Conquer Club

Ok,i dont like new layout,and this is mine sugestion how can this be improved.
If you have more oppinion,maybe we can together,improve even more.
ITs bad that lack dont want to cooperate with comunity in this way,to show visualy how will new layout look,and all this mess can not hepend.
if you press -stats ,they will show you abrevations,what is what.
option no1

option no 2
for this view i take bigest small map in CC-WOrld 2,1,so this mean that for almost all maps scroling up-down its minimal.
I can see almost all imortan things,down,where is all importan info(cards-reinforcment-fortification-fog of war,,,,,,)
now this view its apsolutly funcional for all maps.
I know that im a little subjective,but this view its much better then present not so good implementation,
also i put same stats construction,so when you press -side stats-the stats go side,and no abbrevation,but maybe will be good if stat be in abrevation,where they go side,because in this way you will be almost all stats,together with all map view.
Its not that im create hot water,because this is all ready exist,but you turn everything wrong.

That's better than the new layout. I never realized there was a problem with the old way...but this would be a good compromise between old and new.

dividedbyzero wrote:That's better than the new layout. I never realized there was a problem with the old way...but this would be a good compromise between old and new.

I concur.

But no need for the abbrevations "S" "R" "T" "TD" - They could be spelled out I think, if you put the stats to the side - you have good enough resolution to deal with it.

No, it isn't better than the current layout. The eventual goal is to get rid of putting so much information on the side to eventually allow for larger map sizes. Putting everything back on the side does nothing but defeat that purpose.

by Optimus Prime » Fri Dec 25, 2009 7:59 pm

No, it isn't better than the current layout. The eventual goal is to get rid of putting so much information on the side to eventually allow for larger map sizes. Putting everything back on the side does nothing but defeat that purpose.

This is story for small children-you know they kick me in ass for 16 month ,tell me that waith with WWII Europe map ,and that soon will be aloved new map size,and what hepend-nothing.
Nuckler card sugestion is Old 2,5 years,and new map size its much older,so i realy dont belive that this will be implemented in next 5 years.
Ofcourse if Lack implement this,then we can again TOGETHER,try to find another solution for layout.
The importan things,like What card you have,All game settings,its importan to be down,where player play a game,and its bad that before play,he every turn need to go up,to se what card have and what its settings are game,and its even more dificulty if you play 20+ games.
All this mess with layout will not exist,if lack before implementation work with comunity, and that in this visual examples,try to find best solution,to be good for all.
Now im open this topic,and people can give sugestion,what will be good layout for play.

I concur.

But no need for the abbrevations "S" "R" "T" "TD" - They could be spelled out I think, if you put the stats to the side - you have good enough resolution to deal with it.

ok,i can do that.

Optimus Prime wrote:No, it isn't better than the current layout. The eventual goal is to get rid of putting so much information on the side to eventually allow for larger map sizes. Putting everything back on the side does nothing but defeat that purpose.

So, what was wrong with it being below the map ? If the goal is larger maps, I still want to see the colors of my cards, whether or I own any of the lands, and the game settings while I'm taking my turn or preparing to...I did less scrolling before.

Look, I've never complained about the site prior to this. I've been here since 2006 and definitely consider myself one of the veterans and power users of the site. No, I don't have JR's sheer number of games, but I play a lot..I've purchased membership for 3 years and purchased at least 4 other memberships for others. I support the site. I just wish changes like this weren't so arbitrary. Another player has started a thread in Suggs/Bugs to discuss disclosing changes that are coming so there can be some feedback before things are put into place, scripts break, etc. It seems to me that this is a good idea and that the site would want user feedback before changing things.

Adding optional things isn't a huge deal. I can choose or not choose to play nuclear spoils. I can't choose to reset my game layout so it is more conducive to practical game play. Maybe having a beta interface in the same way we have beta maps - it can utilize the same databases and just have the new front end code base ?

