A Rethink of the Farming Rules

[Symmetry]

There is never going to be a black and white line you can draw because someone will find a way around it. Thats why they have the unwritten rules. Thats a general list so the mods would have some breathing room to decide what is bad and what is acceptable.

Ok, that's an interesting take on it. So far this thread has mainly been about changing the written rules, but yeah, there is an important unwritten rules section (which is written), as well as actual unwritten rules. That's a new way to think about it, to consider those other parts.

[Metsfanmax]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

[s3xt0y]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

I think you can farm any player regardless of rank if they are new to the settings or maps...say a brig who has never played a freestyle game, they get invited into a game with someone who plays only freestyle, has a fast internet connection and is very good with the clickies. They are at an immediate disadvantage and this could be considered farming (if this player does this all the time). I dont think this rule should be written to be limited by rank. It should be written in a way where taking advantage of unknowing players is against the rules. Keep everyone on a level playing field.

[WILLIAMS5232]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

I think you can farm any player regardless of rank if they are new to the settings or maps...say a brig who has never played a freestyle game, they get invited into a game with someone who plays only freestyle, has a fast internet connection and is very good with the clickies. They are at an immediate disadvantage and this could be considered farming (if this player does this all the time). I dont think this rule should be written to be limited by rank. It should be written in a way where taking advantage of unknowing players is against the rules. Keep everyone on a level playing field.

and as long as there is a step system in place where only multiple offenders get bans and point resets then no one will get wrongly accused. or at least with serious consequences. i just don't see why this is so difficult.

[Gillipig]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

I think you can farm any player regardless of rank if they are new to the settings or maps...say a brig who has never played a freestyle game, they get invited into a game with someone who plays only freestyle, has a fast internet connection and is very good with the clickies. They are at an immediate disadvantage and this could be considered farming (if this player does this all the time). I dont think this rule should be written to be limited by rank. It should be written in a way where taking advantage of unknowing players is against the rules. Keep everyone on a level playing field.

And how are people going to try new things then? I've never won a quadruples game but I would never consider it farming if me and 3 other newbies at quads around 2000, lost against some quads specialists. The thing here isn't specific knowledge but general knowledge. When a player has a good grasp about general knowledge he knows to stay away from certain settings or he willingly tries them knowing he's going to lose in the beginning. But when a player without general knowledge plays these specialist settings he might mistake it for general knowledge, think he sucks and leave the site. That's why we should go after those who are playing specialist maps and settings against players who not yet have a general knowledge of the game. Like antichrist himself Gen.LeeGettinhed !

[Geger]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

I think you can farm any player regardless of rank if they are new to the settings or maps...say a brig who has never played a freestyle game, they get invited into a game with someone who plays only freestyle, has a fast internet connection and is very good with the clickies. They are at an immediate disadvantage and this could be considered farming (if this player does this all the time). I dont think this rule should be written to be limited by rank. It should be written in a way where taking advantage of unknowing players is against the rules. Keep everyone on a level playing field.

And how are people going to try new things then? I've never won a quadruples game but I would never consider it farming if me and 3 other newbies at quads around 2000, lost against some quads specialists. The thing here isn't specific knowledge but general knowledge. When a player has a good grasp about general knowledge he knows to stay away from certain settings or he willingly tries them knowing he's going to lose in the beginning. But when a player without general knowledge plays these specialist settings he might mistake it for general knowledge, think he sucks and leave the site. That's why we should go after those who are playing specialist maps and settings against players who not yet have a general knowledge of the game. Like antichrist himself Gen.LeeGettinhed !

Hm.. it's complicated.

Agree with Gillipig here. If I want to try a new map or a new setting, I'll look for a game with many high-rangking players, because I'll lose less points. I won't call these high-rangking players farm me.

But I think, s3xt0y means here, it's not about creating a "special" game or setting and then playing against inexperienced players, but about inviting these inexperienced players.

Inviting someone, who just finished his 5th game (like we can read in C&A-forum), is not against the current rule, it's not farming - but trapping, lol.

It is ridiculous, like hmsps said :

Its like waiting for someones 16th birthday

.

[s3xt0y]

Trying new settings here is fine, the key word I used is consistency, or consistently. There has to be a record of it, if the player in question is always inviting players or baiting players into his games then there is an issue.

