Conquer Club

L M S wrote:This particular case, with all its details, looks pretty bad for the accused.

HOWEVER.

I don't believe the underlying premise of waiting to join your freestyle games last should be labeled abuse. It can't be. Its the right way to play the setting.

The biggest fact that makes this ranching IMO, is the accusations from good freestyle players that have received PMs from this group when they join one of their games. The PM paraphrased said "we are dropping the game because we wanted to wait for lower ranks to join it so we can beat them." This PM shows their intent to ranch. They aren't truly "public" games.

tec805 wrote:Just because we are doing it to get kills for medals doesn't mean I think it's a nice way to play.

Gunn217 wrote:

tec805 wrote:Just because we are doing it to get kills for medals doesn't mean I think it's a nice way to play.

Then why do it?

Master Fenrir wrote:

Gunn217 wrote:

tec805 wrote:Just because we are doing it to get kills for medals doesn't mean I think it's a nice way to play.

Then why do it?

Chicks dig medals, bro.

MoB Deadly wrote:The opponents can read its a freestyle game and know what they are getting themselves into.

MoB Deadly wrote:If they arent inviting their opponents directly into the game I don't think its abuse. The opponents can read its a freestyle game and know what they are getting themselves into.

But using the invite system to hold that game in place so its starts when they are online to go first. I can see how that could be abuse. Thats a pretty clear advantage. Similar to missing the manual deployment phase in city mogul to go first.

aad0906 wrote:

MoB Deadly wrote:The opponents can read its a freestyle game and know what they are getting themselves into.

That is the problem... they don't. Sure, they realize it is freestyle but they don't realize that they are getting into a game where their opponents are timing the start of the game and before you realize the game has started, you have already lost (very easy with unlimited forts if all 4 players are online at the exact time the game starts).
I have a hard time empathizing with that argument. Most players are aware of how freestyle works. If not, they can read the instructions. The only other way to learn is in-game. And this is fine. I am not a fan of how freestyle works and even circumstances such as these, but I cannot condone arbitrary claims of abuse based on the ignorance of how the chosen game works.

Yesterday just for the heck of it I contacted a player who was in the game waiting to start and gave him the link to the other thread where this practice was discussed. This player immediately dropped the game and thanked me for saving him points.
Cool.

Maybe there should be a cool down period, that casual freestyle trip/quad games only start x hours after the 6th or 8th player has joined. If then team 2 is not online and team 1 destroys them, well, at least they had a chance.
This is a good idea. There have been a few posted earlier that could work as well.

tec805 wrote:Shoot those damn freestyle farmers.

Hey, wait a second...

The biggest fact that makes this ranching IMO, is the accusations from good freestyle players that have received PMs from this group when they join one of their games. The PM paraphrased said "we are dropping the game because we wanted to wait for lower ranks to join it so we can beat them." This PM shows their intent to ranch. They aren't truly "public" games.

We LOVE playing good players. WE have joined other freestyle ranchers games to see if we can beat them on their own map (and we have). ljex and some of his friends joined our game and did the exact same thing as us, sit on an invite and wait to join last. The game was going no place, simmons sent a PM. I'm sure ljex can dig it up and paste it here so there is no mis-paraphrasing. There is no game we have ever dropped because we were scared of good players. I'd be very interested to see these "accusations" you mention.

And of course I was sorry for the quick game. Who likes to join a game and get killed before they take a turn? Just because we are doing it to get kills for medals doesn't mean I think it's a nice way to play. We figured it was just a matter of time until someone got pissy about it.

We are in a clan, we are on Skype and we are on the computer quite a bit. We coordinate, strategize and play our games the same whether we are in a war or bogrolling or anything else.

So ranching is cool as long as you pick a complicated map, or something with an objective, so going first isn't so important? Setup a dozen games and wait for noobs to join is the accepted method, gotcha! If making sure taking your turn first in freestyle is abusive then give the warnings and change the system.

jghost7 wrote:

MoB Deadly wrote:If they arent inviting their opponents directly into the game I don't think its abuse. The opponents can read its a freestyle game and know what they are getting themselves into.