This is not just a matter of resisting change. This is a big deal in changing game play for those of us that tend to have a lot of games running at once.

option no 2
for this view i take bigest small map in CC-WOrld 2,1,so this mean that for almost all maps scroling up-down its minimal.
I can see almost all imortan things,down,where is all importan info(cards-reinforcment-fortification-fog of war,,,,,,)
now this view its apsolutly funcional for all maps.
I know that im a little subjective,but this view its much better then present not so good implementation,
also i put same stats construction,so when you press -side stats-the stats go side,and no abbrevation,but maybe will be good if stat be in abrevation,where they go side,because in this way you will be almost all stats,together with all map view.
Its not that im create hot water,because this is all ready exist,but you turn everything wrong.

dividedbyzero wrote:

Optimus Prime wrote:No, it isn't better than the current layout. The eventual goal is to get rid of putting so much information on the side to eventually allow for larger map sizes. Putting everything back on the side does nothing but defeat that purpose.

So, what was wrong with it being below the map ? If the goal is larger maps, I still want to see the colors of my cards, whether or I own any of the lands, and the game settings while I'm taking my turn or preparing to...I did less scrolling before.

Look, I've never complained about the site prior to this. I've been here since 2006 and definitely consider myself one of the veterans and power users of the site. No, I don't have JR's sheer number of games, but I play a lot..I've purchased membership for 3 years and purchased at least 4 other memberships for others. I support the site. I just wish changes like this weren't so arbitrary. Another player has started a thread in Suggs/Bugs to discuss disclosing changes that are coming so there can be some feedback before things are put into place, scripts break, etc. It seems to me that this is a good idea and that the site would want user feedback before changing things.

Adding optional things isn't a huge deal. I can choose or not choose to play nuclear spoils. I can't choose to reset my game layout so it is more conducive to practical game play. Maybe having a beta interface in the same way we have beta maps - it can utilize the same databases and just have the new front end code base ?

This is not just a matter of resisting change. This is a big deal in changing game play for those of us that tend to have a lot of games running at once.

With all due respect, being a long time user does not qualify any of us to make demands on how lackattack decides to change the website. Neither does buying multiple memberships. I've purchased over $600 worth of memberships in my time and I'm under no illusion that it gives me a say in anything. I'm one of the admins, an actual staff member, and I still do not know what at least 50% of the new updates are going to include when they go live. It's entirely up to lackattack. He surprises even his top advisors most of the time. It's his right, it's a private business, let's not forget.

Many people make the argument that user testing and user discussion would help avoid these problems, but look at it practically, those don't solve any real problems, except make everything take longer, and the same people who complain about the changes are the same individuals who harp on lackattack over and over about how long things take. Do you really think he wants to give those people more reason to complain? I doubt it, and if you are honest with yourself, you would likely come to the same conclusion. It's sort of a "damned if we do, damned if we don't situation" and you can't tell me it isn't if you look at things honestly. No matter what gets changed, 80% of the comments are negative. Even if we made a groundbreaking change that could be proven to be of benefit to everyone, almost everything we hear back is going to be "what a horrible decisions, change it back!" So I'd be interested in your thoughts on that sometime if you feel inclined to send me a PM, I'd love to hear a counter argument to such a thing.

So many people think that these things are arbitrary decisions, but they aren't, even if nobody ever takes our word for it, they are not arbitrary decisions.

In regards to making everything optional, some things are easy to make optional, and in those cases sometimes lackattack is willing to do so, but sometimes the things that everyone things should just be made optional are not easy to make that way from a coding standpoint and it takes a cost/benefit decision to determine if it is worth the time to make it so. That is something I would venture a large number of us forget on a regular basis. I mean, how many of us really know how much work it takes to make these things work properly on this website? I build websites for a living, and I don't even know how much work it takes to do some of the stuff lackattack does, so before we throw out accusations about making everything optional and how that would fix it, we should all remember we don't really know what we are talking about, do we?

