[Rules] Limit New Recruit for 16 games in settings and maps

[VampireM]

I still think this idea is great, the exact amount of games needed to unlock stuff may or may not be perfect but its something to really help introduce a new player into the game without the new recruit being overloaded with so many options and being taken advantage of (this goes for any average new player that is under 100 games)

Now with that said i dont like limiting the new player to no spoils.. that is really unfair to them, first they are new without premium if they watch what the better players do they will pick up on the basic idea of stacking up their armies and slow down their learning process because they are stuck at 4 stalemated games (same goes for flat rate).. i think that the game should start off like the board game is ruled.. its what most people know.. that is chained, esc, sunny... dont u think if they are stuck in 30 round + games they are just going to get bored and quit?

[natty dread]

Aargh, this again. Limitations for new recruits are fine, beyond that, people should be allowed to play whatever they want.

[stahrgazer]

Aargh, this again. Limitations for new recruits are fine, beyond that, people should be allowed to play whatever they want.

I don't understand the supposed logic of "at game number six, you're magically qualified for everything, including a 1v1 freestyle at speed against a colonel or higher who lured you into Waterloo, Mogul, AoR, Feudal - or other games with map-specific tactics - with no prior advice "

[mccallan25]

I tremendously like all of the suggestions in the original post.

[natty dread]

Who decides who is qualified to what? You? QH? The Worried Mothers Association?

The thing is, we can't tell how experienced any new player is. Who are we to mother over them, saying "you have only played X games so you can't play Y settings, they're too difficult for you." Heck, can't we trust them to make their own decisions? Let them experiment, if they find a map/setting too difficult they don't have to play that map/setting again.

I understand the limitations for new recruits. Many of them only try the site and play a few turns and then lose interest and deadbeat. This would be easy to take advantage of, hence the farming rules and whatnot. However we don't consider playing against cooks & up farming, so we shouldn't restrict them either.

Go ask some cook with 10 games played how he would feel if 50% of the site features were blocked from him to "protect him". Gee, I wonder what he'll say.

[army of nobunaga]

I think that you and I should open a business together, you have a sharp mind.

This is a great Idea. Order, structure and something that will hook new players. Everyone has some inner need at "unlocking" a next level. This is a great hook and would make CC more efficient and viable.

I hope it gets implemented. Probably one of the best suggestions that has been made in the history of this thread.

[army of nobunaga]

Who decides who is qualified to what? You? QH? The Worried Mothers Association?

The thing is, we can't tell how experienced any new player is. Who are we to mother over them, saying "you have only played X games so you can't play Y settings, they're too difficult for you." Heck, can't we trust them to make their own decisions? Let them experiment, if they find a map/setting too difficult they don't have to play that map/setting again.

I understand the limitations for new recruits. Many of them only try the site and play a few turns and then lose interest and deadbeat. This would be easy to take advantage of, hence the farming rules and whatnot. However we don't consider playing against cooks & up farming, so we shouldn't restrict them either.

Go ask some cook with 10 games played how he would feel if 50% of the site features were blocked from him to "protect him". Gee, I wonder what he'll say.

I think if you made it an "unlock" the next level thing it would create more of an addiction.
Even at 5000 games played atm.. If you locked some SUPER DOOOPER MAP and told me I had to play 100 more games to get to it.. buddy you better believe I wouldnt be mad, I would have 100 1vs1 games going this instant.

[Queen_Herpes]

I don't understand the supposed logic of "at game number six, you're magically qualified for everything, including a 1v1 freestyle at speed against a colonel or higher who lured you into Waterloo, Mogul, AoR, Feudal - or other games with map-specific tactics - with no prior advice "

Stahrgazer, I agree. My perspective is that a player can learn one map playing it as little as 2 times, but more likely takes them 3 times to uncover all the potholes and one-way attacks and such. That being said, a new player could conceivably learn two to three maps in their first five games. To put them out to all the maps after 5 games AND to put them out to all the settings after 5 games is just too quick for the average player. Agreed, there are players out there who are "above average" and probably don't need it, but it doesn't hurt new player to help them learn each setting, does it? I don't think so. I think it helps them and helps the site.

