[Rules] Limit New Recruit for 16 games in settings and maps

[natty dread]

Why is this still stickied?

[Woodruff]

From the start, those of us who DO play all the maps or who like the "unusual" maps have come out against this suggestion. Those who agree are almost all those who just like one type of map, who think maps like Lunar Landing, AOR2, etc are "garbage".

Actually, my suspicion from the start has been that QH and the couple others that were highly favorable towards the idea early on supported it because they hoped it would keep newer/lower ranked people out of their games. They've tried to justify the concept with the idea that it would help new people, but really they are drooling at the possibility that no one with fewer than 50 completed games will end up in their pet maps/settings. As evidence of that, I'd point out how QH reacted to me and one or two other people (Gogatron in particular) that posted in here with strong objections back when we were new recruits (yes, I've been fighting this suggestion nearly the entire time I've been a member here) - read pages 8 and 9 of this thread (starting around post 110) to see what I'm talking about.

I was initially in favor of this suggestion. However, I have since been convinced otherwise. And QHs behavior in this thread has been frankly appallingly trollerific.

[Doc_Brown]

I was initially in favor of this suggestion. However, I have since been convinced otherwise. And QHs behavior in this thread has been frankly appallingly trollerific.

I was actually starting to wonder at what point she was going to be called for necro-bumping. Until very recently, this thread would pretty much die and have no activity for about a month, until QH would quote the most recent nominally positive response and just say, "Great point! This is a really good suggestion." Before that, she would manage to bump the thread simply by being the last person to respond, and after a month, she'd edit her last post.

[Queen_Herpes]

Actually, my suspicion from the start has been that QH and the couple others that were highly favorable towards the idea early on supported it because they hoped it would keep newer/lower ranked people out of their games.

Not true. I play against new recruits and old recruits and even officers - and I like them all the same. An issue that often has come up are team games where a new recruit joins...then doesn't know they can attack teammates, fortify teammates, etc. Similarly, on some maps the new recruit doesn't get what is going on in the map and in a team game that can be detrimental to the team. That issue was what led me to initially come up with the concept. But not so much for myself. If I lose a team game because my teammate is a noob, shame on me for mismanagement of the situation. I don't mind if and when I lose. The new recruit, more often than not, gets hammered in those games. This is to the detriment of their experience of the site and of the game.

I was farmed when I first got here. No big deal, I got posts on my wall and figured they were players being supportive, and they weren't. My husband led me here, though, and I had enough of an introduction to the game from watching him play to not be disaffected by the initial negativity. I'm concerned for the new player who comes to the site without a friendly advocate who hand-holds them through the site. While the site is currently small, what happens when it "blows up" and gets a few thousand new unique hits in a month? Will those visitors become a member? Will they return after their first few games? I'm concerned about he player experience and I wish to support the retention of as many members as possible.

While there is some concern that I am using tactics that have somehow resurrected this suggestion from the abyss, I can only say that I am supporting my suggestion and attempting to respond to the comments that are "response-worthy." I've responded to many of my detractors. I've wasted time with some whose sole purpose was/is to troll this suggestion. I've spent honest and careful time engaging in discourse with others like DocBrown, and even gone to instant message with Bruceswar and others. I believe in the value of creating an automatic training regimine like this suggestion, which is why I comment here as often as is feasible. If I didn't believe in it, I would walk away. Kudos to me for sticking it out despite the many hurtful and demeaning posts that have been placed on here comparing me to Dolores Umbridge, flaming me, trolling the suggestion, etc.

I am open to modification of the suggestion as per the community's comments. I've changed it several times as a result of concerned detractors. And, in the end, if my suggestion is not hte one that goes through, I certainly hope the site does something to retain more players so that the community grows.
They've tried to justify the concept with the idea that it would help new people, but really they are drooling at the possibility that no one with fewer than 50 completed games will end up in their pet maps/settings. As evidence of that, I'd poin

t out how QH reacted to me and one or two other people (Gogatron in particular) that posted in here with strong objections back when we were new recruits (yes, I've been fighting this suggestion nearly the entire time I've been a member here) - read pages 8 and 9 of this thread (starting around post 110) to see what I'm talking about.

OH PLEASE. This "suggestion" has been around for about 2 years. It has been blasted by all but a few, mostly newer members, the entire time.

And, I HAVE been placing multiple other suggestions, some have even been accepted. I have no idea why this suggestion was elevated to sticky level. It should have died a LONG time ago! Mostly, I think folks just get tired of arguing with Q.H. It has nothing to do with liking the suggestion, not really, not in the greater CC world.

