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

[PLAYER57832]

PS. There already are a few "comprehensive" guides to "how to play CC". Few people bother to read them.

Point out where they are located.

Search: Strategy, basic guides or basic gameplay.

Others are in the works, but not yet public.

Part of what a lot of people like is knowing that they have their own way of playing and "discovering" secret techniques and so forth (even if they really are not). I realize you are trying to help, but you have made far too many assumptions all along.

Many, many people keep trying to tell you that the things you mention are not really why QUALITY people leave. Some people do leave because they are "overwhelmed" or lose too often. But those are just plain factors of the game. You are not going to get everyone to like it here. That's just how it is. Not everyone likes every map. A lot of people hate AOR, for example. It is my favorite. A lot of people "hate" maps they have never even tried to play.

When I talk about a variety of maps, by-the-way, up until my 2 years of premium expired, I had not just played, but won every map multiple times. Took a break and have not tried all the newest Beta maps... but I will, in time. Anyway, compare that to your record as far as knowing which maps are and are not OK for newbies to play.

[Queen_Herpes]

PS. There already are a few "comprehensive" guides to "how to play CC". Few people bother to read them.

Point out where they are located.

Search: Strategy, basic guides or basic gameplay.

Others are in the works, but not yet public.

Ok, so you're saying they're hard to find. Thank you for pointing that out. All the more reason for a player to leave.

Part of what a lot of people like is knowing that they have their own way of playing and "discovering" secret techniques and so forth (even if they really are not).

So, again, you're saying they're hard to find. Probably not too helpful for people who are internet-search-and-find challenged.

Many, many people keep trying to tell you that the things you mention are not really why QUALITY people leave.

I'm into quantity, not quality. The quality players are already here. I'm trying to help those players that aren't too hot to get to a basic understanding level, then have an "AHA MOMENT," learn to like it, learn more about the game, stick around. There are precious few (19,000) out of the 350,000 who are quality. I'd like to see a few more stick around, and I don't mind setting something up to attempt to help them out.

Some people do leave because they are "overwhelmed" or lose too often. But those are just plain factors of the game. You are not going to get everyone to like it here. That's just how it is. Not everyone likes every map.

Of course, not everyone will stay. But I feel like you're stating the obvious. 5% have stuck around. I think that number could be easily increased to 10% and we could have a lot more competitors to play against. And not just any old competitor, but ones that have learned the maps and settings before joining the fray.

When I talk about a variety of maps, by-the-way, up until my 2 years of premium expired, I had not just played, but won every map multiple times. Took a break and have not tried all the newest Beta maps... but I will, in time. Anyway, compare that to your record as far as knowing which maps are and are not OK for newbies to play.

Congrats! I've played alot of maps, too. I find that when I play most of my favorite maps, the players who join tend to not know what is going on. When I make comments in the game chat, they don't even know the game chat is there...or they are completely ignoring me (for good reason, i'm a pretty boring gal.) I'm just saying there is a lot that can be done to open the eyes of the newer players...to help them...to make games more interesting, etc.

[Evil Semp]

I'm into quantity, not quality.

I think that quote says it all.

[Doc_Brown]

1) They won't know the maps exist. Current players would be grandfathered in.
2) There would need to be a way to opt out per your recommednations in other comments.
3) I don't know which settings to open up first. I'm open to suggestion. As far as the maps go, I have already listed those in the other suggestion.
4) Players can gain experience on less complicated maps and then apply what they have learned on those maps to then have somewhat of a leg up when compared to players who play five games then play waterloo.
5) Cognitive dissonance combined with simulus overload is theoretically why players would get frustrated and leave. There is no information on how to play, how to deal with settings, etc., on this site such that a player can join, go to the info page, learn basic info, then play. The only way this site offers to learn is to jump into games. Once done, you get an email saying "join the Society of Cooks" which is a meaningless title of a group to a new player.
6) Good point, you've found another way that the enjoyment level could decrease. I think if you go to my other suggestion, you will see that there is a solution with AI opponents. the AIs don't deadbeat.
7) Opting out, as mentioned in another post, would be a viable way to deal with it. However, you made a better suggestion as to a solution for the higher achieving new players and how they can opt out of the training.

