Forum

by **Woodruff** on Sun Jul 29, 2012 7:21 pm

Can we get it out of the REJECTED area then, please?

by **agentcom** on Sun Jul 29, 2012 7:51 pm

Woodruff wrote:Can we get it out of the REJECTED area then, please?

Please read the introductory post.

by **Woodruff** on Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:18 am

agentcom wrote:
Woodruff wrote:Can we get it out of the REJECTED area then, please?

Please read the introductory post.

I have. So there is no chance, based on the mass of C&A cases that this would actually relieve, for this to be accepted as a suggestion in some form? The idea that it will create rank segregation or somehow leave people with few too games or opponents to choose from (if done properly) has been thoroughly debunked.

This would be a tremendous boon to the C&A mods.

by **agentcom** on Mon Jul 30, 2012 2:09 pm

Woodruff wrote:
agentcom wrote:
Woodruff wrote:Can we get it out of the REJECTED area then, please?

Please read the introductory post.

I have. So there is no chance, based on the mass of C&A cases that this would actually relieve, for this to be accepted as a suggestion in some form? The idea that it will create rank segregation or somehow leave people with few too games or opponents to choose from (if done properly) has been thoroughly debunked.

This would be a tremendous boon to the C&A mods.

It is my understanding that lack has been against this idea from the start. You can see (in the edited OP) that he was against it 6 years ago, and I have no reason to believe that he has changed his mind. I believe that while I was merging these that I read through all 39 pages of this topic. I do not recall the "idea that it will create rank segregation or somehow leave people with too few games" being "thoroughly debunked." I'm not really sure how it could be debunked ... I'm not sure how you would even test that. I recognize that the proposition can't be proven either, but I don't think you can call it debunked.

As far as C&A cases go, the only ones that I see this helping are the ones where someone says "I can't control who joins my games." That's not an insignificant amount of cases, but the high profile farming cases of late have not been about this. Also, what if someone sets up games that only allow cooks through cadets to join? You'd have a whole new type of C&A case. If you implement the suggestion, so that can't be done, then you have to figure out where to draw the line. What if a high ranking officer sets up games with complicated settings, but only opens them for the levels right below officer? Would that be considered abuse?

The basic suggestion suffers from potential for abuse and potential for rank segregation. More complicated versions suffer from their own complexity and the potential for unintended consequences and new forms of abuse.

This suggestion is in rejected because in 6 years there is no indication that the owner of the website wants to do this, but also because his underlying concerns arguably have some validity. Unless there is some sort of sea change, that's where it's going to stay.

Personally, I've come out in favor of this idea. I don't really care too much about it (as in there are numerous other things I'd rather see coded in). But I understand the counterarguments, and I understand that the powers that be don't want this. As a moderator I'm basically just filing this in its appropriate place. So unless I'm told to do otherwise, this is where it will stay.

by **CaptainMoo** on Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:03 pm

Concise description:

Games with minimum score players
Specifics/Details:

Forums exist, made by members to allow players with scores of 1800+ 2000+ 2500+ etc to create games amongst similar ranked players so CC should take note of this and provide the option which is clearly wanted by the players
How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

I dont think this will be exclusion but will benefit the site. Players can play similar skilled players and progress to the next "tier" if good enough. Its quite frustrating when you do start to climb up the ranks, make a game and loads of lower ranked players join, especially when they just give up, suicide into a particular player, ruin the game for all. With this option implemented it will allow players to play similar levels easier and improve the whole experience. also as it will be an option players can still have a fully open match if they wish and are not points foucsed, just enjoy the game. I think this is a no brainer and is clearly something a lot of users want hence the popular forums for it. With it made as an opyion too it prevents abuse as well and keeps the CC community happier all round

by **agentcom** on Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:21 pm

Congratulations. You're the first person to have ever thought of this!

Oh wait ...