Agree 100%![/quote]

[PLAYER57832]

OH PLEASE. This "suggestion" has been around for about 2 years. It has been blasted by all but a few, mostly newer members, the entire time.

And, I HAVE been placing multiple other suggestions, some have even been accepted. I have no idea why this suggestion was elevated to sticky level. It should have died a LONG time ago! Mostly, I think folks just get tired of arguing with Q.H. It has nothing to do with liking the suggestion, not really, not in the greater CC world.

Agree 100%!

[/quote]
You know someone has NO REAL DEBATE when then keep attempting to claim those who disagree are really agreeing with you.

Bottom line -- This idea stinks, no poll here gives any kind of representation of true CC feelings. Further, in a case like this you don't even want the majority view. The majority here are already here and are happy, would not be impacted by this at all. You need to find out why people have left. But, such surveys are notoriously poor idicators, becuase people don't always want to be honest. Also, in a case like this many new players may think it sounds good, but only because they have not been here long enough to really understand how CC works.

[natty dread]

You know someone has NO REAL DEBATE when then keep attempting to claim those who disagree are really agreeing with you.

I think she just botched her quote.

[macbone]

QH, perhaps you should attach a poll to the first post.

I suggest something like this:

Are you in favor of new players being limited to 25 maps and restricted settings for their first 16 games, with new settings and maps unlocked as more games are played?

[clapper011]

guys, if you dont have any valuable criticism, then please dont troll the threads.

clappy

[PLAYER57832]

guys, if you dont have any valuable criticism, then please dont troll the threads.

clappy

sorry, clapper, but one of those trolling the most here happens to be a mod. The rest of us are plain frustrated that such a bad idea, around and roundly criticized for about 2 years is stickied while so many very GOOD ideas get no attention at all. I don't think I was the only one who gave up debating this for a time, safely convinced it had died, only to be shocked to see it had been STICKIED.

The above description of QH's actions (continually bumping, ignoring any real criticism, claiming that anything even slightly positive means there is a majority approval for this idea..etc.) is accurate.

this is not just some minor idea that we could try and see. This will represent a very fundamental change in how CC operates. Before anything like this is seriously considered, it needs much more approval and support from the community as a whole.

AND, I DO think it is notable that many of those who object most are those who have been here a long time, AND who play many different maps. Those who agree, mostly are not. (a few exceptions).. and more than a few of those who WERE in favor are now opposed.

[Queen_Herpes]

Only read the OP, but I would think that the possibility of putting these complexity lists (levels0-6) somewhere where all players can see them (maybe even make it a gamefinder option = map level) would be useful for any player's reference.

I agree with this, but where would it get posted?

Also, I think many RISK players would be aghast to not be able to play manual deploy, as that is how most people play real risk (At least where I'm from)

There is a problem with comparing Manual Deploy in real life to Manual Deploy on here. Manual Deploy on here does not allow the player to see where the opponent has deployed. Most Manual Deploy games on here are just dropping all armies on one territory.


Thank you for the post. The more input, the better. I'm interested to hear your response.

[SirSebstar]

PLAYER57832 you keep butchering up the quotes, and i keep thinking you are either stupid or something, but i really dont understand what your point is.
So do me a favor and try to stick to facts

first off, i have supplied 2 studies indicating shortly what type of players there are and what they find attractive (aka why they stay) please tell me of your research why this proposal would not be a good idea.

you have stated that those who object are long time players. Could you list them for me, and even compare them to those who have approved this idea. I only have to consider my joining date to invalidate your statement, but then i am giving you a chance to be factual if you want/can.

next, could you please show why this suggestion would be a major change from the current system? Considering that A this 'trail' period can be simply turned off, so those who like more maps can just play them, and that players are limited to maps and settings for the first 5 maps already. this suggestion is simply an extention of that 5 game period, and with hopefully some helpfull and understandable information at each of the growthpoints.

Trolling is against the rules, can you point out the mod who is trolling here, the specific posts the mod was trolling in and other relevant information?, or would you by any means indicate me? If the latter, may I point out that A, I am not a moderator in this particular forum and that B Clapper is, and it is normally considered unwise not to adhere to a request from a mod, especially a global mod. I am going to assume you are in error, but if not, I am glad to her otherwise.

now that i have adress those remarks you have made in the last post.
Can you please once again state WHY you think this trial period is a bad idea. Just stating that it means people will go away because they cannot play enough maps will however not cut it. The suggestion sees to it that there is the option to get away from the lockout and start playing everything right now. So considering that it is possible to circumvent it, that therefor the option lies with the player, what remains of your concerns?

