Conquer Club

NOTE: this is paired with another suggestion, improving competition in lower ranks, and another for a "played you too many times" list (viewtopic.php?f=4&t=194022)



Concise description:
The upper ranks would not be able to foe people at the same rank or one rank above/below UNLESS there were a specific administration-approved reason.
Specifics/Details:

This would only apply to Brigadiers, Generals and Field Marshals. They would not be able to foe people in the next higher/lower rank, unless there were extraordinary administration-approved reason. ( I actually cannot think of a circumstance, but hold it out as a possibility)

EDIT: A "play once and then don't have to play that person for time" rule might be better, but I am not sure how that would work out technically. That is, if I don't want to play player x, I could put them on my foe list, but it would be overridden if our ranks come close, until I play at least one game (note.. just means that person could join one of my games, not that you HAVE to play them). After playing one game, I could foe them again until I have completed, say, 50-100 games with other people. I think that would be hard to program, and probably harder to manage.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
One problem constantly brought up is that people use the foe list to keep from playing people who might beat them, rather than just people who are absolute jerks. In a few cases, someone may just be tired of playing the same person constantly, which is understandable (I offer another suggestion to deal with that specific situation here: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=194022 ). More often, the accusation is that people use the foe list to limit who they play to people they know they can beat. At lower ranks, this is not such a big deal because there are so many active players "out there". At the highest ranks, however, it can make finding opponents more difficult for some people. In cases where the foeing might be considered "legitimate", Admin can opt in and offer an exception. However, I would see those cases as few and far between. Most things that would make foeing "legitimate" would also mean the person is close to being banned anyway. (though perhaps not always).

Other suggestions to limit use of foe list, etc have been rejected, but I think this very specific and limited suggestion will work.

As noted above, this is paired with another suggestion regarding lower ranks. If anyone wonders why a low rank would make this suggestion, note that I have been here a while, (even though my playing has diminished a good deal) and have therefore heard a lot of complaining! Also, this does tend to "trickle down" to lower rank issues. When higher rank people have a harder time finding games, they are more tempted to play much lower ranked individuals, even if the game won't be much challenge (and then we hear complaining about "random wins that 'should not have happened' ".

Sort of defeats the purpose of using the Foe button. And if they don't want to play them I let them play me, they may win 75% but i'll get more points in the end Also some use foe for medalhunting. And I don't want the site limiting functionality so no.

rishaed wrote:And if they don't want to play them I let them play me,

Exactly.

About this topic, you're limiting the upper ranks. So only Brigs can foe Colonels, and Generals? What about Field
Marshals, and the Private who keeps suiciding on him in speed games, making him lose 50 points a game?

Jdsizzleslice wrote:About this topic, you're limiting the upper ranks. So only Brigs can foe Colonels, and Generals? What about Field
Marshals, and the Private who keeps suiciding on him in speed games, making him lose 50 points a game?

The suggestion only prevents those ranks from foeing other players of those ranks. It allows them to foe lower ranks as much as they want.

spiesr wrote:

Jdsizzleslice wrote:About this topic, you're limiting the upper ranks. So only Brigs can foe Colonels, and Generals? What about Field
Marshals, and the Private who keeps suiciding on him in speed games, making him lose 50 points a game?

The suggestion only prevents those ranks from foeing other players of those ranks. It allows them to foe lower ranks as much as they want.

You can foe whoever you want to. It's like trying to tell someone who they can/cannot dislike.

rishaed wrote:Sort of defeats the purpose of using the Foe button. And if they don't want to play them I let them play me, they may win 75% but i'll get more points in the end Also some use foe for medalhunting. And I don't want the site limiting functionality so no.

No. Using the foe button to exclude people you are afraid will beat you is being a pretty poor sport.

Do you even know what medal hunting is? Its not afraid that they will beat you, but wanting unique opponents. (and the medal) They may forget that they are on the foe list. And there's lots of people who are poor sports on here, that's why ratings abuse and the like happens. I don't see the reason to punish all the high rankers, just for those who are poor sports.

