Mr Changsha wrote:Points 1 and 2...the first is a technical question and I'm not convinced it is hugely key. Assuming you are right, then of course that element of my argument (of course I have so many...) must be disregarded. Concerning point 2, this is a question of our interpertations of motivation. I say they choose these settings to increase their chances of winning, you say they play them for fun. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I will continue to stick with my interpretation.
Well, let´s be real here: Everybody wants to win. Nobody here starts a game and hopes to lose. Even the most casual fun player prefers winning over losing, and I´d guess, that even the most casual fun player will feel a certain pride/satisfaction, when reaching a certain rank (Lieutenant, Captain, Major, whatever) for the first time.
The distinction between "casual" fun & competitive "hardcore" players should be in their main motivation: Do they come here first and foremost to kill some time & play some games, or do they have as their main objective to reach a certain rank & climb the Scoreboard. The borders are somewhat fleeting there, I guess.
Mr Changsha wrote:Point 3 is more crucial as I suspect you have missed an element of the argument. Btw I don't blame you at all for this. If someone else had written all this no doubt I would be entirely lost. i credit you for keeping up so well!! The issue is related to the Alpha or Beta players. Alpha players are prefectly capable of playing sunny, sequential and getting up to 4,000. Of course I know that. So that you have found many players of this type on the first page is irrelevent. The issue is with the Beta players. These guys have to pervert their settings (effectively farm) to compete with the Alpha players. Sadly, because the options are there, some Beta players turn to the dark side. This is what has created the sense of unfairness that pervades this site.
Ok. I get the point. We have all seen those threads in the forum, where some lower ranked player is asking for advice how to improve his rank, and somehow this community seems to think, that the best way is specialising on a certain map & settings. At least that seems to be the standard recommendation.
It is, of course, complete nonsense. Whatever map & setting you choose, if you don´t have the skill, you won´t go far. And if you have the skill, you should be able to apply it to different maps & settings.
Coming to think of it, it seems a kind of double-standard: To have a community, that likes to cry so much about Farming & undeserving players on the top of the Scoreboard, and yet recommending new players again and again to specialise. I reckon, some of the same people giving that advice might cry out half a year later, when a player actually managed to rise to Conqueror by following their own advice ...
Mr Changsha wrote:Therefore, the only way I can see to cleanse the site is to remove the offending settings.
And this is, where we simply disagree.
First of all, the "offending settings" seem to be very arbitrary here. There is general agreement, that most abuse & Farming is happening in Freestyle. But Fog ? Where do you get that idea from ? I don´t see anything wrong whatsoever with Fog ...
But more importantly, I think, you are throwing out the child with the bath water here.
natty dread wrote:
- Separate scoreboard for freestyle & sequential games (because they're really a different game)
- Allow freemiums to play 1 speed game at a time on any map at any time
- Revamp the site UI - including the actual game page, and the Join/Start/Find a game pages
These changes should achieve a lot:
The separation of the Scoreboard would satisfy many old-timers, and the Sequential Scoreboard would have real merit of measuring skill at the game.
Revamping the interface in the discussed manner (hiding games with advanced settings by default) would make the site much easier to navigate for first time visitors and put an immediate end to a lot of Farming issues, whilst still giving people the choice to play advanced settings & maps, if they want to.
And as you can see from the feedback here, those advanced maps & settings actually appeal to many. Again not necessarily because of point/rank issues, but simply because they make for interesting & challenging variations of the game. In my opinion, they should be seen as a strength of the site, not a weakness.
In this way you could have both: Old school Risk games and advanced variations on special maps with special settings. And people would have the freedom to choose for themselves. I am someone, who always has some very old school Standard Esc games going, but also very much likes to explore the more special maps & settings (as long as it is Sequential).
The Speed Game option for Freemiums would simply get more people hooked into the site and make them come back for more to eventually discover what CC has to offer beyond that. And it would also revive the Speed Games themselves.
jltile1 wrote:Fusi baseball also stated that giving speed games like under 50 games that is one of the best ideas as other sites do the same thing, get them hooked.
This is a big No however. It would create a flood of Multis. After having played their 50 Speed games, people would simply open a new account. If you give the Speed option to Freemiums, you have to find other incentives to make them buy Premium.
I think, it would pay off anyway. A far greater number of first time visitors would have a positive first experience & come back for more.
As for all those ideas of video instructions & little volunteer helpers taking new players by the hand, I think, it´s nonsense and not needed at all. The basic Risk rules are simple, and the interface changes would solve the main problems for new visitors. Once someone clicks the "Advanced Settings/Maps" button, he knows, that he is entering unknown territory and does so willingly & by his own choice. You can hardly put up a different video for all the different maps (from Feudal to Stalingrad).
But maybe there should be a "Warning" on top of the advanced "Join/Find/Start a Game" pages, that includes a link to the BOB forum thread, because frankly speaking, some of the more complicated maps seem almost unplayable to me without BOB. And hoping, that lack would finally integrate BOB into the site, now that really seems to be asking too much ...