Conquer Club

Posted: **Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:11 am**

Accused:

Lt. Strike
KuGelFaNg

The accused are suspected of:

Being Multis
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):

Game 5823523

2009-10-31 05:23:38 - KuGelFaNg: attack green, blue!

2009-10-31 05:23:28 - KuGelFaNg ended the turn and got spoils
2009-10-31 05:51:34 - Lt. Strike got bonus of 5 troops added to Rebel Territory Castle
2009-10-31 05:51:34 - Lt. Strike received 2 troops for holding 4 Rebel Territory Territories
2009-10-31 05:51:34 - Lt. Strike received 3 troops for 4 regions
2009-10-31 05:51:42 - Lt. Strike cashed in a group of Lake Minstello 9, Northern Plains 7, and Lake Minstello 15 worth 40 troops
2009-10-31 05:51:48 - Lt. Strike deployed 45 troops on Rebel Territory 3
2009-10-31 05:52:22 - Lt. Strike ended the turn

Comments:

Game 5843470 Coincidentally, I joined this game and the same player is in there with KuGelFaNg. For 3 rounds, Lt. Strike didn't touch my stack of armies. And at the time of my last turn, prior to having him suicide on me, I definitely had more armies than either player. Thus, the reason why I was a bit shocked that all of a sudden KuGelFaNg's sudden encouragement and the action that Lt. Strike took was without a doubt, highly suspicious. Especially if Lt. Strike had single's all over.

Posted: **Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:17 am**

2009-10-27 16:49:59 - owenator: gl
2009-10-31 05:23:38 - KuGelFaNg: attack green, blue!
2009-10-31 10:47:17 - owenator: what the f*ck? blue you just handed the game over to red. and red, you're a fucking coward to try to 'convince' someone to attack me when you know I won this game otherwise
2009-10-31 10:47:22 - owenator: you're both morons
2009-10-31 10:54:05 - KuGelFaNg: sorry man.. I didn't mean that hw would suicide on you!
2009-10-31 11:03:19 - owenator: you just encouraged him to do so - and he did. totally suspicious especially since he just joined another game

youll probably have to find more than one game...and thats no secret....

if everyone is guilty of secret alliance when they tell a player to attack another...

it might be suspicious, but its about 5 games away from being an obvious plan, unless they play alot together..which is kind of up to you to check.

Posted: **Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:21 am**

AAFitz wrote:2009-10-27 16:49:59 - owenator: gl
2009-10-31 05:23:38 - KuGelFaNg: attack green, blue!
2009-10-31 10:47:17 - owenator: what the f*ck? blue you just handed the game over to red. and red, you're a fucking coward to try to 'convince' someone to attack me when you know I won this game otherwise
2009-10-31 10:47:22 - owenator: you're both morons
2009-10-31 10:54:05 - KuGelFaNg: sorry man.. I didn't mean that hw would suicide on you!
2009-10-31 11:03:19 - owenator: you just encouraged him to do so - and he did. totally suspicious especially since he just joined another game

youll probably have to find more than one game...and thats no secret....

if everyone is guilty of secret alliance when they tell a player to attack another...

it might be suspicious, but its about 5 games away from being an obvious plan, unless they play alot together..which is kind of up to you to check.

Totally understand where you are coming from. And I would agree with you 100% AAFitz, however for allowing us to trade a cardspot for 3 rounds, then AFTER KuGelFaNg types something in game chat, then my armies are depleted?!! Lt. Strike is not a noob. He purposely suicided on my armies as previously mentioned. There was no reason or justification for his move as he had nothing to gain by doing that. For an experienced player to do that, is highly suspicious.

Posted: **Sat Oct 31, 2009 4:54 pm**

owenator wrote:
AAFitz wrote:2009-10-27 16:49:59 - owenator: gl
2009-10-31 05:23:38 - KuGelFaNg: attack green, blue!
2009-10-31 10:47:17 - owenator: what the f*ck? blue you just handed the game over to red. and red, you're a fucking coward to try to 'convince' someone to attack me when you know I won this game otherwise
2009-10-31 10:47:22 - owenator: you're both morons
2009-10-31 10:54:05 - KuGelFaNg: sorry man.. I didn't mean that hw would suicide on you!
2009-10-31 11:03:19 - owenator: you just encouraged him to do so - and he did. totally suspicious especially since he just joined another game

youll probably have to find more than one game...and thats no secret....

if everyone is guilty of secret alliance when they tell a player to attack another...

it might be suspicious, but its about 5 games away from being an obvious plan, unless they play alot together..which is kind of up to you to check.

