Conquer Club

Accused:

Someonesweet
kallysdead

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy
Other: Possibly sharing accounts / account sitting



Game number(s):

Game 6823669



Comments:
Some things that made this game suspicious:
1. There were several times where these two had CLEAR opportunities to attack each other and refrained from doing it before ANYTHING was mentioned in game chat about a "truce". At one point I withdrew my armies to cause them to have to fight each other and they did not do it despite having the obvious opportunity of gaining a large upper hand by eliminating one or the other completely and gaining spoils. This is when I first grew a bit suspicious.

2. There were many chat inconsistencies. I was eliminated first in this game, but had grown suspicious of them so I followed it after I was eliminated. In many instances it seemed like there was a mix up about who a question or comment was aimed at and in other instances the reply came from the wrong person or seemed confused or convoluted at the very least. The other player in the game, Ironbuttaxe, actually went so far as saying "2010-04-24 01:23:18 - ironbuttaxe: funny all the misunderstandings in the chat in this game: blue (someonesweet): i was commenting on yellows(kallysdead) words not yours " Hence my suspicion of sharing accounts between the two.

3. It is obvious from reading wall posts, and looking at other games that these two have played, that they are in a relationship. They both have Canada as their country of origin. When Ironbuttaxe mentioned in game that he felt they were working together, someonesweet changed her country to Sweden for several days and then back to Canada. (It is now Sweden again.) I don't know if this adds anything to the "case", but it seemed odd to "change location" after someone sort of calls you out. In the vast majority of instances they are playing in team games. This game, however, was not a team game. I have no problem with friends or relatives playing together, but when you circumvent the rules (ie secret diplomacy) to help each other, that is a problem. If their intentions had been asserted in chat that they had planned on being allied or at least a non-aggression pact mentioned right from the start, this wouldn't have been an issue at all. It might have sucked for Ironbuttaxe and I, but it would've been legal.

4. Ironbuttaxe sent me a PM about his suspicions during the course of the game, after I was eliminated. Coincidentally, I sent him an almost identical PM the day after he sent his and BEFORE I read the PM he sent me. It was telling, in my opinion, that we were both having the same suspicion having not communicated about it beforehand. (By the way, Ironbuttaxe was still doing well in the game at that point, so it was not sour grapes.)

Ironbuttaxe is aware of this forum post and will likely post his thoughts as well.

Couldn't have put it better myself Cruxader, diligently done! As I said in the chat, these two need to either be upfront about their relationship and/or shared accounts, or just play team games. Innocently both Cruxador and I thought we were taking part in a good, fair game, although the odd chat raised some suspicions, which were confirmed when Someonesweet agreed to a truce with kallysdead at a tactically absurd point. The chat was just to give the appearance of open alliance, as were the replies that followed, which at times were more like the ramblings of a schizophrenic, then two real people chatting!

There may have been some secret diplomacy, but I would say they are 2 people. As far as the changing countries goes, CC automatically picks that up from the IP address. someonesweet has a blog that is in Swedish, so I'm guessing she's from there and her boyfriend (who is probably kallysdead) is from canada. I'm not sure they necessarily tried to team up; it was probably more of a subconscious thing. Anyways, I'll leave it in the capable hands of C&A mods.

Sure looks like 2 separate accounts. 2 peeps.

What you may have experienced is an account sitting abuse. Changing flag and confused chat.

It is a rule violation to take turns for someone in a game that your opponents in.

jefjef wrote:Sure looks like 2 separate accounts. 2 peeps.

What you may have experienced is an account sitting abuse. Changing flag and confused chat.

It is a rule violation to take turns for someone in a game that your opponents in.

well said jefjef that sounds about right for this one

I checked out some of the standard 5 player games they are in, and actually was fully expecting to find more examples, but in the three others I checked where one of them won, I definintely couldnt say there was anything suspicious, and their win rates arent overly great so its certainly not a blatent case of secret diplomacy.

The problem still remains however, that it takes very little to throw a game one way or another, so its still safe to say that People cant expect a perfectly fair game, having boy and girl friend in many standard public games, and given what looks like babysitter abuse anyways, I would think at least a warning not to play together except as teams would be in order, and if the babysitting was extremely abused, possibly a block too. I only checked 3 other games though, and all of those seemed fair enough, though I would still not be surprised to find another example of one that did not seem suspicious.

I agree with everyone who has posted. My thoughts were the same as far as it being two people, that's why I didn't bring the accusation of multi-accounter. I do think there was some account sitting/sharing going on though. If the flag changes based on IP address, than I can tell you that Someonesweet's flag has changed to Canada and back to Sweden about 4-5 times that I've noticed since this game took place. I'm still suspicious of the secret diplomacy. There was more than just the one instance where I withdrew to try to get them to attack each other. Don't have time to go into it in detail right now (work ).

That said, I don't want to get anyone banned, but I do think they need warned at the very least and to stick to team games if they are going to continue to play the same maps together.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=98993&p=2261470#p2261470

this was reported before on them so its not their first apperance here in C&A.

I know what I think but I will meet with my board of directors to see their opinions.

pending.
KS

Ok. These 2 are Cleared of being multis at this time. However it seems apparent that they enter into games with the knowledge that they can use the fact that they have a relationship outside of CC to help dictate the way a game can go by offering truces to each other.

While they are technically following the rules by announcing the truce in game chat it is still deemed a violation because they are going outside the bounds of the game by entering in the game knowing they can rely on a forming of an alliance with one another when it makes absolutely no sense but to help one of them win. Thus this is against the rules and seeing as these 2 have had a past as already mentioned they have been Blocked.

This conclusion was also in part to the fact that we noticed the accounts being babysat by one another which as per the Frequently Asked Questions portion of the site:

From the FAQ, #15 -- "The account babysitter should not be your opponent in any current game. It is common courtesy to announce in game chat that another player will take your turn(s) during your absence. Babysitters should only do what is necessary to take the turn(s) and should not interact with the community, start or join new games (except for ongoing tournaments). Furthermore, you should only take another player's turn if they are in danger of missing a turn, not for the purpose of gaining a tactical advantage."

It was apparent that they were using each others accounts to gain tactical advantage and they were involved in a non teams game and doing this.

Warned for babysitter abuse, Blocked from playing together.

Closed.
KS