Thank you for answering these and some of the other questions I posed. I think you recognize, at least at some level, some of my essential complaints with the concept. I've said a couple times that if this was an optional training program, I wouldn't continue to oppose it the way I've been doing. And by optional, I'm okay with an opt-out, so long as it's not a major hassle. I think a tab in the control panel would be sufficiently difficult to find for players already overwhelmed with the site, but players that demonstrate sufficient proficiency in locating information (meaning in my mind that they'll be able to find out what they need to know on most of the maps) would be able to change the level of restrictions on their accounts.

I intend to step back from this suggestion, at least for a good while. I think we still disagree about how effective a number of aspects of this will be and how frustrating (as opposed to helpful) it would be. None the less, it's clear that you recognize potential drawbacks. By all means take or adapt anything I've said that you find helpful and incorporate it in whatever way you see fit! I said early on that I applauded your efforts and your desire to make the site more enjoyable for new players. I still feel that way. I just disagree with you on what I think would be most helpful. Suggestions that I've made in here were meant to be helpful, not as my own ideas, but as ways that might improve areas of your suggestion that I thought were most problematic. If I wanted to keep those ideas as my own they would have gone into a new thread instead of in yours!

In any case, good luck to you in your crusade. Hopefully we'll meet in a game one of these days. In the mean time, if you want some further feedback on a new rendition of your ideas from a fairly new freemium player, feel free to send me another message and I'll take another look at it.

[Queen_Herpes]

1) They won't know the maps exist. Current players would be grandfathered in.
2) There would need to be a way to opt out per your recommednations in other comments.
3) I don't know which settings to open up first. I'm open to suggestion. As far as the maps go, I have already listed those in the other suggestion.
4) Players can gain experience on less complicated maps and then apply what they have learned on those maps to then have somewhat of a leg up when compared to players who play five games then play waterloo.
5) Cognitive dissonance combined with simulus overload is theoretically why players would get frustrated and leave. There is no information on how to play, how to deal with settings, etc., on this site such that a player can join, go to the info page, learn basic info, then play. The only way this site offers to learn is to jump into games. Once done, you get an email saying "join the Society of Cooks" which is a meaningless title of a group to a new player.
6) Good point, you've found another way that the enjoyment level could decrease. I think if you go to my other suggestion, you will see that there is a solution with AI opponents. the AIs don't deadbeat.
7) Opting out, as mentioned in another post, would be a viable way to deal with it. However, you made a better suggestion as to a solution for the higher achieving new players and how they can opt out of the training.

Thank you for answering these and some of the other questions I posed. I think you recognize, at least at some level, some of my essential complaints with the concept. I've said a couple times that if this was an optional training program, I wouldn't continue to oppose it the way I've been doing. And by optional, I'm okay with an opt-out, so long as it's not a major hassle. I think a tab in the control panel would be sufficiently difficult to find for players already overwhelmed with the site, but players that demonstrate sufficient proficiency in locating information (meaning in my mind that they'll be able to find out what they need to know on most of the maps) would be able to change the level of restrictions on their accounts.

I intend to step back from this suggestion, at least for a good while. I think we still disagree about how effective a number of aspects of this will be and how frustrating (as opposed to helpful) it would be. None the less, it's clear that you recognize potential drawbacks. By all means take or adapt anything I've said that you find helpful and incorporate it in whatever way you see fit! I said early on that I applauded your efforts and your desire to make the site more enjoyable for new players. I still feel that way. I just disagree with you on what I think would be most helpful. Suggestions that I've made in here were meant to be helpful, not as my own ideas, but as ways that might improve areas of your suggestion that I thought were most problematic. If I wanted to keep those ideas as my own they would have gone into a new thread instead of in yours!

In any case, good luck to you in your crusade. Hopefully we'll meet in a game one of these days. In the mean time, if you want some further feedback on a new rendition of your ideas from a fairly new freemium player, feel free to send me another message and I'll take another look at it.

