Conquer Club

Doc_Brown wrote:I agree. The instructions state that you should earn a spoil if you conquer a territory. Clans have ruled that refusing to take a spoil card in clan play is considered cheating. I would just like some consistency on the site, which is why the suggestion has two options:
1) Automatically award a spoil if a territory is conquered (for some or all game types), or
2) Officially state that timing out is a valid strategy and reword the instructions to acknowledge that spoils need not always be awarded.

Personally, I favor option 1, as do 75% of the people that have responded to the poll.

it would be great if the site implemented this or changed the wording of the rule. one or the other. come on CC, step up and end this debate.

Donelladan wrote:Only cases I see people not clicking button end turn is nuclear game. So this suggestion will end the very problem of people waiting one hour IMO.
.

so your issue is with nuke spoils ?
or is the issue your having to wait an hour in some cases "rare i would say" so whats the problem your already having to potentially wait days for a turn what difference does a hour make.
is there any data on this happening widely on every nuke game ?

also needs to be more options on the poll

Doc_Brown wrote:I agree. The instructions state that you should earn a spoil if you conquer a territory. Clans have ruled that refusing to take a spoil card in clan play is considered cheating. I would just like some consistency on the site, which is why the suggestion has two options:
1) Automatically award a spoil if a territory is conquered (for some or all game types), or
2) Officially state that timing out is a valid strategy and reword the instructions to acknowledge that spoils need not always be awarded.

Personally, I favor option 1, as do 75% of the people that have responded to the poll.

i agree 100%, and yes, option 1 would be my favourite too

probably it´s possible to code the game that way that you already get a card when you take a terretory, not at the end of your turn.

Time out shouldn't be strategy thing..

because there are times where you want to finish your turn 15 seconds or 20 seconds before your turn finish, some lags happens to you, it's make you angry a times.

so I'm in agreement with this suggestion.

Seulessliathan wrote:

Doc_Brown wrote:I agree. The instructions state that you should earn a spoil if you conquer a territory. Clans have ruled that refusing to take a spoil card in clan play is considered cheating. I would just like some consistency on the site, which is why the suggestion has two options:
1) Automatically award a spoil if a territory is conquered (for some or all game types), or
2) Officially state that timing out is a valid strategy and reword the instructions to acknowledge that spoils need not always be awarded.

Personally, I favor option 1, as do 75% of the people that have responded to the poll.

i agree 100%, and yes, option 1 would be my favourite too

probably it´s possible to code the game that way that you already get a card when you take a terretory, not at the end of your turn.

It's possible, but there are many reasons we don't want people to get a card when they take the territory. It would completely change the nature of spoils games.

Metsfanmax wrote:

Seulessliathan wrote:

Doc_Brown wrote:I agree. The instructions state that you should earn a spoil if you conquer a territory. Clans have ruled that refusing to take a spoil card in clan play is considered cheating. I would just like some consistency on the site, which is why the suggestion has two options:
1) Automatically award a spoil if a territory is conquered (for some or all game types), or
2) Officially state that timing out is a valid strategy and reword the instructions to acknowledge that spoils need not always be awarded.

Personally, I favor option 1, as do 75% of the people that have responded to the poll.

i agree 100%, and yes, option 1 would be my favourite too

probably it´s possible to code the game that way that you already get a card when you take a terretory, not at the end of your turn.

It's possible, but there are many reasons we don't want people to get a card when they take the territory. It would completely change the nature of spoils games.

exactly, spoils games would then match the site's rules.

ps. that was only one reason you've provided

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

Seulessliathan wrote:

Doc_Brown wrote:I agree. The instructions state that you should earn a spoil if you conquer a territory. Clans have ruled that refusing to take a spoil card in clan play is considered cheating. I would just like some consistency on the site, which is why the suggestion has two options:
1) Automatically award a spoil if a territory is conquered (for some or all game types), or
2) Officially state that timing out is a valid strategy and reword the instructions to acknowledge that spoils need not always be awarded.

Personally, I favor option 1, as do 75% of the people that have responded to the poll.

i agree 100%, and yes, option 1 would be my favourite too

probably it´s possible to code the game that way that you already get a card when you take a terretory, not at the end of your turn.

It's possible, but there are many reasons we don't want people to get a card when they take the territory. It would completely change the nature of spoils games.

exactly, spoils games would then match the site's rules.

ps. that was only one reason you've provided

The site instructions clearly state:

What's a set of spoils? You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region, just like reality!

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

Seulessliathan wrote:

Doc_Brown wrote:I agree. The instructions state that you should earn a spoil if you conquer a territory. Clans have ruled that refusing to take a spoil card in clan play is considered cheating. I would just like some consistency on the site, which is why the suggestion has two options:
1) Automatically award a spoil if a territory is conquered (for some or all game types), or
2) Officially state that timing out is a valid strategy and reword the instructions to acknowledge that spoils need not always be awarded.

Personally, I favor option 1, as do 75% of the people that have responded to the poll.

i agree 100%, and yes, option 1 would be my favourite too

probably it´s possible to code the game that way that you already get a card when you take a terretory, not at the end of your turn.

