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

[Queen_Herpes]

I pm'ed you several times.. you never got back to me.

Anytime boss.

Wow, this is such a good idea.

[Doc_Brown]

QH: Why do you keep bumping this thread? I thought you had decided to revamp your proposal, hence the updated version in the other thread:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=102006

Your other version had much more thought and was far better than the suggestion proposed in the first post of this thread - that is, that new players should be limited to the classic map and a certain arbitrary combination of game settings only. If you want to keep bumping your proposal, I suggest you bump your other thread. Though I grant that the other thread might not be as beneficial to your cause given the large number of very well-thought out challenges to your proposal (most of which have gone largely unanswered) from various people.

[Queen_Herpes]

QH: Why do you keep bumping this thread? I thought you had decided to revamp your proposal, hence the updated version in the other thread:
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=102006

Your other version had much more thought and was far better than the suggestion proposed in the first post of this thread - that is, that new players should be limited to the classic map and a certain arbitrary combination of game settings only. If you want to keep bumping your proposal, I suggest you bump your other thread. Though I grant that the other thread might not be as beneficial to your cause given the large number of very well-thought out challenges to your proposal (most of which have gone largely unanswered) from various people.

I'm not bumping, I'm just recognizing the thoughtful and functional responses to the thread. I don't have a ton of time to read them all, but I wil get to the other thread. I think they are both great ideas.

[Queen_Herpes]

I had some good IM chats with several players. Helped me to identify that there are more players in favor of this idea than there are against it. Thank you everyone - especially the two detractors.

[AAFitz]

I had some good IM chats with several players. Helped me to identify that there are more players in favor of this idea than there are against it. Thank you everyone - especially the two detractors.

Yeah, you may want to do some actual research on who thinks this is a good idea before saying something like this. The reason you dont see more people posting against this, is because most realize it is so unlikely to ever be implemented, that it simply doesnt warrant their time. Its great that you like it, and are the champion of it...and in many ways deserve a lot of respect....but I think youll have to open your own gaming site to get the kind of control over things that you seem to want. Though I suppose its more fun to try to tell others what they should do with their site. Its certainly a lot easier. However, a poll could be very interesting, though I doubt the results would mean very much when you see the 75-25% against the very idea of stripping players of their many choices of playing the interesting maps on CC.

I could be wrong, but I think most love that CC offers so much to so many, and even if there was the slight chance that it could even be monetarily helpful.....would still opt to keep it open. Its always has been, and always will be a great place to come play...and will be as open as possible, without choosing games for people simply because you think they are not ready.

Also, just because other players disagree with you, does not make them detractors. Though you seem to think its personal, and that because you think your cause is more important than others...that does not make it so.

I think your idea would be the worst idea CC ever accepted. I may be wrong, and you may be right, but I am very much entitled to that opinion...even if you think I am not. I certainly respect your right to believe your opinion. I simply disagree with it. It will be interesting to see the results of your poll though. Im surprised you havent made one yet.

[Bruceswar]

We had an IM chat... she went in circles trying to tell me why this was needed. In the end nothing got accomplished much but she was really nice about it all.

[Queen_Herpes]

We had an IM chat... she went in circles trying to tell me why this was needed. In the end nothing got accomplished much but she was really nice about it all.

Bruceswar! Thank you for the IM Chat! Yes, you and I did discuss this and I can point out how you were goin in circles as well! Curious comment from you!

For those that supported and IMed about it, feel free to post here. This is a great idea!

[Doc_Brown]

Does that mean you've returned to your original proposal as outlined in the first post of this thread? If not, than you need to edit your first post in this thread and/or make sure all posts go into your new thread. If you have in actuality returned to this idea, and you really think new players will benefit from being confined to the classic map and a very small subset of the possible game types, then you clearly have a very poor concept of the type of people that play games here.