I'll be happy to let you know. You may be surprised to know...and i just learned this...that players who haven't reached their first 5 games are also locked out of certain settings as well:
“New Recruits must earn a promotion to join Assassin games, Terminator games, team games, large games (6 or more players) and games on complex maps (they will be hidden from Join A Game and Game Finder listings). These restrictions do not apply to private games.”
--from the score, rankings, and medals page

[Doc_Brown]

I'll be happy to let you know. You may be surprised to know...and i just learned this...that players who haven't reached their first 5 games are also locked out of certain settings as well:
“New Recruits must earn a promotion to join Assassin games, Terminator games, team games, large games (6 or more players) and games on complex maps (they will be hidden from Join A Game and Game Finder listings). These restrictions do not apply to private games.”
--from the score, rankings, and medals page

I'm quite aware. I had to be invited to my first few SoC games because I hadn't completed the requisite 5 to be able to join terminator games on my own. However, I was able to start terminator games if I wished. I could also be invited to public or private terminator games (or games on any map).

[Queen_Herpes]

I'll be happy to let you know. You may be surprised to know...and i just learned this...that players who haven't reached their first 5 games are also locked out of certain settings as well:
“New Recruits must earn a promotion to join Assassin games, Terminator games, team games, large games (6 or more players) and games on complex maps (they will be hidden from Join A Game and Game Finder listings). These restrictions do not apply to private games.”
--from the score, rankings, and medals page

I'm quite aware. I had to be invited to my first few SoC games because I hadn't completed the requisite 5 to be able to join terminator games on my own. However, I was able to start terminator games if I wished. I could also be invited to public or private terminator games (or games on any map).

Seems like it is part of the site to prevent new players from joining certain maps already...which is partly my point.

[shanksdigs]

How is this suggestion going?

[AAFitz]

How is this suggestion going?

Well, queen had to bump it after almost a month of inactivity...I think that just about sums it up.

[army of nobunaga]

guys, I use to be a marketer and frankly this idea has potential. I have a very high level character in Facebook mafia warz. Very high level. Lot of money and time. I have spent maybe 2000 dollars on it. I am a legend in other explorer games across the web. All have cost WAY more than CC. And I ask myself, why do I spend more time on CC than on any and all other games combined? Its more fun, more drama, more interesting. I dont know the owners financial status. But mafia wars has 10mill paying customers. And this is a better product. .......


Why....


Back to the topic. People are builders, people like goals. Its in the human intellect to build something (thus noobs loving the bonus even in 8 man esc) Its in us all to build.

The owner COULD set up a level and build system that would draw people in like a crack whore in a dollar store. This is an excellent Idea, and I would love to see 10 mill users here.

Everyone is thinking im crazy.. why? its possible. MAfia wars sucks as a game. But people are so fucking addicted to it, its crazy. Hell the owner could hire a programmer to make a facebook app for 10k, and I swear he would be a millionaire.

but anyway


my 2 cents

[shanksdigs]

Probably, what I should have said was, "Hasn't this been approved, yet?"

[jrh_cardinal]

When I first started reading the first post, all I sould think was "this is f***ing reatarded". At the end, I actually agree though. I especially like Queen's explanation of how it would improve the site (David Hoekstra would hate this). This would make mods jobs easier, plus it would lower way overinflated scores (like David Hoekstra's). Sorry, don't mean to pick on you DH, just first person that came to mind, besides, it is your occupation

Back on topic, the multi idea is brilliant. I have seen multiple cases of people freely admitting to making a few multis per day and using special routers and technology crap so they can't be stopped. This is where mods would have much less trouble.

In terms of the actual restrictions though I would definitely lower them a little. People should be able to play at least 5 maps right away plus chained and unlimited reinforcements (I think these are easier than adjacent where you have to work to keep your armies out in front of the action). This way, we don't scare people off who think CC has no variation in its games. Also, they should be able to play all or at least almost all maps at about 20 games. Multi's are freemies obviously so they still won't want to play 20 games to get the rest of the options. A few complicated maps and FOW could be held back for a few more games so that newbies aren't overwhelmed, but again, we don't want people to leave before they even know all the AMAZING options on CC.

I haven't read all 16 pages so some of this has probably been said, sorry, but I did skim most of it so I don't think I'm copying anyone.

My 3 cents (just to be different)

[AAFitz]

Probably, what I should have said was, "Hasn't this been approved, yet?"

As explained many times, its completely against the entire philosophy of CC since inception of making the site better, and the most open site on the web.