Totally understand where you are coming from. And I would agree with you 100% AAFitz, however for allowing us to trade a cardspot for 3 rounds, then AFTER KuGelFaNg types something in game chat, then my armies are depleted?!! Lt. Strike is not a noob. He purposely suicided on my armies as previously mentioned. There was no reason or justification for his move as he had nothing to gain by doing that. For an experienced player to do that, is highly suspicious.

I can agree that "Lt. Strikes" move was a very bad move, infact an insane move, but how does that make me a cheater? I just typed "attack green, blue", in game chat. That's not against any rules. If I would had encouraged him ti that in private messages and on his wall, the matter would be something else.. Accusing us for having a secret diplomacy owenator, just shows me that you're a sore looser and an unstable person. People do unexplained moves every single day, this was one of them, and to accuse us for having a secret diplomacy for that is just pathetic, in my opinion. I hope that this will be solved quickly, and have my name cleared.. Anyone else who has any thoughts on this?

Posted: **Sat Oct 31, 2009 5:06 pm**

owenator is a dick, dont listen to him m8. no case here wot so ever. we have played many games together with and against each other and you have been nothing but polite and a good player..

Posted: **Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:23 pm**

lt.strike can be not a multi of kugelfang , sometimes noobs players or players with no experience try to kill another guys in esc , and if they can kill, they know they dead , so they suicide :roll:

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 1:56 am**

Darthvadar wrote:owenator is a dick, dont listen to him m8. no case here wot so ever. we have played many games together with and against each other and you have been nothing but polite and a good player..

admins/mods, this is a clear case of trolling/spamming/baiting. Darthvadar should be aptly warned and this post should be removed as it has no relevance to the topic at hand.

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 2:05 am**

Aalmeida17 wrote:lt.strike can be not a multi of kugelfang , sometimes noobs players or players with no experience try to kill another guys in esc , and if they can kill, they know they dead , so they suicide

I wish some people would actually READ what I write. Do the research...click on the profile before you say anything. It's annoying when you have people who don't realize that I've already done this. So, just to prevent anyone else who wants to look like they have no idea what the hell they're talking about, I'll save you the trouble:

Lt. Strike

Score:
1329
Games:
520 completed, 127 (24%) won
Attendance:
98% of turns taken

Medals: 7 (key medals to take into consideration: Assassin, Terminator, Cross-map)

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:52 am

User posts: 48

Games on Feudal: 24

This player has obvious knowledge of Feudal. This should definitely still be considered

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:20 am**

owenator wrote:This player has obvious knowledge of Feudal. This should definitely still be considered

Wow, you're so full of it.. What you just said doesn't show he knows feudal, and even though if he did, I might do some crappy moves from time to time, we all do.

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:27 am**

KuGelFaNg wrote:
owenator wrote:This player has obvious knowledge of Feudal. This should definitely still be considered

Wow, you're so full of it.. What you just said doesn't show he knows feudal, and even though if he did, I might do some crappy moves from time to time, we all do.

Really? That's your answer? Dude, you obviously don't go to school because you have a lack for: a) understanding/comprehension, b) review. Listen, again......I have to repeat myself because you're obviously too slow to understand. 24 games on Feudal is having no knowledge?!! I'm not going to even get further into that because that's self-explanatory. Crappy moves, is your explanation? Listen, this player has 520 games played. Multiple achievement medals. This person was trading cardspots for 3 rounds. Then suicides with absolutely no troops for fortification. Why? It just doesn't make any sense for an experienced player, which is why this is an accusation for secret diplomacy.

p.s. please, for the love of God - go to school, child.

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:17 am**

owenator wrote:
KuGelFaNg wrote:
owenator wrote:This player has obvious knowledge of Feudal. This should definitely still be considered

Wow, you're so full of it.. What you just said doesn't show he knows feudal, and even though if he did, I might do some crappy moves from time to time, we all do.

Really? That's your answer? Dude, you obviously don't go to school because you have a lack for: a) understanding/comprehension, b) review. Listen, again......I have to repeat myself because you're obviously too slow to understand. 24 games on Feudal is having no knowledge?!! I'm not going to even get further into that because that's self-explanatory. Crappy moves, is your explanation? Listen, this player has 520 games played. Multiple achievement medals. This person was trading cardspots for 3 rounds. Then suicides with absolutely no troops for fortification. Why? It just doesn't make any sense for an experienced player, which is why this is an accusation for secret diplomacy.

p.s. please, for the love of God - go to school, child.

First of all, you do not have to assault me just because you're "older" than me, you're the one acting childish. Secondly, I have played over 7000 games, and I make horrible moves sometimes too.. And thirdly, I have a question for the moderators: Can yo get banned from the site by accusing people without any, what so ever, evidence or facts that show's that the accused player is a cheater?