Those types of restrictions will cut down on multis a great deal. They'll also prevent long-time players from having to play against new players who end up "messing up" their games. In other words, this proposal will benefit the well-established players here. But at what cost? I've given you a brief survey of people I've recruited to this site. I can assure you that if I had been limited to classic only for a couple months, or even if I had to play a set game type for that length of time, I wouldn't have stuck around for more than 2 games. I likewise wouldn't have brought over the 7+ players that I did. The site would have missed out on 5+ active players that I know about if your suggestion were implemented. Not a single person I know would be more likely to join this site if you tried to impose those restrictions. Most would be far less likely to join.

I know you tried to claim that the restrictions don't matter since people played on this site before some of those options were available. But they're available now and you want to tell a new player that you don't trust him to be good enough to even try a game on alternative maps or with different settings until he's played on this site consistently for months. And don't claim that he won't know about the various maps or settings. I had already browsed portions of the forum and had looked at many of the available maps before I played my first turn. Surely you don't intend to keep new players from browsing the forums too?

But I (and others) have pointed this out over and over again. In my view, you have the following major questions that have been raised but that you've never really addressed:
1) How will cutting people off from various settings and maps make them more likely to stay?
2) How can your suggestion account for new players with a wide variety of skill sets?
3) What are your criteria for determining which maps and settings are appropriate for every single player that has completed X games?
4) How does preventing a person from playing on a wider variety of maps better prepare them to play those maps?
5) Can you provide evidence, even anecdotal evidence, of people that quit the site because there were too many options available to them? In particular, would those same people have been more likely to stay if there were draconian restrictions placed on the playability of the site as opposed to offering them more immediate access to information and assistance?
6) Will not confining new players to a very limited set of games mean that they are more likely to end up in games composed almost exclusively of newer players who have some propensity to deadbeat? How will that improve the enjoyability of the site or the capacity for the new players to improve their skills?
7) Could most of your goals involving player retention and enjoyment be achieved by a tutorial program from which new players could opt out?

There are others, but those are what I could remember in a few minutes. Also, there are far more than 2 people opposed to this idea. I can name 6 off the top of my head. In a brief survey of your two threads on this issue, it looks like about 75% of the people making substantial comments are opposed to the idea. In terms of posts, it looks like more like 90+% of the posts are not in favor of the restrictions.

[Queen_Herpes]

Does that mean you've returned to your original proposal as outlined in the first post of this thread? If not, than you need to edit your first post in this thread and/or make sure all posts go into your new thread. If you have in actuality returned to this idea, and you really think new players will benefit from being confined to the classic map and a very small subset of the possible game types, then you clearly have a very poor concept of the type of people that play games here.

Those types of restrictions will cut down on multis a great deal. They'll also prevent long-time players from having to play against new players who end up "messing up" their games. In other words, this proposal will benefit the well-established players here. But at what cost? I've given you a brief survey of people I've recruited to this site. I can assure you that if I had been limited to classic only for a couple months, or even if I had to play a set game type for that length of time, I wouldn't have stuck around for more than 2 games. I likewise wouldn't have brought over the 7+ players that I did. The site would have missed out on 5+ active players that I know about if your suggestion were implemented. Not a single person I know would be more likely to join this site if you tried to impose those restrictions. Most would be far less likely to join.

I know you tried to claim that the restrictions don't matter since people played on this site before some of those options were available. But they're available now and you want to tell a new player that you don't trust him to be good enough to even try a game on alternative maps or with different settings until he's played on this site consistently for months. And don't claim that he won't know about the various maps or settings. I had already browsed portions of the forum and had looked at many of the available maps before I played my first turn. Surely you don't intend to keep new players from browsing the forums too?