As an admin I take pride in knowing that some thing that get changed are going to upset people, and trust me, when the admins have their meetings there are regularly occasions where we tell each other that our ideas are bad and that the way we want to do it needs to change otherwise we are going to upset a lot of people, there are at least 20 things that haven't been done because of that, and it's good they weren't, it would have just been bad. But in order for the site to grow, changes have to happen at some point. Is everyone going to like the changes? No, of course not, and some people maybe never will and will leave, but if lackattack tries to appease everyone, or even tries to appease some people at times it just makes his work more difficult and ultimately slows down the progress of the website.

I've been displeased with some decisions sometimes, it happens to all of us, even those of us who have power to make decisions from time to time, but ultimately, it truthfully has not ruined the website, or your gaming experience in a permanent way, has it? If you really believe so, then I guess you have a decision to make on whether to stay or not, and we will be sad to see you go.

What we all need to remember is that lackattack isn't perfect, I'm not perfect, none of our members are perfect. Sometimes changes happen to the website that aren't incredibly popular, but in prior instances lackattack has shown willingness to try and fix things soon after or as part of a later update if over time its shown that he really did botch things up a little bit, let's try to remember that. He'll get plenty of feedback from the admin team at our next meeting, and he will read all of the feedback and discussion in the forums, and if it really is shown that change is needed I promise he'll make the change when it can be done most reasonably and keep him on track for other things as well.

Being a member of this website is a lot of fun, we have far and away more features and a better quality product for a price that simply cannot be beat. What makes me sad is to see so many people lose sight of that fact and focus on things that are not really all that bad instead of focusing on helping instead of complaining and moaning. Just last night I was encouraging folks in Live Chat to go do some on the fly testing to make sure nuclear spoils didn't really break anything weird. They were more than eager to help instead of feel offended by the changes. We should all focus on that type of mindset when changes are made instead of jumping down throats and feeling like we've been personally slighted.

I fear if we continue down such a negative mindset every time lackattack puts in hours and hours of effort for us that someday he's going to realize his work isn't all that appreciated and decide he's had enough. I'd feel horrible if that happens and would rather say "thanks for the effort, but it looks like it needs some tweaking, how can I help, or how can I get the community to let you know what you need to adjust to make it perfect."

Sorry for the discourse, just sort of spilled out on me.

Regards,
Optimus Prime

Optimus Prime wrote:In regards to making everything optional, some things are easy to make optional, and in those cases sometimes lackattack is willing to do so, but sometimes the things that everyone things should just be made optional are not easy to make that way from a coding standpoint and it takes a cost/benefit decision to determine if it is worth the time to make it so.

If he can make a table go from under the map to next to the play order, which means moving everything up pixels and dropping an entire column of names and ranks, I think he can make a row of game information go from above the map to below.

You don't need to apologize optimus! Good post to remind us of the facts. I was nodding my head in agreement, because it is a lot of work, as I'm sure this isn't lacks only RL job. I am for one grateful that I have a great risk site I can come to and enjoy playing and meeting new people from around the globe that I would never have met if CC wasn't around.

Nobody ever likes change at first, including myself. So we all have to wait and see how all this works out in the long run. Let's help make lack's work easier by not being negatively critical, but let's positive about what he's doing. I think there could be a couple of tweaks that need to be done, but for now I'm going to wait and see what will happen.

the.killing.44 wrote:

Optimus Prime wrote:In regards to making everything optional, some things are easy to make optional, and in those cases sometimes lackattack is willing to do so, but sometimes the things that everyone things should just be made optional are not easy to make that way from a coding standpoint and it takes a cost/benefit decision to determine if it is worth the time to make it so.

If he can make a table go from under the map to next to the play order, which means moving everything up pixels and dropping an entire column of names and ranks, I think he can make a row of game information go from above the map to below.

Yes, he most certainly could, but do you personally have any clue as to how long it takes him to code that option? If you do, then awesome, but if you don't, be careful about making demands about it. That's my point.

I dont want to start any arguing here, i just want,like you say optimus

I'd feel horrible if that happens and would rather say "thanks for the effort, but it looks like it needs some tweaking, how can I help, or how can I get the community to let you know what you need to adjust to make it perfect."

to try to help with this visual view. No need for any imediatly changes,and like LAck say in some topic,we need to give one mont chance for these new Game layout,and if people still dont like or complain abouth game loyout,then lack need to take this in consideration,because he have frends here.

