The Official Clan Sitting Rules (Old Version)

[agentcom]

Not verification here... on the first page. I was just reading 15 pages.
How will CD team verify SMS or skype? (easy Photoshopable)

They said that they are looking for patterns. It doesn't sound like they are going to be CSI'ing every sat turn or anything.

[chapcrap]

Not verification here... on the first page. I was just reading 15 pages.
How will CD team verify SMS or skype? (easy Photoshopable)

They said that they are looking for patterns. It doesn't sound like they are going to be CSI'ing every sat turn or anything.

Goran, agent is right here.

These rules are more restrictive for everyone, but they are not out of our normal scope. The only great restriction that we previously did not have is the one hour rule for emergencies. That is completely manageable. These rules will do more to protect the integrity of our wars than any damage they will inflict. I promise you that.

[Koganosi]

Rule 2.

Emergency sitting can only be done 1 hour prio missing the turn.

I myself find myself in the clan VDLL, where I like it have good friends and loads of fun. This clan fundemantal basis is talking Dutch, wich pretty much means only having Dutch and Belgium people. Wich we currently only have. This means my turns wich end between 00:00 and 7:00 GMT+1. Cannot nearly be covered. How would you guys fair with this. Or do I have to try to friend an american friend who can sit for me? I really think this can hurt our clan in taking turns during Clan Wars.

Urs

Koganosi

[jbadbear]

it would seem to me that there really only needs to be one rule. all absences must be stated in game chat and any deviance from establish CC rules for Clan play must be agreed upon by all clans involved in the game. otherwise normal CC rules apply which already includes play your own games.

why make this complicated? besides the cheaters will just use different IPs to log in from. Home IP -- mobile hot spot, neighbors open wireless. It comes down to trust. the IP sweep will just snare people in the same apartment or house or building that play fairly.

[JustCallMeStupid]

These rules are more restrictive for everyone, but they are not out of our normal scope. The only great restriction that we previously did not have is the one hour rule for emergencies. That is completely manageable. These rules will do more to protect the integrity of our wars than any damage they will inflict. I promise you that.

First of all, you cant promise this at all. Second the only way this holds somewhat true is if people just dont follow the rules and cover a teammates turn when there are 3 hrs left and they have to go to bed, or go to work, or whatever other thing they have that is more important then waiting near the computer for 2hrs and 01 minutes until they can comply with a silly rule.

Basically the rules will please 10% of people who are actually making a big deal of this enforcing it on everyone instead of just those abusing coverings, it will mostly annoy 40% of players who actually abide by it, 49% of players probably will care less play like normal and cover turns on such rare occasions that they will never get caught for braking the rule since they aren't doing it maliciously or frequently, and the 1% or less who have been braking the rules all of the time will either find a way around it or possibly get caught and maybe just make a new account or something (and yes I pulled all these numbers out of my ass but I am guessing they are probably close to accurate).

This whole system reminds me of the DRM protection of music, or how all the software companies protect the hell out of their software only to piss off regular consumers who pay for the software meanwhile hackers just hack it anyways and bypass the security then hand it out for free to anyone who looks for it.

it would seem to me that there really only needs to be one rule. all absences must be stated in game chat and any deviance from establish CC rules for Clan play must be agreed upon by all clans involved in the game. otherwise normal CC rules apply which already includes play your own games.

why make this complicated? besides the cheaters will just use different IPs to log in from. Home IP -- mobile hot spot, neighbors open wireless. It comes down to trust. the IP sweep will just snare people in the same apartment or house or building that play fairly.

+1 simple is better

[greenoaks]

+1 simple is better

the simplist thing is no account sitting at all.

play your own turns and if you miss one, you get deferred troops. that is what they are there for.

[agentcom]

+1 simple is better

the simplist thing is no account sitting at all.

play your own turns and if you miss one, you get deferred troops. that is what they are there for.

I don't want to live in that world.

[catnipdreams]

I don't want to live in that world.

+1

[jj3044]

+1 simple is better

the simplist thing is no account sitting at all.

play your own turns and if you miss one, you get deferred troops. that is what they are there for.