But I (and others) have pointed this out over and over again. In my view, you have the following major questions that have been raised but that you've never really addressed:
1) How will cutting people off from various settings and maps make them more likely to stay?
2) How can your suggestion account for new players with a wide variety of skill sets?
3) What are your criteria for determining which maps and settings are appropriate for every single player that has completed X games?
4) How does preventing a person from playing on a wider variety of maps better prepare them to play those maps?
5) Can you provide evidence, even anecdotal evidence, of people that quit the site because there were too many options available to them? In particular, would those same people have been more likely to stay if there were draconian restrictions placed on the playability of the site as opposed to offering them more immediate access to information and assistance?
6) Will not confining new players to a very limited set of games mean that they are more likely to end up in games composed almost exclusively of newer players who have some propensity to deadbeat? How will that improve the enjoyability of the site or the capacity for the new players to improve their skills?
7) Could most of your goals involving player retention and enjoyment be achieved by a tutorial program from which new players could opt out?

There are others, but those are what I could remember in a few minutes. Also, there are far more than 2 people opposed to this idea. I can name 6 off the top of my head. In a brief survey of your two threads on this issue, it looks like about 75% of the people making substantial comments are opposed to the idea. In terms of posts, it looks like more like 90+% of the posts are not in favor of the restrictions.

I will get right on these questions and get a reply out as soon as possible. Please realize that my post count is about 1.4 per day....so you've received my post for the day. Unfortunately, My post count isn't 5.5 per day or higher...I just don't have the time. But these 7 questions are a priorty for me and I will get back to you right away.
This is still a great idea!

[Queen_Herpes]

OMG, I just spent 45 minutes typing what I've typed thus far. I will have to get to your list of questions on another night.

Does that mean you've returned to your original proposal as outlined in the first post of this thread? If not, than you need to edit your first post in this thread and/or make sure all posts go into your new thread.

I like both ideas, as do others. Do you think that every player posts in the forums?

Those types of restrictions will cut down on multis a great deal. They'll also prevent long-time players from having to play against new players who end up "messing up" their games. In other words, this proposal will benefit the well-established players here. But at what cost? I've given you a brief survey of people I've recruited to this site. I can assure you that if I had been limited to classic only for a couple months, or even if I had to play a set game type for that length of time, I wouldn't have stuck around for more than 2 games. I likewise wouldn't have brought over the 7+ players that I did. The site would have missed out on 5+ active players that I know about if your suggestion were implemented. Not a single person I know would be more likely to join this site if you tried to impose those restrictions. Most would be far less likely to join.

There is a lot of coaching that needs to take place when any player decides to "bring over" players. I doubt that their first games were on the toughest maps. There is a lot to teach to a new player: game options, maps and aspects of maps like impassables, one-way attacks, bombards, farting, sneezing and taking a crap. Not to mention the strategic aspects of the game like: deploying one troop to three territories and attacking with a 4 v 3 advantage from three locations. (The list of strategic perspectives goes on and on, but one would need to mention what happens when you take out another player (receiving their cards, being too thin, balancing the benefits and rewards.)) I'm just saying, and I think it is obvious, that it is a full time job to "bring over" a player and to use a term like "bring over" (as you so eloquently did) provides a connotation of ease, simplicity, and passive activity. "Bringing over" is NOT easy, NOT simplistic, and NOT passive. It is a very active process that takes a lot of time and committment. Having been "Brought Over" and currently being involved in "Bringing over" a new player, I can offer a perspective of both the trainer and the trainee. This site is not easy to understand, it is not easy to navigate. I think it is easier to navigate than Landgrab, and easier to understand than other similar sites. It is far better than the other sites I have perused. But, it has its inherent difficulties.

In an attempt to free players from the process of training new recruits (which is long and laborious) my suggestion herein is an attempt to put the training in the hands of the system. Allow the system to, well, systematically "train" players by providing them with the information needed to proceed to the next level.

I know you tried to claim that the restrictions don't matter since people played on this site before some of those options were available. But they're available now and you want to tell a new player that you don't trust him to be good enough to even try a game on alternative maps or with different settings until he's played on this site consistently for months. And don't claim that he won't know about the various maps or settings. I had already browsed portions of the forum and had looked at many of the available maps before I played my first turn. Surely you don't intend to keep new players from browsing the forums too?

