Conquer Club

Give people the option of allowing secret diplomacy in their games

Specifics:

• Before joining a game allow people to click a button giving people the right to use secret diplomacy
• Their decision should be visible as one of the setup options

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• People are constantly complaining about people who violated the secret diplomacy rule, this would allow people who want to make secret alliances, to do so fairly, without breaking the rules
• People who dont want to be in games with secret diplomacy, can join games without it
• Its might make certain games more fun

Certain types of games are more fun with secret diplomacy and while people may say it will lead to additional abuse, people concerned dont have to join those games.

i think it would be a good option

they could even have a thing in the game chat where they could talk to whoever s box they checked or something

like team chat

maxatstuy wrote:People are constantly complaining about people who violated the secret diplomacy rule, this would allow people who want to make secret alliances, to do so fairly, without breaking the rules ...

First up I've not noticed that "people are constantly complaining". I have noticed that when people break the rules here at Conquer Club they get reported in Cheating & Abuse reports, but then without rules any game becomes meaningless and unplayable.

So no let's not change the secret diplomacy rule. It's one of the two main rules on Conquer Club for a reason. Because it ensures that the game remains meaningful, playable and hence enjoyable.

You'll be suggesting we change the other main rule of Conquer Club next to allow multiple account abuse ...

cicero wrote:

maxatstuy wrote:People are constantly complaining about people who violated the secret diplomacy rule, this would allow people who want to make secret alliances, to do so fairly, without breaking the rules ...

First up I've not noticed that "people are constantly complaining". I have noticed that when people break the rules here at Conquer Club they get reported in Cheating & Abuse reports, but then without rules any game becomes meaningless and unplayable.

So no let's not change the secret diplomacy rule. It's one of the two main rules on Conquer Club for a reason. Because it ensures that the game remains meaningful, playable and hence enjoyable.

You'll be suggesting we change the other main rule of Conquer Club next to allow multiple account abuse ...

Actually, I have no problem with either of the rules even though you are trying to insinuate that I am only complaining because I break the rules, which is not true in either case. There is no reason to have a rule about secret alliances though if people dont mind joining into a game with it. Being able to secretly team up on someone is fun and if everyone in the game has no problem with partaking in it then I dont see why it should be prohibited. I wasnt referring to when people are breaking the rules that they complain, I am referring to the people who see people not attack each other for what ever reason and say that it is secret diplomacy when it is not. The multiple account rules exist for a reason, so that people dont get around the 4 game maximum or make points unfairly. The secret diplomacy rule exists for a reason as well, so that being teamed up against doesnt take away from a persons enjoyment of the game, however if someone feels it wouldnt take away from their enjoyment and would make the game more fun, then there is no reason for them not to be able to join a game where secret alliances exist.

I probably wouldnt join those games just because I know for sure I would be the one teamed up against, although I know for many, it would be a game to take part in.

wow, this is a TERRIBLE idea!! it would take point farming to a whole new level - two guys could starts dozens of games and agree to split the points between them - unsuspecting novice players would join these games and before they could realize it, bam! game over

the game would be labeled as a "secret diplomacy is allowed" game
you wouldnt have to join them

Also these could probably be organised through private games...

i could see alot of abuse like this... though i like the idea, how hard would it be to say "hey all you newbies, come join this game with me and my bud!" and they wont even know that secret deplomacy is an option...

Natewolfman wrote:i could see alot of abuse like this... though i like the idea, how hard would it be to say "hey all you newbies, come join this game with me and my bud!" and they wont even know that secret deplomacy is an option...

For an officer about your rank to major, I could see that as being a problem, although standard methods of farming are just as difficult/easy to use. If I were to try that it would never work as people at the ranks susceptible for falling for those type of tricks which you are referring to, are too sporadic in their game play. Even with the use of secret diplomacy, it is impossible to know how they will play, and whether they will suicide, so the amount of wins would not make up for the few losses which can occur as a result.

If this feature was established, there is already another rule which prevents a lot of the abuse, as it states that you cannot thrown games or intentionally lose. That would mean that even if you are playing with someone you have a secret alliance with, they have to play for there self and not for you. While you may be able to work together during the game, you would still have to play against each other therefore splitting the wins would not be within the rules.

I proposed the idea just because I thought it would be fun. If it will cause more trouble than it is worth than you can reject it, although if the modification is made that it can only be used in 4 player games or more, I think it would add another dimension to game play.

max is gr8 wrote:Also these could probably be organised through private games...

Isn't this the correct answer^^^

People play games with different rules (see the Adjacent Attacks thread) so why not continue doing it this way?

SuicidalSnowman wrote:

max is gr8 wrote:Also these could probably be organised through private games...

Isn't this the correct answer^^^

People play games with different rules (see the Adjacent Attacks thread) so why not continue doing it this way?

While I agree that they could be organized through private games, that is still against the current rules so you would still be breaking the rules by participating in it.

SuicidalSnowman wrote:

max is gr8 wrote:Also these could probably be organised through private games...

Isn't this the correct answer^^^

People play games with different rules (see the Adjacent Attacks thread) so why not continue doing it this way?

It's a legend!

