Conquer Club

Accused:

Landain
karel

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Other: Landain & karel have not attacked each other the entire game. Landain would have attacked karel in round 11 if they weren't working together. Karel had half the board and was going to cash in 5 cards. Instead of trying to slow him dawn. Ladain attacked blue & yellow to hang them for karel.

I was extremely suspicious so I checked out if they have played with each other before. These two only play doubles, triple and quad games as teammates.

Game number(s): 8513368

Game 8513368



Comments:

They are both in the same clan. That could easily lead to favoritism and skewed play.

snifner wrote:Accused:

Landain
karel

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Other: Landain & karel have not attacked each other the entire game. Landain would have attacked karel in round 11 if they weren't working together. Karel had half the board and was going to cash in 5 cards. Instead of trying to slow him dawn. Ladain attacked blue & yellow to hang them for karel.

I was extremely suspicious so I checked out if they have played with each other before. These two only play doubles, triple and quad games as teammates.

Game number(s): 8513368

Game 8513368



Comments:

i'm not even going to reply to this fool

Well here is all that needs to be said.

When you have played 20 plus games with someone as a partner in doubles, triple and quad games, you shouldn't play standard games with them.

Having said that. In the game in question Game 8513368
Karel, you owned half the board, for most the game. Getting almost more deployments then the rest of us combined. Blue (me) & Yellow were doing everything we could the last 6 or 7 rounds to slow you down and your partner very suspiciously, crippled our efforts instead playing for the win. Attacking our hoards instead of worrying about the monster on the board.

Landains (red) actions were most suspicious. With Green ruling the world, owning two complete continents, Ladain (red) attacked Blue 18 times in this game, Yellow 13 times and his partner Green only twice.

As I mentioned above. In round 11, Karel you were set to take one of us out. You were going to cash in 34 deployments and had 5 cards worth 40 more. Your partner wasn't worried about you taking him out and instead of throwing a block or trying to slow you down. He cleaned up all the Blue & Yellow men in the one area you couldn't reach.

This action was extremely odd and made me investigate your connection, when I found you two play as partners most of the time.

you got to agree this does look bad.

snifner wrote:Well here is all that needs to be said.

When you have played 20 plus games with someone as a partner in doubles, triple and quad games, you shouldn't play standard games with them.

Having said that. In the game in question Game 8513368
Karel, you owned half the board, for most the game. Getting almost more deployments then the rest of us combined. Blue (me) & Yellow were doing everything we could the last 6 or 7 rounds to slow you down and your partner very suspiciously, crippled our efforts instead playing for the win. Attacking our hoards instead of worrying about the monster on the board.

Landains (red) actions were most suspicious. With Green ruling the world, owning two complete continents, Ladain (red) attacked Blue 18 times in this game, Yellow 13 times and his partner Green only twice.

As I mentioned above. In round 11, Karel you were set to take one of us out. You were going to cash in 34 deployments and had 5 cards worth 40 more. Your partner wasn't worried about you taking him out and instead of throwing a block or trying to slow you down. He cleaned up all the Blue & Yellow men in the one area you couldn't reach.

This action was extremely odd and made me investigate your connection, when I found you two play as partners most of the time.

I dont agree, i play team games with a lot of players and meet them in singles too. Dont tar everyone with the same brush, some of us have integrity. Ask atax, we are friends in real life but when we used to play against each other it waqs pure hell. No way on gods earth would we help each other on here.

jefjef wrote:They are both in the same clan. That could easily lead to favoritism and skewed play.

I agree.

karel wrote:i'm not even going to reply to this fool

The guilty never have a valid defense.

eddie2 wrote:you got to agree this does look bad.

Agreed.

Pixar wrote::lol:

You are their teamate too Pixar...i feel sorry for LE_GROS in this game. I wonder if he/she knows what they've gotten into...
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=8555668

FYI Snifner and I play team games together. I've reviewed the entire game play/log and it looks terrible. Of course red and green would prefer to attack yellow/blue....they aren't their friends...they are their enemy. Which is why Snifner and I don't play games against each other anymore...only on the same team.

