elimination and cards

[quote=Cireon]How would people stand if there was a public poll which option should be implemented. Would that leave everybody happy in the end, or would there be people that still want a change. [/quote] What would the question on the poll be asking? Let me see the question cause I am not sure what you would be asking. Plus a lot of the new players have never tried it the "retro" way. lol We now have grew-up enough to have "retro"? @Paddlin...I do enjoy when you make comments!...lol

Alright, we are back to the "option" thing, great... Now I want people to all listen very carefully: [b]An extra option is not an option (no pun intended)[/b] Options are not necessarily a bad thing, so don't think I am some kind of anti-option monster. However, options should be clear for everyone. Having an option "new card turn in rule"... yeah, I can already see the billions of threads on the forum, questions in the chat and message in inboxes asking what that means. No, I am very much against it and I have the feeling that most of the staff agrees with me on that, though I do not respresent the decision-making organ in any way. [b]There is no better rule[/b] Alright, I suggest we now stop arguing about which rule is better. Three posts back I proposed some things that could possibly solve this and I tend to remember I did a while back, but instead you continue on discussing which rule is better. Now... I think that is a complete and utter waste of time, because by now I must have heard all arguments at least twice. [b]Now let's make Thorpe happy[/b] Thorpe (amongst other players) is missing his old (capital) games. He wanted the rule changed back, but that of course is a very big thing. He wanted an option instead, then I came along saying that I am very much against options like these. However, that does not mean I don't want to help you out as much as possible. I have been asking for [i]alternate[/i] solutions since the start. While you may be talking from an individual player's point of view, I am actually looking at the big picture, as I consider that a job as developer for this website. I will not implement any solution that I do not agree with (unless I am paid to do it XD), so instead I ask you guys to come up with alternatives so we can make that work. Thorpe came up with the advanced capitals idea. A suggestion that I can actually work with, as I stated above. If you really want to play ye olde games again, then why are you not completely enthusiastic about me suggesting to implement something in the lines of that idea? I will say it once more: having an addition game mode for "ye olde capitals" is in my opinion not necessarily a bad idea. To let you know that I am actually taking this serious: I have already thrown up a ball in the group of admins and programmers and we will do everything we can to make everyone happy, but we need your help. So what about stopping arguing and starting to actually build up a nice solution together. From now on I will only read and respond to posts that actually try to move forward, instead of trying to prove which rule is the best. ======= Edit: response to Thorpe [quote=Thorpe - Nov 19, 06:02 PM] What would the question on the poll be asking? Let me see the question cause I am not sure what you would be asking. Plus a lot of the new players have never tried it the "retro" way. lol We now have grew-up enough to have "retro"? @Paddlin...I do enjoy when you make comments!...lol[/quote] I think the poll would just be "which rule do you want?", with an option for the new rule, the old rule or to remain neutral. This would solve this problem without the need for any additional options, code or whatsoever, but would leave a portion of the community unhappy, which is suboptimal.

I have said that at the begining, I did not care what you called it, the reason I asked for "What question" was I wanted to know what you wanted to ask... for a option. Yes for a rule change. No for just premium choice option. Yes [b]the advanced capitals idea. Yes and again Yes![/b] I never said I was against anything...and I am also on the staff and looking at the big picture. I voted on the rule change that got me into this mess. As for you saying [i]"though I do not respresent the decision-making organ in any way"[/i] is not true... [i]"I will not implement any solution that I do not agree with" [/i] ...that is a vote in the decision-making organ. Trust me you can do with-out me and a lot of the staff...but we can not do with-out the programers!

As I said I like the idea of Advanced Capitals, if I haven't suggested anythig yet it's because I am still thinking about it. I was talking with marcoxa about a map with a new Cap gameplay, I will send you a message with the idea to know if it's possible to program it

I will look at it if I can find time and comment on that ;) Any suggestions are highly appreciated.

I agree that is not the case to argue what rule is better. I was just trying to explain to the newer players how things were before the rule change. Both rules are good for some reason and I would like to have both available. Take a look on this please --> TURN-IN AFTER KILL: - Always allowed - Only with 5+ cards What is confusing in a simple option like this? You will receive thousands of questions to understand these simple words? I don't think so. Is "Advanced Capitals" less confusing? People won't ask what does it mean? And what exactly is the difference with "Normal Capitals"? They seems to be the same thing! We have 4 options for now: gametype, cards, fortification and fog(y/n). Is that a "jungle of options"? Oops sorry, we have 5, I didn't consider the turn order. If you don't want that jungle, why to allow such a weird option like Same Time? And how many questions you receive about how it works? And how many bugs occur in Same Time? All game options are mixable in this site. Why we should have one only available in a special gametype called "Advanced Capitals"? Put the case I want to play Domination gametype with the old turn-in rule. And really I would but I can't. Cireon, I can put 10$ to have both rules available as a normal option! Not for me, just for the site, because I think it's the best solution. But if you refuse my offer then I agree to have an Advanced Capitals option. Just suboptimal in my opinion but still a solution. In any case thanks Cireon for your availability.