Optimus Prime wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:

Optimus Prime wrote:In regards to making everything optional, some things are easy to make optional, and in those cases sometimes lackattack is willing to do so, but sometimes the things that everyone things should just be made optional are not easy to make that way from a coding standpoint and it takes a cost/benefit decision to determine if it is worth the time to make it so.

If he can make a table go from under the map to next to the play order, which means moving everything up pixels and dropping an entire column of names and ranks, I think he can make a row of game information go from above the map to below.

Yes, he most certainly could, but do you personally have any clue as to how long it takes him to code that option? If you do, then awesome, but if you don't, be careful about making demands about it. That's my point.

I can't imagine very long. Replicate what he did for the game stats to show up in game settings, then copy the row of game info's code and change its location in the code.

Optimus Prime nothing personal toward you as i am sure you didn't direct your post directly at a certain person rather a group . But I think that all the post that will here and the other forum that directed us here are the best thing to happen. It allows "US" the way to communicate to Lack and express our thoughts and opinions. Some are not being very polite about it which is the wrong way to go about it for sure. Decision and opinions are the best way to make something better. Will everybody agree on one way....no, impossible with a following as big as CC. You stated it might be difficult to make things optional and stated that most of us would have no idea of the complications of doing so...well i for one do not. Not my expertise for sure, but I think it's owed to the general community here to do so, of all the other complicated things that have been changed i cant see this being any harder.
After all 1 thing stands above all the rest....we the general community pay the bills, in a sense were the employer, yes the site is owned by Lack or whom ever but without us paying the bills it wouldn't exist very long. So before you get to negative on the guys and gals paying the way think about it in our view.

Thank BYR

Optimus Prime wrote:Many people make the argument that user testing and user discussion would help avoid these problems, but look at it practically, those don't solve any real problems, except make everything take longer, and the same people who complain about the changes are the same individuals who harp on lackattack over and over about how long things take. Do you really think he wants to give those people more reason to complain? I doubt it, and if you are honest with yourself, you would likely come to the same conclusion. It's sort of a "damned if we do, damned if we don't situation" and you can't tell me it isn't if you look at things honestly. No matter what gets changed, 80% of the comments are negative. Even if we made a groundbreaking change that could be proven to be of benefit to everyone, almost everything we hear back is going to be "what a horrible decisions, change it back!" So I'd be interested in your thoughts on that sometime if you feel inclined to send me a PM, I'd love to hear a counter argument to such a thing.

So many people think that these things are arbitrary decisions, but they aren't, even if nobody ever takes our word for it, they are not arbitrary decisions.

Perhaps that is the problem...that people see these as arbitrary changes because the process of change is not a transparent one. Perhaps there is some concern that disclosing future plans in some way might damage CC's uniqueness and give way for a competitor to move in and displace it. That is a real world business concern. I can understand that.

As a former programmer, unix system administrator, and security analyst, I do know from many years of real world experience that user testing and discussion very much do help avoid problems - from simple bug fixes to interface issues to more serious security issues. I also know from considerable academic work in human/computer interaction (the area my Masters degree is in) that real world testing done properly can alleviate many functional issues. To say otherwise seems to indicate a definite lack of experience in that area. No disrespect intended, Optimus, as I see from the length and thought in your response that you care about the site.

I guess since I've mostly stopped participating in the forums that I don't see the criticisms of the site as much as you probably do. I think this is the first update where I've seen so many negative responses in the Announcements section. But again, I will profess ignorance as I no longer enjoy the forums as I used to (which is not a reflection on the site...merely a shift in my priorities).

