elimination and cards

+1 for Axobongo -10000 for Cireon [i][b]*EXPLETIVES DELETED OUT OF CONCERN FOR THE CHILDREN AND CHILDISH WHO MIGHT STILL BE PLAYING HERE*[/b][/i]

Axobongo I was going to reply your post, but after reading this: [quote=Axobogo]l and i personally AM 100% CERTAIN 3+ is better than 5+ for ME, no matter what many of you say! And i am 100% certain its better for the community...[/quote] I guess it's a waste of time.

Can we have a preset chat line to point out which one it is like a capitals game

Excellent idea Sygmassacre :) Hopefully a descriptive line that clearly explains what "default" (5+ to trade only) and what "Advance Increasing" (A set is a set) mean. I would also suggest a line that explains that "Advanced Increasing" is only available from password protected games, so that is why there is a password set.

[quote=The_Bishop - Jan 2, 05:48 AM]When I watch a game, is there some way to distinguish if it is 'normal rule' or 'advanced rule' ?[/quote] Yep, it will say "Advanced" before the card type on advanced card games.

-10000 for Cireon...do not blame some-one that really did not want this. or Matty...the main blame is that Thorpe guy. I gave reasons for it and the why...never did I use my anger to get my way. We had losted a lot of great players that quit because of the cards...they are coming back. If you remember, I asked about the influx of players and asked if this was because of the cards...response was that new maps, options, great reviews on other sites,etc... and way on down on the list, I do not think it even made the list was the card trade-in. If you say this is going to hurt the site and a lot of premium players are complaining...then why is it just two of the same players saying anything? I gave months ago a chance for the out-cry you are now giving by asking players on what they thought and they responded with a lot of "+'s" and the one that was for this change to the 3+ rule in the first place, wished we never did it. Plus the players that come to mind are...The_Bishop, Diddly, Paddlin, Joca, MuzuaneAskari, and myself wanted the change back to the the "Standard Rule" ...there were other players also. We try to do what most players want and like for this site and so far, using my list above you are losing the fight. As for A "GENERAL CONDESCENDING ATTITUDE OF CERTAIN STAFF THAT MADE SITE LESS FRIENDLY" it is the response given from the rudeness of say...Axobongo...must give pause... Of all the staff to come after Cireon is just wrong...he was the one that did not want the change and came back with an option on just "Advanced Capitals". Please when you respond give or put the blame on the correct party. The staff puts a lot of hours into this site and a thank-you goes a long way...more than all the lies. As for buying premium it seems funny you would say you were thinking about buying it, but not now. You have 298 Games Played, Taken 1936 Turns "0" number of players referred all for free and you joined in June of 2013. Thx for all your ...uh....support. As for SpamFree...he loves to watch a good fight. But at least he has reffered "1" player, Joined on 04 July 2013, Games Played 1010, Turns Taken 6164 and he has not bought premium also. In business you need to make money, this site is no different, so as a business side...you give what the premium players want more than the free players want. They do pay for the bills so that is smart business. Right? Why do you not help do what the staff is doing and keeping a eye on the chat, watching the numbers, membership enrollment, programing, map making, responding to giltched games, etc...than to get chewed out in the forum for doing what they feel is best for the D12. If you do continue with the rudeness...please feel "Free" to leave and let some other site put up with it. If you continue to play on D12, bring facts to the table and have fun. This is for both of you...SpamFree and Axobongo: [quote=Rules]3. No name calling or harassing players You can tell a player that they made a bad move if you take the time to explain why, but you cannot call the player names. Attack the strategy but not the person. If an Admin or Moderator reminds you of this rule and you continue to call them names then game chat will be disabled on your account. To harass means to annoy persistently. Do not constantly criticize the same player for the same thing over and over again. Do not follow players around to all their games to make negative comments about them. Do not message someone who has told you to stop messaging them. If an Admin receives multiple complaints about the same player saying or doing annoying things then they will receive an official warning. [/quote] This is your [b][i]official warning[/i][/b].

i agree with axo

Axo makes fair point about set-up. Why such a harsh reaction to the 3 turn in vs. 5 turn in option? (stop ranting axo you sound like you're wearing a tin foil hat). And Cireon, wow you sound like a douche and a half there, cool the 'Better Than Thou' attitude. I think the issue here is that this whole rule change is based on CAPITAL game interactions. Which, as far as I know, are the only games that most of the designers/programmers/site runners play (you big snobs you :P). The problem is that this change alters ALL style of gameplay. So ideally, it SHOULD be an option, because everyone has their own opinions on what's better/more fun; and it effects, not just caps, but deathmatch too. But as Cireon so un-humbly points out, sometimes exerting a little control/restraint around the new players helps them to PLAY better in the long run (I learned caps at the knee of dear old andjelicic and MAN, while it's fun it does tend to ruin what others believe is their god-given chance to win). The other problem, I take it, is trying to figure out how to let people know what the hell they're actually playing. They'd have to rejigger the 'Enter game' page, which sounds like it'd be a lot of work and bring up other issues? But it's just another colored dot to add? TLDR. Old fogies are butt-hurt because the newbs are stomping on their carefully manicured games; the new kids are righteously butt-hurt because the 'Man' changes the rules. Really this WAS an issue for people who only play boring ol' increasing caps, which are EXTREMELY predictable no matter what the set-up. Jump on that steamroller when it comes around boys! (can't resist a dig there).

