Conquer Club

Just found this page that compares the BEST 10 risk pages (ours is first) with 7.3/10


http://www.playriskonline.net/


What is surprising is that this are the best ones not all of them...but if the 10th is 1.1... how will be the others?


What's your opinion?

I migrated here from SGN, and their review made me laugh.

There are about 70 maps in total. Some are interesting and have decent graphics, but most are real turds.

Ha, so true. And the entire time I was there, I think I saw 3 people who grasped the concept of escalating games.

Luckily we play Online World Domination...


--Andy

That website is actually how I found out about Conquer Club.

It is kind of funny how he scores things. For example, there is a fairly low score for vitality. I'm not sure I agree considering the sheer number of different maps and game types one can play on this site (not to mention the forums).

i think this is great.. what i really like is how we are starting to improve on the points that brought CC down (mainly assigning the web developer).. to me the ratings are a non-bias third parties view.. might be wise of us to look at what was said bad about us and try to improve.. mainly it might be a good idea to add some texts to the maps so people can read up on them a little more allowing it easier for new players to get to know a map..

VampireM wrote:i think this is great.. what i really like is how we are starting to improve on the points that brought CC down (mainly assigning the web developer).. to me the ratings are a non-bias third parties view.. might be wise of us to look at what was said bad about us and try to improve.. mainly it might be a good idea to add some texts to the maps so people can read up on them a little more allowing it easier for new players to get to know a map..

Have you explored the Foundry? And looked into the 'Map Info Project'? viewtopic.php?f=127&t=74233

We hope to add to the pop-up map, when you click on a thumbnail, some basic information about the map (# of regions, special features like Objectives, Bombardments, etc).


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:

VampireM wrote:i think this is great.. what i really like is how we are starting to improve on the points that brought CC down (mainly assigning the web developer).. to me the ratings are a non-bias third parties view.. might be wise of us to look at what was said bad about us and try to improve.. mainly it might be a good idea to add some texts to the maps so people can read up on them a little more allowing it easier for new players to get to know a map..

Have you explored the Foundry? And looked into the 'Map Info Project'? viewtopic.php?f=127&t=74233

We hope to add to the pop-up map, when you click on a thumbnail, some basic information about the map (# of regions, special features like Objectives, Bombardments, etc).


--Andy

honestly, no.. been there a bit but not much at all.. i do like ur idea of a pop up.. it was more of a suggestion for newer players, im well enough established in the site that i have a good knowledge of the most of the maps and know people who can teach me if need be on maps i dont know..

thank you for pointing that out to me though.. next time im confused i will be heading over there

Conquer Club rocks. It's as simple as that.

VampireM wrote: might be wise of us to look at what was said bad about us and try to improve....

Very much agree, let's look at one of that site's criticisims:

PlayRiskOnline.net wrote:Users will need 3rd party scripts and add-ons to complement the interface as the developer has not added these improvements to the core game.

I had read this review several months ago and that sentance was once followed by,

PlayRiskOnline.net wrote:For example, scripts are needed to make the maps clickable, this should have already been added to the core game."

Even without his further explaination, you can see what the review was refferring to the non-clickable maps among other needed scripts.

I already read AndyDufresne's response to this before, "The members of CC took some vote and decided that "such a such" a mod was most important right now so LackAttack will focus on that and maybe do clickable maps later."

Andy, that is caca poo. Lackattack can do more than one thing at a time. He's just being lazy and doesn't want to do what he shoud have done 3 years ago when he made this promise in FEBRUARY 2007:

lackattack wrote:Clickable maps are coming sometime this year.

Lackattack, Isn't it about time you made good on your promise? Stop being lazy and keep your word, unless your reputation doesn't matter to you.

(This topic clearly makes me mad so please excuse my strong language, I've reminded Lack of his promise about 10,000 times now and still nothing is done.)

Surrender Monkey wrote:

VampireM wrote: might be wise of us to look at what was said bad about us and try to improve....

Very much agree, let's look at one of that site's criticisims:

PlayRiskOnline.net wrote:Users will need 3rd party scripts and add-ons to complement the interface as the developer has not added these improvements to the core game.

I had read this review several months ago and that sentance was once followed by,

PlayRiskOnline.net wrote:For example, scripts are needed to make the maps clickable, this should have already been added to the core game."

Even without his further explaination, you can see what the review was refferring to the non-clickable maps among other needed scripts.

I already know AndyDufresne's response to this, "The members of CC took some vote and decided that "such a such" a mod was most important right now so LackAttack will focus on that and maybe do clickable maps later."

Andy, that is caca poo. Lackattack can do more than one thing at a time. He's just being lazy and doesn't want to do what he shoud have done 3 years ago when he promised:

Well, we did get a new Web Developer admin.

Hopefully he can fill in the holes which this website-critic pointed out. I agree though. Something like "Universal CC clickable maps" without having to download anything would be perfect.

I play an email form of Risk at http://gamesbyemail.com/Games/Gambit The world map is simple and you only take turns as you wish, no time limit. I like to play with my daughters who would never think of playing CC but like the odd game of Risk with Dad at their leisure. You can play 2 to 8 people with the various settings.

Clickable Maps is being worked on, just so you know.


