Conquer Club

Accused:

Blackwinter




The accused are suspected of:


Other: Rating abuse



Game number(s):

Game 13405954
Game 13350915
Game 8834815


Comments: In his last games this user apparently gave nearly always negative ratings simply because he lost the game. For instance he gave me a negative rating. He informed he that he felt it appropiate because "I used my ressources inappropriate" as I attacked him. - I attacked him indeed, which he went mad about in the Game Chat. Whenever he is attacked lately, he gets mad, complains in the Game Chat "and he is still attacking me" (Game 8834815) or "and still red attacks me"(Game 13405954) and then gives negative ratings.

from looking at his ratings, he has seemed to give 3 bad rating b4? hmmmm

Edited part: Also, you are using a game that is from 2 years ago your evidence. that shows slight desperate-ness....

Frox333 wrote:from looking at his ratings, he has seemed to give 3 bad rating b4? hmmmm

Edited part: Also, you are using a game that is from 2 years ago your evidence. that shows slight desperate-ness....

I looked at his last ratings, not how many games he played in the last years And all of his last ratings are bad, except a player (templeyard) who didn't had any contact with him in the particular Game, as he was stuck in a corner and had no influence in this game.

I would ask you:
Why do you rate players down and accuse them of cheap tactics and to be irrational? Simply because "they attacked you" in the game and you lost? Isn't that the purpose of this game, to attack and get attacked vice versa? Or did I get that wrong and the real purpose of the game is to help Blackwinter win his games

I wouldn't really call this rating abuse.. He just got pissed off at you guys and rated you badly. It's not like he's been rating everybody in game after game badly.

i dont actually see whats so wrong with the ratings he left, some hate when others make truces and rate badly because of that. and just by reading game chat it seems like you suicided in to him to end the game.

after all you were the only one who got 1 star from gameplay
you and green got 1 star from fair play (that would be for the truce)
and both you and green had a bad attitude so thats why you both got 1 star for the attitude

thats what i think he rated, i was not in the game so

Gabriel13 wrote:He just got pissed off at you guys and rated you badly.

Yes, exactly. And after I was already called a m***f*** for winning games on this site, I think that the time is right to do something against sore losers.

Gabriel13 wrote: It's not like he's been rating everybody in game after game badly.

These were probably the games he won.

bahrain wrote:i dont actually see whats so wrong with the ratings he left, some hate when others make truces and rate badly because of that. and just by reading game chat it seems like you suicided in to him to end the game.

after all you were the only one who got 1 star from gameplay
you and green got 1 star from fair play (that would be for the truce)
and both you and green had a bad attitude so thats why you both got 1 star for the attitude

thats what i think he rated, i was not in the game so

A truce is allowed as long it is not a secret one (look at the rules) he has no right to rate us badly. Look at the other game, he complained there too and afterwards gave bad ratings. No truce there, still he rated others (spilseth/ joe theriault) badly.

And to my game with him: He was winning and me and SiriusCowking (green) made a truce. SiriusCowking afterwards stabbed me without warning and told me this was not a truce at all. I gave him a backstabber-tag but I would hardly rate him badly because of that, he was otherwise quick & able. I would play another game with him.



If this is allowed, then okay, in a short time everybody should rate everybody badly, only exception are the poor winners.

he has every right to rate you badly if he feels you 2 played unfair against him, thats why there are different ratings like fair play.
and the other game you posted looks the same as this 1, 1 player killed him and lost so he maybe suicided against him to end the game like you did.

He gave me a bad rating just because he was mad that he was first winning, but then we all focused him so he lost in the end. Game 13405954

bahrain wrote:he has every right to rate you badly if he feels you 2 played unfair against him, thats why there are different ratings like fair play.
and the other game you posted looks the same as this 1, 1 player killed him and lost so he maybe suicided against him to end the game like you did.

Rubbish. Unfair? He was on the verge of winning, then in the GameChat we openly decided to stop him instead of handing him over the easy victory.

And to give you a quick note: He himself had a truce with another player, so if you try to excuse him by saying he hates players because of this, then you need to get the facts straight.

He lost. This is the only reason why he got mad. He even told this to me per PN, as I asked him what his rating was all about.