I hardly doubt lack is going to reverse this policy and have a complete personality change just because your "friend" really, really wants her idea to be approved and supplied her "credentials".

I do truly hope that some of these ideas are implemented however, all except for the locking of the maps. There really needs to be a labeling of the difficulty and types of maps so new players can make informed decisions as to what they want to try to play.

The only part of this I, and most others happen to disagree with, is the fact that the queen should decide what they play, and when.

I would also regret having to point out the flaws more, if so very early on she was not made aware of these facts by several players that understand the situation quite well. Pushing beyond that was fine, but she was well warned of the reasons this was against everything CC stood for, and she simply pressed on, either ignoring, or for whatever other reason.

In the end, its been made very clear that limiting options will obviously, and self-evidently not make new recruits stay, and more likely will leave before seeing some of the great maps available, if this idea were ever implemented.

Again though, this is not to discredit the work put into it which is more than respectable. It was to some degree just misplaced effort, and quite clearly became a selfish push to get her idea implemented, with no real regard for the actual effects of it. If you and she didnt continually bump it, it wouldnt even be discussed anymore.

[PLAYER57832]

[

I do truly hope that some of these ideas are implemented however, all except for the locking of the maps. There really needs to be a labeling of the difficulty and types of maps so new players can make informed decisions as to what they want to try to play.

I created a list with this intent. Some people have liked it, but it was never fully accepted.

One problem is that everybody seems to have their own pet classification system. Ironically, many of those same people have not even played most of the maps, but no one system is going to please everybody. I tried to keep things as nuetral as possible, looking mostly at styles of play. I did classify some as "complicated", but otherwise, just stuck to general stuff, like resource pairs, route variations and unusual shapes.

[Queen_Herpes]

When I first started reading the first post, all I sould think was "this is f***ing reatarded". At the end, I actually agree though. I especially like Queen's explanation of how it would improve the site (David Hoekstra would hate this). This would make mods jobs easier, plus it would lower way overinflated scores (like David Hoekstra's). Sorry, don't mean to pick on you DH, just first person that came to mind, besides, it is your occupation

Back on topic, the multi idea is brilliant. I have seen multiple cases of people freely admitting to making a few multis per day and using special routers and technology crap so they can't be stopped. This is where mods would have much less trouble.

In terms of the actual restrictions though I would definitely lower them a little. People should be able to play at least 5 maps right away plus chained and unlimited reinforcements (I think these are easier than adjacent where you have to work to keep your armies out in front of the action). This way, we don't scare people off who think CC has no variation in its games. Also, they should be able to play all or at least almost all maps at about 20 games. Multi's are freemies obviously so they still won't want to play 20 games to get the rest of the options. A few complicated maps and FOW could be held back for a few more games so that newbies aren't overwhelmed, but again, we don't want people to leave before they even know all the AMAZING options on CC.

I haven't read all 16 pages so some of this has probably been said, sorry, but I did skim most of it so I don't think I'm copying anyone.

My 3 cents (just to be different)

You are spot on. Some members had the same initial reaction, one or two have carried that reaction to the extreme, discounting the merits of the suggestion...in a blind crusade to stop something completely functional from helping the site. Kudos to you for being open minded and taking a look at the potential of this suggestion. As you mentioned, the number of games to unlock is still too high, something I will likely put more time and effort into in the future.

Thank you for the support and GREAT POST!

[AAFitz]

You are spot on. Some members had the same initial reaction, one or two have carried that reaction to the extreme, discounting the merits of the suggestion...in a blind crusade to stop something completely functional from helping the site. Kudos to you for being open minded and taking a look at the potential of this suggestion. As you mentioned, the number of games to unlock is still too high, something I will likely put more time and effort into in the future.

Thank you for the support and GREAT POST!

Actually, most of the members I see posting, are simply pointing out the many reasons why this suggestion is bad for CC. The only blind crusade is the one ignoring the many, many problems with deciding which games people should be able to play, essentially eliminating CC's greatest advantage over all other gaming sites which is its vast array of maps and that is yours.

Your crusade completely ignores the benefit to other sites if this suggestion was implemented, because since most copy CCs maps....new players could literally be able to go try these awesome maps out on other sites before ever getting the chance to try them on CC, for which they were created in the first place.