I have clearly stated and supported documentation that there are a large group of potential players who would potentially like this suggestion. I understand if you do not like QH, or me or have some other bias against this suggestion, but i urge you to stay factual and documented in your claims. If you are just deadset against it, so be it. if you allow yourself to be persuaded, then please indicate what kind of information you would require further

regards,
SirSebstar

guys, if you dont have any valuable criticism, then please dont troll the threads.

clappy

sorry, clapper, but one of those trolling the most here happens to be a mod. The rest of us are plain frustrated that such a bad idea, around and roundly criticized for about 2 years is stickied while so many very GOOD ideas get no attention at all. I don't think I was the only one who gave up debating this for a time, safely convinced it had died, only to be shocked to see it had been STICKIED.

The above description of QH's actions (continually bumping, ignoring any real criticism, claiming that anything even slightly positive means there is a majority approval for this idea..etc.) is accurate.

this is not just some minor idea that we could try and see. This will represent a very fundamental change in how CC operates. Before anything like this is seriously considered, it needs much more approval and support from the community as a whole.

AND, I DO think it is notable that many of those who object most are those who have been here a long time, AND who play many different maps. Those who agree, mostly are not. (a few exceptions).. and more than a few of those who WERE in favor are now opposed.

[natty dread]

I have already presented my arguments, which have gone unanswered so far... a) first impressions are important. b) Someone who's just checking out the site might not notice an option of disabling a "tutorial mode", so when he comes in, he sees that there are not many maps or options, and goes away.

The diversity of maps and options is the best asset this site has, the best trump card in the increasing competition, and instead of advertising the fact to new players, you want to basically hide it from them? Talk about backwards logic.

Also, if there's an option of disabling this tutorial mode, what is the point of it anyway? Creating a weird roadblock to inconvenience the new players? Those who would enjoy the challenge of "unlocking" the maps will feel like it is a pointless chore since they can just "cheat" it by disabling it whenever they want. And those who would rather dive into all of the content the site has to offer, will just see it as an annoyance that needs to be averted.

A much better idea would be improving the documentation and adding instant help buttons to the game pages. For example, the start a game -page could have a "what does this option do" button for all the different options, join a game page could have a help button that lets you know how many and what kind of games you can join, etc.

Combine this with organizing the maps into categories, and adding a short description for each category... I think these two things together would much better accomplish everything this suggestion tries to address, but without any of the ill effects.

[Queen_Herpes]

Considering that this 'trial' period can be simply turned off, so those who like more maps can just play them, and that players are limited to maps and settings for the first 5 [games] already. this suggestion is simply an extention of that 5 game period, and with hopefully some helpful and understandable information at each of the growthpoints.

You make a great point here, SirSebstar. Part of this suggestion is that the trial period can be turned off. This is important for the 99%ers out there who won't need the trial period. For the rest of the population, the fact that the trial period can be turned off is a moot point.

Another great point you made is that new recruits are already limited in their first 5 games on conquerclub during a trial period that was established by lackattack(lackattack is the owner and webmaster of this gaming site.) By extending this trial period to 16 games, and unlocking certain settings and maps over time, the new recruit is afforded the opportunity to learn the site in a piecemeal fashion. When learning part-to-whole in this fashion, the student (in this case the student is the new recruit) can more effectively learn the material (in this case the material is how to use the settings and that certain maps are more complicated than other maps.)

[SirSebstar]

I have already presented my arguments, which have gone unanswered so far... a) first impressions are important. b) Someone who's just checking out the site might not notice an option of disabling a "tutorial mode", so when he comes in, he sees that there are not many maps or options, and goes away.

The diversity of maps and options is the best asset this site has, the best trump card in the increasing competition, and instead of advertising the fact to new players, you want to basically hide it from them? Talk about backwards logic.

Also, if there's an option of disabling this tutorial mode, what is the point of it anyway? Creating a weird roadblock to inconvenience the new players? Those who would enjoy the challenge of "unlocking" the maps will feel like it is a pointless chore since they can just "cheat" it by disabling it whenever they want. And those who would rather dive into all of the content the site has to offer, will just see it as an annoyance that needs to be averted.

A much better idea would be improving the documentation and adding instant help buttons to the game pages. For example, the start a game -page could have a "what does this option do" button for all the different options, join a game page could have a help button that lets you know how many and what kind of games you can join, etc.

Combine this with organizing the maps into categories, and adding a short description for each category... I think these two things together would much better accomplish everything this suggestion tries to address, but without any of the ill effects.