To the moderators of Suggestions, thank you for stickying this suggestion. I'm going to try to stay out of commenting on this for the time being so that more thoughts and opinions can jump in from other users I think most who have read this and my other suggestion know that I am in support of:

-keeping new players at the site
-increasing the enjoyment of all players at this site
-supporting some kind of automatic training program whether that be:
-
-----AI, or
-
-----Practice Games, or
-
-----my suggestion to have certain aspects of the game unlocked over time, or
-
-----another suggestion from the peanut gallery that helps retain new recruits!
-
QH

[natty dread]

I think if you made it an "unlock" the next level thing it would create more of an addiction.
Even at 5000 games played atm.. If you locked some SUPER DOOOPER MAP and told me I had to play 100 more games to get to it.. buddy you better believe I wouldnt be mad, I would have 100 1vs1 games going this instant.

AON, I respect & like you so I don't want to argue with you. However, I suggest you read the original thread, it was full of lengthy and well-thought out explanations on why this is a bad idea.

The gist of the matter is, CC is no video game where unlocking new features is part of the fun. This is a casual gaming site. Think how many new recruits deadbeat when they find out they have to wait 10-20 hours to make their next move. Think how short the attention span of the average new player is. Now you want them to play 80 games - 4 at a time - before they can get to enjoy the full variety of CC? Good for business?? I don't think so.

The best part of CC is the variety. Lots of maps, lots of options. You take those away from the new players, and I guarantee they are not going to feel they are being challenged, they feel they are being mothered over and will move to another site which lets them play what they want.

[natty dread]

If you locked some SUPER DOOOPER MAP and told me I had to play 100 more games to get to it.. buddy you better believe I wouldnt be mad, I would have 100 1vs1 games going this instant.

What if you were freemium and had to play those 100 games 4 at a time, no speed games, and on only certain settings that some Concerned Mother has deemed you qualified to play? Sorry but I can't believe you would be so thrilled.

[army of nobunaga]

I think if you made it an "unlock" the next level thing it would create more of an addiction.
Even at 5000 games played atm.. If you locked some SUPER DOOOPER MAP and told me I had to play 100 more games to get to it.. buddy you better believe I wouldnt be mad, I would have 100 1vs1 games going this instant.

AON, I respect & like you so I don't want to argue with you. However, I suggest you read the original thread, it was full of lengthy and well-thought out explanations on why this is a bad idea.

The gist of the matter is, CC is no video game where unlocking new features is part of the fun. This is a casual gaming site. Think how many new recruits deadbeat when they find out they have to wait 10-20 hours to make their next move. Think how short the attention span of the average new player is. Now you want them to play 80 games - 4 at a time - before they can get to enjoy the full variety of CC? Good for business?? I don't think so.

The best part of CC is the variety. Lots of maps, lots of options. You take those away from the new players, and I guarantee they are not going to feel they are being challenged, they feel they are being mothered over and will move to another site which lets them play what they want.

Dont ever be worried about arguing with me man, I have like zero hard feelings over any type of debate.

I think we would have to disagree here though. there are 161 maps currently... I think even 20 maps to a new player that is use to one map (classic from the boardgame) is pretty overwhelming enough. I can still remember feeling overwhelmed and excited.

I think the main thing queen is suggesting is that we bring new people into some structure and coddle them so they stick and are not taken advantage of and leave.

[army of nobunaga]

If you locked some SUPER DOOOPER MAP and told me I had to play 100 more games to get to it.. buddy you better believe I wouldnt be mad, I would have 100 1vs1 games going this instant.

What if you were freemium and had to play those 100 games 4 at a time, no speed games, and on only certain settings that some Concerned Mother has deemed you qualified to play? Sorry but I can't believe you would be so thrilled.

Hate to say this, but If I was a free player, this might be something that convinced me to spend 25 bucks. Actually in my case, yes, I would spend 25$ probably faster than you can read this reply, and then have my 100 1vs1 games up before you could type out a response.

I have to run errands.

Good day to you ND

[Queen_Herpes]

I think if you made it an "unlock" the next level thing it would create more of an addiction.
Even at 5000 games played atm.. If you locked some SUPER DOOOPER MAP and told me I had to play 100 more games to get to it.. buddy you better believe I wouldnt be mad, I would have 100 1vs1 games going this instant.

AON, I respect & like you so I don't want to argue with you. However, I suggest you read the original thread, it was full of lengthy and well-thought out explanations on why this is a bad idea.

The gist of the matter is, CC is no video game where unlocking new features is part of the fun. This is a casual gaming site. Think how many new recruits deadbeat when they find out they have to wait 10-20 hours to make their next move. Think how short the attention span of the average new player is. Now you want them to play 80 games - 4 at a time - before they can get to enjoy the full variety of CC? Good for business?? I don't think so.