[Metsfanmax]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

I think you can farm any player regardless of rank if they are new to the settings or maps...say a brig who has never played a freestyle game, they get invited into a game with someone who plays only freestyle, has a fast internet connection and is very good with the clickies. They are at an immediate disadvantage and this could be considered farming (if this player does this all the time). I dont think this rule should be written to be limited by rank. It should be written in a way where taking advantage of unknowing players is against the rules. Keep everyone on a level playing field.

And how are people going to try new things then? I've never won a quadruples game but I would never consider it farming if me and 3 other newbies at quads around 2000, lost against some quads specialists. The thing here isn't specific knowledge but general knowledge. When a player has a good grasp about general knowledge he knows to stay away from certain settings or he willingly tries them knowing he's going to lose in the beginning. But when a player without general knowledge plays these specialist settings he might mistake it for general knowledge, think he sucks and leave the site. That's why we should go after those who are playing specialist maps and settings against players who not yet have a general knowledge of the game. Like antichrist himself Gen.LeeGettinhed !

Hm.. it's complicated.

Agree with Gillipig here. If I want to try a new map or a new setting, I'll look for a game with many high-rangking players, because I'll lose less points. I won't call these high-rangking players farm me.

But I think, s3xt0y means here, it's not about creating a "special" game or setting and then playing against inexperienced players, but about inviting these inexperienced players.

Inviting someone, who just finished his 5th game (like we can read in C&A-forum), is not against the current rule, it's not farming - but trapping, lol.

Yes, but this is a slippery slope argument that doesn't really end. At what point does inviting someone lower-ranked than you stop counting as farming? What is the rating point or game count that matters? There isn't really a good way to answer that. So ultimately you do have to pick an arbitrary line in the sand.

[maxfaraday]

For what it's worth, here's my 2 cent:
just add "finding your way around the law" to the unwritten rules.

[natty dread]

Yes, but this is a slippery slope argument that doesn't really end. At what point does inviting someone lower-ranked than you stop counting as farming? What is the rating point or game count that matters? There isn't really a good way to answer that. So ultimately you do have to pick an arbitrary line in the sand.

For that reason, it's best that farming rules are kept for NR:s only.

[Metsfanmax]

Yes, but this is a slippery slope argument that doesn't really end. At what point does inviting someone lower-ranked than you stop counting as farming? What is the rating point or game count that matters? There isn't really a good way to answer that. So ultimately you do have to pick an arbitrary line in the sand.

For that reason, it's best that farming rules are kept for NR:s only.

That just artificially covers the issue; you could simply redefine NR status if you wanted to protect people for more games.

[Symmetry]

Yes, but this is a slippery slope argument that doesn't really end. At what point does inviting someone lower-ranked than you stop counting as farming? What is the rating point or game count that matters? There isn't really a good way to answer that. So ultimately you do have to pick an arbitrary line in the sand.

For that reason, it's best that farming rules are kept for NR:s only.

That just artificially covers the issue; you could simply redefine NR status if you wanted to protect people for more games.

Indeed, but as games become more complex, there could maybe be a more flexible approach to farming too.

[s3xt0y]

I still think it's about consiscenty...if there is a history of invites and game abuse, point reset...if it continues...site ban. This is actually a really simple way of solving it and I haven't really seen anyone make a point against it.

Rank doesn't matter, if a player is consistently inviting people to games or searching them out or whatever they can even get a warning. New recruits are the obvious one but we have to expand this rule so that people like the gen can't just sit there and invite people who are unknowingly walking into a loss due to unfamiliarity of the maps or settings or whatever.

[PLAYER57832]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

OK, but here is the thing. What is fundamentally wrong with people playing other people and winning?

Because the premise of anti-farming rules is just that, that someone coming here and losing right off will lead them to think this is a bad place. Except... do we really WANT people who cannot stand to lose? Don't we have enough poor sports?

I am all for rules that make "being mean" to newbies, in particular, saying nasty things to them in chat, deadbeating without good reason (computer fail), etc.

Instead of criticizing older players for playing newbies.. many of them will offer a new player a GOOD experience, help them learn the maps, etc, instead there should be a way for folks to better explore new maps.

There is already a suggestion for a mentor program.. one by me, one by someone else (2 different ways of doing it). I also suggested something I call "beginner random". It would pair ONLY people who have not played a map. There are some complications. For example, someone with only a few maps unplayed is not really new, even if they have not played that particular map (and if they really want, they have been here enough to seek out a few players who are new to the map).