IMO clans and people playing games like this should be banned from doing so. Maybe there should be a "risk factor" for a game so you know how risky it is to enter a game...given the game looks like a setup from the start. Landain & karel don't care who wins...as long as it's one of them.

hmsps wrote:I dont agree, i play team games with a lot of players and meet them in singles too. Dont tar everyone with the same brush, some of us have integrity. Ask atax, we are friends in real life but when we used to play against each other it waqs pure hell. No way on gods earth would we help each other on here.

I agree hmsps...which is why action speak louder than words. We are reviewing their actions in the game. Keep up your integrity and play fair. We respect each other for it. Just make sure your actions continue to reflect your words.

I quickly scanned the game it it looks mildly shadey when red has only attacked green two times (taken only 2 territories) in 12 rounds, on a map that big, when green looks to have been the leader for quite some time. Green has only attacked red 6 times. The only reason it looks so bad is because it's escalating. You have to admit that when green attacks yellow more in one round than red and green have attacked each other all game...it starts looking suspicious.

karel and I have never collaborated either in game chat nor in private anywhere to team up in the game in question. I play this game to have fun. I have no desire to cheat, nor have I ever cheated. Yes, karel and I have recently played a few games before, but that does not mean we have collaborated to team up in the game in question. This allegation is absurd. I've been in this game for almost four years now and never violated any of the rules. I'm not going to start now.

as an addition how can anyone say secret dimplomancy with just one game mentioned no screen shots etc. We cannot see the board each round, i am sure they all went for bonuses and yellow got hit pretty hard early on probhably left many 1's and others just built up their troop count. I am sure this will be noted but thats all.

Though there are no screen shots, it isn't a fog game so you can still get a good idea about the game. And not incriminating anyone here, but to reply to hmsps, one game is all it takes for secret diplomacy. But I agree with you when you say it will probably be noted.

what i am saying is there is no history and you dont know what armies were on each territories, were they attacking 1's or hitting blues 1 million!

hmsps wrote:what i am saying is there is no history and you dont know what armies were on each territories, were they attacking 1's or hitting blues 1 million!

They may not have directly collaborated but the being in the same clan and having a history of being partners in team games can definitely lead to favoritism. Intentional or not.

They should probably avoid playing against each other in multiple player games. I and many other teams avoid entering into games that can easily lead to this type of play/complaint. We also advise our clan members to avoid these kind of circumstances.

it's ridiculous to think they did anything of the sort. they didn't have to attack each other because of the drop. And yellow and blue went after them so they were separated from one another. People play with each other all the time. People who are partners tend to enjoy the same kind of games and end up in the same games.

There is no proof of any kind of diplomacy here aside from one player disagreeing with the strategy of another player. How many active games does landain have at the moment? he takes most of his turns within ten minutes of it becoming his turn to think he looks at the game and decides who to attack based on who is playing is ridiculous. He always plays with the same strategy and karel tends to be a more aggressive player. If it made sense to attack one another they would have.

I agree with the game being a bit suspicious especially when red went through the middle of the map after green made a major assault on yellow in round 12. Red's turns in this game seems it is "avoiding" contact with green until the 15th round. Still, circumstances could have also led red to adjust his game strategy in this game. This game is still not enough to confirm there was a secret diplomacy between the accused. There may have been some suspicious instances but that would be it. This shall be noted for future reference.

The change in strategy from Red only came after I pointed out the alliance in round 12.

snifner wrote:The change in strategy from Red only came after I pointed out the alliance in round 12.

snifner

NOTED seems to be the correct decision and does serve notice to Landain and Karel that if they were playing favorites, as it appears they may have been, that they should cease and that they are not off the hook in case an issue comes up again. They potentially face a block from playing together. That is very strong incentive to play an honest game.

Even if they had been found guilty the game would not be void or anything.