Conquer Club

Aalmeida17 wrote:hey guys i have a sugestion , what abbout a option to limited your game !

ex: you limited to round 4 , at round 4 the game OVER , and the guy with most troops WIN , simple and very cool to tourneys , cuz some games if all the players good never end , some games still active after 800 turns, and in a tourney game that sucks , so i think its a good idea even if just used in tourneys (or not)

That would be cool for tourneys... So maybe make a 'Tourny-Only-Option'? This way multis cant abuse it, and it can still be used in a tourny-loving manner?

Aalmeida17 wrote:

Sir. Ricco wrote:

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

Sir. Ricco wrote:Easily abused by Multis. Unless there was a minimum requirement. All the multi would have to do is suicide on neutral while the player built up.

every gametype is abusable by multis, we really shouldn't be basing our rules around cheaters (this is the same reason I think limiting new players to certain maps is retarded when it's only meant to appease a hyper-minority of players who actually care about their rank)

We don't need to make it easier on them either. That is why there needs to be minimum round requirement, as I stated above. 4 rounds is way to short, something around 20 rounds.

lol 20 rouns?
part of the games end before the 10 round

Not for most No Card of Flat rate game that turn into the 800 round games you were talking about. I think the only way this would pass is if it was used, not a game setting so much, but more as a deterrent from stalemate games. In that case 20 is way to short, 30 or 50 would be better.

iamkoolerthanu wrote:
That would be cool for tourneys... So maybe make a 'Tourny-Only-Option'? This way multis cant abuse it, and it can still be used in a tourny-loving manner?

There's a work-around for that: Tournament organizers who're worried about stalemating have established a round at which the game for the game is over for tournament purposes; while the players might continue to play the game, the 'winner' of the game for tournament purposes is announced based on terrcount, troops, etc.

I see mainly negatives with the idea for normal play.

Some players enjoy being part of crazy-round games, so would dislike this option. Especially true of a few Battle Royale games.

The option is likely to encourage intentional stalling... people who won't attack, not because they risk another player massacring them, but because they're higher in troopcount so simply wait for the requisite number of rounds to announce them the winner.

One hope the site must have, since it's a business, is that people playing for free will ultimately want to buy premium. One reason people buy premium is because they want to play, and some games stall and hold up their allotted number of games. If games end at a certain round regardless, that could detract from the player's wish to purchase a premium account.

iamkoolerthanu wrote:

Aalmeida17 wrote:hey guys i have a sugestion , what abbout a option to limited your game !

ex: you limited to round 4 , at round 4 the game OVER , and the guy with most troops WIN , simple and very cool to tourneys , cuz some games if all the players good never end , some games still active after 800 turns, and in a tourney game that sucks , so i think its a good idea even if just used in tourneys (or not)

That would be cool for tourneys... So maybe make a 'Tourny-Only-Option'? This way multis cant abuse it, and it can still be used in a tourny-loving manner?

yhea

SultanOfSurreal wrote:

Sir. Ricco wrote:Easily abused by Multis. Unless there was a minimum requirement. All the multi would have to do is suicide on neutral while the player built up.

every gametype is abusable by multis, we really shouldn't be basing our rules around cheaters (this is the same reason I think limiting new players to certain maps is retarded when it's only meant to appease a hyper-minority of players who actually care about their rank)

wow, this is off topic but... if you really think that there is a "hyper minority" (as if that's fuckin English) of players who care about their rank, you r smokin from the biggest fuckin bong that's ever been made... (which i owned at one time). The majority of players on this site care about their rank.. duh.. Every topic in this forum is related to rank. OMG ru out to lunch.

Merged duplicate suggestions.

This is something I'm looking into now...

I voted YES.

Why? Because it's an option. Some players will dislike it, and they will simply not choose it. But some other players will find it useful. For example, for tournaments, and then they will be able to use it.

Impementing it does not hurt people that don't like it, but benefits people who will use it.

Done!

lackattack wrote:Done!

What happens with the game and the points when the round limit has been reached?

Lx

Edit: Found the answer already: Round Limits