SECRET DIPLOMACY CHEATS: THEFIVE & DAUNTLESS07 [cleared]

by **PonyGal** on Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:22 pm

Accused:

DAUNTLESS07
THEFIVE

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):

Game 8368941

Comments:

DAUNTLESS07 (RED) & THEFIVE (BLACK).

Initially in this game black held an entire region of asia and was running away with the game when red suggested to all of the other players that we band together to temper him. Noone responded (we were all quite weak), then red suggested he and I form a border truce/aliance, i accepted. Blue player then made an alliance with me also - and it got to a point where the game became only 4 players left. Myself, red, black and blue. Red and black had by this staged formed a known 9and totally legal/legit) truce also. As I was far infront and I held alliances with both red and blue I actually made the suggestion to cease truces as in a four player game this meant that black would be massively disadvantaged being very weak and i held truces with all but he. It was agreed by all players that ALL truces would cease in round 18. I became suspicious when i noticed that red and black never attacked each other, and that red had forted his borders with myself and blue to 25-40 troops each border (over 100 troops), yet kept his borders with black on 1's! As did black. After the first round of play once truces had been declared by all to have ceased black cashed and loaded all of the troops he could find onto a heavily stacked border I had and used them on me, despite red have a good 13+ extra bonus due and only 1's on his bonus regions.. odd. Then round after round as red SUDDENLY ceased the lead (appx 2 rounds he had more troops than the rest of us combined and still kept his borders with black on 1... his bonus was now worth 39 troops per round... mine was about 26 from memory, and blue even less ... yet black still ignored reds completely unprotected 39+ bonus and went for only myself and my forted up borders each round. Red also could have broken blaks borders, but neither player attacks each other despite the 1 v 1 borders all around them. I reported this with an e ticket initially and was told that it was too hard to prove. I honestly believe that there is absolutely no way to now deny that there is a secret diplomacy at work here, as the last few rounds will prove. Red now has 68 regions of the board and *still* has 1s on his borders with black (i had to break through to find this as its a fog of war.. but once i got to their shared borders I saw that they indeed still had them free of troops). Red owns double the regions than the entire 3 of us combined, yet black attacked myself and blue again - despite red having no protection on his borders. Im so distressed by this game, because it seems utterly ridiculous to deny that they are cheating, there is no other evidence that could possibly be provided that could scream a secret diplomacy any louder than the facts of the game have shown. I have no idea why black did this when red had been aggressive toward him all game, and I had tried to 'play fair'. I really hope that you dont brush me off here, i love cc but if im to be punished for trying to play fairly and secret diplomacy is rewarded by red been handed my points and the points of the players who played fairly who were eliminated previously then its something that I will take very personally. Plse let me believe that cheaters never prosper. And if this is *not* a secret diplomacy then plse someone explain to me why 1 v 1 borders are kept on some players and 35-40 are kept on others? And that why black, who can see that red is getting 40 troops per round, and has his masive borders sitting on all 1's - ENTIRELY unprotected would stilll choose to never attack that? And why would red not feel the need to protect a 40 troop bonus ? He does protect it from blue and I, yet black cashes and loads up large armies to use only on others. Im reconsidering my CC membership on this game, ive lost faith in the concept of a fair game on the lack of help with this. Anyone whos ever played will call this for exactly what it is. I dont even care about winning, i honestly dont. But it does bother me that cheating is allowed so openly and will be rewarded by about 100 points from honest players given to a sham! Plse guys, its the most obvious cheat ive ever seen. Plse help

by **Dauntless07** on Thu Feb 10, 2011 9:37 am

I figured this was comming, as two people have already foed me for supposed Secret Diplomacy, so I suppose I shall make my case. This game is on the World 2.1 map. Innitially, gray (thefive) and i did fight a bitter war for Asia, where he came out on top. My attempt to take a bonus in Africa was also foiled by yellow (hosty2u) leaving me with only a tiny corner of the map in SA. It was at this point, when I could only muster a stack of 10 or so, that I offered a truce with green (ponygal) and blue, (GeneralConfusion) which they accepted. It allowed me to get backin the game as they quickly also made truces with each other.