I can't argue that 80% of the site feedback about any change is negative. I simply do not know. I know any change will often be met with resistance because people in general resist change. This is the only real site change I've found over the past 3+ years that I've really found to be troublesome. I'm not sure what that says. It mostly says good things, I think. I'm not one of the masses that gets mad at the time to implement changes. I simply wish for the site to work in a logical way that I can enjoy. I also realize that I have little say in the matter. I do realize that it's a private business, however, we are customers (and fairly loyal customers at that), and that ultimately if we're unhappy we vote with our feet and dollars. However, I'd like to think that the management would be interested in what the users do want.

Perhaps the user base requested this change ? I haven't gone looking. I do think there is some merit to a change schedule so we know what's coming and can prepare...but perhaps that's too much work. I do not have all of the answers. I wish I did. I do think there can be viable solutions to make the communications process more robust.

Respectfully,
dbz

Optimus Prime wrote:With all due respect, being a long time user does not qualify any of us to make demands on how lackattack decides to change the website. Neither does buying multiple memberships.

1. The customer is always right. It's capitalism baby.

2. I quoted a part of your response. In fact, no quote was needed. You overdid it anyways. All people are saying is that the "non-essential" information (i) in fact is essential and necessary to check when making the moves, (ii) this particular change causes extensive scrolling up and down (something which the explicitly has been a stated aim to avoid here), and (iii) this change caused the problem since no one to my recollection has ever complained to have this "non-essential" information in a row or two just beneath the map (in fact, this placement was probably ideal from a game play perspective).

3. I'm sure that the site owner had very good intentions. And, I haven't seen anyone expressing the view that this would be a deliberate attempt to make things worse. But it did. Shit happens. And customers complaints. Again, it's capitalism baby.

alstergren wrote:

Optimus Prime wrote:With all due respect, being a long time user does not qualify any of us to make demands on how lackattack decides to change the website. Neither does buying multiple memberships.

1. The customer is always right. It's capitalism baby.

Only works when you are paying for something made by your own design and architecture. If you are just buying a product in the store - you are buying the default design as well. You might be right, but it is not your only voice that makes the decision. Remember, that is entirely lack's project and he is the only one who will make changes here. And yeah, we need to stick with this site and try to help to make it better, but just saying "this sucks, change" not going to help anyone but will just irritate admins and other users.

You are not customers here, you are end users. And lack is the product owner - so he creates what needs to be done and when. You just use it and feedback it, hoping that he can change it later .

To use an analogy here:

I recently bought a new flavour chocolate bar that had changed the recipe from its old one. In the future I will not be repurchasing said bar as I dislike the new flavour.

However they still have my money, they just won't get it again. Surely if you are *so* opposed to the changes you will be leaving the site. Another customer will purchase this they may like the changes or they may not mind. If you are going to stay it is fine unless customers actually start leaving lackattack does not need to be worried.

If the goal is to make larger maps and place the info Below...why not try this.
3 tables of info... Game info, Players with spoil count and the Stats as an option
Leave the My Spoils directly below the map and above the Combat Di buttons

My Spoils ([bracketed] if owned): g:Constantinople b:Bohemia

BOX For Di Rolls

Game 6132524-------------------------Players______----------R---T---TDue
Round 1---------------------------------* 0 S0 r:player----------3---12---3
Time Remaining-----------------------* 0 S0 g:player----------3---12---3
08:42:23--------------------------------* 0 S0 b:player----------3---12---3
Game Type: Standard ----------------* 0 S0 y:player----------3---12---3
Initial Troops: Automatic-------------* 1 S1 p:player----------3---12---3
Play Order: Sequential----------------* 0 S0 c:player----------3---12---3
Spoils: Flat Rate-----------------------* 1 S1 o:player----------3---12---3
Reinforcements: Unlimited ----------* 0 S0 s:player----------3---12---3
Fog of War: No

[refresh map] [smaller map][remove colour codes] [side stats]

Dako wrote:

alstergren wrote:

Optimus Prime wrote:With all due respect, being a long time user does not qualify any of us to make demands on how lackattack decides to change the website. Neither does buying multiple memberships.

