Conquer Club

Accused:
NoLeafClover

The accused are suspected of:
Double intentional suiciding, trying to ruin other people's games without gaining any competitive advantage himself.

Game number(s):

Game 16869258
Game 16869257

Comments:
I believe the accused is intentionally throwing himself into me out of pure vindiction, in an attempt to purely screw me over. My suspicion of his vindiction results from a 5-2-5 rating in another game after he employed an ill-considered strategy. By evidence of the Tournament rank he has/had absolutely nothing to gain from his actions. In the following a sequence of the events:

In Game 16869258 I believed I was going to lose until apparently Awoodness attacked NoLeafClover in the last round. This resulted in him commenting in chat

2016-10-06 05:16:54 - Awoodness: gg, your choice blue....

This obviously drives me to think that it had become a somewhat tie between Awoodness and myself as I was close enough 3rd when I still took my turn. In subsequence NoLeafClover drove himself in suicide into me. Here I already suspected ill intent, but as I didn't have any snapshot of after Awoodness' turn and this was a unique event, I let it slide, that is until he did it a second time.

Then in the next game, same tournament(Game 16869257). I clearly gained the victory position in the game as proven with my snapshot.

show: round 20 snapshot right before the accused took his turn

And yet again he suicided into me and gave the game to Awoodness.

Now I already foe'd him and re-adjusted his rating to 1-1-1, and I'm not asking for any ban on him considering how unfortunately common this kind of behaviour is. I would however appreciate it if the accused received a warning. There are many factors that can take away the fun of this website, but this type of behaviour definitely takes the cherry.


Much appreciated,

waauw

Winning position? Deluded. Yellow was winning by a country mile, or do you struggle with the game.

No case, please warn waauw for stupid behaviour

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:Winning position? Deluded. Yellow was winning by a country mile, or do you struggle with the game.

No case, please warn waauw for stupid behaviour

I realize you're another one of Owenshooter's zealouts and therefor desire to emulate him, but you fail miserably at it. The math simply isn't on your side.

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:Winning position? Deluded. Yellow was winning by a country mile, or do you struggle with the game.

No case, please warn waauw for stupid behaviour

So, purely looking at units: Waauw > yellow.

Oh, it's round 20. Round 20 is the round limit, which means he wouldve wone if not for blue's actions.

Winning position? Deluded. Yellow was winning by a country mile, or do you struggle with the game.

No case, whoops please warn waauw WingCmdr Ginkapo for stupid behaviour their impromptu response to a completely legitimate claim

...fixed


In any case - this looks like clear suiciding to me. At least in the game shown here, for sure. Not sure if you need a pattern, but considering its a tournament.. *shrug*

Weve been here before multiple times.

Waauw traps blue in the corner
Blue takes the only option left to him, attacks waauw
Waauw crys like a baby.

Its not even a tourney suicide, that would imply blue had a choice, he didnt, he had no one else to attack.

It was predictable. So sorry, but that wasnt a winning position.

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:Weve been here before multiple times.

Waauw traps blue in the corner
Blue takes the only option left to him, attacks waauw
Waauw crys like a baby.

Its not even a tourney suicide, that would imply blue had a choice, he didnt, he had no one else to attack.

It was predictable. So sorry, but that wasnt a winning position.

But did attacking waauw give blue any chance at all to gain victory?

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:Weve been here before multiple times.

Waauw traps blue in the corner
Blue takes the only option left to him, attacks waauw
Waauw crys like a baby.

Its not even a tourney suicide, that would imply blue had a choice, he didnt, he had no one else to attack.

It was predictable. So sorry, but that wasnt a winning position.

Not attacking is not a choice? The only way for blue to win was to kill 7 green's without losing, then another 4 yellow's, assuming he still hasn't lost anything (not even throwing red into this equation...). It looks like he tried to do that too, at least for the start. but upon realizing it really wasnt possible just decided to gift the win to yellow. It's poor sportsmanship to do that, and as waauw mentioned in the OP, "[...] this was a unique event, I let it slide, that is until he did it a second time.". Doing it once is poor sportsmanship. Doing it twice to the same person on the same day is very suspicious.

If you guys want to play bots then please do so.

People are highly predictable. Risk isnt a game of dice and odds, those are just the tools. Risk is a game of outwitting your opponents.

