Total Change

Revamp the whole membership & non-membership conditions! Members get rank and other benefits listed, non members get basic privileges! Your problems here would be over in 1 day... the day you change the conditions! [list type=decimal] [li]Implement a rule that says, you [b]can't[/b] gain rank or enter any Dominator contests or use any maps other than the designated non-member ones or anything else unless you pay![/li] [i]It is a fact that people who pay to watch entertainment show a lot more appreciation to the act than those who had it free and people who saved and purchased their favourite gizmo, respect it and look after it more than the one they were given for free"![/i] [li]Have a 'boot' option for officers only, sorting out the problem of personal, spite and known teaming attackers, given only to those that are experienced (officers) enough to know when to implement it and not abuse it.[/li] [li]Program a lit up icon to appear next to the offending players that share the same IP in a live non password game, not that there would be many in the members sector, but just to ward them off![/li] [li]Have a 5 minute 'Hold' button on live games where an officer can operate it and it should directly link to the 'duty admins' and have a situation appraised before continuing the game.[/li] [li]The ability of admins, if deemed necessary, to remove a player from the game, with a one and only warning, if they broke rules or tried to cheat.[/li] [li]Make all members show true rank with automatic purchase. [i]No benefit to not showing anymore[/i][/li] [li]Eliminate tokens. [i]No longer required[/i][/li] [li]Points can be gained and lost at the same rate i.e. based on amount of points owned.[i]This point would make non-member players who are good and who want to see a benefit as well as having to lose so many of their hard earned points from a loss, purchase membership[/i][/li] [li]Make the Dominator contest (1st) Rank based (2nd) Points based [i](1st) Rank based, means members only, get to be in the contest to get rewards and bragging rights![/i][/li] [li]Give a large manual points reward to the Quarterly / Biannual Dominator. [i]This allows more points to be available to lower ranks to try and win and an elitism to be challenged that is deserving of anyone good enough to (a) get in the contest (b) win such a contest[/i][/li] [li]Have a team of non playing duty admin that are on automatic call from the 'Hold' button where a game link will be received in their console and they can attend the game within the allotted 5 minutes and also via a link on the game pages for such games where there are no Officer Members with a 'Hold' button. [i]This would allow proper policing of games and rogue players[/i][/li] [li]Make the game quantity maximum for non members, 1 live game and 1 long term game at any one time.[/li] [li]Make a Training area which is available for designated experienced players to train newcomers or players that want to better themselves and have a 'trained' version of your rank badge (members and free players) if you complete 10 training sessions split between Deathmatch & Capitals using different card and fortification options. [i]This would allow the availability of a new and very valuable create game option, where you could select [b]"trained players only"[/b] and would greatly reduce the amount of rank attacks, unnecessary suicidal attacks & spite attacks.[/i][/li] [li]Make forums available to read for all, but only input available to members.[/li][/list] Does it really matter if lots of non paying people leave the site? I don't see a reason why they would, as there is still a free play facility, points system available to them and a place to have fun & chat. You must remember, the server is solely paid for by paid members! There aren't any better Risk sites to go to, so they'd soon be back! I don't think as many as imagined would leave. Once they've seen what paying players receive here, they'll be throwing their money at the site, then there would be money for more staff, which equals more admin online 24hrs a day, paid programmers and more map makers, creating a more varied and changing series of map options and game plays, which in turn will create intrigue and add to the growth of the site's new members. You have to make it so that gaining experience and rank allows you privileges and more control of nasty situations. Implementation: When programmed and tested, give 1 month notice with a countdown on every page that if required, membership has to be purchased by that date and that on that date, free players will be reduced to 'basic' with only 1000 starting/re-starting points & no ranks ever gained until becoming a paid up member. All ranks and points will be kept if purchasing membership within the allocated time. There are a thousand other membership benefits that could be implemented, making the whole site a rewarding experience for those who truly support it and when I say support it, I don't mean play here a lot or bring character & fun to the game chat or even say your piece in a forum, they are all just what the diversity of players bring to this site and any other site, support is to ensure the site remains active, offer the provision of services that only help and not hinder the work load of the staff and constantly think of ways that would improve the playing experience & player safeguarding, not what would suit an individuals needs or requirements, as that's where too much "blah blah" clogs up all the really necessary improvements/changes! Any owner and or decision maker of any business/game website, should rule with an iron fist, read suggestions, listen to advice, but do not be forced into changes that cost you time and effort, which are really for the personal needs of 1 or 2 players. If it was my business that had a lot of people/customers/users that had a feedback/suggestions box, I would read, listen and gain ideas from them, but I'd be damned if I would spend any valuable time responding to it all and double damned if I would be forced into a decision I did not truly believe was good only for the business/site and for its customers/users/players. I myself am as guilty as any other player here for putting my say in the forums, as they are there and they currently offer the guarantee that someone will respond to it at some time in the current way that can be debated. However, I believe the responses from the staff should be short and sharp, please or offend, with such things as "Intriguing", "I like it", "I don't like it", "disregarded", "Please bring some facts and I will review them" or "Please stop responding to this suggestion, the staff don't like it and it will never be implemented". I am, believe it or not, a very humble guy, but have a tendency to get on my high horse when I believe I am trying to help and then get publically laughed at or talked down to by people who weren't even born when I was serving my country and for that reason I like to have plain and simple warranted responses on, what I believe, is a valid suggestion and not have it dragged through the dirt, turned around to become someone else's suggestion or negated because it wasn't someone else's idea! The last example of responses above [b]"Please stop responding to this suggestion, the staff don't like it and it will never be implemented"[/b], is the one I fully expect for this suggestion and if so, [size=15][b]the boss has spoken and that is that![/b][/size] Thank you all for your reading time, I hope it has given some inspiration to this site and sorry to all the free players if I appear to make you feel unwanted here, that is not the case, I am only trying to promote the belief of, [i]if you love something, you should do whatever it takes to keep it[/i]! I too was a free player & rubbish at risk to say the least, when I first joined and even though there were no real rewards for paying toward the site, I still felt it was something I had to do for all the right reasons!