Anyway, THAT type of directon would go far further. I have said it before and will say it again. The main impact of these anti-farming rules has been to keep people from playing the unusual settings and variety maps. This is exactly the opposite of what will help CC to grow. SOC is there for folks who want to learn standard maps (and, I understand team play on other maps as well, now). However, a lot of people just don't like that type of training program, for any number of reasons. (for me, its time, also, I just prefer not to play the standard maps)

[s3xt0y]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

OK, but here is the thing. What is fundamentally wrong with people playing other people and winning?

Because the premise of anti-farming rules is just that, that someone coming here and losing right off will lead them to think this is a bad place. Except... do we really WANT people who cannot stand to lose? Don't we have enough poor sports?

I am all for rules that make "being mean" to newbies, in particular, saying nasty things to them in chat, deadbeating without good reason (computer fail), etc.

Instead of criticizing older players for playing newbies.. many of them will offer a new player a GOOD experience, help them learn the maps, etc, instead there should be a way for folks to better explore new maps.

There is already a suggestion for a mentor program.. one by me, one by someone else (2 different ways of doing it). I also suggested something I call "beginner random". It would pair ONLY people who have not played a map. There are some complications. For example, someone with only a few maps unplayed is not really new, even if they have not played that particular map (and if they really want, they have been here enough to seek out a few players who are new to the map).

Anyway, THAT type of directon would go far further. I have said it before and will say it again. The main impact of these anti-farming rules has been to keep people from playing the unusual settings and variety maps. This is exactly the opposite of what will help CC to grow. SOC is there for folks who want to learn standard maps (and, I understand team play on other maps as well, now). However, a lot of people just don't like that type of training program, for any number of reasons. (for me, its time, also, I just prefer not to play the standard maps)

Really? Are you a glg multi?

[Metsfanmax]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

OK, but here is the thing. What is fundamentally wrong with people playing other people and winning?

Because the premise of anti-farming rules is just that, that someone coming here and losing right off will lead them to think this is a bad place. Except... do we really WANT people who cannot stand to lose? Don't we have enough poor sports?

The premise of the anti-farming rules is that there is absolutely no fairness in the way the game is played -- it is pretty much impossible to expect that the NR has any actual ability to win the game, regardless of their intelligence. The fact that this discourages some people from staying with the site is a secondary concern; albeit an important one, because this IS a business and if more people stay and pay for premium so that we can add more site features, I'm all for that.

[PLAYER57832]

Nobody wants to see people caught out unfairly, and nobody wants to see people get away with stuff that's blatantly against the spirit of the rules, while being technically within the wording.

The way I see it, the spirit of the rules is to prevent people from profiting from NR:s en-masse because they are most likely to deadbeat out of their games.

So let me put it this way. How is "farming" non-NR low-rankers in any way harmful? You haven't shown that yet. The only harm I can see in it is that some people get butthurt about it sometimes. I posit that placing more restrictions on who you can or can't play would be infinitely more harmful for the site.

Infinitely more? That's a big number, not many bigger outside of the school yard, where of course, infinity plus one rules apply in such arguments.

Taking it down a notch, the case I cited in the OP was one in which a high ranking player approached players new to the site and asked them to play a game with him. Note that he approached them, and targeted new players. I tend toward the opinion that this is pretty immoral. I interpret the spirit of the rule a little differently- I think that it's to allow new players a decent shot at getting used to the game without being preyed on by experienced players. I don't particularly see it as a way of protecting high ranking players from deadbeats.

I know of a few cases where this happens. I also know of a couple of people who did this to up their number of people played, not so much for points.

I do think that someone who sends multiple pms to new people should be watched, if not curtailed. However, I don't believe they really have a negative impact unless they are mean and nasty. (and sadly, too often farmers are). The problem is "mean and nasty" is too subjective. Mods only have so much time, so the simpler the better.

I think farming is mostly a concern to some high rank people who have conquerer aspirations. I don't think it actually harms the rest of the community much, if at all. Yet the arguments against it are that it hurts new people.

Sort of a big part of the argument is that is discourages new players from sticking around. I can't post any figures, I can just go with my gut on that and personal experience from other sites. Unfortunately, if they don't stick around, they won't raise it as an issue. So that part of the problem becomes a bit self-selecting. The people who experienced that behaviour and stayed are kind of by definition the ones who didn't have a problem with it.

Am I explaining that well? It's a bit of a wordy post...

I get that reasoning, but just disagree.