Yes, it would be simple, but it isn't going to happen as only the tiny minority are looking for this rule.

Let's be constructive and help the CD's with improving the rule instead of rehashing the same argument over and over again.

[greenoaks]

+1 simple is better

the simplist thing is no account sitting at all.

play your own turns and if you miss one, you get deferred troops. that is what they are there for.

Yes, it would be simple, but it isn't going to happen as only the tiny minority are looking for this rule.

Let's be constructive and help the CD's with improving the rule instead of rehashing the same argument over and over again.

merely pointing out the simplist thing.

a compromise would be to allow others to take your turn if the clock drops below 1 hour remaining and it isn't a regular thing to allow others to take it for you.

[Funkyterrance]

I don't want to live in that world.

+1

Cmon, you guys, why? I realize you are in the habit of having this ability but I'm still fuzzy about what would be the huge downside? The argument is that it would be the most fair option, which hasn't been contested. The counter has just been: " I wouldn't like it". I mean, wth?

This discussion is looking like most people being in favor of convenience over fairness. Is this the code of the site? Basically I'm hearing a lot of "It doesn't affect me or my clan so why should I care?" and "It's only a small percentage, thus an exaggeration (logic?).". Instead of considering making a small sacrifice like always taking our own turns (most of us do this 99% of the time already right?), everyone looks to be more considering how bothersome that will be. Is it something to do with points? Clan standing? I'm asking honestly here.
Let's just imagine that account sitting were disallowed for a minute. It's already been soundly argued that ultimately there would be no more chance of one clan missing than another and therefore this factor would just come out in the wash. If your clan loses one war over an awol player, is this really going to be a reflection of the prowess of your clan as a whole? No. The only other possible fear is that while some people would miss turns by obeying the rules, others would not due to them account sitting anyway by tricks like changing IP's, etc. Why couldn't you just make people use the same IP's when they turn? Or one of 2? I'm pretty sure this is a possibility but let me guess, this is too inconvenient?
I fell like CC has a history of being pretty intolerant of cheating, both by the administration and by the community. Why change this course for the sake of convenience? Some people found loopholes, fine, cut the loopholes. For those who don't like the spirit of fairness at the cost of slight inconvenience, from what I hear there are other options for playing online Risk-like games.

[stahrgazer]

Nothing is stopping you from simply missing turns if you can't play them yourself. If you're that casual on a site that's just for fun (not judging you, most of G1 feels this way) then you shouldn't care about a rare missed turn.

I don't particularly care about a rare missed turn, but I do care that a rare missed turn can affect the outcomes for others, I do care that these "official clan sitting rules" are going beyond beyond for "everyone" when the site itself has allowed the occasional sitter and a few rare idiots abused "sitting".

[stahrgazer]

The only great restriction that we previously did not have is the one hour rule for emergencies. That is completely manageable. These rules will do more to protect the integrity of our wars than any damage they will inflict. I promise you that.

This is a huge restriction, it's NOT 'completely manageable' and it's ridiculous for a casual gaming site to have rules about presence that are far more restrictive than most companies that pay people to be there when they say they will.

[HardAttack]

+1 simple is better

the simplist thing is no account sitting at all.

play your own turns and if you miss one, you get deferred troops. that is what they are there for.

Yes, it would be simple, but it isn't going to happen as only the tiny minority are looking for this rule.

Let's be constructive and help the CD's with improving the rule instead of rehashing the same argument over and over again.

My opinion is, well i agree this is not going to look anygood without account sitting.


Reason i am writing is, responding to you jj, this site has got nothing to do with what minority or majority asking.
There have always been a 1v1 team play suggestion, for more than 3 years to now, among many names, couple of times at different times similar looking suggestions had been made, among them maybe the most brilliant work came from ahunda, he made a 3-4 day study, he made a poll, and honestly % 90 of ppl clapped, said hats off, said amazing idea, said they are full of behind of the idea, they loved the idea and so...At the end ? Nothing...So, jj, i want to believe in your words, but facts have got nothing to do with if a thing accepted by minority or majority, i dont think it is a matter.