Well, I am not in a position to make a decision on this, but I will still give you a short answer: maybe this will solve your problems, but apparently you have no idea how managing a site like this works. Free-to-play has been and will always be a vital part on this website. Even the introduction of premium maps led to a rage on the forums. However, I agree there could be more premium options. Free-to-play or not, this site has to pay its bills and in the long term, I suppose they want to make some profit from it as well.

I do like alot of the suggestion. The idea of new players to the site going through a tutorial (manditory?) I think this would help solve alot of problems. However that would be alot of games for "officers" to handle... not to mention the games that are not tutorials.

I like the training suggestions, but where to get trainers? Also some ppl just need more than 10 games, and other get it after 3 - that should be judgeable without being unfair, how to do those kind of things? On the member only d12 tourney, I would hate that. I like it that when I am in the D12 game, all my opponents are really good. It's just sooo much harder than normal, soooo much more of a challange. The whole point about entering the D12 game is being good, not paying. Super bad members can be premium, super good members can be free to play. It should never be so that a super bad member has more chance to enter such a tourney than a super good member. Another thing you should realize is that premium members rely on free to play members to make this game fun. If you would play with the same 40 (or 100 for that matter) players, things would become really boring. We need free players just as much as members. Consequently, I see no reason to limit their games to 1 live and 1 long term. The only real result of that would be that they never join a fixed card game anymore.... Which means I wouldnt play them anymore either, member or not, because its less fun.