LOL. I love the "Old fogies" word. As I pointed out this was for the whole site, not just for me. As for it being an "option" you are lucky Cireon put it in...he is against anymore options. I waited a year to see what it was like and then my computer died and then brought up my issues with the cards. I said that I would go with what the others thought, and brought to the table the other players who wanted it changed...yes they have more skill points...cause they wanted better games than lucky ones..give reasons why you think this is a bad choice. Play for more than a week on the old trade-in rule and then come back with reasons why. You all complain but give no reasons to go back to the 3+ rule. What has it done to your games and why should it be changed. Yes for the players that are use to the 3+ rule you need to know what you are playing...this was the main reason Cireon did not want to include a option and just change it altogether with no option...we may have to do that if it is to confusing. The main reason the 3+ rule was put in was the stalemates on deathmatches for the "Oldies" players. With that change the "Oldies" did not know that the increase of ruined games would be so high and the great players we had leave. Give reasons why this is not the right step. The rule we have, "5+", is the standard for all of "Risk" players on board games and other sites.

I really do think of this almost in terms of a generational issue. There's a group of people who started playing this game on the board game. Where the rules are the rules and there's no options, really not much customization? Then there are younger players who have only played on-line games where anything and everything is optionable (a lot of the games with bots, cards can be turned in with three, which is where this whole idea arose from?). It's a dichotomy I think between traditional players and new. Fascinating really. I have no real preference to the +5 or +3, and it's a VERY good idea to try them out first before making a decision one way or the other. (Try it green eggs and spam :P) Thank you powers that be for allowing time to adjust and NOT actually cutting players off at the knees like some thing they have been. Thank you Thorpe for providing some history and thank you Cireon for going against your guns and adding the option for those who prefer it.

@naathim This is exactly why the board game rules should be and now are once again the default and the 'new fangledee youngin' rules are advanced and optional.

If you read the very being with The_Bishop statement on the rules of the game of "Risk" you will find out a lot...so I did not bring that up...reading is good for the brain...lol [quote=naathim]I have no real preference to the +5 or +3, and it's a VERY good idea to try them out first before making a decision one way or the other. (Try it green eggs and spam :P) Thank you powers that be for allowing time to adjust and NOT actually cutting players off at the knees like some thing they have been[/quote] That is what we did and made the decision to go back to the rule that works the best. How do you think I felt when they changed it 1 1/2 ago? My knees still are gone. Yes you will like green eggs and ham, try it, try it and you will see. This was not done because of me...the reason was given time and time again...and it was not just the staff...but for the players that have played with both rules...they can tell you really how this affected thier games, while the players that have joined in under the 3+ rules have not even give it a try...we gave it a year and 1/2 try...not just a couple of days. Please try the 5+ trade-in before you really make comments, then if you do...do not use rudeness in your comments and say this is about the elite and the lower class. Oh, by the way, there is one ruler here @D12 and she pays the bills for the free use of this site....THANK-YOU... bearded cat witch from the North, that walks with a limp! Enough said?

Here is a comment in chat game.... [b][i]tramadol: I have noticed a lot less suicides and personal attacks since the change, worth playing now![/i][/b]

[quote=naathim - Jan 3, 03:10 AM]So ideally, it SHOULD be an option, because everyone has their own opinions on what's better/more fun; and it effects, not just caps, but deathmatch too.[/quote] But... it is an option? It is just not the default, so what gives? Giving it a default has two advantages: [list type=decimal] [li]People that play the normal turn in don't have to click, which statistically means half of the people.[/li] [li]Beginning players will often go for default and thus will not play advanced turn in as much which is, as the experiment taught us, a good thing.[/li] [/list] So... the only thing you want changed is to make it an actual option. So... another box on that page? Well, we can't make boxes on that page for everything, unless you want to scroll endlessly to finally make your game, so speaking from an interface design aspect: not a good idea. Then, you would also require all players creating a game making an additional click, even the "default guys", while as for now, only people that want an advanced, special option that (I once more stress) was never supposed to be there have to click something. So again from an interface design aspect: not a good idea. Finally, the fact that members are drawn to defaults and as the last year has clearly proven: the quality of games in general drastically decreases on advanced turn in rules. It is only fun if you play with people who know what they are doing. So from a staff members' and players' point of view: not a good idea. [quote=naathim - Jan 3, 03:10 AM]The other problem, I take it, is trying to figure out how to let people know what the hell they're actually playing. They'd have to rejigger the 'Enter game' page, which sounds like it'd be a lot of work and bring up other issues? But it's just another colored dot to add?[/quote] This is actually something I brought up about two days ago in the staff forums and we are currently discussing the best way to do this. [quote=naathim - Jan 3, 03:10 AM]And Cireon, wow you sound like a douche and a half there, cool the 'Better Than Thou' attitude.[/quote] Why thank you! I do my very best. On a more serious note: I won't bother defending myself on that aspect.

[quote=Sygmassacre - Jan 3, 01:05 AM]Can we have a preset chat line to point out which one it is like a capitals game[/quote] It already is there. If it's not clear enough, please suggest an improvement. If you can't see it, press Ctrl-F5 a couple of times. On another note: isn't it weird that the players that are familiar with both advanced and normal cards either don't mind, or prefer normal cards as defaults. And that it's the players that only played with one of the two prefer the advanced? And one more note: if you ever want to try to change my mind, I have a tip for you: use proper reasoning. Shouting, raging, cursing, swearing, name calling do usually convince me that I'm right :)