--Andy

Obviously Conquer Club won due to conspiratorial dice.

pimpdave wrote:Obviously Conquer Club won due to conspiratorial intensity cubes.

fixed

AndyDufresne wrote:Clickable Maps is being worked on, just so you know.
--Andy

THANK GOD AND THE STARS ABOVE!!!! You don't realize how much that change to clickable maps will increase the number of players and revitalize CC. I know I've been a pain in your asses about this, but, as I've said before....

If you build it, they will come

and I will be the first one to come over and bring my GF and several friends.

Actually Conquer Club won because the person read our Newsletter and saw my hilarious comics.

I'm such a comedic genius. Just like Christ Farley!

One of the funniest one is Stra.tegery.com where says that you can buy armies lol

also FellowshipOfLuca.com

Read the manifesto, join the cult, expand your mind. Oh and play some Risk too.

What type of page is this one

and about landgrab.net

Players can upload their own maps without official approval

Im wondering what you can find there

thegreekdog wrote:It is kind of funny how he scores things. For example, there is a fairly low score for vitality. I'm not sure I agree considering the sheer number of different maps and game types one can play on this site (not to mention the forums).

Yes,I also find it odd, but the important is what he/she said

to be honest..clickys must be integrated to the core page. For sure.

So now, CC, is on the Second position even though that is 7.5 a bit better
The first one being in beta has a score of 8.1
MajorCommand

Created by a splinter group of ConquerClub veterans, MajorCommand looks to bring something fresh to the table.

And with 6.2 warlight

An innovative online Risk site that could be a contended with some more members and better maps.

Well in 5th place with 3.9 there's also dominating12

This spinoff from a Conquerclub player had some potential but has since stagnated..

Apart from this ones, the other seems equal to the time this post was created

darth emperor wrote:So now, CC, is on the Second position even though that is 7.5 a bit better
The first one being in beta has a score of 8.1
MajorCommand

Created by a splinter group of ConquerClub veterans, MajorCommand looks to bring something fresh to the table.

And with 6.2 warlight

An innovative online Risk site that could be a contended with some more members and better maps.

Well in 5th place with 3.9 there's also dominating12

This spinoff from a Conquerclub player had some potential but has since stagnated..

Apart from this ones, the other seems equal to the time this post was created

Yeah, them having Major Command at the top is bullshit.

The community over there sucks. You post a question in the forum, come back 5 days later, nobody has answered it. You start up a game, finally, 4 days later, it's filled. You get online hoping for a speed game, there are 2 other members online. You happen to not have the greatest internet connection, too bad, can't play. You want maps made by different people that don't all look the exact same, well, too bad. Sure, they're nice looking, but they all look done by the same person in the same style. Plus, there is only 1 or 2 that I personally enjoy. And with that few number of maps, how could anybody play there for any amount of time? You want a nice simple, clean interface that's not overloaded with pointless graphics, not gonna happen, sucks to be you.

Perhaps MC has the potential to be better than CC one day, but as of today, it most certainly is not. It really seems like whoever updated that list is biased in some way.

I was just glancing around Major Command and came across a blog post with newly released maps:
http://www.majorcommand.com/blog/map/ma ... to-conquer
The third one looks awfully familiar! I'm guessing Oaktown was one of the players that moved over there and took his map with him.

Who left to make Majorcommand anyway?

Funkyterrance wrote:Who left to make Majorcommand anyway?

heheee... funny seeing this post unanswered here after 3 months, and just a few posts above seeing tkr dis them for taking a week...

tkr4lf wrote:Yeah, them having Major Command at the top is bullshit. The community over there sucks. You post a question in the forum, come back 5 days later, nobody has answered it......

Anyway, as a classic old school RISK player, here is my 2 cents worth...

Dominating12 is pretty sweet, and I must appreciate that it is the ONLY internet site i have found that actually uses the ORIGINAL escalating rules, and as a result has the most dynamic game play. Also, the new mgnt there is decidedly active, why i have even seen suggestions and quick implementations on the fly within several games. Very cool indeed. This site should be near the top of the list now.

MC is cool, but it was coded in a cumbersome way that makes it dreadfully slow. Until the coding is fixed, this site should not be anywhere near the top. As for escalating, they are even further away from the original rules than CC, but it's not hard to adapt to the strategy.

Robinette wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:Who left to make Majorcommand anyway?

heheee... funny seeing this post unanswered here after 3 months, and just a few posts above seeing tkr dis them for taking a week...

tkr4lf wrote:Yeah, them having Major Command at the top is bullshit. The community over there sucks. You post a question in the forum, come back 5 days later, nobody has answered it......

Anyway, as a classic old school RISK player, here is my 2 cents worth...

Dominating12 is pretty sweet, and I must appreciate that it is the ONLY internet site i have found that actually uses the ORIGINAL escalating rules, and as a result has the most dynamic game play. Also, the new mgnt there is decidedly active, why i have even seen suggestions and quick implementations on the fly within several games. Very cool indeed. This site should be near the top of the list now.

MC is cool, but it was coded in a cumbersome way that makes it dreadfully slow. Until the coding is fixed, this site should not be anywhere near the top. As for escalating, they are even further away from the original rules than CC, but it's not hard to adapt to the strategy.

Escalating is painful as is the speed. For better or worse they are aiming for a completely different idea with how to handle posts and such.

It will be interesting to see how and if it works out.

CC is so much better overall than the 4 Ive played at its not funny, but each one definitely has its unique little benefits.