deadbeating.

You only get one chance to make a first impression
User avatar
Sergeant lackattack
 
Posts: 6096
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:34 pm
Location: Montreal, QC

Postby TuckerCase on Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:39 am

I think doing this would cause some points inflation. It would be easier for higher ranked players to maintain or increase their scores. So that's something to consider. Also, and more importantly, I don't really like the idea of public games that are restricted to an elite. Keep public games public.
User avatar
Major TuckerCase
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 8:55 pm

Postby HighBorn on Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:52 am

i will vote yes on this one but "ONLY" as an "option" nothing more...... lack..... ;)
User avatar
Private 1st Class HighBorn
 
Posts: 3013
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:22 pm
Location: Kentucky

Postby max is gr8 on Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:45 am

I'm sure I have already suggested this

:strokes chin:
‹max is gr8› so you're a tee-total healthy-eating sex-addict?
‹New_rules› Everyone has some bad habits
(4th Jan 2010)
User avatar
Corporal max is gr8
 
Posts: 3720
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:44 am
Location: In a big ball of light sent from the future

Suggestion..... game set up.

Postby jay_a2j on Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:14 am

Most games that I have played where people join then never play involve players with ( ? ) as their rank. I think there should be an option during game set up to exclude the non-proven players from your game. The (?) could play other (?)'s until they prove they will play the game. I usually set games (and drop them if a (?) joins as my partner) because I do not know if they will stick around CC long enuff to play or they just "stumbled" across this site, set up an account...never to return. I cannot "monitor" my waiting games to ensure I have a game that will move along at a decent pace. Or maybe a "drop game" option during play as I would rather lose points then take 2 months to play a game.















?
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.

JESUS SAVES!!!
User avatar
Lieutenant jay_a2j
 
Posts: 4293
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:22 am
Location: In the center of the R3VOJUTION!

Postby AK_iceman on Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:34 pm

If new recruits only played new recruits, how many do you think would stay at the site?
I agree with you that most dont know how to play the game, or never show up again. But we should be trying to help them instead of blocking them. If you see a new recruit in your game as your partner, send him a pm or something. Give him some ideas on how to play his turn. If he makes a few friends quickly on the site he is more likely to stay and buy premium.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class AK_iceman
 
Posts: 5704
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 10:39 pm

Postby reverend_kyle on Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:16 pm

I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby jay_a2j on Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:00 pm

reverend_kyle wrote:I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.




yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry. :wink:


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.

JESUS SAVES!!!
User avatar
Lieutenant jay_a2j
 
Posts: 4293
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:22 am
Location: In the center of the R3VOJUTION!

Postby reverend_kyle on Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:10 pm

jay_a2j wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.




yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry. :wink:


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)



Haha, I was referring more to you in particular would be better off playing with a liberal than a new recruit.
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby jay_a2j on Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:48 pm

reverend_kyle wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.




yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry. :wink:


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)



Haha, I was referring more to you in particular would be better off playing with a liberal than a new recruit.




Possibly. But I don't have any new recruits as partners. I take all steps necessary to avoid that.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.

JESUS SAVES!!!
User avatar
Lieutenant jay_a2j
 
Posts: 4293
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:22 am
Location: In the center of the R3VOJUTION!

Postby reverend_kyle on Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:01 pm

jay_a2j wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:
jay_a2j wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:I think hed be better playing with a hardcore liberal as his partner...

at least that combo could win a game.




yeah that worked well for Gore and Kerry. :wink:


I don't mind helping others play the game but what if they joined and never return to CC? Then you're stuck in a slow game (like the 6 player with 4 new players game I'm in)



Haha, I was referring more to you in particular would be better off playing with a liberal than a new recruit.




Possibly. But I don't have any new recruits as partners. I take all steps necessary to avoid that.


As do I, I dont join games without partners I knwo for sure are there..
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby ksslemp on Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:08 am

i'M A NEW MEMBER WITH THAT DREADED "?" NEXT TO MY USERNAME. I HOWEVER WATCH MY GAMES AND PLAY IN A TIMELY MANNER, SO I DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR SUGGESTION.

HOW ABOUT REDUCING THE PLAYER TURN TIME WITH EACH MISSED TURN?
SAY 24HRS/18HRS/12HRS FOLLOWED THEN BY REMOVAL.

WHAT DO YOU THINK? IT WOULD AT LEAST SPEED IT UP!
User avatar
Major ksslemp
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:30 pm
Location: Slemp, KY 41763 Pop. 'nough

Postby MeDeFe on Fri Aug 11, 2006 5:23 am

You should have pressed Caps Lock one more time before starting to write that post, kss...


Anyway, I guess you play lot of doubles jay and if you don't want to play with recruits that's up to you. But an option to block recruits would effectively keep them out of most games where they could actually learn something.
If you know some people you could start playing together with them, then you'll know your partners and be sure you can trust them.

btw, I've also seen a lot of privates and even sergeants deadbeat, you can never guarantee that a game will proceed quickly.



and kss, that would certainly help to speed up games a little, but sometimes people miss a turn or two because of RL circumstances, their internet connection might be down, power failures, lots of work and so on.

Deadbeats already lose points, that should be enough to discourage people from deadbeating on purpose, no need to make things harder for people who just happen to have bad luck.
User avatar
Major MeDeFe
 
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

PreviousNext

Return to Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users