[Invites] Not allow inactive players to be invited to games

[stahrgazer]

It has NEVER been illegal to refuse a game, and CC should not start a precedent of making it 'illegal' or "impossible" to refuse a game.

Implementing this feature has nothing to do with whether players can refuse games or not.

Teams that are doing this "invite one opponent" thing are either 1) being cleverly proactive about refusing to play existing teams by limiting the ability in advance; 2) hoping some experienced players show a less experienced player the ropes; 3) trying to encourage more activity; or 4) letting the person they do invite go through the legwork of inviting whoever he/she wants to team with.

None of the above are what is being discussed here. Clearly there is a fifth possibility, that is the cause for this suggestion: they are taking advantage of naive or stupid players (i.e. the ones who would join a random game with an unknown teammate). Whether you call it farming or not, it's qualitatively the same.

Sorry, you can't prove that it's not: Teams that are doing this "invite one opponent" thing are 1) being cleverly proactive about refusing to play existing teams by limiting the ability in advance;

But even if you could? Again, per CC prior rulings: It's only a problem if it's done to ? (new recruits). Otherwise, it's all perfectly fine parts of the game, that nothing needs to be done to correct... Nothing should be done to correct something that's perfectly legal ESPECIALLY when what would be done legitimate uses of invite, which this would.

Now, when CC starts ruling that any taking advantage of naivety on an ongoing basis against individuals (even if they are no longer 'new recruits') DOES constitute "farming or other abuse of the game system" and starts disciplining or other programming to fix that - then I would agree that something should be done about potential taking advantage of naivety in team games. But between the two, taking advantage on a 1-on-1 basis is worse, because at least with teams, the naive individual has a chance to get teammates who DO know what they're doing.

[Metsfanmax]

Sorry, you can't prove that it's not: Teams that are doing this "invite one opponent" thing are 1) being cleverly proactive about refusing to play existing teams by limiting the ability in advance;

But even if you could? Again, per CC prior rulings: It's only a problem if it's done to ? (new recruits). Otherwise, it's all perfectly fine parts of the game, that nothing needs to be done to correct... Nothing should be done to correct something that's perfectly legal ESPECIALLY when what would be done legitimate uses of invite, which this would.

Now, when CC starts ruling that any taking advantage of naivety on an ongoing basis against individuals (even if they are no longer 'new recruits') DOES constitute "farming or other abuse of the game system" and starts disciplining or other programming to fix that - then I would agree that something should be done about potential taking advantage of naivety in team games. But between the two, taking advantage on a 1-on-1 basis is worse, because at least with teams, the naive individual has a chance to get teammates who DO know what they're doing.

This is all irrelevant. If someone was going to be hurt by this policy, then that would be one thing. But the fact is that we're only preventing something that rationally shouldn't be allowed in the first place (inviting people to play your game who most likely won't join because they're inactive). The only people that this affects are the people who are using the current system to prevent actual teams from joining their games; but I don't feel particularly bad for them. If they don't want to play against particular people, they shouldn't start open games. As an added benefit, we also protect players from joining games with teammates that they didn't intend to play with. Even if you think it's a good thing that there's a loophole people can use to refuse to play existing teams (?), it's certainly also a good thing that we're protecting unsuspecting players.

[jefjef]

This is a fantastic and flawless suggestion.

End of discussion.

[stahrgazer]

This is all irrelevant. If someone was going to be hurt by this policy, then that would be one thing.

As (I think it was Andy?) pointed out, sometimes inactive players are invited to games as a means of bringing them back; which means that, potentially, CC would be hurt by this change.

And, it's not irrelevant to suggest that if it's "bad" to invite near-noobs to team games, because those near-noobs just might not understand the map; bad enough that you have to create a program change to prevent it... then it's quite relevant to wonder why, if it's so BAAAAAAAAAAD for team games, then why isn't it as bad or even worse to do it for individual games?

CC has already ruled consistently that it's only illegal to invite "lesser skilled players" if the near-noobs being invited are true noobs, as in, new recruits, on a systemic basis. That is not what this suggestion claims will be prevented.

So, if it's not illegal, no change should be made. If it is illegal, then start enforcing it on individual bases.

[Woodruff]

This is all irrelevant. If someone was going to be hurt by this policy, then that would be one thing.

As (I think it was Andy?) pointed out, sometimes inactive players are invited to games as a means of bringing them back; which means that, potentially, CC would be hurt by this change.

