Conquer Club

Concise description:

• Given we have a wide range of more complicated settings - or at least ones that offer very different gameplay - I think these should be unlocked after a certain amount of games are played.

Specifics/Details:

• Unlock new settings when the following amount of games have been completed:
  
  • 10: Terminator
  • 15: Fog
  • 20: Assassin
  • 30: Manual
  • 40: Polymorphic
  • 50: Parachute & No Forts
  • 65: Trench
  • 80: Freestyle
  • 100: Nuclear & Zombie
• Send an automatic PM when new settings are unlocked
  
  • Give brief explanation on what the new settings are and how they work
  • Provide a link to the instructions page for more info
  • Mention how many games until the next setting(s) is/are unlocked
• Exlude settings from all game finding methods until they are unlocked

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• I believe that having such a wide variety of settings that new players don't understand, and seeing games on weird maps with weird settings (from a New Recruit's point of view) will deter players from sticking around. Especially since they're not as likely to enjoy the game if they're getting spanked because they don't understand the settings.
• Players will stick around because they play on the basic settings and enjoy the game, picking up general gameplay intuition as they play. Then after completing 50 games they unlock a couple more settings to explore, more after 75 and more after 100. It keeps new players interested.

Note: the restricted settings could be explained on the instructions page.

I'm open to debate.

I like it, and this is something that should probably need doing at some point in time. The settings would need to be debated a lot more as some of them seem out as well as the game played levels.

The levels are open to discussion and yes, new settings would have to be integrated into this system as they were released.

Given that many people coming to CC will have played the board game then manual will be something they're already familiar with so shouldn't need unlocking.

Maybe first unlocked should be terminator - killed a few opponents in standard games and got no points? Well try terminator, every kill is worth something!

I thought about Terminator and thought it doesn't need unlocking but I guess it could be put at a low level.

I know Manual is the original way to play but it works differently and the strategy is totally different.

I love this idea for many reasons... cuts down on farming... shields new accounts from being overwhelmed with the multitude of the new settings available... forces noobs (at least to some point) to develop a basic skill level and understanding of the game before delving into more comlicated and nuanced settings. I cant really think of anything negative here... maybe new, really intelligent, skilled players not being able to jump right into the deep end (Seems like an extrmemly small % of new players, and not something that would directly affect membership).

Big thumbs up here unless someone can show me how its not good..

I think this is a pretty reasonable idea.. I guess my only question is that when new settings are unlocked, is anything done to help them understand those settings?

I'm imagining a PM or something that goes to them at the completion of Game X and says "New Settings Unlocked!" and gives some brief details of those settings... otherwise we're relying on them wandering their way to instructions etc. Seems like if the site was more proactive about educating about the settings, a lot of the confusion would go away.

Not a criticism of your idea at all, just a possible enhancement that might compliment it.

Good point. I guess if there wasn't some kind of explanation when they unlocked the new settings they'd be almost as clueless anyway. I would say there should be a PM as you described, just like when you get a medal, with a brief explanation about how the new setting works and a link to the instructions page.

OP updated.

I really like this idea. It also gives the new recruits something to work towards and stick around for. Maybe the next unlock level and naming the setting it unlocks could be included in the PM to encourage the new player to stick around and work towards unlocking the next setting level.

Personally I'd suggest spreading the setting out a bit more so a new setting gets unlocked every 10-15 games or so. It'll make it seem like the next level isn't as far away and is more obtainable.

Revised the original suggestion with an improved breakdown and PM details.

Do we want to include team games in the settings restrictions?

-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:Do we want to include team games in the settings restrictions?

I would say definitely not to this...team games are a way for noobs to get specific instructions from potentially much better players... I would say this is one of the few things that SHOULD NOT be locked

The other suggested modifiers to this suggestion I do like however... pms and decreasing of games thresholds before unlocking the next level of settings.

I think freestyle should be locked for a longer period.... specific settings do add a certain nuance to gameplay, but freestyle is a completely different game... like football and futbol... seem the same... but not... lol hell.. one of em you cant even use ur hands (what idiot thought of a ball game where u cant use ur hands) *shakes his head*

rhp 1 wrote:

-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:Do we want to include team games in the settings restrictions?

I would say definitely not to this...team games are a way for noobs to get specific instructions from potentially much better players... I would say this is one of the few things that SHOULD NOT be locked

I completely agree with my babe on this one. I have played risk 2v2 more than any other style in real life. Of course there is also the factor that people join this site to play on the team together, and they can also learn from mentors as rhp said.

rhp 1 wrote:I think freestyle should be locked for a longer period.... specific settings do add a certain nuance to gameplay, but freestyle is a completely different game... like football and futbol... seem the same... but not... lol hell.. one of em you cant even use ur hands (what idiot thought of a ball game where u cant use ur hands) *shakes his head*

I think 80 games is a considerable amount, taking into account the great variance in people's game loads and the fact the high majority of new players are freemium, so 80 is quite a substantial number.

Also, since there are two settings unlocked at 50 games, I thought it was nice to have 2 unlocked at 100 rather than at 80 with freestyle at 100. I have nuance for things like that.

Swifte wrote:I think this is a pretty reasonable idea.. I guess my only question is that when new settings are unlocked, is anything done to help them understand those settings?

I'm imagining a PM or something that goes to them at the completion of Game X and says "New Settings Unlocked!" and gives some brief details of those settings... otherwise we're relying on them wandering their way to instructions etc. Seems like if the site was more proactive about educating about the settings, a lot of the confusion would go away.