HERE IS WHAT AHUNDA SUGGESTED 3 YEARS AGO, still nothing has done over such a cute and promising idea.
viewtopic.php?f=535&t=109621&p=2458643#p2458643

[stahrgazer]

+1 simple is better

the simplist thing is no account sitting at all.

play your own turns and if you miss one, you get deferred troops. that is what they are there for.

Yes, it would be simple, but it isn't going to happen as only the tiny minority are looking for this rule.

Let's be constructive and help the CD's with improving the rule instead of rehashing the same argument over and over again.

My opinion is, well i agree this is not going to look anygood without account sitting.


Reason i am writing is, responding to you jj, this site has got nothing to do with what minority or majority asking.
There have always been a 1v1 team play suggestion, for more than 3 years to now, among many names, couple of times at different times similar looking suggestions had been made, among them maybe the most brilliant work came from ahunda, he made a 3-4 day study, he made a poll, and honestly % 90 of ppl clapped, said hats off, said amazing idea, said they are full of behind of the idea, they loved the idea and so...At the end ? Nothing...So, jj, i want to believe in your words, but facts have got nothing to do with if a thing accepted by minority or majority, i dont think it is a matter.


HERE IS WHAT AHUNDA SUGGESTED 3 YEARS AGO, still nothing has done over such a cute and promising idea.
viewtopic.php?f=535&t=109621&p=2458643#p2458643

Interesting idea.

I liked, particularly, this point:
"Repeated counter-arguments here were: The potential of abuse by a few should not be reason enough to reject a game option, that could be enjoyed by many" mainly because this is pretty much the same counter-arguments going on here.

Here's these "official clan sitting rules" that are announced, overkill that will affect many because of the abuse by a few.

Shows an interesting CC management trend, does it not? Punish everyone because a few people abused things, rather than punish the abusers for abusing things and leaving it as it was.

[HardAttack]

Interesting idea.

I liked, particularly, this point:
"Repeated counter-arguments here were: The potential of abuse by a few should not be reason enough to reject a game option, that could be enjoyed by many" mainly because this is pretty much the same counter-arguments going on here.

Here's these "official clan sitting rules" that are announced, overkill that will affect many because of the abuse by a few.

Shows an interesting CC management trend, does it not? Punish everyone because a few people abused things, rather than punish the abusers for abusing things and leaving it as it was.

Here is something,
1 minute speed games,
2 minutes speed games....These are new farming grounds say when the speed game with 1 minute is FOR EXAMPLE played in hive map...
TO ME, those who ever play 1-2 minute speed in large and complex maps are farmers...
I am not going to name who it is, someone, i saw him playing a 1 minute speed in hive, 1v1 game, asked him to make a real time, he denied and laid his reason why he denied to be, if he played it real time, there wud be enough time for opponent to think for the move him to make, simple, he didnt want his opponent to have enough time to think about his own move....
Dont you think 1-2-3 minute/s speed games are abused ? So lets move em all together...

i think, word here is spoken here...what are we talking/speaking for i dont know...

[catnipdreams]

Instead of considering making a small sacrifice like always taking our own turns (most of us do this 99% of the time already right?), everyone looks to be more considering how bothersome that will be. Is it something to do with points? Clan standing? I'm asking honestly here.