I now understand what the proposals / requests are in this thread. I feel compelled to agree with The_Bishop who actually started this topic and his last statement above. I see a lot of 'to & fro' talk for nearly 18 months with everybody pulling and pushing for what they want and yet the last statement appears to solve everybody's wants, needs and desires by way of choice. It would only take a new paragraph of information in the Glossary to answer everybody's questions of how this option works and the 6th game setup option would surely only be used by those that choose to play that version of game play. It would take a little while for the word to go around that there is a new game play option and anyone happening into a created game using this option would surely be told by the creator (as most do in Capital games), of the type of game they have entered? Surely also the creator would offer all the relevant information during play to coach newcomers. Perhaps have a Preset made for this purpose?

I give up. People apparently do not bother to look up the plenty of posts I made on why making a new "card turn in option" is a bad idea. I understand this thread has become very long, but I see no point in repeating myself over and over again.

I give up also...you say yes and then you say no...I am completely confused. I have from the beginning ...when the new card trade-in was suggested, I said to have it as a option...that was a year ago or longer. My reason is and always been the same and now I see it as fact. When I re-opened this topic ...I again said "No rule change"...so a poll is not needed. I just want it as a option. [quote=Cireon]Thorpe came up with the advanced capitals idea. A suggestion that I can actually work with, as I stated above [/quote] If this is the poll ...then ask away. It is me or are you giving off two answers here? [quote=Cireon] People apparently do not bother to look up the plenty of posts I made on why making a new "card turn in option" is a bad idea.[/quote] Let me say... if this can not be a option, advanced capital, or any other way than to change the rules...then I say leave it alone...it is good overall for the site, but I will not be playing games and will just make my maps and help in the forum.

Let me put it this way for your poll: 1. No-body wants to change the "Trade-in rule" 2. Everybody wants it as a option and they do not care if it just for premium players, under a completely different game type under the listing as Advance Capitals or what ever you feel that you can live with...just so they can play it one way or another. Now that is a quick summary of this whole thread, short and sweet. So is this possible?

I will discuss this with the rest of the staff to figure out what the best idea is to implement this. I talked to Matty and he is also a fan of the "Old-school capitals" idea and actually had some things he wanted on top of that to make sure that the amount of confusion is minimal. So we will iron out that idea and implement that. I just can't stand that there are people continuously hammering on an idea that is said not to be implemented (a new option/setting for games). That is why I am getting a little bit frustrated about this topic.

Kudos, Cireon! Thanks for spending a lot of personal time on getting these things going. Also, thanks for listening to the concerns of folks who lack the institutional power and capabilities to make such changes. I think the "old school capitals" approach is excellent (thanks to Matty and others as well). You could even name it, "Thorpe's-brain-is-stuck capitals" instead of "advanced" or "old school." ... had to take a jab since I haven't seen Thorpe play a game since the rule change ;) Thorpe, Cireon is saying that instead of making it an option, he is going to make it a game type. Making it an option creates too much confusion when selecting options. Also, these things take time. The site is run by people who volunteer tremendous amounts of time (as you have done in the past). So, I wouldn't expect a change overnight. Especially since there is an additional level of bureaucracy that the decision needs to filter through.

[quote=The_Bishop - Nov 19, 09:47 PM]What is confusing in a simple option like this? You will receive thousands of questions to understand these simple words? I don't think so.[/quote] Cireon is a web developer. There is one rule in web development: people are stupid. Since he (and actually kind of all staff) knows that, he also knows that this will happen. There is a really good reason for not adding this as just another option. @Thorpe: he clearly stated he did not wanted another option. Then at least two ppl said that he could just make it another option. Almost litteraly. Do you see why he gave up now?

"Old-school Capitals" will be welcome!! I'm sorry with Cireon for being so hammering, I just didn't get what the point was. By the way thanks again Cireon and Matty also.

Old-school capitals it is then. Will see if I can get that working as soon as possible. I think it should be fairly easy to do. I will discuss "who can access it" etc. with the team, but I am letting you all know now that I have put this on top of my list.