MERGED and REJECTED

by **CaptainMoo** on Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:13 pm

sorry did search, must have missed it

though - " What if a high ranking officer sets up games with complicated settings, but only opens them for the levels right below officer? Would that be considered abuse? "

This is not what i suggested. I was suggsting that if i have a rank of say 1800 then because i have attained that level then i can make a 1800 + only game. thus eliminating the possible abuse / farming above...My point was i dont want low levels joining my games as quite often their stupid play ruins it for the rest and this is why the their is a forum area dedicated to these type s of organised games.......also the objection quoted there already exists as thats what lots of top ranked players prey on

by **agentcom** on Wed Aug 15, 2012 6:24 pm

CaptainMoo wrote:sorry did search, must have missed it

though - " What if a high ranking officer sets up games with complicated settings, but only opens them for the levels right below officer? Would that be considered abuse? "

This is not what i suggested. I was suggsting that if i have a rank of say 1800 then because i have attained that level then i can make a 1800 + only game. thus eliminating the possible abuse / farming above...My point was i dont want low levels joining my games as quite often their stupid play ruins it for the rest and this is why the their is a forum area dedicated to these type s of organised games.......also the objection quoted there already exists as thats what lots of top ranked players prey on

That is one sentence of a 39 page topic. Officer only, Officer mess, enlisted only, etc. game options are also lumped in here along with the ones that are based on points like 1800+. Ranks are based on points, so it's just another way of saying the same thing.

by **donkeymile** on Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:32 pm

It's ridiculous that this suggestion isn't being taken seriously - and where's Lack with a reason why this wouldn't benefit the site?

That's all I have - just shaking my head at this.

by **Campin_Killer** on Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:38 pm

donkeymile wrote:It's ridiculous that this suggestion isn't being taken seriously - and where's Lack with a reason why this wouldn't benefit the site?

That's all I have - just shaking my head at this.

You wouldn't have an excuse if you were caught farming...

But, you know, suggestions forum is becoming like the foundry before the strike

by **Sawdust91** on Thu Jan 17, 2013 2:53 pm

My idea is short and sweet, I find it really annoying when some cook with 130 points joins my game, i mean like what the hell if this guy wins its alot of points gone, so my idea is to have "blinking" which gives a player the option to "blink" out people with a rank, e.g. if i was a conqeror i could "blink" out captains or under (giving a 5 rank radius down, which can be altered to 6 or 7 or 8 if that person wishes) so if i was a captain i could be blinked out only by conquerors but i can blink out the rank 5 below me, this way it avoids high ranked people getting farmed, but this option should only be able to be used for 1v1 games (to avoid team games and games where 2 friends might want to play together being ruined)

overall to be honest i think its a good idea, you might not agree with me or you might agree with me, there's no point in telling me that it was pointless making this post, or something like that, i will most likely not look at this again as i will probably forget about it (hehe) lets see what happens anyway, it would definately be handy

by **chapcrap** on Thu Jan 17, 2013 3:34 pm

Sawdust91 wrote:My idea is short and sweet, I find it really annoying when some cook with 130 points joins my game, i mean like what the hell if this guy wins its alot of points gone, so my idea is to have "blinking" which gives a player the option to "blink" out people with a rank, e.g. if i was a conqeror i could "blink" out captains or under (giving a 5 rank radius down, which can be altered to 6 or 7 or 8 if that person wishes) so if i was a captain i could be blinked out only by conquerors but i can blink out the rank 5 below me, this way it avoids high ranked people getting farmed, but this option should only be able to be used for 1v1 games (to avoid team games and games where 2 friends might want to play together being ruined)

overall to be honest i think its a good idea, you might not agree with me or you might agree with me, there's no point in telling me that it was pointless making this post, or something like that, i will most likely not look at this again as i will probably forget about it (hehe) lets see what happens anyway, it would definately be handy

MERGED another.

by **chapcrap** on Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:22 pm

chapcrap wrote:MERGED another.

+1

by **agentcom** on Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:56 pm

Did you just "+1" your own merge? :roll:

by **BENCLUB** on Wed Feb 13, 2013 3:26 pm

Hi all

Sorry, my english is too bad to write an introduction and an conclusion of suggestion.

It will be nice to start a game if with people who have a minimum if x points.

Because when you have 1800 points, you really don't want to have people with less than 1500 points in your game.

So please add an option :

"Minimum points to join your game : [x]....... [x][NONE]"

Thank you so much