The best part of CC is the variety. Lots of maps, lots of options. You take those away from the new players, and I guarantee they are not going to feel they are being challenged, they feel they are being mothered over and will move to another site which lets them play what they want.

Ugh, I hate to drop back in on the convo, but natty...

The original suggestion was intended to be like putty...moldable and shapeable. I'm by no means stuck to limiting players to 80 games to unlock everything. There have been some great comments here and on the other suggestion where users pointed out that 80 games is too long....I tend to agree!

AON is supporting the aspect that he likes about the suggestion. He perhaps doesn't like absolutely everything about it.

I think, but not sure, you at one time had suggested fewer games to unlocking everything as well. Sounded like you were in support of the concept, but not in support of the number of games. If so, please mention how you would like to shape it...

Natty, I think we would have to disagree here though. there are 161 maps currently... I think even 20 maps to a new player that is use to one map (classic from the boardgame) is pretty overwhelming enough. I can still remember feeling overwhelmed and excited.

I think the main thing queen is suggesting is that we bring new people into some structure and coddle them so they stick and are not taken advantage of and leave.

AON, this goes to my original concept which is this: A player who can only play 4 games at one time cannot possibly play on every map at conquer club until they have played 161 games. So, I aagree with you AON.

[natty dread]

Like I said to you in pm QH, I wouldn't be opposed to upping the 5 games limit to 10 or so. Kinda like extending the new recruit period. And some additional limitations could be applied to it, perhaps - not all in this suggestion, but some. But after those 10 or whatever games are over and you're no longer a new recruit, then you should be able to play whatever you want.

You know, I often try various shareware programs. One thing that I hate is when a program is marketed as having a "free trial" but then when you install and try it, half the options are blocked, or you can't save your edited files, or something, rendering the program useless. At this point, the software usually leaves my harddrive faster than the speed of light. I do not feel the slightest inclination to pay for the software after such trickery. The funny part is, if the software was actually decent, and it would have let me use it properly in trial mode, I would have been more inclined to buy the full version.

But perhaps that's just me.

[stahrgazer]

What if you were freemium and had to play those 100 games 4 at a time, no speed games, and on only certain settings that some Concerned Mother has deemed you qualified to play? Sorry but I can't believe you would be so thrilled.

Then, natty, for your logical consistency, you should be opposing the protection of ? from 'farmers' as well... because five games isn't enough to protect them anyway, it's simply someone playing 'mother' as you called it.

[SirSebstar]

I want to support the queens idea because i like the unlocking part. there are different type of players, but for me its the collecting that does the trick.
As too mother goose telling me what to play and what not to play, well lets face it, when did you last time go for for freestyle waterloo fog manual quad in your first 11+ games... and won?!?
My connection is 0.7 MB at best and i play my turns within 10 minutes a day. Trust me, on that basis alone i have no business being in freestyle, so i dont. But it took me a while to figure it out. If i had had a person telling me, you should try this first and try that later, i might even have had a better time.

So i modify the siggestion,
Suppose we do not want to be big mama, how than if we give players the OPTION of following the queens plan??? Basicly a self chosen restraint, dedicated to getting the most of the CC experience and fun and getting the best knowledge quickly. Some people never read the manual, but if you can not kill yourself with nukes in game 11 do your really miss out that much?????

[stahrgazer]

I want to support the queens idea because i like the unlocking part. there are different type of players, but for me its the collecting that does the trick.
As too mother goose telling me what to play and what not to play, well lets face it, when did you last time go for for freestyle waterloo fog manual quad in your first 11+ games... and won?!?
My connection is 0.7 MB at best and i play my turns within 10 minutes a day. Trust me, on that basis alone i have no business being in freestyle, so i dont. But it took me a while to figure it out. If i had had a person telling me, you should try this first and try that later, i might even have had a better time.

So i modify the siggestion,
Suppose we do not want to be big mama, how than if we give players the OPTION of following the queens plan??? Basicly a self chosen restraint, dedicated to getting the most of the CC experience and fun and getting the best knowledge quickly. Some people never read the manual, but if you can not kill yourself with nukes in game 11 do your really miss out that much?????

hehehe

I know of very few boys who exercise 'self restraint' (boys more than girls, will tend to push barriers when told don't. too bad if that's a sexist remark, it's accurate based on stats but I'm not going to bother going to find the stats, either).

