Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
iAmCaffeine wrote:This is the last time I explain.
The point of the game is to win. 99% of the time, you attack others in order to win. I assume we agree with that.
The issue I have is that when you're in a position where it's impossible to win, but you suicide into the leader of the game, just to stop them from winning.
If you think the latter is acceptable, then that's fine. Our back and forth can stop, it's pointless.
I'm asking for this to be ruled on so that a precedent can be set. Then I know going forward, whether I am allowed to play games with my goal being to stop certain players from winning those games and/or tournaments, instead of trying to win myself.
If there is no punishment to b00060, I'm fine with that. Then I know I can do the same to the multitude of people I dislike and there is no way I can be punished for it. I'm absolutely okay with that.
IcePack wrote:I'm not convinced the case in your OP and this one are the same. In that case, Confed attacked seemingly at random the leader bcuz they deadbeated and to punish you, which was deemed wrong. He also took actions against someone in that game that were unrelated to the game at hand (he attacked x because of issues in other games)
However in this case, it wasn't a random targeting just to punish you. I believe (could be wrong) similar cases in the past have also happened where two people got into it, and someone suicided into the other to keep the person who ruined the game for them from winning. The statement was something akin to "this is part of diplomacy, don't make enemies that can keep you from winning".
In the confederate case, KA has the following to say:This still doesn't prohibit people from making attacks to whoever they want to in a game. Most of you have this set of thinking that just because you have the lead in a round limit game, and it's getting in the last round, the win is already assured. We all think that whoever who has no or little chance in winning making an attack on the leader should be punished. This is not always in black & white and we always need to evaluate the situation and take it from there. It is in the nature of the game to get attacked by an opponent. It happens. It's a game.
Just because you were leading the game, doesn't mean its rest assured to be yours.
Honestly not going to spend a ton of time (and don't care the outcome) so people who care more about it can argue, I just don't see them as apples to apples cases. Here b00060 attacks the one not to keep you from winning, but because you're the one he views as the reason he didn't win himself. Not suiciding, just leveraging his remaining troops to keep the person he didn't like in the game from winning.
IMO, in this situation it would be ok (unless he continued to do so in other games as continued punishment that were unrelated to the current game), since he's responding to actions taken in the actual current game.
b00060 wrote:If he was such a lock to win and I suicided into him, then why do I have more men than him in the end? Caffeine you are a fucking asshole, I had more men than you in the last round, because you killed it off both of us, neither of us was going to win because of your unbalanced play. You are a fucking whinny little asshole. You ruined the game for both of us and then act like you were going to win and I caused you to lose. No you dumb ass, you sealed that fate for both of us, otherwise you would have had more men than me stupid shit!
iAmCaffeine wrote:b00060 wrote:If he was such a lock to win and I suicided into him, then why do I have more men than him in the end? Caffeine you are a fucking asshole, I had more men than you in the last round, because you killed it off both of us, neither of us was going to win because of your unbalanced play. You are a fucking whinny little asshole. You ruined the game for both of us and then act like you were going to win and I caused you to lose. No you dumb ass, you sealed that fate for both of us, otherwise you would have had more men than me stupid shit!
You realise lying doesn't really work when I posted screenshots of the last four rounds right?
I can understand why you have a spiteful and vindictive attitude. 11yrs playing this game and not one notable achievement, it makes sense.
Dukasaur wrote:"the whambulance"
Zeus made a funny!
iAmCaffeine wrote:If you want to make a separate report about me feel free.
You fail to realise the difference between attacking a player to win, and preventing someone else from winning a tournament by suiciding troops purely out of spite when you can't win yourself. Or, you see the difference and think the latter is acceptable.
I asked Lindax to provide links for his instance and he hasn't yet done so. Not sure why you're quoting it as 100% fact.
As I said before, let's just wait and see what the ruling is.
b00060 wrote:Tell me how you were going to win when I still had more men than you the last round????????????
iAmCaffeine wrote:Yeah zeus, I read your posts sometimes. I don't believe I ever stated I never read them. If you have an issue with my comments in game chat, then report me. Otherwise you have no reason to bring them up. If you get more upset over words than the integrity of the game then you should grow some thicker skin.
Like I keep saying, let's just wait for a ruling shall we? I'm over the tournament loss. It makes a lot of sense why b00060 would be so vindictive considering he was outplayed for 19 rounds and has never achieved anything noteworthy in his 11yrs of playing. I can't relate to him, but I can sympathise. I'm just waiting for a ruling to be given one way or another so that I know whether or not I can start targeting people I don't like in tournaments just to make sure they don't win.
iAmCaffeine wrote:I don’t really care about your opinion on my gameplay, or anything. I’m also not bothered which way this is ruled on. It’s not like I can get that tournament win now, so no point being bothered about it. If b00060 isn’t punished then that leaves a lot of room for people I dislike to start losing tournaments. Sounds good to me.
Jdsizzleslice wrote:*Sigh*
Was what b00060 did in the game a douchey move? Sure. Was it against the rules? Don't think so. This has happened in several major tournaments I have been in, namely the BR tournaments that last year-round.
Was what iAmCaffeine said in the game chat a douchey move? Sure. Was it against the rules? Don't think so. There a few no-no words and I don't think any of them were said.
Both of you need to grow up, for real. It's immoral to take the lead from someone when you have no chance of winning on the last round, and it's immoral to wish cancer and death to kids. Both of you are at fault here.
riskllama wrote:lol, how old are you?
Jdsizzleslice wrote:It's immoral to take the lead from someone when you have no chance of winning on the last round, and it's immoral to wish cancer and death to kids. Both of you are at fault here.
Kotaro wrote:I dunno, but a grown ass adult wishing death over a video game, while repeatedly calling someone a cunt? Why is something that is probably perma-bannable on the forums allowed in the game? Actually curious on this.
iAmCaffeine wrote:I didn't wish death or cancer on any kids. Just like to clarify that, thank you.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users