I like the feedback so far, it says to me that it has caused intrigue on some listed suggestions. Remember, it is always food for thought and nothing has to be exactly as it is suggested. Ideas should be used to gather better ideas and promote new ways of looking at things that just didn't pop into the mind before! [quote=Dferguson]I do like alot of the suggestion. The idea of new players to the site going through a tutorial (manditory?) I think this would help solve alot of problems. However that would be alot of games for "officers" to handle... not to mention the games that are not tutorials. [/quote] Training, I don't believe would be that difficult, apart from if interest by the players became a large demand! It may cause a waiting list! I would bet that a lot of experienced players and some staff would be happy/able to give a few hours a week to training and you could have a purpose made training map with a console for the trainer to control. The whole training could be pre-set and pre-arranged. It could even be automated, if programmers want to be really clever! This would eliminate the need for trainers! There would have to be a database of the players training that would eventually be completed for certification and may have to be carried out over several sessions for some players. Again, just food for thought! Premium v Free-Play: I get the feeling from the feedback so far of "I don't like it", with the general opinion being that free-play is a vital part to the site and the D12 contest. [quote=Matty]Another thing you should realize is that premium members rely on free to play members to make this game fun. If you would play with the same 40 (or 100 for that matter) players, things would become really boring. We need free players just as much as members.[/quote] I haven't suggested eliminating the ability to play for free here, only that to get the rewards, you should support the site. There also wouldn't be the same 40 (or 100 for that matter) players in the Premium/Member sector, this would of course dramatically increase and hence, so will the diversity of stable, reliable, trained players available to play. [quote=Cireon] Free-to-play has been and will always be a vital part on this website. Even the introduction of premium maps led to a rage on the forums. However, I agree there could be more premium options. Free-to-play or not, this site has to pay its bills and in the long term, I suppose they want to make some profit from it as well.[/quote] I understand that there will probably always be this response from general feedback and especially the staff as, the belief that free-play is vital to the site is set in stone and I don't disagree, it should always be available! I like the fact that the response ends with the same knowledgeable understanding that "Premium" membership pays for the site! All in all the response is very good so far and I hope it keeps feeding the imagination for change!? If all this comes to nothing and the site stays static or dwindles, there are many other ideas of premium options that I have, to create new intrigue and possibly tempt free-players to pay toward the site to gain access to them.

I think it's good to avoid non-premium from being 'dominating'. They still can be awarded for the placement in the classification. There are people trying to arrive there with every tools, also cheating. Premium members usually are not cheaters. Non-premium cheaters have no reason to cheat anymore if they know they can't arrive on the top. @Matty - I feel your thoughts but I think, as the site has grown now, we are able to find 12 good players among the premiums only. And also I would prefer to have a 'dominating' bad player rather than a 'dominating' cheater.

I have played a game called Khanwars for a while, its a really awesome game. Except that at some point I reach a point where I know that I play better and smarter than him, but he can just buy his way out of it. Even if I had all the money in the world, I would still not buy premium there - I would just leave, as it ruined the game for me, its just not fair. Just like the skillcapes in runescape, even if you manage to get lvl 99 woodcutting (which is hard as non member), and even if you can talk to the skillcape guy because he actually is in the free part of the world, you still can't get the skillcape. You get that thing for your skill right? Not because you payed...

It isn't a clique here though! I got almost to the top 3 or 4 in rank (6th, next 50 points put me in 3rd or 4th, I don't remember which) here a little while ago until the Same Time players shot up in rank and I am just a nobody who joined within a year and simply learned as I went. I play all types of games except Same Time (don't think it represents Risk)! This is not a place that says "you can't play with us, we are paying players and you will never get to the top as we will buy our way there", it says or should say, "you are welcome to join any game (within your allocated free area, which every paying site allows) and if you want a fuller experience and to see the benefits & rewards, support your favoured site"! [quote=The_Bishop]I think it's good to avoid non-premium from being 'dominating'. They still can be awarded for the placement in the classification. There are people trying to arrive there with every tools, also cheating. Premium members usually are not cheaters. Non-premium cheaters have no reason to cheat anymore if they know they can't arrive on the top.[/quote] My point exactly! How about I start giving ideas of enticing things for free-play people to pay for membership?

