Suggestion: New Recruit Amnesty (with Poll)

[dfaarc]

i voted no for obvious reasons

yeah, because it is a stupid idea that only hurt new recruits trying to play a game

i wouldn't have stuck around if my first five games had no point value. some of you might like the idea of conquer club without the great dfaarc, but i don't

[Gold Knight]

i voted no for obvious reasons

yeah, because it is a stupid idea that only hurt new recruits trying to play a game

i wouldn't have stuck around if my first five games had no point value. some of you might like the idea of conquer club without the great dfaarc, but i don't

Who?

Still like the idea of a training type atomsphere for new recruits, if they really like the game they wont leave because the 1st 5 games arent going to race them up the scoreboard (which it wont) and might set up for lower ranks actually being more accepted on this site if their skill levels were better.

[GrimReaper.]

I have an idea how about out of their first 10 games they will e able to choose which 3 will be of now point value?

(of course when they join they will get an automated pm explaining farming what kinde of games they should start out with ect.)

[hecter]

i voted no for obvious reasons

yeah, because it is a stupid idea that only hurt new recruits trying to play a game

i wouldn't have stuck around if my first five games had no point value. some of you might like the idea of conquer club without the great dfaarc, but i don't

Why? I mean, what's the big deal? You have no rank until five games, what's the big deal of having points for those games as well? Hell, I don't even think most New Recruits realize that there's a point system!

[Digital Jihad]

i voted no for obvious reasons

yeah, because it is a stupid idea that only hurt new recruits trying to play a game

i wouldn't have stuck around if my first five games had no point value. some of you might like the idea of conquer club without the great dfaarc, but i don't

Why? I mean, what's the big deal? You have no rank until five games, what's the big deal of having points for those games as well? Hell, I don't even think most New Recruits realize that there's a point system!

I agree. I didn't notice it till my question mark was gone. Then I read the instructions and looked at my score. Then I understood.

[GrimReaper.]

I have an idea how about out of their first 10 games they will e able to choose which 3 will be of now point value?

(of course when they join they will get an automated pm explaining farming what kinde of games they should start out with ect.)

or we could give them the 5 games of no points so they start out as a private not a cook if they lose.

[lt.pie]

i voted no for obvious reasons

yeah, because it is a stupid idea that only hurt new recruits trying to play a game

Your a funny guy max What you really mean is...yeah,because it is a stupid idea that only hurts me preying on new recruits.

[Digital Jihad]

i voted no for obvious reasons

yeah, because it is a stupid idea that only hurt new recruits trying to play a game

Your a funny guy max What you really mean is...yeah,because it is a stupid idea that only hurts me preying on new recruits.

[FabledIntegral]

I don't understand why we can't just set a point limit. "New recruits can't join games with Major and up." Or something of that sort.

A noob playing against a stripper is no different from a noob playing against a field marshal. A field marshal my have more experience, but he has that same advantage in every game he plays. No matter who joins the game that a noob sets up, it is still farming; against me the noob just loses less points.

I don't quite follow your logic. It was completely irrelevant to the point I made.

The entire point of this thread is to keep players from targeting ?'s to up their score. If there was a point limit, as said such as Major, then people could only farm up until that Major rank. On new recruits at least.

[GrimReaper.]

I don't understand why we can't just set a point limit. "New recruits can't join games with Major and up." Or something of that sort.

because New recruits would become out cast if that happened

[The Neon Peon]

Why have set in quotes when there is nothing in them?

Also, majors up are a very small portion of the people on the site, it is not exactly being "outcast" if you can't play the top 4% of people.

[Geger]

I voted for NO. Reasons :
1. Not all "?" are bad players, they want points too
2. "?" is free to choose a game to join (example : never join an assassin game on waterloo-map created by lt.pie )
3. "?" shall not create a game, because "creating a game" means you challenge all players (I see nothing wrong what maxatstuy did)
4. ... etc.