There is a balance. The fact that people come here and don't stay is not absolutely a bad thing, if its a matter that they simply found the site is not what they want. Trying to please everyone can be a really, really big mistake. Try to please everyone and you wind up pleasing no one.

To me, this is partly about weeding folks out. Do we really and truly want more people who cannot stand to lose? Competetiveness is one thing, but we already have enough well, "spoiled brats".

The line that is drawn is "if this person plays with lots of low ranked people on odd maps and wins", then they are a "farmer". The trouble is, that means a LOT of people who just plain like the "odd" maps and settings. It can be hard to get people to play those maps and settings at times. (each seems to have a "cult" following, but after a while one can get tired of playing the same folks). So, you start a game and if someone new joins... no biggie. Myself, I take the time to explain. In truth, I suspect I would have been labeled a farmer a long time ago if it were not for my poor win record. Also, I do take pains to try and explain the maps and such. However, I still have met my share of folks who seem to think just the fact that I beat them means I am a jerk (instead of the reverse).

[PLAYER57832]

The point of the "unwritten" rules is not so there's flexibility in what's considered farming -- there's not: farming can only occur against NRs, which is a specific definition -- but so that there's flexibility in punishing people who come up with creative ways to abuse the system. There should absolutely be a hard-and-fast rule for what is considered abuse of low-ranked/new players so that people know what is and what is not wrong.

OK, but here is the thing. What is fundamentally wrong with people playing other people and winning?

Because the premise of anti-farming rules is just that, that someone coming here and losing right off will lead them to think this is a bad place. Except... do we really WANT people who cannot stand to lose? Don't we have enough poor sports?

The premise of the anti-farming rules is that there is absolutely no fairness in the way the game is played -- it is pretty much impossible to expect that the NR has any actual ability to win the game, regardless of their intelligence. The fact that this discourages some people from staying with the site is a secondary concern; albeit an important one, because this IS a business and if more people stay and pay for premium so that we can add more site features, I'm all for that.

Except, is it a true premise? I argue that the problem, then is in not identifying specific maps or settings as being difficult. If they are identified as such, then it should be up to the individual to choose. From my perspective the anti-farming rules are driving players away now.. players who like the unusual maps and settings, but who sometimes have a hard time finding folks to play against. I think I see this more than many here because I am one who likes to play those maps. I have found it markedly harder to find partners now than in the past because so many of those I used to play have been pushed off as "farmers".

We already have prohibition against newbies joining Waterloo, etc. The few we have are OK, but to expand those more means just being too much of a "nanny".. something that will also drive folks away. Instead, we need a compromise. Something like a popup that notifies people "hey, realize the rules for this are unusual.. be sure to study before taking a turn, or maybe you would like to try another map" (something less wordy, but you get the point).

[Metsfanmax]

From my perspective the anti-farming rules are driving players away now.. players who like the unusual maps and settings, but who sometimes have a hard time finding folks to play against. I think I see this more than many here because I am one who likes to play those maps. I have found it markedly harder to find partners now than in the past because so many of those I used to play have been pushed off as "farmers".

If you can't find people to play on those maps, they're just unpopular. The problem isn't solved by allowing brand new players (who have no idea how to play the map) join you -- will you feel like you got a good game out of them?

[PLAYER57832]

From my perspective the anti-farming rules are driving players away now.. players who like the unusual maps and settings, but who sometimes have a hard time finding folks to play against. I think I see this more than many here because I am one who likes to play those maps. I have found it markedly harder to find partners now than in the past because so many of those I used to play have been pushed off as "farmers". .

If you can't find people to play on those maps, they're just unpopular.

First of all, I am talking about specific people who were ousted for farming because they only liked to play AOR2 or other unusual maps.

The problem isn't solved by allowing brand new players (who have no idea how to play the map) join you -- will you feel like you got a good game out of them?

Your argument absolutely makes NO sense. You say that bringing in new people won't increase play on the variety maps? Come again???

The problem is not that these maps are terrible maps no one wants to play them, the problem is that CC currently pushes them to the back burner until people have already attained competency on the Classic. Its exactly backwards from how I and many other older players who are still here actually begain. If it were not for Coral Cairns, Age of merchants and Crossword (there were only 20 something maps when I started), I probably would never have become premium. I have helped quite a few people learn those maps. But, since the SOC started, folks are actively discouraged from joining these other maps.