This is not about trust. This is about getting more people involved in the site, more players...more fun! There seem to be a lot of players who have made it to the site; But, once here, they have chosen to leave and haven't returned. I agree that the length of time prescribed (number of games to become fully unlocked) in the other thread is too long based on the fact that freemium players cannot get through the training and unlocking in a swift manner unless they are hyperactive players who login more than once per day and play a lot of rounds per day. (also assuming their opponents are logging in and playing just as much.)

I'm attempting to make this site more functional for the least common denominator. Perhaps some other aspect could be added into the mix such as, if a player was "brought over" or "introduced" to the site by a benevolent current member. Perhaps those players and any players who take the steps to join the Society of Cooks can get a "pass" to bypass the systematic training. By far, the largest group of visitors to the site are going to be people who find the site via searches, links, and browsing. While each player here could foreseeably tell 10 friends and then each of them can tell 10 friends, you would have to assume that alot of that has already taken place to this point. My system is for the casual browser who needs the assistance of a systematic training program that doesn't rely upon humans to walk them through.

There are others, but those are what I could remember in a few minutes. Also, there are far more than 2 people opposed to this idea. I can name 6 off the top of my head. In a brief survey of your two threads on this issue, it looks like about 75% of the people making substantial comments are opposed to the idea. In terms of posts, it looks like more like 90+% of the posts are not in favor of the restrictions.

In any business, with any idea, or any service, the people who are opposed to an idea or felt like they had "bad service" or felt wronged are more likely to call, comment, email, or tell 10 friends about the situation. People who like something or felt like things went really well somewhere are unlikely to say anything to anyone about it. As it happens, some have said positive things to me in game chat, in PMs, on my wall and some here in this thread and the other thread. Of the posters here, a few have shown their dislike. One in particular has posted frequently and often about her dislike for the suggestion. To term it in a percentage of the posts would be giving unfair weight to one poster.

Ultimately, this is a tried and true recommendation. Gamers all over the world unlock their way to greatness with video games like Conquer Club. There is precedent as currently lackattack has chosen to lock new recruits out of 50+ maps. They unlock those maps with time. Great idea! I merely stand on the shoulders of giants.

[Bruceswar]

We had an IM chat... she went in circles trying to tell me why this was needed. In the end nothing got accomplished much but she was really nice about it all.

Bruceswar! Thank you for the IM Chat! Yes, you and I did discuss this and I can point out how you were goin in circles as well! Curious comment from you!

For those that supported and IMed about it, feel free to post here. This is a great idea!

Maybe I should add we did not have much middle ground so we both seemed to go in circles. I am one who does not like to limit people from playing anything they wish or like. You used the ... if other games can do it... The only thing I will add.. is those other games you can usually play unlimited amounts of time on unlike CC where you must wait for each turn. Anyhow moving on...

[Queen_Herpes]

Conquerclub would be in a better place to consider a plan where new levels of unlocking are added to the one that lackattack already built into the system. Great idea!

[SuicidalSnowman]

Wow this is some dedication!

[Doc_Brown]

This site is not easy to understand, it is not easy to navigate. I think it is easier to navigate than Landgrab, and easier to understand than other similar sites. It is far better than the other sites I have perused. But, it has its inherent difficulties.

Speak for yourself! I've pointed out several times before that no one held my hand when I joined the site. I had no trouble finding BOB, reading through the forums, and getting a general feel for strategy. I think wacicha, mpjh, Georgex7di, firstholliday, and AAFitz could all tell you that I picked up on strategy pretty fast. I did join the SoC early on, but I think the instructors there can confirm that it hasn't taken much coaching (and certainly minimal hand-holding) to get me to a solidly competitive level. At least one of the players I brought over to the site has likewise had no trouble climbing the ranks to SFC. She never bothered to join SoC or any of the other training groups here. I did nothing in the way of coaching or explaining the site to her, yet she is a solid player. I'm not claiming that there aren't people that need more instruction, all I'm doing is pointing out that you would seriously stunt players like us.