And, it's not irrelevant to suggest that if it's "bad" to invite near-noobs to team games, because those near-noobs just might not understand the map; bad enough that you have to create a program change to prevent it... then it's quite relevant to wonder why, if it's so BAAAAAAAAAAD for team games, then why isn't it as bad or even worse to do it for individual games?

CC has already ruled consistently that it's only illegal to invite "lesser skilled players" if the near-noobs being invited are true noobs, as in, new recruits, on a systemic basis. That is not what this suggestion claims will be prevented.

So, if it's not illegal, no change should be made. If it is illegal, then start enforcing it on individual bases.

Just because this action isn't currently illegal doesn't mean that it shouldn't be looked at as being illegal. As well, just because a thing is determined to be illegal, does not at all mean that all types of that thing must be illegal. This seems as clear-cut as possible of an example of abuse of the system that should be removed.

[Metsfanmax]

This is all irrelevant. If someone was going to be hurt by this policy, then that would be one thing.

As (I think it was Andy?) pointed out, sometimes inactive players are invited to games as a means of bringing them back; which means that, potentially, CC would be hurt by this change.

What is the hope? That they'll see an e-mail saying "you've been invited to a game!" and think "I totally forgot about Conquer Club, I'm going to start playing again right now!"? Seems unlikely. If they haven't even logged in for a month, say, it doesn't mean they forgot about CC - it means they don't want to play anymore. Presumably if they wanted to be available to be contacted after leaving, they would select that option in their profile preferences.

And, it's not irrelevant to suggest that if it's "bad" to invite near-noobs to team games, because those near-noobs just might not understand the map; bad enough that you have to create a program change to prevent it... then it's quite relevant to wonder why, if it's so BAAAAAAAAAAD for team games, then why isn't it as bad or even worse to do it for individual games?

In individual games, you don't rely on your opponent being good to win - in fact, it typically helps if they're not good. This suggestion is specifically about team games; I don't even understand how you could possibly relate the two.

CC has already ruled consistently that it's only illegal to invite "lesser skilled players" if the near-noobs being invited are true noobs, as in, new recruits, on a systemic basis. That is not what this suggestion claims will be prevented.

So, if it's not illegal, no change should be made. If it is illegal, then start enforcing it on individual bases.

There's no logical reason why it shouldn't just be made automatically impossible if it's illegal. After all, illegal implies that no one should be doing it - why make more unnecessary work for the mods?

[stahrgazer]

There's no logical reason why it shouldn't just be made automatically impossible if it's illegal. After all, illegal implies that no one should be doing it - why make more unnecessary work for the mods?

Two "for the change" arguments in this thread:
1) it takes unfair advantage of the uninformed.
2) Whaa whaa my team can't join intact.

Well, argument 1?
It's not illegal for individuals UNLESS it's a systematic attempt to go after NEW RECRUITS. period. Thus, going after cadets, privates, or people who just don't know a map/setting is NOT illegal for individuals. If it's not illegal for individuals, it shouldn't be illegal for teams. Unless it's "illegal" no change should be made.

And for argument 2?
So? Find another game. No change should be made.

[Woodruff]

There's no logical reason why it shouldn't just be made automatically impossible if it's illegal. After all, illegal implies that no one should be doing it - why make more unnecessary work for the mods?

Two "for the change" arguments in this thread:
1) it takes unfair advantage of the uninformed.
2) Whaa whaa my team can't join intact.

Well, argument 1?
It's not illegal for individuals UNLESS it's a systematic attempt to go after NEW RECRUITS. period. Thus, going after cadets, privates, or people who just don't know a map/setting is NOT illegal for individuals. If it's not illegal for individuals, it shouldn't be illegal for teams. Unless it's "illegal" no change should be made.

Incorrect...you are giving the definition of FARMING, NOT the definition of ABUSE. We are not talking about farming, we are talking about ABUSE. I don't even play team games, and I can see it for what it is.

[Metsfanmax]

Well, argument 1?
It's not illegal for individuals UNLESS it's a systematic attempt to go after NEW RECRUITS. period. Thus, going after cadets, privates, or people who just don't know a map/setting is NOT illegal for individuals. If it's not illegal for individuals, it shouldn't be illegal for teams. Unless it's "illegal" no change should be made.

This totally ignores the point of my above post. You said if it's illegal, then it should be done on a case-by-case basis. I observed that that makes no sense.