Thing is, the site already implies that there are some levels a new recruit isn't going to be ready to try. Q's suggestion is accurate in that, the site doesn't go quite far enough. I think her opinion that even offering "young players" (by young players, I don't mean age, I mean time on CC/games played) the chance to eat the entire elephant at once is probably enough to choke most of them away, is correct.

What I see here is simply variation on how big the pieces of elephant being offered, should be.

Suggesting that five games makes someone new, and six games makes them ready for all, may have been viable when CC had few maps and few options, but it no longer has any basis in logic. Arbitrarily doubling that to ten is equally illogical, given the variety of options. Making it 160 games (based on current number of maps) may be a bit too much.

But between 5 or 10, and 160; all-at-once and none-for-months, there really ought to be some compromise that a majority of folk deem would be reasonably edible pieces of the huge elephant CC offers.

That's why I suggested a compromise. Granted, I didn't complete the idea for QH's entire list. But whatever 'level' a set of games is, picking one of those to go into the next LOWER level, so they do get a sampling of what "more is to come" seems viable, and is consistent with the "unlock video games" natty mentions. As well as, allowing them to play ANY style game, provided they're playing on the same side as at least one teammate who is "unlocked".

[TheForgivenOne]

I like Sir's idea. This would kind of thread out who truly are New Recruits, and who is Duality

All-in-all, i think this is a good idea. Some things i'd like to point out.

I agree with Natty in some parts. Yes, it is annoying when you don't have all the parts in a Free Trial. BUT, in your free trials, you have to buy it to get the whole package. In QH's Suggestion, they are slowly unlocking new things throughout the process. lack isn't forcing them to pay to play on all the maps, on all the settings (minus speed and Private). He gives them the option to try all these new settings.

This reminds me of some video games. At the very beginning, you get basic training, on how to do This, and That, and all these new things. It gets you used to the new controls. I know for a fact, if i was thrown into the middle of a game, where i had no clue what the A and B button do, i'd be lost or killed within minutes. But if i would have been given tutorials on all the mechanics, for example, what happens if i hold down L and hit the A, i may have lasted a few minutes, or kept going.

ALSO, in most-all games, you slowly unlock cool and new things as your progress. In such games as, The Legend of Zelda, you didn't start out with ALL the weapons, if you did, then the game would have been so freaking easy at the beginning. Instead you had to deal with the basic tools, The Sword, your shield, the Deku Stick, etc etc. This made the game SO much funner, as you had to keep playing, to keep unlocking cool and new weapons.

Now if you were to parallel CC to a game like The Legend of Zelda, i think it would increase the number of users. As always, a few would go "You mean i have to learn? screw this". But i think more would go "So i get these basic settings, that i am used to, and if i keep playing, i will get to play with all these cool new maps and settings? COOL!"

On a side note. I do think that instead of "No Cards", Players should start out with Escalating. Because i know that when i originally played Risk!, that is how we played it, With Escalating cards. Now i do agree Manual shouldn't, because it is fogged over.

That's my 2 cents

[safariguy5]

I'm not sure we need participation medals. To me, medals are a thing that you need to work hard to get. With the exception of the ratings medal, I felt and still feel incredibly proud for all of the medals I earned from team games, fog, etc. I feel a participation medal rather cheapens the value of medals and do not support it. Given that most of us commenting on this sugg won't feel the effects, (we are no longer noobs) it would just lead to extra server space needed to award all of us that hardware. I understand the motivation for it (carrot on a stick) but I don't think medals are the right way to go. If anything, it should be a reverse motivation like your rank changing from silver to gold when you go premium. I would support some sort of tag on the name that lessens and disappears when the player had completed prerequisite games.

[Doc_Brown]

I want to support the queens idea because i like the unlocking part. there are different type of players, but for me its the collecting that does the trick.
As too mother goose telling me what to play and what not to play, well lets face it, when did you last time go for for freestyle waterloo fog manual quad in your first 11+ games... and won?!?
My connection is 0.7 MB at best and i play my turns within 10 minutes a day. Trust me, on that basis alone i have no business being in freestyle, so i dont. But it took me a while to figure it out. If i had had a person telling me, you should try this first and try that later, i might even have had a better time.

So i modify the siggestion,
Suppose we do not want to be big mama, how than if we give players the OPTION of following the queens plan??? Basicly a self chosen restraint, dedicated to getting the most of the CC experience and fun and getting the best knowledge quickly. Some people never read the manual, but if you can not kill yourself with nukes in game 11 do your really miss out that much?????