I can only answer this from my personal point of view, but I feel very strongly, personally. Please do not consider what clan I am in, or any politics involved, and so on. From my heart: I care deeply about my teammates, I care deeply about game strategy, and my joy on CC comes from planning out a turn carefully, and taking into consideration all that I know to make the best turn possible. I have absolutely no desire to cheat on CC, and I even go out of my way to exhibit good sportsmanship by, for instance, observing the 12 hour fog rule, even when it's a casual game where there is no fog rule in place. Some would call me stupid for giving up a tactical advantage by not taking my turn immediately if I go first in a fog game, but, that's the way I like to play. One of the things that destroys my joy of playing is missed turns by my teammates. Suppose I have passed a stack to my teammate who goes next, and that turn is missed? The stack is useless, the game is probably lost, and all my care and attention is wasted. The flip side is, suppose I am the teammate who misses a turn, and I had been forted the stack to use for a critical move? That is a terrible thing to do to my dear teammates! I play each game for the game itself; if that game is part of a clan war, then I hope I have helped in that effort, but my enjoyment comes from the actual playing of each game. Points are irrelevant, although I do enjoy having more, rather than fewer. The only way I could continue to play on CC if sitting were outlawed would be to take a careless, casual approach to a game, maybe spend some time on strategy, maybe not, maybe take my turns, maybe not, and have the same lack of expectations for my teammates. Once I actually invest myself in a game, and put my time and energy into it, I want that game played properly, with no missed turns. Since real life does happen, people do lose internet, people do go away for a romantic weekend where they are seriously NOT going to be logging in to CC, I could simply not play the way I enjoy playing on CC if sitting was not allowed. It's not about minor inconveniences like posting in open chat when you sit for someone, it's about changing the entire CC experience. It is utterly unreasonable to expect my teammates to take 100% of their own turns all the time, and since missed turns are horrible (to me), sitting must be allowed for me to continue to enjoy CC. That is why I am passionate about this issue - not because I want to cheat, not because I am too lazy to type out "catnip in" in open chat, but because this goes to the core of my CC experience. I don't want to stray off topic here, but this continued questioning of allowing any sitting at all bothers me horribly. Have I helped you to understand my point of view? Although I speak only for myself, i do think that others feel similarly. Let's please find a way to allow legitimate sitting that is both simple and easy for sitters, yet has whatever checks and balances that are needed for fair play.

[Funkyterrance]

I don't particularly care about a rare missed turn, but I do care that a rare missed turn can affect the outcomes for others, I do care that these "official clan sitting rules" are going beyond beyond for "everyone" when the site itself has allowed the occasional sitter and a few rare idiots abused "sitting".

This is still a big contradiction. If it's casual gameplay, missed turns shouldn't matter either way. You can't have it both ways, either you take clans seriously or you don't. CC in general may be casual but clans are not, they exemplify the next level of competitiveness, beyond casual.

[stahrgazer]

Instead of considering making a small sacrifice like always taking our own turns (most of us do this 99% of the time already right?), everyone looks to be more considering how bothersome that will be. Is it something to do with points? Clan standing? I'm asking honestly here.

I can only answer this from my personal point of view, but I feel very strongly, personally. Please do not consider what clan I am in, or any politics involved, and so on. From my heart: I care deeply about my teammates, I care deeply about game strategy, and my joy on CC comes from planning out a turn carefully, and taking into consideration all that I know to make the best turn possible. I have absolutely no desire to cheat on CC, and I even go out of my way to exhibit good sportsmanship by, for instance, observing the 12 hour fog rule, even when it's a casual game where there is no fog rule in place. Some would call me stupid for giving up a tactical advantage by not taking my turn immediately if I go first in a fog game, but, that's the way I like to play. One of the things that destroys my joy of playing is missed turns by my teammates. Suppose I have passed a stack to my teammate who goes next, and that turn is missed? The stack is useless, the game is probably lost, and all my care and attention is wasted. The flip side is, suppose I am the teammate who misses a turn, and I had been forted the stack to use for a critical move? That is a terrible thing to do to my dear teammates! I play each game for the game itself; if that game is part of a clan war, then I hope I have helped in that effort, but my enjoyment comes from the actual playing of each game. Points are irrelevant, although I do enjoy having more, rather than fewer. The only way I could continue to play on CC if sitting were outlawed would be to take a careless, casual approach to a game, maybe spend some time on strategy, maybe not, maybe take my turns, maybe not, and have the same lack of expectations for my teammates. Once I actually invest myself in a game, and put my time and energy into it, I want that game played properly, with no missed turns. Since real life does happen, people do lose internet, people do go away for a romantic weekend where they are seriously NOT going to be logging in to CC, I could simply not play the way I enjoy playing on CC if sitting was not allowed. It's not about minor inconveniences like posting in open chat when you sit for someone, it's about changing the entire CC experience. It is utterly unreasonable to expect my teammates to take 100% of their own turns all the time, and since missed turns are horrible (to me), sitting must be allowed for me to continue to enjoy CC. That is why I am passionate about this issue - not because I want to cheat, not because I am too lazy to type out "catnip in" in open chat, but because this goes to the core of my CC experience. I don't want to stray off topic here, but this continued questioning of allowing any sitting at all bothers me horribly. Have I helped you to understand my point of view? Although I speak only for myself, i do think that others feel similarly. Let's please find a way to allow legitimate sitting that is both simple and easy for sitters, yet has whatever checks and balances that are needed for fair play.