But using the invite system to hold that game in place so its starts when they are online to go first. I can see how that could be abuse. Thats a pretty clear advantage. Similar to missing the manual deployment phase in city mogul to go first.

Both mentioned are GameType issues. Both can be solved with fixes to the gametype, particularly Freestyle, as the games covered in this thread are.

It would be an advantage to any team that went first and freestyle teams don't get a random start. So, if you join all at once you can more than expect that the other team will join and use their advantage wisely. Is there truly a fair way to start a team freestyle game? Whatever the scenario, whoever goes first has the major advantage no matter if it is held by invite or a full game joined by a team.

So, they found a way to delay the inevitable join and kill...
and now someone thinks it sucks,
which is fine, but the real issue is with the gametype.
fix that and these issues go away.

aad0906 wrote:

MoB Deadly wrote:The opponents can read its a freestyle game and know what they are getting themselves into.

That is the problem... they don't. Sure, they realize it is freestyle but they don't realize that they are getting into a game where their opponents are timing the start of the game and before you realize the game has started, you have already lost (very easy with unlimited forts if all 4 players are online at the exact time the game starts).
I have a hard time empathizing with that argument. Most players are aware of how freestyle works. If not, they can read the instructions. The only other way to learn is in-game. And this is fine. I am not a fan of how freestyle works and even circumstances such as these, but I cannot condone arbitrary claims of abuse based on the ignorance of how the chosen game works.

Yesterday just for the heck of it I contacted a player who was in the game waiting to start and gave him the link to the other thread where this practice was discussed. This player immediately dropped the game and thanked me for saving him points.
Cool.

Maybe there should be a cool down period, that casual freestyle trip/quad games only start x hours after the 6th or 8th player has joined. If then team 2 is not online and team 1 destroys them, well, at least they had a chance.
This is a good idea. There have been a few posted earlier that could work as well.

ljex wrote:what you dont understand is that the city mogul ruling is also a game type issue that was rule as abuse. Sometimes it is easier to make a rule against something that have lack waste his time making an update to stop a handful of players from abusing the system instead of making an update that people actually care about and the majority of cc can benefit from. You keep saying the system is flawed, and I disagree. The system is in place for players who wish to not use cheap methods...and i think more fault is on the cheap players than the system. And yes this includes myself for the oasis games...i was at fault in that situation. Its a little different for many reasons and i dont think my method is as bad as this but i do realize that i should have went about things differently.

Chuuuuck wrote:Please note, no one outside of their clan has defended these actions and said they dont' think it is abuse. I think it is obvious to everyone that isn't involved and has a stake in the action that this is abuse.

Simple quetion, if you took all the players in their games, put them all online at the same time and started those games, would they have a win ratio like they do? .... Absolutely not.

But they abuse the system to give themselves and unfair advantage taht was not meant to be given repeatedly.

This was not a problem before the invite system, because they were forced to join their game as a team, team 2 could join and they would know when the game started. So the creators of the game took on the risk.

This was a loophole created with the invite system because they are creating the game they want and then abusing the system to guarantee an advantage. They are refusing to play the game without the advantage. That gaurantees an unfair advantage 100% of the time with the settings they prefer. No other word for it than abuse.

Chuuuuck wrote:Please note, no one outside of their clan has defended these actions and said they dont' think it is abuse. I think it is obvious to everyone that isn't involved and has a stake in the action that this is abuse.
This is a load of crock. Just because I am in a clan with them, I don't have a valid input or opinion? I have no stake in this, but I do feel strongly enough to give my thoughts and input. It should not be disregarded just because of that. LOL

Simple question, if you took all the players in their games, put them all online at the same time and started those games, would they have a win ratio like they do? .... Absolutely not.
For sure they wouldn't. I don't think it would be that far off, but there you go.