[BaldAdonis]

1. Not all "?" are bad players, they want points too
2. "?" is free to choose a game to join (example : never join an assassin game on waterloo-map created by lt.pie )
3. "?" shall not create a game, because "creating a game" means you challenge all players (I see nothing wrong what maxatstuy did)

Of course they're not all bad, but many are impatient. If they expect to play an entire game immediately, and don't get to, then they often give up and never come back. Why would you give points for "defeating" those players?
If they want to play, then they will be happy to play 5 games. This is really a method to curb point inflation from so many new recruit deadbeats, and to stop them from having a bad experience courtesy of farmers who can't win a game any other way.

[FabledIntegral]

I don't understand why we can't just set a point limit. "New recruits can't join games with Major and up." Or something of that sort.

because New recruits would become out cast if that happened

I do believe new recruits only count for the first 4-5 games so they can suck it up and not join a major+ game. There are tons of games out there, it's hardly limiting.

[e_i_pi]

Yeah, let's keep in mind that New Recruit status goes away after 5 completed games. Also, the vast majority of New Recruits don't even play that many games. I will endeavour to get stats on this and report back.

[Geger]

Yeah, let's keep in mind that New Recruit status goes away after 5 completed games. Also, the vast majority of New Recruits don't even play that many games. I will endeavour to get stats on this and report back.

Don't you think 5 games are too much?

My point is, if a "?" meets a high ranked player in a game, the mistake is from "?" side. I know most "?" want to join a game immediately, before read the Instruction or Help. I admit, that I did it too. But I did only 1.

I like the idea to create some games without points. Maybe after new joining, the "?" are given 2 options to choose :
* Learn to Play --> join games without points
* Prove Yourself --> join games with points

[e_i_pi]

I like the idea to create some games without points. Maybe after new joining, the "?" are given 2 options to choose :
* Learn to Play --> join games without points
* Prove Yourself --> join games with points

Yeah I was tossing that up as an idea to add in. So you can take yourself out of "Newbie-ness" before the 5 games, but then we still have the problem of people making sacrificial points lambs to race up the scoreboard.

[maxatstuy]

i voted no for obvious reasons

yeah, because it is a stupid idea that only hurt new recruits trying to play a game

Your a funny guy max What you really mean is...yeah,because it is a stupid idea that only hurts me preying on new recruits.

actually, I dont like the idea because it is illogical that a noob will stick around when it takes an hour and a half for his first game to start and then he learns that it didnt mean anything that he just beat a field marshal and didnt gain any points. It has very little effect on me. I am a very good farmer; joining games on new recruits is a hobby, I will just start to gain my points from other methods. As I said before though, this a stupid method and will only cause more players to leave this site.

The entire point of this thread is to keep players from targeting ?'s to up their score. If there was a point limit, as said such as Major, then people could only farm up until that Major rank. On new recruits at least.

If you are making the point that farming isnt fair, then it isnt fair for low ranks to do it either. You are creating a double which is wrong.

[saraith]

I like the idea to create some games without points. Maybe after new joining, the "?" are given 2 options to choose :
* Learn to Play --> join games without points
* Prove Yourself --> join games with points

Why limit that option to the "?" rank? That could even function as a global option. I for one, care as much for points as I do for the farming that it would curb. (Which, of course, is to say very little.)

As I am sure there are other folks out there with the same mindset, I would enjoy playing them, and would almost exclusively would.

[saraith]

The entire point of this thread is to keep players from targeting ?'s to up their score. If there was a point limit, as said such as Major, then people could only farm up until that Major rank. On new recruits at least.

If you are making the point that farming isnt fair, then it isnt fair for low ranks to do it either. You are creating a double [standard] which is wrong.

Actually, he's got a point, there, FabledIntegral

@maxatstuy: Please don't take this to mean that I agree with your methods, I consider them to be unethical, in fact; but I do agree with the statement I quoted.