Eventually, green said it was unfair to gang up on gray and ended the truces. I then unleashed my armies on green, and she became suspicious. She broke through Gray and saw we had 5 (not 1s) on our borders between Oceania and Asia. What she did not see however, was that I also had 16 troops on Hawaii. My reasoning for this move was the strategic situation. Green and blue were powerful, and gray was weak, (the other players had been eliminated by this point) I was not worried about gray attacking me as he stated in the game chat he was trying to keep a low profile. If he had attacked me, I would have retaliated with my stack on Hawaii. At the same time, this allowed me to fortify against blue, who was building up in Central America. It is true I had much larger stacks on my borders with green and blue, but this was only because they were more powerful players, I was pressed for men, and Oceania was not as important as some of my other bonuses. Later, as my resources started running thin, I stripped more and more from Oceania until there were 1s as green noted. Still I was not worried about gray because green was attacking him every round; breaking his Asia bonus.

It was at this point green began the accusations of secret diplomacy, invited me to a game, (only to find I'm foed, lol) and left a mean comment on my wall. I stress the only diplomatic negotiations taking place between gray and I are what is in the game chat, and CC will uphold this. I did not cheat, I have no multis, I do no secret diplomacy, if you're losing it's because your play has failed and mine has won. Just because I do not put my troops where YOU think I SHOULD put them, and I do not attack who YOU think I SHOULD when YOU think I SHOULD does not mean I am cheating. They're my troops, and I'll attack whoever I want with them.

by **thebest712** on Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:43 am

those are long texts...

by **murphy16** on Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:46 am

thebest712 wrote:those are long texts...

by **Bruceswar** on Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:55 pm

How many of these cases are you going to make? You have made 4 or 5 already and every last one of them have been cleared. Not even noted or blocked. You play an 8 man game where there is a chance for someone to do something stupid, then when they do it you have to deal with it. I am sure slate was reclaiming his bonus back from you in his mind, while you likely should have been attacking someone else? Being this is a FoW game it is hard to know exactly what went on. It is not that uncommon for people to leave weaker borders where weaker players are. You need to learn more about the game before you think everytime someone goes against what you think should be done is committing secret diplomacy. It will save you some grace.

by **Streaker** on Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:22 am

Bruceswar wrote:How many of these cases are you going to make? You have made 4 or 5 already and every last one of them have been cleared. Not even noted or blocked. You play an 8 man game where there is a chance for someone to do something stupid, then when they do it you have to deal with it. I am sure slate was reclaiming his bonus back from you in his mind, while you likely should have been attacking someone else? Being this is a FoW game it is hard to know exactly what went on. It is not that uncommon for people to leave weaker borders where weaker players are. You need to learn more about the game before you think everytime someone goes against what you think should be done is committing secret diplomacy. It will save you some grace.

This, and paragraphs are your friend

by **king achilles** on Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:54 am

After reviewing the comments and the game, this is cleared.

by **_Spike** on Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:11 pm

Pony, you appear to be fairly talented to reach such a rank in such a short time since joining CC. After reading the game logs, there is much you have to learn about the game. In CC, there are always losers for there to be winners, and better put you're a loser 70% of the time. So what does that say about your cheap tactics and cowardly accusations. Get a grip pony, it's a game and people are entitled to play however they wish. Just because they don't play the way you expect them to doesn't mean your strategy is any better! You're obsessively PARANOID that the site is full of cheaters, which is not the case. Bruce and many others are well respected and have been members for along time before your little pony (ASS) arrived. So just accept that it's their right to play however they wish unless you have serious evidence and stop wasting people's time.

How befitting that you joined the AFOS clan.
New Definition:
AFOS - A FEMALE OBSESSIVELY SCHITZO!!!! Members = 1

Maybe you can suck up to them to be more gracious at losing than what you are at winning. Will you Foe them too if they don't play the way you do! Learn to be a better loser than a winner in CC and maybe in your "real life" you'll make a difference too!

by **Dauntless07** on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:44 pm

_Spike, not to hate on the whole agreeing with me thing, but how are you so knowledgeable? You seem to know a lot about the inner details of the site even though you've only been part of the site for a month, and havn't played any games or made any posts apart from this one so far. Quite odd I think.... :-s

by **_Spike** on Mon Mar 07, 2011 8:08 am

Let's just say it doesn't matter. It's how people play that matters. From the chat logs, it seems like you're more reasonable than some. Ie: A scorned woman.
I hate cheaters as much as Pony, but it's the lack of sportsmanship/sportswomanship which is not in the spirit of the game. Sore losers don't rank either. I disagree with EmmDizzle's (How to be colonel in 50 games: The Emmdizzle Method) approach to "farming" and so does many that I've read, but I do commend him on finding and sharing legally how the system can be exploited. Does the end justify the means to get to the CC summit? It is a game after all and subscribing to such measures is "a strategy", but not the only graceful method. It's how much we choose to solicit our morals to be a player, or be played. For all we know, are we actually the people we say we are? Enjoy the games. Mahalo. :-)