As for what you're saying here, you're not adding anything constructive, because we're talking about what ought to be considered abusive, not what currently is considered farming.

[stahrgazer]

This totally ignores the point of my above post. You said if it's illegal, then it should be done on a case-by-case basis. I observed that that makes no sense.

.

No, I said INDIVIDUAL. I corrected you.
Right now, it's NOT "illegal" for an individual to do those things, but this change wants to make it impossible for teams to do so.

If it's not illegal for individuals, it shouldn't be impossible for teams.

IF this type of "near farming" is made ILLEGAL for individuals (1v1) to do; which it currently is NOT and there's a ton of cases where this - as one of the guys who likes to do it calls it: orchard tendering - is considered an abusive offense...if C&A reports on it are addressed as more than, "famo" - THEN I'd support the idea of a program change that makes it harder for teams to do this sort of thing.

But if it's NOT illegal for individuals (and currently it's not, and lots of CC C&As were closed because it's NOT considered an abuse by CC admin and mods) then this program change should not occur.

[Metsfanmax]

No, I said INDIVIDUAL. I corrected you.
Right now, it's NOT "illegal" for an individual to do those things, but this change wants to make it impossible for teams to do so.

If it's not illegal for individuals, it shouldn't be impossible for teams.

And I pointed out that this comparison made absolutely no sense. Inviting inactive players to games doesn't matter in 1v1 games, because it can't abuse naive players in any way (there's a specific harm in the case of team games - that they'll be paired up with someone they can't effectively play with, and the "preying" team will get an easy win; this harm is non-existent in individual games, because how well the naive players do is based on how good they are, and only that). I don't even understand how you could possibly think the two situations are equivalent.

[stahrgazer]

No, I said INDIVIDUAL. I corrected you.
Right now, it's NOT "illegal" for an individual to do those things, but this change wants to make it impossible for teams to do so.

If it's not illegal for individuals, it shouldn't be impossible for teams.

And I pointed out that this comparison made absolutely no sense. Inviting inactive players to games doesn't matter in 1v1 games, because it can't abuse naive players in any way (there's a specific harm in the case of team games - that they'll be paired up with someone they can't effectively play with, and the "preying" team will get an easy win; this harm is non-existent in individual games, because how well the naive players do is based on how good they are, and only that). I don't even understand how you could possibly think the two situations are equivalent.

If the player is truly inactive, the invite will expire.

If the player accepts the invite, only those who want to team with the player will also enter the game. If they accept invites blindly, so be it. AT LEAST in a team game, the new-to-map player has a chance that the other player knows the map, even if the players do not know they mesh well together.

I play with new teams all the time, to find OUT if I play effectively with the other. And you know what? I bet YOU do, too. It's how it's done. I can't see how you possibly think the situation the OP described is any worse.

And I can't believe you think that to invite a new player to a map he doesn't know is favorable to inviting members of a team who may or may not know the map to play with other members who may or may not know the map. At least in a team environment they have more regions to ask, "what does that one hit?" And... as CC admins and mods have consistently said, "they do NOT have to join."

UNLESS it's "new recruits" being systematically farmed, CC admin and mods have consistently said, so what? Since CC admin and mods consistently say, 'so what?" this change should not occur.

[Metsfanmax]

If the player is truly inactive, the invite will expire.

If the player accepts the invite, only those who want to team with the player will also enter the game. If they accept invites blindly, so be it. AT LEAST in a team game, the new-to-map player has a chance that the other player knows the map, even if the players do not know they mesh well together.

This isn't about the person who is inactive; it's about the newbie who sees a team game with one open slot and joins it, thinking maybe they have a chance, and then finding out that they've unintentionally joined a game with much more experienced players who are trying to game them out of some points. While you are correct that CC doesn't really care about that, as long as the players involved are not New Recruits who are systematically being lured to these games, the point is that these teams are doing it because they know that if they don't do it, a good team will join and they won't have nearly as easy of a time getting points. These players are trying to cheaply avoid playing good teams, and hurting inexperienced players in the balance. Is it farming? No. But it's still a case of abuse of the system.

I play with new teams all the time, to find OUT if I play effectively with the other. And you know what? I bet YOU do, too. It's how it's done. I can't see how you possibly think the situation the OP described is any worse.

Well, I don't really play team games that much, so I don't do that. But to address your point, if that's what these players were doing, that would be fine. But they're not looking, necessarily, to find new teammates to play with.

