Conquer Club

Listen,

nothing against you 'freemiums' but when I make a game that has the option where it states: casual (24 hours), and sequential order, rather than freestyle...do you think that I want to play RT? I'm getting a bit tired of the nagging for this request. If you ask every time, why don't you either simply pay for a membership, or simply make your own game? I'm not trying to start the classic war of freemiums vs. premiums, but you should certainly respect us for paying our membership regardless of your situation. It gets tiring after awhile and if I had it my way, I would simply make a request to the admin's to simply have freemiums play another freemium and until they reach officer status - at that point they can play against a premium member. Just my 2 cents.

Freestyle doesn't imply RT either.

anyone with "owen" in their name that posts in the GD has to be held to the
standard that he/she is simply ALWAYS correct. regardless of any facts or any other
opinions, users with the name owen, are always correct. thus, this guy is
spot on! deal with it...-0

p.s.-another of my multis running loose in the GD openly... take that InterfacerPH!!!

owenator wrote: I would simply make a request to the admin's to simply have freemiums play another freemium and until they reach officer status - at that point they can play against a premium member. Just my 2 cents.

Go play marbles if you are so sensitive. Or play some real naggers like Scott-land, thedice or mbohn2 to grow your skin sick

If I ran this site, freemiums would also been banned from playing 1v1. One way to get more paying customers on board is to take away the game styles that allow more games per week, than were available when i first joined the site.

Pedronicus wrote:If I ran this site, freemiums would also been banned from playing 1v1. One way to get more paying customers on board is to take away the game styles that allow more games per week, than were available when i first joined the site.

banned them from escalating, when they take out an 11 of yours just to try and get a bonus of 2 and your both out within the next round.

DAZMCFC wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:If I ran this site, freemiums would also been banned from playing 1v1. One way to get more paying customers on board is to take away the game styles that allow more games per week, than were available when i first joined the site.

banned them from escalating, when they take out an 11 of yours just to try and get a bonus of 2 and your both out within the next round.

Because freemiums can't be good players?

owenator wrote:Listen,

nothing against you 'freemiums' but when I make a game that has the option where it states: casual (24 hours), and sequential order, rather than freestyle...do you think that I want to play RT? I'm getting a bit tired of the nagging for this request. If you ask every time, why don't you either simply pay for a membership, or simply make your own game? I'm not trying to start the classic war of freemiums vs. premiums, but you should certainly respect us for paying our membership regardless of your situation. It gets tiring after awhile and if I had it my way, I would simply make a request to the admin's to simply have freemiums play another freemium and until they reach officer status - at that point they can play against a premium member. Just my 2 cents.

If a freemium asks for RT, just tell them no. If they start begging, what's to stop you from foeing them? Or simply stop reading the chat.

Stroop wrote:

DAZMCFC wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:If I ran this site, freemiums would also been banned from playing 1v1. One way to get more paying customers on board is to take away the game styles that allow more games per week, than were available when i first joined the site.

banned them from escalating, when they take out an 11 of yours just to try and get a bonus of 2 and your both out within the next round.

Because freemiums can't be good players?

owenator wrote:Listen,

nothing against you 'freemiums' but when I make a game that has the option where it states: casual (24 hours), and sequential order, rather than freestyle...do you think that I want to play RT? I'm getting a bit tired of the nagging for this request. If you ask every time, why don't you either simply pay for a membership, or simply make your own game? I'm not trying to start the classic war of freemiums vs. premiums, but you should certainly respect us for paying our membership regardless of your situation. It gets tiring after awhile and if I had it my way, I would simply make a request to the admin's to simply have freemiums play another freemium and until they reach officer status - at that point they can play against a premium member. Just my 2 cents.

If a freemium asks for RT, just tell them no. If they start begging, what's to stop you from foeing them? Or simply stop reading the chat.

yes they can, i'd just wish they would learn how to play escalating. no need for a card every turn and no need for a bonus.