It's possible, but there are many reasons we don't want people to get a card when they take the territory. It would completely change the nature of spoils games.

exactly, spoils games would then match the site's rules.

ps. that was only one reason you've provided

The site instructions clearly state:

What's a set of spoils? You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region, just like reality!

which is our point.

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

Seulessliathan wrote:

Doc_Brown wrote:I agree. The instructions state that you should earn a spoil if you conquer a territory. Clans have ruled that refusing to take a spoil card in clan play is considered cheating. I would just like some consistency on the site, which is why the suggestion has two options:
1) Automatically award a spoil if a territory is conquered (for some or all game types), or
2) Officially state that timing out is a valid strategy and reword the instructions to acknowledge that spoils need not always be awarded.

Personally, I favor option 1, as do 75% of the people that have responded to the poll.

i agree 100%, and yes, option 1 would be my favourite too

probably it´s possible to code the game that way that you already get a card when you take a terretory, not at the end of your turn.

It's possible, but there are many reasons we don't want people to get a card when they take the territory. It would completely change the nature of spoils games.

exactly, spoils games would then match the site's rules.

ps. that was only one reason you've provided

The site instructions clearly state:

What's a set of spoils? You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region, just like reality!

which is our point.

Not sure what you're saying. Getting a card at the time at which you conquer a territory would be different from getting a card when you end your turn, and would not be in line with what is written in the instructions. The cleanest solution to this problem is to always award a spoil at the end of the turn if a territory has been conquered, and it's really the only one that could conceivably get implemented.

I prefer option 3: award spoils for all games except freestyle/speed where it's part of the timing.

But if that's going to hurt folks' heads, then Option 2: award card if a region is taken whether the player hits "end turn" or not.

In the case of freestyle/speed, if cards were awarded regardless, all players have the same opportunity to keep assaulting without having to end for a spoil so the timing thing doesn't change alot.

But either of these changes would fix the recurring questionable tactic in nuclear spoils where players who want to assault but don't want to have to nuke themselves, just let time run out after they got what they wanted to avoid the part they don't want.

There have been coding in the past that were argued for long times as "legitimate if questionable" until the site finally decided to end the matter by recoding to fix the 'questionable' tactic. (Freestyle double turn ring any bells for folks here?)

When you have many tournaments and group wars making a rule "against" a particular tactic, then it does seem that the majority of the site - at least the most legit players on the site - consider that tactic to be a violation rather than legal and as such, it seems the site should change the coding like they've changed the questionable codings in the past.

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote: The site instructions clearly state:

What's a set of spoils? You earn spoils at the end of every turn in which you successfully conquer a region, just like reality!

which is our point.

Not sure what you're saying. Getting a card at the time at which you conquer a territory would be different from getting a card when you end your turn, and would not be in line with what is written in the instructions. The cleanest solution to this problem is to always award a spoil at the end of the turn if a territory has been conquered, and it's really the only one that could conceivably get implemented

we are not asking for it when you conquer a terit, we are asking for it when your turn ends & you have conquered a terit - just like the rule you quoted points out.

If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

spiesr wrote:If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

there are many of us that have been doing so for months now.

what we have been requesting doesn't seem to be sinking in with the Suggs mods.

greenoaks wrote:

spiesr wrote:If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

there are many of us that have been doing so for months now.

what we have been requesting doesn't seem to be sinking in with the Suggs mods.

We are well aware of what this suggestion is asking for. Seulessliathan seemed to be asking for something different than the consensus. Either way, it doesn't need to be belabored.

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

spiesr wrote:If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

there are many of us that have been doing so for months now.

what we have been requesting doesn't seem to be sinking in with the Suggs mods.

We are well aware of what this suggestion is asking for. Seulessliathan seemed to be asking for something different than the consensus. Either way, it doesn't need to be belabored.

then why is this not in Submitted.

change it so everyone gets a spoils when their turn ends if a terit was conquered or change the written rule to reflect reality.

why is getting clarification so difficult?

codierose wrote:hate the idea myself you snooze you lose
so will you get a bunch of lazy assed players not ending turns, why would they getting rewarded for not doing so. 8 man esc games could last forever, could potentially have everyone taking 24hrs per turn no thanks. Already having to deal with deadbeats now you want to reward them.

If they're "deadbeats" they arent' gettin rewarded.. they're deadbeating... so what, they lose the game with one more spoil than they would have previous this game change...

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

spiesr wrote:If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

there are many of us that have been doing so for months now.

what we have been requesting doesn't seem to be sinking in with the Suggs mods.

We are well aware of what this suggestion is asking for. Seulessliathan seemed to be asking for something different than the consensus. Either way, it doesn't need to be belabored.

then why is this not in Submitted.

change it so everyone gets a spoils when their turn ends if a terit was conquered or change the written rule to reflect reality.

why is getting clarification so difficult?