Ugh. How the hell did this get a sticky? And I thought QH had revised her suggestion to just be an optional AI training program. When she stated that several pages back, I quit paying much attention since I didn't have any objections. If we're going back to the mandatory unlocking program and that is what has been stickied, I'm going to be really pissed off. Whoever stickied this, please go back and read through the 10+ pages here and the 15+ pages in the other (virtually identical) thread. They're filled with reasons why the mandatory restrictions are very bad. All the newish players (including me) that have commented have uniformly stated that they would have been far less likely to stick around with those restrictions in place.

Now, if you want to change it so that something like half the settings and maps are available at 5 completed games, and the rest are available after 10, I wouldn't complain too much, but I don't think it has been demonstrated that there is an actual problem with the way things are now that couldn't be solved by simply putting up a page with information and tips about difficult maps and game settings that players would be automatically forwarded to on starting their first game on a new map or setting.

Also, early in this thread I offered another alternative that would allow players that are prepared for the challenging maps and settings from the beginning to not feel constrained while still coddling newer players: Start by changing the way the game finder works by putting default restrictions to the game finder options in a player's control panel. In this way, the "Join a Game" button would only display games fitting the settings and map selections enabled on a special screen in the control panel. The maps would be divided into different levels (perhaps using QH's approach). By default, the higher level maps, as well as assassin, terminator, team games, and freestyle would not be enabled. Until a player completes his first 5 games, he will be unable to change any of the settings on that screen (which automatically provides for current new recruit site behavior). After 5 games, all the options are available, but they are not automatically changed. So players that have completed 6 games that click "Join a Game" will still be shown the same list as if they'd only completed 2 games. But they can go to their control panel and start enabling various options. That way a player can choose whether he feels ready to take on level 7 (or whatever the highest level is) maps or if he'd prefer to stick to levels 1-3 for a while longer. The players that don't bother finding out what they need to know about the more complicated maps and settings are largely going to be the same players that never manage to find the settings in the control panel.

[TheForgivenOne]

Do not tell me how to do my job. This had a huge discussion going on throughout it. We, as Suggestion Moderators, are supposed to sticky threads, that seem to have either A) A lot of support or B) Has had a lot of discussion.

Also, way way WAY back when CC had just started, someone made a suggestion for "AI Maps" or "Bots" And lack made it quite clear, that he wants to keep this site clean of "bots", yet i still have people saying "Well, there is new technology/xml" and "Well maybe he changed his mind".

[army of nobunaga]

I want to support the queens idea because i like the unlocking part. there are different type of players, but for me its the collecting that does the trick.
As too mother goose telling me what to play and what not to play, well lets face it, when did you last time go for for freestyle waterloo fog manual quad in your first 11+ games... and won?!?
My connection is 0.7 MB at best and i play my turns within 10 minutes a day. Trust me, on that basis alone i have no business being in freestyle, so i dont. But it took me a while to figure it out. If i had had a person telling me, you should try this first and try that later, i might even have had a better time.

So i modify the siggestion,
Suppose we do not want to be big mama, how than if we give players the OPTION of following the queens plan??? Basicly a self chosen restraint, dedicated to getting the most of the CC experience and fun and getting the best knowledge quickly. Some people never read the manual, but if you can not kill yourself with nukes in game 11 do your really miss out that much?????

hehehe

I know of very few boys who exercise 'self restraint' (boys more than girls, will tend to push barriers when told don't. too bad if that's a sexist remark, it's accurate based on stats but I'm not going to bother going to find the stats, either).

very friggin sexist... imo... but a comment that endears me to you lol.

[Doc_Brown]

I like Sir's idea. This would kind of thread out who truly are New Recruits, and who is Duality

All-in-all, i think this is a good idea. Some things i'd like to point out.

I agree with Natty in some parts. Yes, it is annoying when you don't have all the parts in a Free Trial. BUT, in your free trials, you have to buy it to get the whole package. In QH's Suggestion, they are slowly unlocking new things throughout the process. lack isn't forcing them to pay to play on all the maps, on all the settings (minus speed and Private). He gives them the option to try all these new settings.

This reminds me of some video games. At the very beginning, you get basic training, on how to do This, and That, and all these new things. It gets you used to the new controls. I know for a fact, if i was thrown into the middle of a game, where i had no clue what the A and B button do, i'd be lost or killed within minutes. But if i would have been given tutorials on all the mechanics, for example, what happens if i hold down L and hit the A, i may have lasted a few minutes, or kept going.