DAZMCFC wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:If I ran this site, freemiums would also been banned from playing 1v1. One way to get more paying customers on board is to take away the game styles that allow more games per week, than were available when i first joined the site.

banned them from escalating, when they take out an 11 of yours just to try and get a bonus of 2 and your both out within the next round.

ahh like clockwork DAZ!
no idea why i join esc. public speedgames- i keep reassuring myself that they are in fact fun but every time some poodle (Readers digest word of the month: November 1978) wipes you out in Australia... the other gem is the old old 'go for Europe by killing your 11 stack... i got done by both moves in the same round a few days back, i was very polite in the circuntances.

anyway i don't want to ban them but i would like a small, one-way, electric shock button for premium users... i have suggested it before but there was a problem with xml or something!

So they can be good players, but they don't know how Escalating works?

Anyway, it's the risk you take when you create or join a public game, someone who doesn't understand the settings might join, and they might make you lose. If you want to avoid it, I suggest you make private games.

Stroop wrote:So they can be good players, but they don't know how Escalating works?

Anyway, it's the risk you take when you create or join a public game, someone who doesn't understand the settings might join, and they might make you lose. If you want to avoid it, I suggest you make private games.

i don't mind public games, especally wacicha's ones. if a couple of the noobs read game chat and i tell them NO NEED to attack every go. then hopefully they will learn and get better.

owenator wrote:Listen,

nothing against you 'freemiums' but when I make a game that has the option where it states: casual (24 hours), and sequential order, rather than freestyle...do you think that I want to play RT? I'm getting a bit tired of the nagging for this request. If you ask every time, why don't you either simply pay for a membership, or simply make your own game? I'm not trying to start the classic war of freemiums vs. premiums, but you should certainly respect us for paying our membership regardless of your situation. It gets tiring after awhile and if I had it my way, I would simply make a request to the admin's to simply have freemiums play another freemium and until they reach officer status - at that point they can play against a premium member. Just my 2 cents.

Depends on how its asked.

I play a lot of 1v1. Asking if I want rt is fine. I tell folks I can almost never gaurantee I can stay (young kids and a volunteer fire chief husband).

BUT when it goes from a simple request to $^%$# ... or a poor rating because I am "slow"... its ignore list time!

DAZMCFC wrote:

Stroop wrote:So they can be good players, but they don't know how Escalating works?

Anyway, it's the risk you take when you create or join a public game, someone who doesn't understand the settings might join, and they might make you lose. If you want to avoid it, I suggest you make private games.

i don't mind public games, especally wacicha's ones. if a couple of the noobs read game chat and i tell them NO NEED to attack every go. then hopefully they will learn and get better.

To a point, I agree, but when I see over 200 private games, versus maybe 2 public ones ... there is a problem. I think we need more tolerance on all sides ... and maybe some clearer instructions on some types, such as assassin

Stroop wrote:So they can be good players, but they don't know how Escalating works?

Anyway, it's the risk you take when you create or join a public game, someone who doesn't understand the settings might join, and they might make you lose. If you want to avoid it, I suggest you make private games.

oh don't be so serious .. so you like my electrocution button idea or what?

jiminski wrote:

Stroop wrote:So they can be good players, but they don't know how Escalating works?

Anyway, it's the risk you take when you create or join a public game, someone who doesn't understand the settings might join, and they might make you lose. If you want to avoid it, I suggest you make private games.

oh don't be so serious .. so you like my electrocution button idea or what?

Money would flood into CC's bank account all because people would be afraid to play without premium. It's and excellent idea

If the freemium has set up the game and a premium joins that game (especially a 1v1) then it's only fair to expect that freemium player would like to play rt in order to avoid using up their free slots.

There should be an option when the game is set up requesting that the player who joins is prepared to play rt as far as is possible.

I still like the electrocution idea though, but would perhaps use it on those attempting to win by distracting players with lewd comments in game chat - yes jimi, that means you

Stroop wrote:
Money would flood into CC's bank account all because people would be afraid to play without premium. It's and excellent idea

thank you mate! I agree with your assessment, this would swell the CC coffers!
Come on Lackster, this is a must for your future.

what should we call this new feature?

mandyb wrote:If the freemium has set up the game and a premium joins that game (especially a 1v1) then it's only fair to expect that freemium player would like to play rt in order to avoid using up their free slots.