That fact is so obvious and blatant, that it raises suspicions of the intent of this crusade at its very core. I dont want to accuse anyone of planting threads as you have, but I will certainly say that I personally am suspicious of the entire thread, especially given your familiarity with other sites, and your constant bashing of this ones management, and your low ratings, and constant negativity in games and forums.

To suggest you only have CC's interest at heart, is simply not believable, which is why much effort has been put into pointing out the many flaws and dangers of this suggestion, which would have died, long ago, without your obvious bumping of it by you, and...very close friends of yours.

[AAFitz]

[

I do truly hope that some of these ideas are implemented however, all except for the locking of the maps. There really needs to be a labeling of the difficulty and types of maps so new players can make informed decisions as to what they want to try to play.

I created a list with this intent. Some people have liked it, but it was never fully accepted.

One problem is that everybody seems to have their own pet classification system. Ironically, many of those same people have not even played most of the maps, but no one system is going to please everybody. I tried to keep things as nuetral as possible, looking mostly at styles of play. I did classify some as "complicated", but otherwise, just stuck to general stuff, like resource pairs, route variations and unusual shapes.

Well theres no doubt that a perfect classification is not possible, but as a quick guide, and if used only as a reference there is no harm if a map falls in between. Settings will always change the classification too, but I do completely agree with Queen Herpes that new recruits deserve to know the difficulty of the game they are about to join.

I simply disagree that they do not deserve the chance to try them.

When I came to CC, I was looking for a risk site, but what kept me here was the community of good players, most with good feedback...I ignored the ones with bad feedback like her easy enough....and the various maps....

I certainly played my share of Classic games but now, the map is a mere memory, and I dont even think it is a fair representation of CC anymore.

CC is a collection of many maps, of all types, and not letting players see that very early on, would be a disaster for retaining players.

Again, Herpes is correct where she points out that new players do get overwhelmed by good players on tough maps, and quite frankly, Im surprised they have not been categorized officially on the join a game page already, but I still contend, as do most that have posted in here, that forcing the decision on the new player and telling them what they are ready for, and can try is simply wrong and not helpful to the objective of keeping other players on.

I think given her ratings, blocking new players from players like her with low ratings is actually a better idea for customer retention...since theres no doubt its bad attitudes that are more likely to send new players packing, than a fun board that someone loses on on a game, learns how to play it, and goes on to win on the next game.

Most of this is immediately obvious to anyone who is here, which is why its no surprise she is forced to bump this every month or so.

Its just unfortunate that so much work has been put into the blind crusade as she calls it, but its clear the objective is the crusade itself at this point. I do hope that it does get the maps labeled and classified officially though. The suggestion has pointed out a very real need for action. It has simply specified the wrong one to take, for many reasons, all very well articulated, by a great many experienced players, all who clearly respect the passion, if not the idea itself.

[Queen_Herpes]

Probably, what I should have said was, "Hasn't this been approved, yet?"

Lol. Next time add something constructive! I appreciate the support, but I'd like to hear more background reasoning for your support. See comment from jrh cardinal for reference.

[AAFitz]

Probably, what I should have said was, "Hasn't this been approved, yet?"

Lol. Next time add something constructive! I appreciate the support, but I'd like to hear more background reasoning for your support. See comment from jrh cardinal for reference.

No wonder you accused others of making plants in this thread.

[Queen_Herpes]

You might not realize this, but an AI would have to be retrained for every single different map on which it was designed to play. That's currently 152 different AIs. If you want 3 different levels of play, that becomes 456 different AI players that have to be trained. At best, this would only ever be implemented on 1-2 maps. It's completely impractical to do otherwise. Most likely it would be implemented on the classic map only. So even if this was a good suggestion, it's far too much work to be remotely practical for this site.

Yes, I realize the AI would need to be trained on every map. I've read enough about AI on other sites to know that (while difficult) it is completely "do-able." Once done for one map, the concept would be down and could be applied to the other maps, though obviously specially designed for the other maps.

The initial AI doesn't need to be smart or all that great. It could use terrible strategy and attack much like the "infected neutrals" or the "zombie neutrals." Whatever coding is written for the neutrals could be used as the attack profile for the AI opponent.