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:38 am**

KuGelFaNg wrote:
owenator wrote:
KuGelFaNg wrote:
owenator wrote:This player has obvious knowledge of Feudal. This should definitely still be considered

Wow, you're so full of it.. What you just said doesn't show he knows feudal, and even though if he did, I might do some crappy moves from time to time, we all do.

Really? That's your answer? Dude, you obviously don't go to school because you have a lack for: a) understanding/comprehension, b) review. Listen, again......I have to repeat myself because you're obviously too slow to understand. 24 games on Feudal is having no knowledge?!! I'm not going to even get further into that because that's self-explanatory. Crappy moves, is your explanation? Listen, this player has 520 games played. Multiple achievement medals. This person was trading cardspots for 3 rounds. Then suicides with absolutely no troops for fortification. Why? It just doesn't make any sense for an experienced player, which is why this is an accusation for secret diplomacy.

p.s. please, for the love of God - go to school, child.

First of all, you do not have to assault me just because you're "older" than me, you're the one acting childish. Secondly, I have played over 7000 games, and I make horrible moves sometimes too.. And thirdly, I have a question for the moderators: Can yo get banned from the site by accusing people without any, what so ever, evidence or facts that show's that the accused player is a cheater?

'Assault' you? How so? I was being serious. Honestly, if I wanted to be condescending and make fun of you, I will - and you'd know it. And if you want proof, I'd be happy to pm you and trust me, you won't like what I have to say. I was actually saying that stuff because you are so consumed with CC that you seem to miss the difference between real life and fiction. I'm the type where if someone pisses me off and it couldn't be done in real life (i.e. calling me a "chink") then, you bet your ass I'd say something. Again, back to the topic at hand, you're being accused of something - focus on that.

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:51 am**

owenator wrote:
KuGelFaNg wrote:
owenator wrote:
KuGelFaNg wrote:
owenator wrote:This player has obvious knowledge of Feudal. This should definitely still be considered

Wow, you're so full of it.. What you just said doesn't show he knows feudal, and even though if he did, I might do some crappy moves from time to time, we all do.

Really? That's your answer? Dude, you obviously don't go to school because you have a lack for: a) understanding/comprehension, b) review. Listen, again......I have to repeat myself because you're obviously too slow to understand. 24 games on Feudal is having no knowledge?!! I'm not going to even get further into that because that's self-explanatory. Crappy moves, is your explanation? Listen, this player has 520 games played. Multiple achievement medals. This person was trading cardspots for 3 rounds. Then suicides with absolutely no troops for fortification. Why? It just doesn't make any sense for an experienced player, which is why this is an accusation for secret diplomacy.

p.s. please, for the love of God - go to school, child.

First of all, you do not have to assault me just because you're "older" than me, you're the one acting childish. Secondly, I have played over 7000 games, and I make horrible moves sometimes too.. And thirdly, I have a question for the moderators: Can yo get banned from the site by accusing people without any, what so ever, evidence or facts that show's that the accused player is a cheater?

'Assault' you? How so? I was being serious. Honestly, if I wanted to be condescending and make fun of you, I will - and you'd know it. And if you want proof, I'd be happy to pm you and trust me, you won't like what I have to say. I was actually saying that stuff because you are so consumed with CC that you seem to miss the difference between real life and fiction. I'm the type where if someone pisses me off and it couldn't be done in real life (i.e. calling me a "chink") then, you bet your ass I'd say something. Again, back to the topic at hand, you're being accused of something - focus on that.

You called me a child.. That's just shows me what kind of person you are..

I am focusing on me being accused.. I'm awaiting the what the judges will say.. I won't write here anymore..

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 3:45 pm**

You called me a child.. That's just shows me what kind of person you are..

I am focusing on me being accused.. I'm awaiting the what the judges will say.. I won't write here anymore..

I'm not about to type your user name everytime I have to refer to you. I'm not about to call you "dude", "bro", "friend", "son", because I can assure you at that point - I would purposely be mocking you. You are half my age. I think it's warranted. Again, focus on-topic and relevant matters.

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 5:38 pm**

owenator wrote:
Again, focus on-topic and relevant matters.

Again, I am...

Posted: **Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:21 pm**

I am focusing on me being accused.. I'm awaiting the what the judges will say.. I won't write here anymore..