Skiman wrote:it would take point farming to a whole new level - two guys could starts dozens of games and agree to split the points between them - unsuspecting novice players would join these games and before they could realize it, bam! game over

You do realize that if they announce it in the chat on round 1 it can be done already just the same... The only limit is what the mods would consider to be abuse but that would apply to the games the OP suggested to.

Thezzaruz wrote:

Skiman wrote:it would take point farming to a whole new level - two guys could starts dozens of games and agree to split the points between them - unsuspecting novice players would join these games and before they could realize it, bam! game over

You do realize that if they announce it in the chat on round 1 it can be done already just the same... The only limit is what the mods would consider to be abuse but that would apply to the games the OP suggested to.

the game type I am referring to is currently against the rules. Whether it is agreed upon or not, it is against the rules to use secret diplomacy and it is my feeling that if no one in the game objects, it should be allowed, hence my suggestion.

People don't cheat because they want the fun of a secret alliance, they cheat because it's cheating, so they can get something from it they usually couldn't. Why would they do it legitimately, since that wouldn't get them what they want?

Nikolai wrote:Maxatstuy, ##### ## #####.

Well that was uncalled for.

Nikolai wrote:People don't cheat because they want the fun of a secret alliance, they cheat because it's cheating, so they can get something from it they usually couldn't. Why would they do it legitimately, since that wouldn't get them what they want?

If the option was implimented, it wouldnt be cheating, and people could use the method in order to play new style games. I dont know how many people cheat because they want the excitement of cheating, but I am pretty sure that most people do it for other reasons. Being aloud to communicate with other members of a game without all parties knowing would add a new dimention to the game which is more exciting.

If implimented with a 4 player minimum in those style games and in conjunction with the "no throwing games" rule, abuse would be a lot more difficult, and no more abuse would occur than the abuse which already takes place.

You don't understand. I'm saying that simply making it not cheating won't stop people who do it now from doing it, and if everyone can do it the cheaters will seek other ways to cheat. So your advantages don't exist. Beyond that, it's a terrible idea that could potentially cause very skewed gameplay, along with a number of other problems.

kylegraves1 wrote:i think it would be a good option

they could even have a thing in the game chat where they could talk to whoever s box they checked or something

like team chat

Yeah a team chat would be good but this could only be used when you are below the other player by say 500 points so two cooks join a game and then a General comes thinks it will be a easy win the cooks can form a diplomacy and win. The ywould have to split the points or something though.

blacky44 wrote:

kylegraves1 wrote:i think it would be a good option

they could even have a thing in the game chat where they could talk to whoever s box they checked or something

like team chat

Yeah a team chat would be good but this could only be used when you are below the other player by say 500 points so two cooks join a game and then a General comes thinks it will be a easy win the cooks can form a diplomacy and win. The ywould have to split the points or something though.

no general would be stupid enough to join a 3 player game where secret diplomacy is allowed

Wouldn't implementing this just be creating a slippery slope that did not previously exist?

No other game options allow for suspension of rules while this would. It could lead to the ignorant defense of, "Oh sorry, I thought it was a Secret Diplomacy game." Another possibility would be that it could cultivate a culture of secret diplomacy that spreads into the general population. Many people don't cheat because they have respect for the rules but given a taste of success earned by secret diplomacy could lead to increased s.d. outside of s.d. games, i.e., the slippery slope idea I led with.

Anyways, I say no as it violates one of the basic tenets of the game and the game that this game may or may not be based on.

As much as i dislike Max's farming, i agree with him here.

WHY NOT have a game mode where secret alliances are allowed? It would certainly keep you on your heels and it could then become a more strategy based game with more diplomocey rather than a whole lot of knuckle heads running around the board with 1000's of armies.

Natewolfman wrote:i could see alot of abuse like this... though i like the idea, how hard would it be to say "hey all you newbies, come join this game with me and my bud!" and they wont even know that secret deplomacy is an option...

Someone would have to lose the game, either you or your buddy and there is farming enough going on that this won't do anything to change it...

It would make this website more interesting... Personally CC is beggining to bore me, there is never anything new or interesting on this site (no offense) but we need DESPERATELY a new game mode to try out. Try something new CC, expand your horizons

*edit* when i say "never anything new or interesting", the new maps are nice but what else is there?

maxatstuy wrote:Give people the option of allowing secret diplomacy in their games

yes its so hard to cheat nowadays
please stop punishing me for cheating

PepperJack wrote:Wouldn't implementing this just be creating a slippery slope that did not previously exist?

No other game options allow for suspension of rules while this would. It could lead to the ignorant defense of, "Oh sorry, I thought it was a Secret Diplomacy game." Another possibility would be that it could cultivate a culture of secret diplomacy that spreads into the general population. Many people don't cheat because they have respect for the rules but given a taste of success earned by secret diplomacy could lead to increased s.d. outside of s.d. games, i.e., the slippery slope idea I led with.

Anyways, I say no as it violates one of the basic tenets of the game and the game that this game may or may not be based on.

Well put.

I don't agree with it as a global option, but could it be a Game Chat thing? Maybe a Button and/or CheckBoxes that give the option of proposing an alliance.

Perhaps there could be something in game chat that says something like:
<player1 has proposed an alliance with Player 2>
<player2 has accepted an alliance player1>
<player1 said something to player2>

... etc

In this way, Diplomacy is not secret, but the other opponents can't see what the teammates are talking about