People only learn any map by playing it. Many of those "unpopular" maps are actually far easier to learn in strategy and such than the "classic" map... even aside from the fact that competition on classic is much heavier than on other maps. AOR2 is a classic example. It is about the easiest map to play and learn. Arms Race is a bit harder, but not by much. I would NEVER suggest anyone start with classic, unless they were simply intent on that map, becuase they see its similar to a game they might already know. Else... its probably the worst map to start unless you are very, very good. The SOC is a good way to teach people that map, but in no way shape or form does it prepare anyone for Lunar landing, AOR 1 or 2 or Arms Race.

So many of you make those assumptions about how hard these maps are because they have either not played them or are so focused on their strategy they cannot be bothered to learn other techniques. Yet.. what makes CC unique is precisely those variety maps. You can find other Risk Clones. You cannot find Oasis, Arms Race or Waterloo. (not that Waterloo is a beginning map).

[Metsfanmax]

Your argument absolutely makes NO sense. You say that bringing in new people won't increase play on the variety maps? Come again???

The problem is not that these maps are terrible maps no one wants to play them, the problem is that CC currently pushes them to the back burner until people have already attained competency on the Classic. Its exactly backwards from how I and many other older players who are still here actually begain. If it were not for Coral Cairns, Age of merchants and Crossword (there were only 20 something maps when I started), I probably would never have become premium. I have helped quite a few people learn those maps. But, since the SOC started, folks are actively discouraged from joining these other maps.

People only learn any map by playing it. Many of those "unpopular" maps are actually far easier to learn in strategy and such than the "classic" map... even aside from the fact that competition on classic is much heavier than on other maps. AOR2 is a classic example. It is about the easiest map to play and learn. Arms Race is a bit harder, but not by much. I would NEVER suggest anyone start with classic, unless they were simply intent on that map, becuase they see its similar to a game they might already know. Else... its probably the worst map to start unless you are very, very good. The SOC is a good way to teach people that map, but in no way shape or form does it prepare anyone for Lunar landing, AOR 1 or 2 or Arms Race.

So many of you make those assumptions about how hard these maps are because they have either not played them or are so focused on their strategy they cannot be bothered to learn other techniques. Yet.. what makes CC unique is precisely those variety maps. You can find other Risk Clones. You cannot find Oasis, Arms Race or Waterloo. (not that Waterloo is a beginning map).

New Recruit status is for 5 games. We're not locking anybody out of having fun, we just want to make sure that people get a feeling for how to actually take turns and play games on Conquer Club before they get into something they don't understand.

[Symmetry]

New Recruit status is for 5 games. We're not locking anybody out of having fun, we just want to make sure that people get a feeling for how to actually take turns and play games on Conquer Club before they get into something they don't understand.

Yes, and if that is the principle, then it should be revisited as the game becomes more complicated.

[PLAYER57832]

New Recruit status is for 5 games. We're not locking anybody out of having fun, we just want to make sure that people get a feeling for how to actually take turns and play games on Conquer Club before they get into something they don't understand.

Except, the fact that a map is not a standard risk clone in no way, shape or form means it is difficult. AOR2 is one of the EASIEST maps to learn and play there is, but just because its not like Risk, most people assume it is hard.. people who mostly cannot be bothered to even try it!


And.. nothing in the current structure really helps people to know what maps are easier to learn. In fact, you start out by basically pushing people onto the most competetive map here.. Classic! Classic is fine, its popular, but it is not the best way for everyone to start out. It is one option, but by making that "the" option, you wing up pushing out a whole section of other people who might very well like to play here, but who cannot be bothered to wade through SOC, etc.

[Metsfanmax]

New Recruit status is for 5 games. We're not locking anybody out of having fun, we just want to make sure that people get a feeling for how to actually take turns and play games on Conquer Club before they get into something they don't understand.

Except, the fact that a map is not a standard risk clone in no way, shape or form means it is difficult. AOR2 is one of the EASIEST maps to learn and play there is, but just because its not like Risk, most people assume it is hard.. people who mostly cannot be bothered to even try it!

I would be willing to bet that most of the people who come here, come here from a Risk background. As a result, even if they can figure it out initially, it's going to be confusing and it's going to be new and unfamiliar. Yes, in principle they could go out their first time and do really well, but chances are they're not going to sit and really think about strategy because it's their first time doing something new.

[natty dread]

The current King Herpes C&A report is an excellent example why farming rules shouldn't be extended beyond NR:s.