Moderator: Community Team
caymanmew wrote:no joke i was just thinking i should try to play 50 1-1's i say take a way of the limit all together you promise us unlimited games fulfill your promise
Night Strike wrote:caymanmew wrote:no joke i was just thinking i should try to play 50 1-1's i say take a way of the limit all together you promise us unlimited games fulfill your promise
To be correct, "Unlimited Games" and "Speed Games" are on separate lines, so limiting the number of speed games in no way affects the unlimited games that you can play. Real-time and simultaneous are not the same thing.
On topic, I have no real opinion on the actual number as I rarely play speed games, and even when I do, 2 at a time is plenty for me.
White Moose wrote:Are point dumpers really that big of a problem that we have to limit speed games? I think it will just do more harm then it will help.
Point dumpers are really rare, it's happened just a few times. At least i don't feel it's a big enough problems to limit speed games. But then again, i'm not a admin/moderator.
It just feels... strange and unnessecary to me. That's all.
jammyjames wrote:not entirely cayman. i totally agree with KP's point, however i do agree the whole point dumping issue is a problem...surely something could be put in place to say for instance if a player creates more than 10 games at once, a message or something will be sent to one ofthe active mods , they can then inestigate this and see whether the play is point dumping or just generally playing lots of games.. just a suggestion tha i think would stop people moaning about the limit and stop point dumpers too.
AND playing!!! Okay so this is a serious change. I'll be honest with you. I do not get it. Why the change? because its against pointdumpers....?!? They can still dump points, just a bit slower. Although if they take a turn and kill themselves, it can be done with in under 5 minutes. Not really effective in my book, but then, the limitation is only a limit to so few people. 10 speed games at a time? seriously?!?waiting to fill and playing
TheForgivenOne wrote:Well, if you are going to complain that there is a limit at 10, then why not complain at a limit of 50? It's still the same thing "hindering your unlimited games"
TheForgivenOne wrote:I guess the fact that i don't play a ton of speed games is hindering my perspective. Just playing 15 speed games at once seems like a hassle to me. .
TheForgivenOne wrote:I guess the fact that i don't play a ton of speed games is hindering my perspective.
TheForgivenOne wrote:how come nobody complains about the 50 casual pending limit then?
Sniper08 wrote:im betting most players that voted 10 or less or even 10 speed games dont even play speed games that often.TheForgivenOne wrote:I guess the fact that i don't play a ton of speed games is hindering my perspective. Just playing 15 speed games at once seems like a hassle to me. .
this is the problem ,people who dont play speed regurly are making decisions that effect the players who do play a lot of speed games.
Sniper08 wrote:this is a really stupid update , what we were promised when we bought a premium is suddenly being revoked.
AndyDufresne wrote:If the upper limit was raised to 15, would that be sufficient to end 'the world is ending, yowzers oh no?!' ?
--Andy
phantomzero wrote:I think 10 active speed games is enough, but perhaps 20+ waiting speed games as well. Or maybe a compromise at 15-20 total. This would limit the amount of dumping, but dumping can still always happen.
denominator wrote:phantomzero wrote:I think 10 active speed games is enough, but perhaps 20+ waiting speed games as well. Or maybe a compromise at 15-20 total. This would limit the amount of dumping, but dumping can still always happen.
Active and Waiting must be grouped together. If you're in 10 active games and 20 waiting, what happens if one of your 20 waiting fills before one of your active games ends?
ljex wrote:denominator wrote:phantomzero wrote:I think 10 active speed games is enough, but perhaps 20+ waiting speed games as well. Or maybe a compromise at 15-20 total. This would limit the amount of dumping, but dumping can still always happen.
Active and Waiting must be grouped together. If you're in 10 active games and 20 waiting, what happens if one of your 20 waiting fills before one of your active games ends?
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=121261 is how it should be imo
denominator wrote:I voted 10 or less simply because it gets annoying trying to fill 4+ player games in the speed section when so many games are spammed by the same people. There's always multiple Doodle Assassin games posted and usually enough people join them to play them, but are scattered across many games so each is jammed at 4 players rather than having one playing.
Return to Conquer Club Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users