Furthermore, I would claim that players like us, who catch on to the site quickly and don't need your training restrictions, are the ones that would be most likely to stick around long-term and won't get frustrated and leave the site after losing too many games. On the other hand, if your restrictions were in place, we wouldn't bother to stick around and would just go find another place where we can find people who would treat us with an appropriate level of respect. As a result, the overall quality of players on this site would decline.

This is about getting more people involved in the site, more players...more fun!

Easy for you to say. This wouldn't impose any restrictions on you. As one that would be affected by this proposal, I can tell you that it would absolutely NOT be fun in ANY way.

I agree that the length of time prescribed (number of games to become fully unlocked) in the other thread is too long based on the fact that freemium players cannot get through the training and unlocking in a swift manner unless they are hyperactive players who login more than once per day and play a lot of rounds per day. (also assuming their opponents are logging in and playing just as much.)

I would probably fit the category of the hyperactive player. As a freemium player, the best I can do is about 10 games per month. Lack's restrictions allow my to play on any map I want from day 1, so long as I create the game. I can join any game on the site within about 2 weeks (on average). That is an acceptable level of restrictions for a well-abled player. You would have me stuck playing the classic map only for a full month or more. The thing that attracted me to this site was the variety of maps and settings. I didn't even bother to try the classic map until I joined the SoC. To think that restricting me to the classic map, even for just 10 games, would improve my enjoyment of this site is absolutely foolish.

I'm attempting to make this site more functional for the least common denominator.

I understand that, but you can't do that at the expense of people at the higher end of the scale. Ultimately it's going to be the above average people that will: 1) Be most likely to become premium and stick with the site long-term; 2) Most dislike these restrictions; and 3) Be most likely to leave the site if these restrictions were in place. This idea would be completely counter-productive to the long-term health of this site.

Perhaps some other aspect could be added into the mix such as, if a player was "brought over" or "introduced" to the site by a benevolent current member. Perhaps those players and any players who take the steps to join the Society of Cooks can get a "pass" to bypass the systematic training. By far, the largest group of visitors to the site are going to be people who find the site via searches, links, and browsing. While each player here could foreseeably tell 10 friends and then each of them can tell 10 friends, you would have to assume that alot of that has already taken place to this point. My system is for the casual browser who needs the assistance of a systematic training program that doesn't rely upon humans to walk them through.

The casual browser that has extensive gaming experience on other sites would have no need of your program. I didn't. An alternative that I've suggested over and over again that would make this suggestion very palatable and could actually accomplish much of what you want in terms of helping new players without chasing away more highly-qualified players would be to automatically enroll new players in your system but to allow them to opt out if they wish. The people that will read enough to find out how to opt-out are the players that are most likely to dig around enough to figure out how to be competitive on this site.

Side note: The above paragraph is assuming the other version of your proposal where new players would have a fairly substantial pool of maps to choose from. To be completely honest and blunt, limiting players to the classic map only for their first 10 games is the worst suggestion I've seen to date.

Ultimately, this is a tried and true recommendation. Gamers all over the world unlock their way to greatness with video games like Conquer Club. There is precedent as currently lackattack has chosen to lock new recruits out of 50+ maps. They unlock those maps with time.

Video game players are able to unlock content in a matter of hours, not months. Even with that, the video gamers chafe under the restrictions and go searching for ways to get access to the hidden content without having to submit to the few extra hours required. Furthermore, in terms of advancing to later levels, the new content is a direct extension of the earlier content. The abilities gained in the early levels directly transitions to that needed in later levels. Conversely, on this site, different game settings and different maps are played in radically different ways. To some extent, the strategies used in no-spoils games are almost the exact opposite of those used in escalating spoils games.