1. The customer is always right. It's capitalism baby.

Only works when you are paying for something made by your own design and architecture. If you are just buying a product in the store - you are buying the default design as well. You might be right, but it is not your only voice that makes the decision. Remember, that is entirely lack's project and he is the only one who will make changes here. And yeah, we need to stick with this site and try to help to make it better, but just saying "this sucks, change" not going to help anyone but will just irritate admins and other users.

You are not customers here, you are end users. And lack is the product owner - so he creates what needs to be done and when. You just use it and feedback it, hoping that he can change it later.

Wow... Well, dunno what kind of capitalism you got in Russia. But outside Putin-governed territories, a customer is someone who pays for goods or services (someone who makes something by his own design is a producer). CC is a service. And the customer is always right is an expression that goes to the heart of capitalism. You would have understood if you had lived in the free world.

alstergren wrote:

Dako wrote:

alstergren wrote:

Optimus Prime wrote:With all due respect, being a long time user does not qualify any of us to make demands on how lackattack decides to change the website. Neither does buying multiple memberships.

1. The customer is always right. It's capitalism baby.

Only works when you are paying for something made by your own design and architecture. If you are just buying a product in the store - you are buying the default design as well. You might be right, but it is not your only voice that makes the decision. Remember, that is entirely lack's project and he is the only one who will make changes here. And yeah, we need to stick with this site and try to help to make it better, but just saying "this sucks, change" not going to help anyone but will just irritate admins and other users.

You are not customers here, you are end users. And lack is the product owner - so he creates what needs to be done and when. You just use it and feedback it, hoping that he can change it later.

Wow... Well, dunno what kind of capitalism you got in Russia. But outside Putin-governed territories, a customer is someone who pays for goods or services (someone who makes something by his own design is a producer). CC is a service. And the customer is always right is an expression that goes to the heart of capitalism. You would have understood if you had lived in the free world.

Nah, you are wrong if you think that Russia is not a free country. Different people - same motives and problems. Don't want to drag it further, because you don't know me and I don't know you, so it is kind of pointless from the start.

Yes, you pay for goods. And here you pay 20$ a year (1.5$ a month, eh). I don't tell you that you should not discuss things and have no vote, but right now 80% of the people are saying "lack, this design is shit, change it back, it sucks". Now try to place you as a lack - what would you feel if you are putting your own time and effort to make the site actually better and most of the people don't even try to try the change - they just keep saying your work is horseshit. They just block the changes by default and want things back. No evolution, no development. Even bad changes are better than no changes. At least you can see what is wrong when you try that. Now people are just shouting "this is bad" without proper explanation what is bad. Yes, more scrolling, different layout, your super-duper big monitor have more unused space now. And how about the owners of netbooks? With 11" diagonal? Most of the people here think only about their own situation and don't care about others who benefit from this changes.

That is the problem I see right now. Yes, this change is, mmm, doubtful, not tested, veeery unusual. All I say - try it. If you will get used to it (and I hope you will cause I am right now) - things will settle down.

The purpose of the update is to clear space for further additions. You don't know them. Lack does. That is why he makes this changes. They might not look complete and whole right now, but later (half a year?) the picture will be pretty clear.

And if you say "I will not renew this membership because I lost 1 speed game due to site update" - man, that is just lame.

The only real problem I see right now in the design - hard to read a line with settings and "refresh map" link is far on the top and you still need to use it from time to time.

I would say option 2 but with some fix in the way that the links refresh maps and that are presented, since it seems a bit overwhelmed in that corner

by Falkomagno » Sun Dec 27, 2009 10:14 pm

I would say option 2 but with some fix in the way that the links refresh maps and that are presented, since it seems a bit overwhelmed in that corner

need more explane,because i dont understand quite,what you mean.

qwert wrote:

by Falkomagno » Sun Dec 27, 2009 10:14 pm

I would say option 2 but with some fix in the way that the links refresh maps and that are presented, since it seems a bit overwhelmed in that corner

need more explane,because i dont understand quite,what you mean.

He's saying that area (bottom right) is overcrowded. I like #2, too.

He's saying that area (bottom right) is overcrowded. I like #2, too.

Bottom right-in what version?