But they abuse the system to give themselves and unfair advantage taht was not meant to be given repeatedly.
I do not think that this is abuse. The other teams have the option to try to go last as well. It is a problem with the gametype rather than the invite system.

This was not a problem before the invite system, because they were forced to join their game as a team, team 2 could join and they would know when the game started. So the creators of the game took on the risk.
LOL , that was another suggestion put up earlier, to remove invites from the Freestyle gametype. It would solve the immediate issue regarding this, however I think the timer is better for this.

This was a loophole created with the invite system because they are creating the game they want and then abusing the system to guarantee an advantage. They are refusing to play the game without the advantage.
Once again you are assuming abuse. They have the option to try to wait it out if they choose, so they do. Also, they do not always create the games. It is logical to try to set up to go first if you can, so if they have a way to attempt it you jump in and cry 'Abuser, Cheater'? If you think the invite system caused the problem then one would think that a simple fix such as removing the invite system from freestyle would fix it yes?


That gaurantees an unfair advantage 100% of the time with the settings they prefer. No other word for it than abuse.
Well, I would think that one would do what he could to try to win, and that would include trying to go first in these games. Simply trying to cry abuse about something you see that you dislike, why not then try to advocate a change? Trying to win the game that they are playing by going last is not abuse. Both teams have the option to perform this action so how is it unfair? I personally think that they should just make a change to fix it.

Chuuuuck wrote:Please note, no one outside of their clan has defended these actions and said they dont' think it is abuse. I think it is obvious to everyone that isn't involved and has a stake in the action that this is abuse.

Simple quetion, if you took all the players in their games, put them all online at the same time and started those games, would they have a win ratio like they do? .... Absolutely not.

But they abuse the system to give themselves and unfair advantage taht was not meant to be given repeatedly.

This was not a problem before the invite system, because they were forced to join their game as a team, team 2 could join and they would know when the game started. So the creators of the game took on the risk.

This was a loophole created with the invite system because they are creating the game they want and then abusing the system to guarantee an advantage. They are refusing to play the game without the advantage. That gaurantees an unfair advantage 100% of the time with the settings they prefer. No other word for it than abuse.

TheGeneral2112 wrote:

Chuuuuck wrote:Please note, no one outside of their clan has defended these actions and said they dont' think it is abuse. I think it is obvious to everyone that isn't involved and has a stake in the action that this is abuse.

Simple quetion, if you took all the players in their games, put them all online at the same time and started those games, would they have a win ratio like they do? .... Absolutely not.

But they abuse the system to give themselves and unfair advantage taht was not meant to be given repeatedly.

This was not a problem before the invite system, because they were forced to join their game as a team, team 2 could join and they would know when the game started. So the creators of the game took on the risk.

This was a loophole created with the invite system because they are creating the game they want and then abusing the system to guarantee an advantage. They are refusing to play the game without the advantage. That gaurantees an unfair advantage 100% of the time with the settings they prefer. No other word for it than abuse.

In a foggy game without 12 hour rule, all players have invites. Do you want to be the first to join or the last? Do people hold invites as long as possible to get a screenshot? Is this also game abuse? This is actually common fucking sense and there is no reason this should be in C&A. It isn't questionable. It is as basic as not attacking a 1 from a 2. In clan games and tourney games, (without 12 hour) teams try as HARD AS THEY CAN TO JOIN LAST FOR A SCREENSHOT OR A FIRST TURN! This is why most tourney's say if you don't accept within 24 hours you are disqualified. They aren't inviting anyone other than their own team. They aren't missing turns. This should be pretty cut and dried...

Fastposted by Betiko - "team freestyle is by essence unfair if you play with a steady team that plays together their turns."

Did you honestly just say this? YES, IF YOU PLAY AGAINST A REAL TEAM, IT WILL NOT BE A WALK IN THE PARK!!

Jesus, people...

Also, Chuuck, I'm not in their clan. I'm speaking out.