Lack's current implementation allows players to get around the restrictions if they really wish to do so. The restrictions only last for 5 games. Even for those first five games, something like half the maps on the site are available. You would more than double the length of the restrictions, enforce them with no way to get around them, and you would lock it down from 40+ maps to a single map. To say that your concept is built on top of those other ideas is analogous to claiming that if a person enjoys an occasional glass of wine or beer, they'll be much better off if they start downing the alcohol constantly seven days a week.

Great idea!

If I start ending every post on this topic with "Horrible idea," will it make it more true?

[Queen_Herpes]

doc, I'll get back to you soon. My infant daughter has a fever and so do I. I'm on here to play games and will attempt to get to your questions and these responses as soon as I can.

[captainwalrus]

I don't like your rates. I would never have staid if it took me 6 months to unlock all the maps. My first game was world 2.1 and that is what hooked me. If I hadn't been allowed to play that, I wouldn't thing CC was anything special and I would have left.

[Outnumbered]

Hi Everyone,

I'm a Freemium NR and I am attracted to the sheer variety of maps on offer here. I look forward to playing a few casual games and gaining full access to this site. Please do not restrict my options. I hate unlockables as I'm a rather busy guy. Unlockables have thier place in video games (gotta keep the kids hooked) but being a working adult, I've always wished for a way to access ALL of the content that I paid for in a game without jumping through hoops or reaching for some "carrot on a stick". Sides, this is no video game as far as I'm concerned, it's RISK on steroids which I thinks is great.

Right now, I'm happy playing only a couple of casual 24hr games at once and I fear that if this idea became reality, I'd never get to see the content I want to see at the pace I'm going. Education is the answer here not restriction.

[AAFitz]

Hi Everyone,

I'm a Freemium NR and I am attracted to the sheer variety of maps on offer here. I look forward to playing a few casual games and gaining full access to this site. Please do not restrict my options. I hate unlockables as I'm a rather busy guy. Unlockables have thier place in video games (gotta keep the kids hooked) but being a working adult, I've always wished for a way to access ALL of the content that I paid for in a game without jumping through hoops or reaching for some "carrot on a stick". Sides, this is no video game as far as I'm concerned, it's RISK on steroids which I thinks is great.

Right now, I'm happy playing only a couple of casual 24hr games at once and I fear that if this idea became reality, I'd never get to see the content I want to see at the pace I'm going. Education is the answer here not restriction.

I suspect that would be the sentiment of EVERY new player coming to the site. I for one expect you will be allowed to try the site out as you please. I will certainly never stop trying to protect this right, for you, others like you, and CC in general. I feel at this point its obvious that this suggestion will serve no one on CC in any meaningful way, and will much more likely cost potential customers, rather than attract them with this....less is more, approach.

I think if you ask any new player if they would like to try difficult maps...or need to play some that others consider less difficult first, nearly every one would say yes. None would say, no...please dont let me try those maps. What is needed, is information about them, so you can join, fully educated, that this map, and these settings are advanced, and while you are welcome to give them a try, you should at least be prepared.

Also, since some come fully capable of learning these maps after a game or two on them...its just pointless to make them play maps they might not enjoy, simply because someone else considers them more or less difficult.

This suggestion will not serve you, and wont serve any like you. The stated goals are completely achievable with simple labeling, and I think that that has been established quite clearly at this point...especially from input of new players like yourself...or any that remember what they did when they first got here....

I myself had played risk for years....but I wanted to try the new maps...the new settings, the new options... I very may well have left if I was stuck playing a map that I already understood quite well. But thats just me. Perhaps not everyone wants to have freedom to decide what they'd like to try, what they enjoy playing, or deciding when they are ready...however...I suspect most would like that freedom. I am thankful that the owner of this site, has proven that this very freedom is the basis for nearly ever decision CC has ever made. Its why so many work hard to protect these freedoms.