You are all talking like this is gonna happen, but I'd personally wait to see what the owners have to say about this. Also Matty, I do not completely agree with your last post. You give two examples. I can not judge on Khan Wars, but I know of several instances where the so-called "pay-to-win" syndrome is going on. That is something that I would never support. Even in environments where you have microtransactions, everything that is important to the game should be achievable without. However, the skillcape example you are giving is something I do not see a problem with. You still reach your 99 woodcutting, you just don't get to show it off. In other words: you maybe do not have the full experience, but it is not keeping you from actually getting the achievement. In that aspect, it would be similar to having a lot of points, but not being able to get some of the higher ranks or the dominator title for example. As free player, you will never get the full experience, but that is essential to make the paying pay off. Because if every free player would get the full experience, there would be no incentive to invest money in getting a... "fuller experience"? In the end, differences have to be made and it depends on the owners (or in a more professional environment, the investors, though one could argue those are in fact the owners of the game then) where the split is being made. I think the changes proposed here are too extreme and I think the current limitations put on this website are already very close to what is optimal for a site like this.

[size=14][b]Premium[/b] [/size] I'm trying to pinpoint the goal you are trying to accomplish with the suggestions you gave. Is it to make the site smaller with more quality players who help pay for the site? I certainly would like to have 1000 quality players with 20% paying than having +2000 more bad players but only 10% paying. There are a few problems with this though. If we implemented the ideas you suggested the site would shrink too much too fast. I have been monitoring the site's growth carefully for 3+ years and watching what happens to the numbers after every change is made and I'm confident that if we made it mostly a premium site it would die. I think we would need at least 10,000 active players before we would have 1000 quality players left after making such drastic changes. The other thing I don't like about making it mostly for premium players is that there are a lot of good players who simply can't afford it. There are many places in the world where a hard working individual makes as much money in a year as others make in month. I'd like these individuals to have 5 free long term games at a time not 1. Many of the new features we've added in the last year+ we have made even better for premium players. With every new feature we always discuss how to make it better for those who pay. Eventually we will have plenty of reasons to pay. But I don't think limiting free players works to accomplish the goal of better games. I can think of several premium players that I would give refunds to if I was Fendi and ask them to leave and play somewhere else. They are simply horrible players and will never be good because they aren't good at strategy games. Some people just can't think strategically and will never learn. Everytime I post the Dominating 12 list I cringe when I see experienced players with less than 500 points. Why do these players persist? They are horrible and need to move on to another game that involves even more luck and less strategy. My suggestion to gradually increase the quality of players is for the good players to stop playing the horrible players. Make every game you create require at least 800 points. Players with less than 800 points will get frustrated and hopefully leave or try harder to win the games that are not Point Range Limited games so that they can get into the games with the better players. [b]Let the point system determine who is good enough to play here and not whether or not they have money to pay.[/b] Premium players can create more point range limited games than non premium players so if you want more quality games then buy premium. [size=14][b]Training[/b][/size] We soon will have rating-less games--no points awarded or lost. This will make it easy to join games where your only goal is to train and you don't care if you win or lose. Again, premium players will be able to create/join more of these. We are still debating about how many games should be allowed per player. Your input would be appreciated. [size=14][b]Moderating[/b][/size] We have learned from experience that very few people have the skills required to successfully moderate games. We will never let just any officer do this. They will offend more players than they help and people will leave. I appreciate the ideas aeronautic but in my mind they just don't seem like they would accomplish the goal given the experience I have had helping to run this site over the last couple years.