When does the validation happen? When the foe button is clicked? What if they aren't similar ranks when put on foe but after a week they are. Is the foe removed? Is it then put back on when ranks split again?

What about message board posts? I foe people because I get sick of hearing their drabble. Would that no longer apply if we are same rank?

rishaed wrote:Do you even know what medal hunting is? Its not afraid that they will beat you, but wanting unique opponents. (and the medal) They may forget that they are on the foe list. And there's lots of people who are poor sports on here, that's why ratings abuse and the like happens. I don't see the reason to punish all the high rankers, just for those who are poor sports.

Per the medal bit... there is another suggestion for that.

Also, I did say that if someone has a legitimate reason to not want to play someone.. aka they are an absolute jerk, then there is an option for that.

The trouble is that too many people label someone a "jerk" because they don't want to play people who might beat them. And, at some levels, it can be hard to find opponents unless you join a clan. That limits general mobility and while people certainly ought to be able to play friends, its not really competition if you only choose certain oponnents all the time.

patrickaa317 wrote:When does the validation happen? When the foe button is clicked? What if they aren't similar ranks when put on foe but after a week they are. Is the foe removed?

Yes

patrickaa317 wrote:Is it then put back on when ranks split again?

Not sure... probably not automatically, but that would be up for debate. Maybe when other person's rank changes you could be notified automatically and given the option to re-foe?

patrickaa317 wrote:What about message board posts? I foe people because I get sick of hearing their drabble. Would that no longer apply if we are same rank?

This would be one of the admin approval situations, though if its a forum issue, probably a forum mod should have the approval authority, rather than going through other admin folks.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:When does the validation happen? When the foe button is clicked? What if they aren't similar ranks when put on foe but after a week they are. Is the foe removed?

Yes

patrickaa317 wrote:Is it then put back on when ranks split again?

Not sure... probably not automatically, but that would be up for debate. Maybe when other person's rank changes you could be notified automatically and given the option to re-foe?

patrickaa317 wrote:What about message board posts? I foe people because I get sick of hearing their drabble. Would that no longer apply if we are same rank?

This would be one of the admin approval situations, though if its a forum issue, probably a forum mod should have the approval authority, rather than going through other admin folks.

If I went to the effort to foe someone, I wouldn't want it to be undone once our ranks were similar. If this went in, it would seems like a big waste of development time. And being notified and re-foe people as the bounce in ranks. Ish.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:What about message board posts? I foe people because I get sick of hearing their drabble. Would that no longer apply if we are same rank?

This would be one of the admin approval situations, though if its a forum issue, probably a forum mod should have the approval authority, rather than going through other admin folks.

Great! just another way to crowd our admins responsibilities. Even when extremely good suggestions take 4 mo. at least for implementation.

Everyone above 3500 points do not play low rank anyway. You can have a look to the games played by general and above.
You will find almost only team games and private games. Some of them may play special settings on one map only, and in that case the game wont be team or private but it is because they win 90% of the time on that specific map using those specific settings.
So, they wont foe low rank, because they only play them on 1vs1 or team game, and they want those easy points, otherwise it is private game or clan war. You wont see them playing public standart/assassin/terminator game with 3+ players anyway.
So I'd say it was an interesting suggestion but useless.

Donelladan wrote:Everyone above 3500 points do not play low rank anyway. You can have a look to the games played by general and above.
You will find almost only team games and private games. Some of them may play special settings on one map only, and in that case the game wont be team or private but it is because they win 90% of the time on that specific map using those specific settings.
So, they wont foe low rank, because they only play them on 1vs1 or team game, and they want those easy points, otherwise it is private game or clan war. You wont see them playing public standart/assassin/terminator game with 3+ players anyway.
So I'd say it was an interesting suggestion but useless.

I think you are referring to another suggestion (high ranks intruding on low rank games for farming purposes, etc.).

At any rate, you are correct that higher ranked folks tend to play more private games. This is not necessarily a good thing, though, for the community as a whole. This is why I offered the suggestion. This issue has been riding around for years.