Wonderfully stated, catnip, thank you!

And requiring a sitter to play within one hour or obtain prior permission from various folks is just not simple and easy. Making it a major offense to forget to type your name in one game if you're sitting for multiple games for a player doesn't seem like a reasonable check/balance required for fair play, either.

And, Terrance? You can take a casual game seriously, the "casual" part is that you get to play on your time, at your convenience, as opposed to teaming required in pro sports, where you must play at the time the coaches agree to.

Would it affect your game play if you were REQUIRED to take a turn within a given hour, rather than within a given 24 hour period? "All your turns must be played at 3 am to 4 am your time." Is that inconvenient for you? If you cannot agree to that for your games, why must a sitter have to run the risk that that's what will happen for any turns, just because some few idiots acted like idiots and cheated?

[Nicky15]

And requiring a sitter to play within one hour or obtain prior permission from various folks is just not simple and easy. Making it a major offense to forget to type your name in one game if you're sitting for multiple games for a player doesn't seem like a reasonable check/balance required for fair play, either.

I wish everyone would read the responses from the Cds and not the ill informed. I can understand how that is difficult, all factual information is getting lost as this thread is soo long

Common sense is the number one rule here. I will repeat we are not here to punish the honest legitimate players. These rules give us the framework to punish the people trying to gain an advantage.

I will repeat again if you are sitting for someone and you post in most of the games, but forget a few, this IS NOT an offense. Clearly you are not trying to cheat or gain an advantage, you simply forgot.

If you have been legitimately asked to sit, you carry on as normal. Nothing changes. Just make sure you post in most of the games. Posting once in each game is fine. For example Player A off for ..... (insert time) player B covering. This saves you having to remember to post each turn. When player A returns he or she posts back.

All rules have been made in the framework of existing site rules.

Players are allowed to account-sit for others as long as they are not opponents within the game. It is common courtesy to announce in game chat that another player will take your turn(s) during your absence. Babysitters should only do what is necessary to take the turn(s) and should not interact with the community, start or join new games (except for ongoing tournaments). Furthermore, you should only take another player's turn if they are in danger of missing a turn, not for the purpose of gaining a tactical advantage.

The exceptions are, we have defined the period where you are in danger of missing a turn, and made it a rule to always post.

These rules are not complicated, we will apply common sense when looking at everything, to give those with truly legitimate reasons for breaking the hour rule, the room to do so within reason.

Everyone is reading far too much into this. The CD team is not here to punish honest legitimate players.

[stahrgazer]

Everyone is reading far too much into this. The CD team is not here to punish honest legitimate players.

We're reading into it precisely what the cd team put into it.

Defining the period where a player is "in danger of missing a turn" to something inconvenient to the sitter or the player, and inconsiderate of real-life schedule fluctuations, or requiring weeks of "litigation" is a legitimate concern.

Stating on one hand the "common courtesy" policy of posting a name is now mandatory, then sidestepping and saying, "but we won't enforce it across the board," is a legitimate concern. Post-your-name-if-you-sit is either simply common courtesy as site policy indicates, or it's mandatory and we're criminal cheaters if we forget. if it's mandatory as it states in these "official clan sitting rules", why not enforce it across the board? If it's common courtesy, why have it required as part of official rules?

The issue all this came from is someone systematically taking another player's or several players' turns, to the point that it appears the games were nearly one-man-teams, right?