When I got on the site, there were much less maps, but i did not play all the maps then. not right away any ways. I still hate freestyle after an few runins even at that time. The site has grown to the power since then. If I guide a noobie now, i have to tell him to restrain himself and get some more exp first. Those that did not invariable leave, feeling this site is just unfair.
so much for appearances and first impressions. Many noobs deadbeat because they dont even know they need tot ake a turn and wait 24 hours (or check every 24 hours), again, nice impression.

also, i supplied you with information that only 1 out of the 3 designated groups is even interrested in amount of maps. most people just dont care. just consider the few who have even played all the maps..those with 5 victories is but a handfull.

I guess you either dont play much games, or you would know that nearly every game has a tutorial of some kind, and most can be bypassed by just clicking something. if they idea is crazy, so is the rest of the world. So if your counter arguments are, i dont want to change it into a tutorial mode,because someone might think less of the site for having one, then i am also not impressed. QH has interrested in making one, i believe it would help more then i would damage. in fact i believe this site is severely lacking such assistance.. ill be back later with some more arguments, i am off to dinner

other then that, your suggestions on improving the information is noted. please create such information. I think both both the SOC and the strategy forum also request assistance. maybe you could write a welcom to cc guide..

[natty dread]

OH, JUST ONE MORE THING:

Online gaming sites are not the same as video games. Unlocking content works for a video game, since it's a very different setting, a very different type of gameplay: a video game is a static entity, new content usually can't be added - except as add-ons which usually need to be purchased separately. Therefore in videogames it makes sense to add content that you need to unlock, it gives the player some more gametime for the game he's already paid for, it gives some extra challenge therefore extending the lifetime of the game.

Online game site is something different though. A site like CC depends mostly on the social aspect of gaming - pitting your wits against other human beings. It's a simple game that doesn't have flashy effects or 3d graphics to keep the kids interested. So CC can not afford not to use every advantage to compete for the attention of players - advantages like game types, maps... but furthermore, an onlinge game site is seen differently than a video game, it is seen more as a service. A new player joins the site to check it out, and if he doesn't find the service of the site adequate, he will leave - there's nothing that can be done to keep those players except to offer better service.

Unlockable content is not seen as service in this context, it is seen more as an annoyance by most. Again, you can't compare online games to video games.

[natty dread]

When I got on the site, there were much less maps, but i did not play all the maps then. not right away any ways. I still hate freestyle after an few runins even at that time. The site has grown to the power since then. If I guide a noobie now, i have to tell him to restrain himself and get some more exp first. Those that did not invariable leave, feeling this site is just unfair.
so much for appearances and first impressions. Many noobs deadbeat because they dont even know they need tot ake a turn and wait 24 hours (or check every 24 hours), again, nice impression.

People who quit because they can't wait 24 hours to take a turn are people that we have no chance of retaining anyway, and frankly, they are people we wouldn't even want on the site. At most, we could advertise speed games more.

also, i supplied you with information that only 1 out of the 3 designated groups is even interrested in amount of maps. most people just dont care. just consider the few who have even played all the maps..those with 5 victories is but a handfull.

I'm sorry, where did you supply this information? I must have missed it. Can I see some statistics?

I guess you either dont play much games, or you would know that nearly every game has a tutorial of some kind, and most can be bypassed by just clicking something. if they idea is crazy, so is the rest of the world.

Video games. They're not the same as online gaming sites. Read my previous post.

So if your counter arguments are, i dont want to change it into a tutorial mode,because someone might think less of the site for having one, then i am also not impressed. QH has interrested in making one, i believe it would help more then i would damage. in fact i believe this site is severely lacking such assistance.. ill be back later with some more arguments, i am off to dinner

No, my counter arguments are what I wrote in my post. Don't strawman me.

My main argument is that the diversity of play is an asset to the site, that needs to be advertised. Freedom of play is important for a site like this.

Another point was, that if the tutorial mode can be disabled, what is the point of it? It effectively just provides a roadblock that will have no real effect on anything. An annoyance.

other then that, your suggestions on improving the information is noted. please create such information. I think both both the SOC and the strategy forum also request assistance. maybe you could write a welcom to cc guide..

Me? I think there are better suited people for those tasks. I already have my hands full providing new playable content for this site...

Also, my suggestion would still require lack to implement the help buttons and the categories for the maps - me just posting these things somewhere on the forums wouldn't be much good since most players never visit the forum.

[blakebowling]

This has gone on far too long. I've failed to see any construction on this for some time now.

If you feel you can be civilized and develop this suggestion, feel free to start a new thread.

This thread is Locked, feel free to PM myself if you have any concerns.