[Qwert]

Well i think that best option will be Tutorial Period,where player are limited to 5 games in most simple Map-Classic,after that everything its open for play. Also instead limitation its best to improve all basic informacion abouth Strategy-Cards-Gameplay, and to have data base of all maps in one place with all relevant informacion(territory,strategy,bonuses).
Every new player will get message with this links to visit and to read these informacions.

[Queen_Herpes]

Hi Everyone,

I'm a Freemium NR and I am attracted to the sheer variety of maps on offer here. I look forward to playing a few casual games and gaining full access to this site. Please do not restrict my options. I hate unlockables as I'm a rather busy guy. Unlockables have thier place in video games (gotta keep the kids hooked) but being a working adult, I've always wished for a way to access ALL of the content that I paid for in a game without jumping through hoops or reaching for some "carrot on a stick". Sides, this is no video game as far as I'm concerned, it's RISK on steroids which I thinks is great.

Right now, I'm happy playing only a couple of casual 24hr games at once and I fear that if this idea became reality, I'd never get to see the content I want to see at the pace I'm going. Education is the answer here not restriction.

I suspect that would be the sentiment of EVERY new player coming to the site. I for one expect you will be allowed to try the site out as you please. I will certainly never stop trying to protect this right, for you, others like you, and CC in general. I feel at this point its obvious that this suggestion will serve no one on CC in any meaningful way, and will much more likely cost potential customers, rather than attract them with this....less is more, approach.

I think if you ask any new player if they would like to try difficult maps...or need to play some that others consider less difficult first, nearly every one would say yes. None would say, no...please dont let me try those maps. What is needed, is information about them, so you can join, fully educated, that this map, and these settings are advanced, and while you are welcome to give them a try, you should at least be prepared.

Also, since some come fully capable of learning these maps after a game or two on them...its just pointless to make them play maps they might not enjoy, simply because someone else considers them more or less difficult.

This suggestion will not serve you, and wont serve any like you. The stated goals are completely achievable with simple labeling, and I think that that has been established quite clearly at this point...especially from input of new players like yourself...or any that remember what they did when they first got here....

I myself had played risk for years....but I wanted to try the new maps...the new settings, the new options... I very may well have left if I was stuck playing a map that I already understood quite well. But thats just me. Perhaps not everyone wants to have freedom to decide what they'd like to try, what they enjoy playing, or deciding when they are ready...however...I suspect most would like that freedom. I am thankful that the owner of this site, has proven that this very freedom is the basis for nearly ever decision CC has ever made. Its why so many work hard to protect these freedoms.

Nice plant. This thread was efffectively dead until a player than joined a few days before found it on PAGE 3 of the sugs and bugs page.

Lack already locks players out of certain maps. Precedent. The plant has joined a luxembourg and canada game. More an example of self-regulating than anything else.

[Queen_Herpes]

Well i think that best option will be Tutorial Period,where player are limited to 5 games in most simple Map-Classic,after that everything its open for play. Also instead limitation its best to improve all basic informacion abouth Strategy-Cards-Gameplay, and to have data base of all maps in one place with all relevant informacion(territory,strategy,bonuses).
Every new player will get message with this links to visit and to read these informacions.

Agreed, a tutorial period is a great idea, opting into it or out of it would be a great option.

[Doc_Brown]

Agreed, a tutorial period is a great idea, opting into it or out of it would be a great option.

That's all I've been asking for all along! If the tutorial is strictly optional (and I'd even be content with the slightly more intrusive opt-out approach), I have no major objections.

As for the other new player, I highly doubt he was a plant of any sort. Within the first couple days after I joined I had scanned a few pages deep in this forum and in the strategy forum. He may also have found this thread via the links in the original thread whose title is enough to cause a minor panic in new players. It's an astute observation that he joined games based on the more basic maps in a self-regulating manner. This is why actual restrictions are unnecessary! A significant portion of the players that join will take a good look at the maps and will jump into more advanced maps when they think they are ready to do so. A fair number may find themselves a bit overwhelmed even at that, but most of us would at that point either decide to play a whole bunch of games on a particularly difficult map to figure it out, or we'll decide to avoid it for a good while and come back to it later.