Posted: **Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:21 pm**

I looked but I don't see any secret diplomacy here. Definitely a questionable move but not secret diplomacy. CLEARED

Posted: **Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:33 pm**

shouldn't it be "Noted" then? And obviously I'm questioning the decision/judgment here. If an experienced player suicides after cashing in a set after NOT having hit my armies for 3 rounds with no obvious fortifications, then all of a sudden after someone tells him/her to attack me - and does so, how is that not secret diplomacy? I joined another game, and suspiciously enough that same player joined KuGelFaNg's game again: Game 5843470. Again, I'm wondering what kind of investigating was done here because this should clearly be a "Noted" or "Warned" case.

Posted: **Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:38 am**

owenator wrote:shouldn't it be "Noted" then? And obviously I'm questioning the decision/judgment here. If an experienced player suicides after cashing in a set after NOT having hit my armies for 3 rounds with no obvious fortifications, then all of a sudden after someone tells him/her to attack me - and does so, how is that not secret diplomacy? I joined another game, and suspiciously enough that same player joined KuGelFaNg's game again: Game 5843470. Again, I'm wondering what kind of investigating was done here because this should clearly be a "Noted" or "Warned" case.

Suck it up Cup Cake

Posted: **Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:06 am**

owenator wrote:shouldn't it be "Noted" then? And obviously I'm questioning the decision/judgment here. If an experienced player suicides after cashing in a set after NOT having hit my armies for 3 rounds with no obvious fortifications, then all of a sudden after someone tells him/her to attack me - and does so, how is that not secret diplomacy? I joined another game, and suspiciously enough that same player joined KuGelFaNg's game again: Game 5843470. Again, I'm wondering what kind of investigating was done here because this should clearly be a "Noted" or "Warned" case.

I've made over 200 of these games, Lt.Strike has joined about two of them, and you find that suspicious? That's pretty naive if you ask me...

I knew that I will be cleared as it's clearly no case at all, and hey owenator, of you can't trust the moderators, maybe you should consider leaving this site...

Posted: **Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:39 pm**

KuGelFaNg wrote:
owenator wrote:shouldn't it be "Noted" then? And obviously I'm questioning the decision/judgment here. If an experienced player suicides after cashing in a set after NOT having hit my armies for 3 rounds with no obvious fortifications, then all of a sudden after someone tells him/her to attack me - and does so, how is that not secret diplomacy? I joined another game, and suspiciously enough that same player joined KuGelFaNg's game again: Game 5843470. Again, I'm wondering what kind of investigating was done here because this should clearly be a "Noted" or "Warned" case.

I've made over 200 of these games, Lt.Strike has joined about two of them, and you find that suspicious? That's pretty naive if you ask me...

I knew that I will be cleared as it's clearly no case at all, and hey owenator, of you can't trust the moderators, maybe you should consider leaving this site...

Again, maybe you should go to school. You don't read, do you? And what the hell is "hey owenator, of you can't trust the moderators?" I'm not going to repeat myself again as to why this was an obvious case of secret diplomacy. If you'd like to buy out my membership, I'd gladly leave. In the meantime, stop being an idiot. Keep baiting me, I fucking dare you.

Posted: **Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:05 pm**

owenator wrote:shouldn't it be "Noted" then? And obviously I'm questioning the decision/judgment here. If an experienced player suicides after cashing in a set after NOT having hit my armies for 3 rounds with no obvious fortifications, then all of a sudden after someone tells him/her to attack me - and does so, how is that not secret diplomacy?

I didn't note it because there wasn't any proof that there was diplomacy going on.

They have no history together.

An experienced player suicided on you, that is not against the rules. It doesn't matter how many turns you traded cards, that has nothing to do with secret diplomacy either. Maybe he figured he was going to be the next one eliminated and decided to expedite his demise.

KugelFaNg told him to attack and he did, again that was in game chat nothing secret about that.

Was the attack questionable? Yes it was.

owenator wrote:I joined another game, and suspiciously enough that same player joined KuGelFaNg's game again: Game 5843470.

There is nothing against the rules about him joining another one of KuGelFaNg's games. What is suspicious about that?

owenator wrote:Again, I'm wondering what kind of investigating was done here because this should clearly be a "Noted" or "Warned" case.

I went through the game chat, checked their walls, the game log, I went into some of their other games looking for any signs that they had done secret diplomacy before and I checked any game history the two may have had. I did not find one thing that would point to any diplomacy in any of their games that I checked.

All I ask for is a shred of proof that there was secret diplomacy, until I see some I stand by my decision/judgment.

You always have the option of opening an E-Ticket.

Conquer Club

KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy [cLEARED]

KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy [cLEARED]

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: Accused: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy

Re: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy [cLEARED]

Re: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy [cLEARED]

Re: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy [cLEARED]

Re: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy [cLEARED]

Re: KuGelFaNg and Lt. Strike - Secret Diplomacy [cLEARED]