Not a criticism of your idea at all, just a possible enhancement that might compliment it.

Something like many games feature.
Lets say u reach a level when u can now play poly games. Then a warning is showed(something like the new stars warning?)saying that u have now unblocked Poly games and a quick tutorial to follow.(or something that explains how to's)

I like this idea. It creates real . challenges to players . Rh1p also wrote about other benefits of the idea

iAmCaffeine wrote:

rhp 1 wrote:

-=- Tanarri -=- wrote:Do we want to include team games in the settings restrictions?

I would say definitely not to this...team games are a way for noobs to get specific instructions from potentially much better players... I would say this is one of the few things that SHOULD NOT be locked

I completely agree with my babe on this one. I have played risk 2v2 more than any other style in real life. Of course there is also the factor that people join this site to play on the team together, and they can also learn from mentors as rhp said.

rhp 1 wrote:I think freestyle should be locked for a longer period.... specific settings do add a certain nuance to gameplay, but freestyle is a completely different game... like football and futbol... seem the same... but not... lol hell.. one of em you cant even use ur hands (what idiot thought of a ball game where u cant use ur hands) *shakes his head*

I think 80 games is a considerable amount, taking into account the great variance in people's game loads and the fact the high majority of new players are freemium, so 80 is quite a substantial number.

Also, since there are two settings unlocked at 50 games, I thought it was nice to have 2 unlocked at 100 rather than at 80 with freestyle at 100. I have nuance for things like that.

I really don't have a big opposition to the fs thing... I just thought it being such a unique setting and all.. but your point is well taken...

and your use of the word "nuance" (as you well know) blows there...

10 games for terminator? I'd put it way lower, maybe down to 5. And nuclear isn't that complicated. I'd unlock it much earlier, say at 50 games.

And what about Fog? 75 games? 100?

Yeah, nuance did blow.

@macbone - I don't see any point having it lower when they're restricted for a player's first four games, unless they use game finder. Fog could be included I guess, although I'm not sure it's necessary.

Edit: I have added fog at 15. Terminator isn't moving. Nuclear and Zombie aren't particularly complicated when you know the basic gameplay but they are totally different from any other setting. Also added a point about games being excluded.

Yeah, but Caffeine, we use Terminator for our SoC training. Raising it to 5 is ok, but 10 games for a freemium could be months before they can join the SoC training academy.

We do use Standard, too, but more of the games are Terminator, and it's nice for that immediate bump in score that gives a lot of our players confidence to continue playing.

macbone wrote:Yeah, but Caffeine, we use Terminator for our SoC training. Raising it to 5 is ok, but 10 games for a freemium could be months before they can join the SoC training academy.

We do use Standard, too, but more of the games are Terminator, and it's nice for that immediate bump in score that gives a lot of our players confidence to continue playing.

It really doesn't take that long to complete ten games, in the high majority of circumstances. I just don't think five games is worthwhile considering you receive a rank after four.

If other people can weigh in I will reconsider.

This has been suggested before:
viewtopic.php?t=102006

I was 100% opposed to it then, and I remain so now. Here's the basic reason: A significant portion of new players coming to the site have extensive board game experience and are ready for the complicated settings from day 1. They may not excel on them, but they see the most complicated settings as a challenge. They start playing games (as freemium players) and realize that unless they stick to 2-4 player games, it's taking 5-7 days to complete a game. They're looking at 3-6 months to unlock some of the features of this site that are most interesting. So, given the choice between playing settings they don't care about for a few months to unlock the games they really want to play or to go find another online gaming site that allows them to immediately jump into interesting and challenging gameplay, where do you think they end up?

If the choice is between scaring away newbies with an abundance of options or boring new advanced players with limited functionality, then it becomes a question of which type of player the site would prefer to keep around.

iAmCaffeine wrote:

macbone wrote:Yeah, but Caffeine, we use Terminator for our SoC training. Raising it to 5 is ok, but 10 games for a freemium could be months before they can join the SoC training academy.

We do use Standard, too, but more of the games are Terminator, and it's nice for that immediate bump in score that gives a lot of our players confidence to continue playing.

It really doesn't take that long to complete ten games, in the high majority of circumstances. I just don't think five games is worthwhile considering you receive a rank after four.

If other people can weigh in I will reconsider.

If the players remain freemium and prefer larger games (which was the case for me), it will take a solid month to complete 10 games.

Doc_Brown wrote:This has been suggested before:
viewtopic.php?t=102006

I was 100% opposed to it then, and I remain so now. Here's the basic reason: A significant portion of new players coming to the site have extensive board game experience and are ready for the complicated settings from day 1. They may not excel on them, but they see the most complicated settings as a challenge. They start playing games (as freemium players) and realize that unless they stick to 2-4 player games, it's taking 5-7 days to complete a game. They're looking at 3-6 months to unlock some of the features of this site that are most interesting. So, given the choice between playing settings they don't care about for a few months to unlock the games they really want to play or to go find another online gaming site that allows them to immediately jump into interesting and challenging gameplay, where do you think they end up?

If the choice is between scaring away newbies with an abundance of options or boring new advanced players with limited functionality, then it becomes a question of which type of player the site would prefer to keep around.

Yeah, pretty much.

I'd opt for more advanced players since the market for newbies is being engulfed by flash player games. CC is in an aging market. Limiting people's opportunities won't encourage them to wait 3-6 months.