The fact that it is not in Submitted is more of a formality than anything else. This particular issue is not going to get handled in the normal way that other suggestions do. It requires the entire administration to reach a consensus on what we want, because it's a controversial issue (even clarifying the rules, as you request, has implications because it suggests that we intend to keep the rules this way for the indefinite future, which is not necessarily the case). That controversy is reflected in this thread. It's even possible that we get some sort of compromise not listed in your two options, like only freestyle games keep the current status.

This was discussed behind the scenes under the last administration and the discussion stalled. I will post with an update when we reach a decision with the new ownership.

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

spiesr wrote:If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

there are many of us that have been doing so for months now.

what we have been requesting doesn't seem to be sinking in with the Suggs mods.

We are well aware of what this suggestion is asking for. Seulessliathan seemed to be asking for something different than the consensus. Either way, it doesn't need to be belabored.

then why is this not in Submitted.

change it so everyone gets a spoils when their turn ends if a terit was conquered or change the written rule to reflect reality.

why is getting clarification so difficult?

The fact that it is not in Submitted is more of a formality than anything else. This particular issue is not going to get handled in the normal way that other suggestions do. It requires the entire administration to reach a consensus on what we want, because it's a controversial issue (even clarifying the rules, as you request, has implications because it suggests that we intend to keep the rules this way for the indefinite future, which is not necessarily the case). That controversy is reflected in this thread. It's even possible that we get some sort of compromise not listed in your two options, like only freestyle games keep the current status.

This was discussed behind the scenes under the last administration and the discussion stalled. I will post with an update when we reach a decision with the new ownership.

ok thanks

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

spiesr wrote:If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

there are many of us that have been doing so for months now.

what we have been requesting doesn't seem to be sinking in with the Suggs mods.

We are well aware of what this suggestion is asking for. Seulessliathan seemed to be asking for something different than the consensus. Either way, it doesn't need to be belabored.

then why is this not in Submitted.

change it so everyone gets a spoils when their turn ends if a terit was conquered or change the written rule to reflect reality.

why is getting clarification so difficult?

The fact that it is not in Submitted is more of a formality than anything else. This particular issue is not going to get handled in the normal way that other suggestions do. It requires the entire administration to reach a consensus on what we want, because it's a controversial issue (even clarifying the rules, as you request, has implications because it suggests that we intend to keep the rules this way for the indefinite future, which is not necessarily the case). That controversy is reflected in this thread. It's even possible that we get some sort of compromise not listed in your two options, like only freestyle games keep the current status.

This was discussed behind the scenes under the last administration and the discussion stalled. I will post with an update when we reach a decision with the new ownership.

+1

speed fs needs to be exempt from this change, it's an integral part of the game...

rhp 1 wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:

greenoaks wrote:

spiesr wrote:If you reread that quote chain Seulessliathan appears to have been asking that.

there are many of us that have been doing so for months now.

what we have been requesting doesn't seem to be sinking in with the Suggs mods.

We are well aware of what this suggestion is asking for. Seulessliathan seemed to be asking for something different than the consensus. Either way, it doesn't need to be belabored.

then why is this not in Submitted.

change it so everyone gets a spoils when their turn ends if a terit was conquered or change the written rule to reflect reality.

why is getting clarification so difficult?

The fact that it is not in Submitted is more of a formality than anything else. This particular issue is not going to get handled in the normal way that other suggestions do. It requires the entire administration to reach a consensus on what we want, because it's a controversial issue (even clarifying the rules, as you request, has implications because it suggests that we intend to keep the rules this way for the indefinite future, which is not necessarily the case). That controversy is reflected in this thread. It's even possible that we get some sort of compromise not listed in your two options, like only freestyle games keep the current status.

This was discussed behind the scenes under the last administration and the discussion stalled. I will post with an update when we reach a decision with the new ownership.

+1

speed fs needs to be exempt from this change, it's an integral part of the game...

no it's not

SUBMITTED.

Going on two years since this was submitted. What is the status now?

Doc_Brown wrote:Going on two years since this was submitted. What is the status now?

We don't have submitted anymore. Nor do we have a suggestions process to make sure things are implemented. It's up to BW, and he's been through the previous Submitted section many times before.

JamesKer1 wrote:

Doc_Brown wrote:Going on two years since this was submitted. What is the status now?

We don't have submitted anymore. Nor do we have a suggestions process to make sure things are implemented. It's up to BW, and he's been through the previous Submitted section many times before.

I'll also point out as I did before that this is more of a rules/policy change than it is a coding change (though it is the latter too, of course). It never really belonged in Suggestions anyway except as a way to ensure that the owner thought about whether he wanted to change current policy.

Metsfanmax wrote:

JamesKer1 wrote:

Doc_Brown wrote:Going on two years since this was submitted. What is the status now?

We don't have submitted anymore. Nor do we have a suggestions process to make sure things are implemented. It's up to BW, and he's been through the previous Submitted section many times before.

I'll also point out as I did before that this is more of a rules/policy change than it is a coding change (though it is the latter too, of course). It never really belonged in Suggestions anyway except as a way to ensure that the owner thought about whether he wanted to change current policy.

Well, the main request is for a coding change, and there is overwhelming support for it. But in the event that this is rejected, I would simply like a statement that it is considered an acceptable strategy.