Great feedback from the main man! Just for the courtesy of reply and further food for thought, I'd like to say: [quote=Vexer]I'm trying to pinpoint the goal you are trying to accomplish with the suggestions you gave. Is it to make the site smaller with more quality players who help pay for the site?[/quote] On the contrary, I aimed to turn the small % of quality players paying into the big % of quality players paying. [quote=Vexer]The other thing I don't like about making it mostly for premium players is that there are a lot of good players who simply can't afford it. There are many places in the world where a hard working individual makes as much money in a year as others make in month. I'd like these individuals to have 5 free long term games at a time not 1. [/quote] I was always aware of this and would have felt bad for those individuals. But, being fair to those also opens the door to the exploiters! I understand, it's a trade off on the bad/nasty players that it allows to join and create havoc, but there is no other way... unless there was an application process for the people who would like Premium, but can't afford it and those that can, could voluntarily pay a little extra to sponsor a percentage of some free entry Premium accounts. When renewing the annual premium account have a radio button to select [Premium] X$ [Premium + Sponsorship] X$. Just a secondary thought there! Another thought for a small amount of extra income for the site would be an advertising page that would have to be selected to view it, so as not to interfere with the main site and its advertising-free gaming experience, but there could be another reason to go to that page that will help in allowing the adverts to be seen, perhaps secondary information such as; free Premium account info, tournament info, off-topic items, a chat room, funny/fun links, brain teasers or any number of secondary un-associated reasons! Obviously, advertisers would only be prepared to pay smaller amounts if not on the main pages of a site, but there could still be a top position, i.e. 1st seen advert/whole page when selected, that if enough advertisers were on board, would be something they would start to barter for, especially on a site with 100's of users per day! [quote=Vexer][size=14]Training[/size] We soon will have rating-less games--no points awarded or lost. This will make it easy to join games where your only goal is to train and you don't care if you win or lose. Again, premium players will be able to create/join more of these. We are still debating about how many games should be allowed per player. Your input would be appreciated.[/quote] Training by any means is good! My input to this would be, as it is for no points/rating, a training game should be allowed only as a live game and in addition to the set number of live games currently allowed to Premium and Free-Play players and that there would be no point to having more than one training game in play at any one time as they will be time consuming. [quote=Vexer][size=14]Moderating[/size] We have learned from experience that very few people have the skills required to successfully moderate games. We will never let just any officer do this. They will offend more players than they help and people will leave. [/quote] If not officers, what about the ability to pause the game by the moderators/admin for the length of a 5 minute turn to appraise a situation? And perhaps the quick call link on the game page that I also mentioned? Again, just food for thought! [quote=aeronautic]How about I start giving ideas of enticing things for free-play people to pay for membership?[/quote] I have some ideas in the pipeline, new uncomplicated maps (I would make or help to make) and scenario types with more small battle like strategies, all in-keeping with the game play of Risk!

I just stumbled across this thread and will take the time to read it thoroughly at a later date, but have [u][b]very, very briefly[/b][/u] skimmed over aeronautic's initial post and [size=16][b][i][u]Entirely DISAGREE[/u][/i][/b][/size] I will clarify the reasons for my own [b]DISAGREEMENT[/b] at a later date, when I can devote sufficient time to the discussion.

Hello all, If I may comment these suggestions, as a non-paying member. Things I kinda disagree with : - Only allow ranks for paying members / Make all members show true rank I think ranks are more a way of knowing the level of your opponent than a bragging purpose. That being said, i reserving it to paying members or allowing to "hide" it is a contradiction. Things I kinda agree with : - Make the game quantity maximum for non members, 1 live game and 1 long term game at any one time. - Make a Training area and offer the possibility to play with only trined players Non-paying members are already limited to one live game at a time, which is a pain in the ***. I don't know about the training area thing, I think completing the "information" page with strategy tips and warning about the rules should be enough. However, I think an option is already available for paying members to only allow players with the good amount of points. These two facts are currently the two main reasons I'm considering buying a premium membership. It's important enough so that I want it, and not important enough so that non-paying members want to leave the site. Things I totally disagree with : - Make forums available to read for all, but only input available to members. Not only rich people should have the right to vote - Eliminate tokens. Here could be a great option to entice free-play people to buy premium membership. And a way to reward skilled players. Make us use our tokens. Some ideas (for free-play players only) : No tokens if kicked out for two missing turns. No tokens if caught suiciding/teaming up in a game. Token has to be paid for everything different than "World classic, deathmatch, increasing, no fog", etc. People would be a lot more careful / willing to pay if they knew they had to win more token than they lose in each game. Regards, Xixi2

I disagree, only because it would be impossible for a lot of us to be Premium. A lot of us non-members are younger players who most likely don't have a job and don't get money to waste on a game instead of buying what we need. I'm 15 myself, and I don't get an allowance or have a job (though I want one this summer). I can't go to my parents like, "Can I have ten bucks a month to play some game?" It'd sound outrageous to them! Money in my family is tight as it is. I do understand that this site relies on the paying players, but it is simply impossible for some of us to pay. Thanks, JT