The owner of the site has gone and started other sites, so I would think that he has time to do this. Or, perhaps he wants to have several sites that have a relatively small number of users, rather than having one site that has a few hundred thousand. Adding AI could demonstrably increase the number of users here at Conquer Club. I can't guess about what he wants to do, and I won't guess about how much time he has to implement AI. "Far too much work to be practical for this site?" That question can only be answered by one person and that is lackattack, not by you, Doc_Brown.

As far as "levels of play," there doesn't need to be a beginner, intermediate and advanced AI. Just one, that is terrible at first. Try it out, if players like it...keep developing more. And it doesn't need to be on every map at once....just one...try it and see if players like it.

[jrh_cardinal]

Okay, all of you posted like an entire essay in each post, so I haven't really read them all, I would just like to say that I like that you now have noobs able to start with multiple map options. I would maybe change the groups around slightly, but nothing important.

I still have two major suggestions: first, to allow recruits to play escalating games. I think other risk sites use escalating, so people might leave for other sites first of all, second of all normal risk (at least the risk I play) has escalating spoils, so many will already now how to play escalating, like to play it, and (think) they are good at it.

Also, I would suggest NOT letting new players play freestyle. Imagine them logging on (in Round 10 or something), seeing they have a turn, and clicking "start turn". They then proceed to sip their morning coffee while deciding what to do. Then (without noticing anything happening because they haven't been refreshing the screen) they are dead and the game is over. HUH!!!! They are utterly confused, really pissed at the major bugs this site has, and angry that their coffee is gone and their computer is fried, with big coffee splotches all over it . Ya, they're definitely going to stay on CC.

[natty dread]

This suggestion should be buried somewhere deep IMO.

I realize I'm not helping by posting into it, but....

If I had to wait 50 or even 30 or even 5 games before I could play human players on this site, I probably would have quit on my first day here.

Also, the blocking of maps for 50, 80 games, is the same. It's ok that some maps are blocked for the first 5 games, but after you've played 5 games, you're not as likely to deadbeat out of games anymore, so you should be allowed to play what you want.

The players here who support this suggestion... get over it. I'm sure it's easy to say now that you have hunderds of games under your belt. If playing noobs truly bothers you, join a clan or go to callouts to find some friends of matching rank.

Lastly, Queen Herpes... I do not believe you are trolling per se. I do believe you think your suggestions would improve the site. However, you should give it a rest already. You will not get this suggestion going anywhere. There are lots of actually good suggestions on this forum, with far less opposition, that haven't gone anywhere... I'd say this suggestion has a snowball's chance in hell of ever being implemented. Sorry for being so blunt, but I believe that just is the case.

Now, as for some constructive input... to address the issues which this suggestion tries to address (although not very successfully), I'd say some kind of "tutorial mode" for new recruits, which would not restrict any maps or options (except for the current 5 game restrictions) but instead, all the game options would be much more verbose. All the options and buttons would have additional explanations. So when you join a game or start a game, you'd be forced to read what exactly each setting means. The tutorial mode could be turned off anytime the player likes, but it would be on by default.

Something like this could be feasible.

[Queen_Herpes]

Now, as for some constructive input... to address the issues which this suggestion tries to address (although not very successfully), I'd say some kind of "tutorial mode" for new recruits, which would not restrict any maps or options (except for the current 5 game restrictions) but instead, all the game options would be much more verbose. All the options and buttons would have additional explanations. So when you join a game or start a game, you'd be forced to read what exactly each setting means. The tutorial mode could be turned off anytime the player likes, but it would be on by default.

Something like this could be feasible.

If the worst thing that happens is that some aspect of this suggestion is considered valid, then I believe the site will be improved, easier to navigate for new users, and more enjoyed overall. Tutorial has its advantages, but (as others have noted) has its disadvantages as well. As to the rest of your comment, my plan is to drastically reduce the number of games required to pass each level, just haven't had the time to go over the data again. I also wanted to hear more comments from both sides and let the idea sit for a while.

[Queen_Herpes]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

[AAFitz]

Anyone have any thoughts on which maps should be the first to let new players access?

All of them. Its their choice. Not yours. You are queen of herpes and shankdigs, not CC.

Its time to put more energy into suggestions which will actually KEEP players, like blocking them from low rated players who ruin their games.