ALSO, in most-all games, you slowly unlock cool and new things as your progress. In such games as, The Legend of Zelda, you didn't start out with ALL the weapons, if you did, then the game would have been so freaking easy at the beginning. Instead you had to deal with the basic tools, The Sword, your shield, the Deku Stick, etc etc. This made the game SO much funner, as you had to keep playing, to keep unlocking cool and new weapons.

Now if you were to parallel CC to a game like The Legend of Zelda, i think it would increase the number of users. As always, a few would go "You mean i have to learn? screw this". But i think more would go "So i get these basic settings, that i am used to, and if i keep playing, i will get to play with all these cool new maps and settings? COOL!"

On a side note. I do think that instead of "No Cards", Players should start out with Escalating. Because i know that when i originally played Risk!, that is how we played it, With Escalating cards. Now i do agree Manual shouldn't, because it is fogged over.

That's my 2 cents

I figured when I read this that you were probably a teenager. The big difference between this site and a video game is that you can make it through a video game in a matter of a few days. Go back to your Zelda example. Suppose that I told you that there was no way you would possibly be able to get the shield in less than 4 months and that the master sword was going to take about 8 months. How appealing would the game be? Freemium players will be doing extremely well to complete more than 10 games per month. I've said multiple times in these threads that if these restrictions were in place, I would have played for a week, realized how long it was going to take to play on some of the more interesting maps, and I would have left.

I really don't think lack is prepared to turn the freemium option into what will essentially become an extremely limited trial version. That's another good way to chase away a huge part of the site membership. As it stands right now, 4 games is generally sufficient for me. Even if I joined, I'd almost certainly never have more than 10 going at a time. Also, the real-time games don't particularly interest me. So, with money tight in the current economy, I'm not going to shell out $25 right now to be able to play a few extra games, though I'd seriously consider doing so when I have extra money. The point is, I'm a potential premium member as long as I stick around the site, and I'll stick around the site so long as I feel like the site is worth my time. Cut off huge amounts of content because of an arbitrary idea that I'll "be ready" for tougher maps once I've played 50 games on the easier maps and I'll leave. Read through this thread and you'll see my sentiments echoed universally by every newer player that has commented.

Furthermore, as several people pointed out, you don't get good at Supermax by playing more games on Classic. Sure, there are skills and concepts that are easier to develop on the simpler maps, and those skills will translate. But some of us came to this site with many of those skills already in place and don't need 50 games to develop them. Furthermore, you'll still have just as many people frustrated with the tougher maps because they will have had the same amount of exposure to those tougher settings whether they've completed 5 games or 50.

[Doc_Brown]

Do not tell me how to do my job. This had a huge discussion going on throughout it. We, as Suggestion Moderators, are supposed to sticky threads, that seem to have either A) A lot of support or B) Has had a lot of discussion.

Well don't tell me how to play the game! I'm protesting because there is not a lot of support for this. If you read through the threads, the comments were about 3 to 1 in opposition to the whole unlocking approach (and more like 10 to 1 if you go be the word count!). Additional information and optional training never really received much discussion because discussion about the problems with unlocking pretty well overwhelmed everything else.

Also, way way WAY back when CC had just started, someone made a suggestion for "AI Maps" or "Bots" And lack made it quite clear, that he wants to keep this site clean of "bots", yet i still have people saying "Well, there is new technology/xml" and "Well maybe he changed his mind".

I'm quite aware. Like I said, I don't object to the AI training, but I'm fully aware that it's unlikely to happen (or is at the very least is very low on the priority list).

[army of nobunaga]

Do not tell me how to do my job. This had a huge discussion going on throughout it. We, as Suggestion Moderators, are supposed to sticky threads, that seem to have either A) A lot of support or B) Has had a lot of discussion.

Well don't tell me how to play the game! I'm protesting because there is not a lot of support for this. If you read through the threads, the comments were about 3 to 1 in opposition to the whole unlocking approach (and more like 10 to 1 if you go be the word count!). Additional information and optional training never really received much discussion because discussion about the problems with unlocking pretty well overwhelmed everything else.

Also, way way WAY back when CC had just started, someone made a suggestion for "AI Maps" or "Bots" And lack made it quite clear, that he wants to keep this site clean of "bots", yet i still have people saying "Well, there is new technology/xml" and "Well maybe he changed his mind".

I'm quite aware. Like I said, I don't object to the AI training, but I'm fully aware that it's unlikely to happen (or is at the very least is very low on the priority list).

If the priority list is to make money... I think I would hire queen herpes... This is the first Idea that will help retain new people Ive seen.