And I can't believe you think that to invite a new player to a map he doesn't know is favorable to inviting members of a team who may or may not know the map to play with other members who may or may not know the map. At least in a team environment they have more regions to ask, "what does that one hit?" And... as CC admins and mods have consistently said, "they do NOT have to join."

I wasn't talking about inviting new players to maps. I was just talking about the use of the invite system to block full teams from joining maps; the new player who joins may or may not have been invited by the deceptive team.

[BoganGod]

So how long before this great idea is implemented?

[Darwins_Bane]

There still seems to be a lot of differing points about what should be done, if anything.

[macbone]

I for one support the idea, although it's of low priority to me. If it helps cut down on hurting inexperienced players, I'm all for it.

[PapaGeek]

I think I know where you are coming from. You see a game you might like or start one as a “Public” game. Someone else joins in and hijacks it so “YourFriend” can play also. I can perfectly understand this, but locking down the game for 24 hours makes everyone wait.

Why not set the timeout on a public invite to just 1 hour. That gives you plenty of time to contact YourFriend so they can join. If YourFriend can’t get to the computer in that time, “You” can sit there and wait for the timeout and invite them again. The rest of us do not have to wait for 24 hours

[TheForgivenOne]

I think I know where you are coming from. You see a game you might like or start one as a “Public” game. Someone else joins in and hijacks it so “YourFriend” can play also. I can perfectly understand this, but locking down the game for 24 hours makes everyone wait.

Why not set the timeout on a public invite to just 1 hour. That gives you plenty of time to contact YourFriend so they can join. If YourFriend can’t get to the computer in that time, “You” can sit there and wait for the timeout and invite them again. The rest of us do not have to wait for 24 hours

I dislike this. Because many people get invite when they are at work, while they are sleeping, school, etc. It would be near impossible for some members to invite friends to games due to time differences.

And this was raised more because of a problem that occurred, where a player was inviting inactive players to doubles or team games (Only one slot) so that no established teams could join the game.

[MeDeFe]

So, on the one hand we have people who join as a team and invite one inactive player to to the opposing side a game to make it impossible for another team to join and give them some real competition. The invite expires after 24 hours, during that time some random players may have joined. If none have, a new invite can be sent out.

On the other side we have people who either play very seldomly and thus often register as "inactive", or people who have left the site and come back upon seeing an invite, either from someone they know or from some random person.



How about a compromise? Instead of making it impossible to send invites to people who are "inactive", make it impossible to invite someone to the opposing side in team games. I suppose this might interfere with Tournaments to some degree, but PMs worked well enough for quite some time, and maybe it could be made possible to invite people to Tournament games at creation.

[Thezzaruz]

This isn't about the person who is inactive; it's about the newbie who sees a team game with one open slot and joins it, thinking maybe they have a chance, and then finding out that they've unintentionally joined a game with much more experienced players who are trying to game them out of some points. While you are correct that CC doesn't really care about that, as long as the players involved are not New Recruits who are systematically being lured to these games, the point is that these teams are doing it because they know that if they don't do it, a good team will join and they won't have nearly as easy of a time getting points. These players are trying to cheaply avoid playing good teams, and hurting inexperienced players in the balance. Is it farming? No. But it's still a case of abuse of the system.

If CC doesn't consider it to be illegal, farming or abuse for individual games then I don't see why it should be seen as such for team games either.

[Woodruff]

How about a compromise? Instead of making it impossible to send invites to people who are "inactive", make it impossible to invite someone to the opposing side in team games. I suppose this might interfere with Tournaments to some degree, but PMs worked well enough for quite some time, and maybe it could be made possible to invite people to Tournament games at creation.

I don't believe it would impact tournaments, since the Tournament Organizer (the one making the tournament games) would be sending invites to BOTH sides of the aisle. Not only that, it could easily be programmed to "not apply" to tournament games.

[lord voldemort]

yer i think it can be programmed as such to only apply to public games...u arent really farming in private/tourny games (esp now that clan games are tourny games)...and its kinda obvious if you are...good idea medefe

[blakebowling]

Just trying to get a feel as to where the community is on this suggestion. Would you rather prevent inactive players from being invited to games, or to prevent invitations to the opposing side in team games?

[natty dread]

Just trying to get a feel as to where the community is on this suggestion. Would you rather prevent inactive players from being invited to games, or to prevent invitations to the opposing side in team games?

The first option, IMO.

[SirSebstar]

i would support that inactive players cannot be invited to games, in particular teamgames