There should be an option when the game is set up requesting that the player who joins is prepared to play rt as far as is possible.

I still like the electrocution idea though, but would perhaps use it on those attempting to win by distracting players with lewd comments in game chat - yes jimi, that means you

hah! i would use it on you but it would only encourage your sexual skulduggery!


to people whining in games: perhaps there should be an option to block chat for that game .. at the moment you would have to place them on ignore and that seems unnecessary.

jiminski wrote:

mandyb wrote:If the freemium has set up the game and a premium joins that game (especially a 1v1) then it's only fair to expect that freemium player would like to play rt in order to avoid using up their free slots.

There should be an option when the game is set up requesting that the player who joins is prepared to play rt as far as is possible.

I still like the electrocution idea though, but would perhaps use it on those attempting to win by distracting players with lewd comments in game chat - yes jimi, that means you

hah! i would use it on you but it would only encourage your sexual skulduggery!

LIES!!

good word though..

mandyb wrote:

jiminski wrote:
hah! i would use it on you but it would only encourage your sexual skulduggery!

LIES!!

good word though..

bzzzzzzzzzzt

skulduggery!



really though has anyone suggested a 'block game chat option' ?

jiminski wrote:

Stroop wrote:
Money would flood into CC's bank account all because people would be afraid to play without premium. It's and excellent idea

thank you mate! I agree with your assessment, this would swell the CC coffers!
Come on Lackster, this is a must for your future.

what should we call this new feature?

"power to the paupers"?
"fry a freemium"?
"charge"?

owenshooter wrote:anyone with "owen" in their name that posts in the GD has to be held to the
standard that he/she is simply ALWAYS correct. regardless of any facts or any other
opinions, users with the name owen, are always correct. thus, this guy is
spot on! deal with it...-0

p.s.-another of my multis running loose in the GD openly... take that InterfacerPH!!!

I wholly agree with you.

kletka wrote:

owenator wrote: I would simply make a request to the admin's to simply have freemiums play another freemium and until they reach officer status - at that point they can play against a premium member. Just my 2 cents.

Go play marbles if you are so sensitive. Or play some real naggers like Scott-land, thedice or mbohn2 to grow your skin sick

I'm not being sensitive, cupcake. I'm just ranting. But you obviously can't read because you didn't see the title heading. It's my opinion and I'm entitled to it, just like you are. Have a nice day otherwise, sweetie pie.

mandyb wrote:I

There should be an option when the game is set up requesting that the player who joins is prepared to play rt as far as is possible.

There is ... its called SPEED games, open to those who pay.

1. There is a difference between RT and Speed. I'd love to play an RT game, however unless I play my buddies in China, that simply isn't going to happen.
2. I understand there may be financial reasons why some players cannot buy premium. You don' t have to pay for the premium if you don't want to.
3. However, I noticed my rating dropped from 4.5 (I've been slowly building it up from 3.9 ) to 4.4 and wondered why...I played a 1vs1 with a freemium named 'iberico' who felt it fair to rate me 111 in a game that lasted 6 rounds and 3 days. I didn't miss a turn (though came a little close once) and though I lost I wasn't in anyway rude or offensive. My play was at worst average. A point reset as well as a short, sharp electric burst as he logs in again must surely be the only fair consequence.
4. (and as usual fairly randomn) Are most players only able to give ratings of 5's or 1's? I get 5's in games I have not won or come close to winning and in fact have effectively sucked; and I have got 1's from a player in a game I won quite brilliantly, if I do say so myself. So most players seem to give 5's if they rate at all. How sweet! Yet, I have given a 3 for gameplay when one of my opponents played ok but not too well. Later, I wondered if the said player was going to be incredibly offended by that 3. The rating, the rating!!! Anyway, it is a stupid system judged by the fact of, I would guess, 95% of the players have a got a rating over 4. Aren't we all so talented and nice? To wrench this post back to the topic at hand, I think any freemium caught rating in this way should, as well as losing points, have THEIR rating cut by one whole point.

That'll learn 'em.

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=3236501