So make THAT illegal and look for THAT and punish THAT... but otherwise, when it's not "systematic to the point that games appear to be nearly one-man-teams," leave the time period for playing turns up to the players, like the overall site allows; and leave the state-your-name as common courtesy like the overall site indicates.

Otherwise, you're inconveniencing legitimate players by giving them absurd rules to follow.... that the "team" will or will not enforce as the mood takes them.

[Bones2484]

The only great restriction that we previously did not have is the one hour rule for emergencies. That is completely manageable. These rules will do more to protect the integrity of our wars than any damage they will inflict. I promise you that.

This is a huge restriction, it's NOT 'completely manageable' and it's ridiculous for a casual gaming site to have rules about presence that are far more restrictive than most companies that pay people to be there when they say they will.

How is this ridiculous? Are you sure you aren't misinterpreting the rule? If you KNOW someone is out, you can take their turn at anytime. The rule you are freaking out about is when you DO NOT KNOW someone is out. In that case, you need to wait until the final hour.

I fail to see how that is a problem at all. That's nicer than the rule I would have suggested.

[stahrgazer]

The only great restriction that we previously did not have is the one hour rule for emergencies. That is completely manageable. These rules will do more to protect the integrity of our wars than any damage they will inflict. I promise you that.

This is a huge restriction, it's NOT 'completely manageable' and it's ridiculous for a casual gaming site to have rules about presence that are far more restrictive than most companies that pay people to be there when they say they will.

How is this ridiculous? Are you sure you aren't misinterpreting the rule? If you KNOW someone is out, you can take their turn at anytime. The rule you are freaking out about is when you DO NOT KNOW someone is out. In that case, you need to wait until the final hour.

I fail to see how that is a problem at all. That's nicer than the rule I would have suggested.

Many's the time I log in to find a pm, "Take my turns for me tonight, please."

It means I did NOT know in advance the person would be out to make the arrangements these rules require, and if the person is in a game that's just starting, according to these rules we'd be in potential violation and whatever hoops we'd have to jump through to "prove" legitimate sitting because I'm not going to wait until zero-hour to take a turn. Rarely, but occasionally I've had to make a similar request.

In either case, to have any sort of questions over a turn in a game is ridiculous, when the REAL PROBLEM isn't a turn in a game or two on one night, it was someone who was being consistent about taking someone else's turns.

And the reason we would potentially be questioned under these new rules is because according to these rules, you have to have pre-permission to take a turn other than zero-hour at the start of a game.

A BETTER rule is to say, "don't do this consistently because that's abuse" and have the watchers do their watching and whoever suspects do their reporting and have whoever did do it consistently get their fanny spanked or whatever the penalty du jour is, and leave alone the 99.999% who take legitimate turns at odd times because life happens and this is a casual gamesite.

If these rules are supposed to be designed for that, then make them say THAT instead of what they do say.

[chapcrap]

These rules are more restrictive for everyone, but they are not out of our normal scope. The only great restriction that we previously did not have is the one hour rule for emergencies. That is completely manageable. These rules will do more to protect the integrity of our wars than any damage they will inflict. I promise you that.

First of all, you cant promise this at all.

That response was directed at someone in my clan. So, I was speaking for my clan. And I can make that promise.

The only great restriction that we previously did not have is the one hour rule for emergencies. That is completely manageable. These rules will do more to protect the integrity of our wars than any damage they will inflict. I promise you that.

This is a huge restriction, it's NOT 'completely manageable' and it's ridiculous for a casual gaming site to have rules about presence that are far more restrictive than most companies that pay people to be there when they say they will.

Everyone understands this is only in clan war games, right? It's not every game you play in.

[stahrgazer]

Everyone understands this is only in clan war games, right? It's not every game you play in.

Which could be seen to make the discrepancy worse; two sets of rules to check to identify whether it's okay to take a turn or whether taking the turn may result in questioning what was otherwise a legitimate replacement.

And all these questions and concerns because a small percentage of people abused the already-existing account sitting guidelines.