[AAFitz]

Lack already locks players out of certain maps. Precedent. The plant has joined a luxembourg and canada game. More an example of self-regulating than anything else.

Locking new players out for five games is vastly different then your suggestion. Precedent means nothing when making decisions. The fact that it has been done, does not even mean that it should have been done...or should be done again. This is not a court case, its a discussion about whats best for the site. As far as what map he thinks will be fun, I think thats up to him, while you clearly do not.

Nice plant. This thread was efffectively dead until a player than joined a few days before found it on PAGE 3 of the sugs and bugs page.

Now for the fun part... Are you are accusing me of knowing this other person, and asking them to post? This is funny for a few reasons one... if I wanted to do this, I would not have waited till now. Two... I could easily ask many, many players to post in here if I wanted to, but do not do that, and have not. Three...to even think this, shows how personal you take this, when all it is is a simple suggestion, that I happen to disagree with. As it turns out.. I saw someone post who happened to be a new player, and added to what they said. His post confirms what I suspect would be the feeling of nearly all new people to the site, which is the reason I post in here. I think through all this trying to prove your court case with references, arguments, precedents, you have lost sight that we are trying to do whats best for CC...and not just win an argument. Your passion is admirable, and the time you put into it is fully respectable, however, I truly believe you have a closed mind on the subject, and have not truly heard one real point or question that any oposer has presented.

So now you' ve accused a new player of posting with alterior motives, and want to take away his maps. It makes it real hard to think you have CCs best interests when I see such things... if you are just paranoid however, I apologize for suspecting that. More importantly, if I wanted to have someone post in here... Id have done it long before now. Like you said...it was on page three...kind of silly of me to ask someone to bump it if you really think about it...

I suppose I do see why you suspected it though, except that a new recruit may very well be interested in a thread about new recruits. In any case, if its a plant...its not mine. I also wonder if this suspicion is because you yourself ask people to come to your thread and post support. Unlike you I wont accuse you of such a thing, but I will wonder about it now, as will many I suspect.

[captainwalrus]

Do you really think it takes 80 games to understand how to play?
Even so, you don't need to only let them play once they have gotten it down well and can win, you just need to restrict them until they have gotten the hang of it enough so that they won't be overwhelmed and leave. As someone who has been playing here for over two years but has played less than 200 games, I say, this idea sucks.
Once people are no longer new recruits, let them play whatever they want. That gives them five games of classic standard gameplay under their belt, which is enough for the basics. Then if they try something new and get overwhelmed, so be it, they have their original few maps and standard settings to fall back on if they feel they can't get used to other settings. Then they can try new things out on their own time. I was here for over a year by the time I would have been allowed to play all maps and all settings under this system. You premiums forget how slow it can be for someone with a maximum of four games at a time.

While I admit, the first time I played freestyle I was a bit overwhelmed, delaying it 6 months isn't going to help that, it is just going to mean that when I get bored of standard I leave the site, instead of shifting over and trying some new settings, because I haven't unlocked them yet.

[Outnumbered]

I AM legit and I've been reading the Forums for several days since I signed up.

It's interesting to read what veterans of this site have to say about people like me so, I followed this thread. I'm only familiar with the European/US rule sets to the old boardgame at present and I haven't played in quite a while so I've no intention of getting into Freestyle, Assassin, nukes etc. until I fully understand what they are about. I was inspired to play here after getting totally whipped a few weeks ago in a game of straight Risk using the Godstorm map. Your mapsmiths are doing an amazing job guys! Sillysoft (Lux Delux) offer something like 700 maps but they don't appeal to me as much as yours do.

Thanks.