[Geger]

I know you all want to solve the problem with people gaining easy points (farming). I support it too. But this suggestion won't solve the problem.
I just want to tell you, how the idea looks from another perspective (New Recruit's view). Let's see :

Someone find this site or you told a friend about this site. They join. Then they realize that they must play 5 game without points first.
How long it take? I can say 2 weeks in average, because New recruits are usually freemiums (they can't play speedgames).
2 weeks play for no points. Don't you think it's boring?? I don't believe new recruits want to wait so long

Just my 2 cents

[maxatstuy]

The entire point of this thread is to keep players from targeting ?'s to up their score. If there was a point limit, as said such as Major, then people could only farm up until that Major rank. On new recruits at least.

If you are making the point that farming isnt fair, then it isnt fair for low ranks to do it either. You are creating a double [standard] which is wrong.

Actually, he's got a point, there, FabledIntegral

@maxatstuy: Please don't take this to mean that I agree with your methods, I consider them to be unethical, in fact; but I do agree with the statement I quoted.

I have no problem with anyone thinking farming is cheap or unethical, (with the exception of lt.pie since he is a definitional farmer attempting to lobby against they methods which gave him the majority of his points,) but there is nothing wrong with the way I farm in the sense of having a negative impact on the people I play, or against the site in general. Through farming, I gain probably less than 5 points a day on average yet I am the second highest ranked player on the scoreboard. Criticizing farming is fine, but pretending it is detrimental because people with high scores use it is absurd. If farming is bad, it would be bad used by anyone, not just the higher ranked players, and in the case of having no point noobs, it WOULD detract from there desire to continue playing. What is the point of playing if you can win a game against high ranks and not get any points...I agree with you about that Geger, playing would have no purpose.

Also, how would team games work where the noob plays with a non noob player? And still no one has addressed my other point: what would discourage people from throwing games to new recruits in multi player games where they know that the noob wont take any of their points if the new recruit wins?

[hecter]

1. Noobs can't join team games.
2. As I said before, many many games give noobs some sort of amnesty, generally through a "noob island" experience, so if you sell it like that, people will see it like that.
3. If you care so much about points that you'll leave if you're first five games (that's NOTHING, BTW, my fifth game finished on the 13th, four days after I joined) I doubt you'll stay if you join a game on a map that makes no sense against somebody that knows exactly what to do, and you end up getting slaughtered for your first give games.
4. Most noobs don't stick around long enough to learn there's a point system, much less care.

In terms of throwing games to new recruits, well that's a genuine concern...

[e_i_pi]

3. If you care so much about points that you'll leave if you're first five games (that's NOTHING, BTW, my fifth game finished on the 13th, four days after I joined) I doubt you'll stay if you join a game on a map that makes no sense against somebody that knows exactly what to do, and you end up getting slaughtered for your first give games.
4. Most noobs don't stick around long enough to learn there's a point system, much less care.

In terms of throwing games to new recruits, well that's a genuine concern...

Thanks hecter, these two stand out for me as the main arguments you've just made for the suggestion. If noobs don't stick around long, why on earth should the entire scoreboard be inflated with points that aren't even earned from playing games in the way that your average punter earns them?

I got about 300 points from my first 5 games, partially through luck, partially through skill. But in the 600 or so games I've played I've fluctuated an awful amount, and I'm sure that if the first 5 games weren't counted, it would make very little difference to me now. It certainly wouldn't have negatively affected my decision to join the site, wouldn't have affected me contributing to the Foundry, Tournaments, and Suggs. I strongly doubt it would have affected me becoming a member of LoW. Furthermore, if I had known they were worth nothing, I most likely would have played game types and maps I knew nothing about, rather than the maps I did play: 2 Europe, 3 Classic. This would have given me experience in the rich diversity of the site, rather than sticking to waters I thought were safe.

Noob Zones are the lifeblood of online gaming. That is why every MMORPG has one.

[yeti_c]

The lame duck arguments put forth put the "farmers guild" only make me think that this must be a good idea as they are fighting so hard to stop it.

C.