And I never suicided; I would really urge you to get the facts straight, before you post something.

i took the facts from the game chat. maybe you should read on the forum about truces there is alot of players against it so i dont blame him for rating you bad because of it. after all only noobs need truces to win

bahrain wrote:i took the facts from the game chat. maybe you should read on the forum about truces there is alot of players against it so i dont blame him for rating you bad because of it. after all only noobs need truces to win

Maybe you should read again, but this time carefully. As I said already, he had an alliance himself with another player. This was NOT why he rated us down.
Another completely redundant comment from your side?

my opinion is still in my first post, why dont you give the evidence if you know why he rated you badly atm you just say he rated badly because he lost

CMetternich wrote:
A truce is allowed as long it is not a secret one (look at the rules) he has no right to rate us badly. Look at the other game, he complained there too and afterwards gave bad ratings. No truce there, still he rated others (spilseth/ joe theriault) badly.

You're right, a truce like you said is well within the rules, but depending on circumstances, it is also bad sportsmanship. If you truce, you run the risk of a bad rating. You are within your rights to truce, but he is also within his rights to rate you down if he feels it goes against what he believes is fair play.

The more diplomacy there is in a game, the more hard feelings there are afterward. That is an unfortunate but true fact.

Of course truces and alliances are legal, but they still create resentment, and the victims of diplomatic maneouvres are often bitter. I don't think it's ratings abuse.

this report is going absolutely no-where. its just yapping with the same words over and over again lets close this before I get involved in the shouting???

When it comes to ratings abuse, we would need a lot more examples than just 2 or 3, but let's not include games that have been over for years already. Although I can agree with the point you are trying to convey, you guys just wanted to survive the game and did what was needed. Put yourself in the other shoe and we also wouldn't be surprise if this does not go well for you. There will always be a risk when you form a truce with another opponent to weaken another player, don't expect 'high fives' from that player. One of you may eventually win the game but of course, let's not be surprised if the other player didn't take the truce against him positively. Some won't mind and understand but some won't. Try to contact him and settle this between yourselves.

king achilles wrote:When it comes to ratings abuse, we would need a lot more examples than just 2 or 3, but let's not include games that have been over for years already. Although I can agree with the point you are trying to convey, you guys just wanted to survive the game and did what was needed. Put yourself in the other shoe and we also wouldn't be surprise if this does not go well for you. There will always be a risk when you form a truce with another opponent to weaken another player, don't expect 'high fives' from that player. One of you may eventually win the game but of course, let's not be surprised if the other player didn't take the truce against him positively. Some won't mind and understand but some won't. Try to contact him and settle this between yourselves.

I just don't know if I am writing Aramaic or nobody reads my posts.

I contacted him before I opened this thread and I asked him why he gave me this rating. He bluntly told me that -in his opinion- I didn't used my ressources accordingly by attacking him.

For the truce once again: He himself had an alliance with another player in this particular game and in other games as well. He himself suggested it, the other player agreed to that. He is absolutely fine with alliances - as long as he is the profiteer.

But okay, from now on it is clear one can do whatever he wants if he lost a game. Rate them down, calling other players M*****f*****, everything is okay and allowed here, as long as it is just now and then and not in every game.

Great news.

CMetternich wrote:

king achilles wrote:When it comes to ratings abuse, we would need a lot more examples than just 2 or 3, but let's not include games that have been over for years already. Although I can agree with the point you are trying to convey, you guys just wanted to survive the game and did what was needed. Put yourself in the other shoe and we also wouldn't be surprise if this does not go well for you. There will always be a risk when you form a truce with another opponent to weaken another player, don't expect 'high fives' from that player. One of you may eventually win the game but of course, let's not be surprised if the other player didn't take the truce against him positively. Some won't mind and understand but some won't. Try to contact him and settle this between yourselves.

I just don't know if I am writing Aramaic or nobody reads my posts.

I contacted him before I opened this thread and I asked him why he gave me this rating. He bluntly told me that -in his opinion- I didn't used my ressources accordingly by attacking him.

For the truce once again: He himself had an alliance with another player in this particular game and in other games as well. He himself suggested it, the other player agreed to that. He is absolutely fine with alliances - as long as he is the profiteer.

But okay, from now on it is clear one can do whatever he wants if he lost a game. Rate them down, calling other players M*****f*****, everything is okay and allowed here, as long as it is just now and then and not in every game.

Great news.

Guess you didn't quite read his post either. You need at least 5 cases of the abuse happening. Or else we are just going to get a bunch of people in here complaining about 1 bad rating.