In this case, it was extremelly obvious that Blue would attack Waauw, after all, why should he not? He had nothing to lose. Its basic phycology.

But sigh, I gave up on believing that people on this site actually knew how to play their opponents hand for them a long time ago. Its very pedestrian here.

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:If you guys want to play bots then please do so.

People are highly predictable. Risk isnt a game of dice and odds, those are just the tools. Risk is a game of outwitting your opponents.

In this case, it was extremelly obvious that Blue would attack Waauw, after all, why should he not? He had nothing to lose. Its basic phycology.

But sigh, I gave up on believing that people on this site actually knew how to play their opponents hand for them a long time ago. Its very pedestrian here.

Blue had nothing to lose, nothing to gain. In that case I say it's suiciding, which is exactly what he is accused of.

Extreme Ways wrote:

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:If you guys want to play bots then please do so.

People are highly predictable. Risk isnt a game of dice and odds, those are just the tools. Risk is a game of outwitting your opponents.

In this case, it was extremelly obvious that Blue would attack Waauw, after all, why should he not? He had nothing to lose. Its basic phycology.

But sigh, I gave up on believing that people on this site actually knew how to play their opponents hand for them a long time ago. Its very pedestrian here.

Blue had nothing to lose, nothing to gain. In that case I say it's suiciding, which is exactly what he is accused of.

Enjoyment? Thats quite a big thing to gain.

We all know that Waauw cant cope with life. I'd be very proud if my actions had started another meltdown in the form of this thread.

So I think I have come to the conclusion that it is impossible to suicide against Waauw as there is so much to gain by attacking him.

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:

Extreme Ways wrote:

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:If you guys want to play bots then please do so.

People are highly predictable. Risk isnt a game of dice and odds, those are just the tools. Risk is a game of outwitting your opponents.

In this case, it was extremelly obvious that Blue would attack Waauw, after all, why should he not? He had nothing to lose. Its basic phycology.

But sigh, I gave up on believing that people on this site actually knew how to play their opponents hand for them a long time ago. Its very pedestrian here.

Blue had nothing to lose, nothing to gain. In that case I say it's suiciding, which is exactly what he is accused of.

Enjoyment? Thats quite a big thing to gain.

We all know that Waauw cant cope with life. I'd be very proud if my actions had started another meltdown in the form of this thread.

So I think I have come to the conclusion that it is impossible to suicide against Waauw as there is so much to gain by attacking him.

You retort to personal attacks now?

I dont think the question is "did he enjoy it?", but rather: "was it suiciding?". I get that you see "enjoyment" as a motive for him attacking, but a murder with a good motive is still a murder. If you suicide and enjoy it, it's still suicide. It's not like suiciding is not suiciding anymore because you had a reason to.

So, case study:
Say we're playing a 6 man FFA escalating game. For example, Game 16879700. At the time of writing it's purple's turn, but you know escalating works so by the time red has to play the board wont change much. Now say red executes the following attacks, for his enjoyment:
Buenos Aires => Lima
Los Angelos => Chicago
Dakar => Nairobi => Johannesburg
Magadan => Yakutsk
Bangkok => Hong Kong
Reykjavik => Montreal.

He ends his turn, receives his card and green finishes him off, because red suicided. But hey, he enjoyed it so no harm done, right?

Suicide - ruin of one's own interests

By definition, you have to have something first in order to lose. Or else it isnt suicide....

Red in your game has a small chance of winning, so throwing it away is by definition suicide.

In Waauw's game, blue had nothing, and after attacking, still had nothing. So by definition that isnt suicide.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

How have I made any personal attacks? Those are statements of facts about Waauw, hopefully it will help him admit to himself that he needs to grow a backbone. I'm being constructive here.

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:

Suicide - ruin of one's own interests

How have I made any personal attacks? Those are statements of facts about Waauw, hopefully it will help him admit to himself that he needs to grow a backbone. I'm being constructive here.

Let me just quote from your other post, the thing I had bolded.

We all know that Waauw cant cope with life

You dont think this is a personal attack? Even if waauw really cant cope with life, it's a personal attack. If you're heavily suicidal IRL and I say that for the sake of "winning" an argument, it's still a personal attack.

Unwritten Rules
Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, holding players hostage, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new recruits and colluding with other players in any way to manipulate the scoring system.

Source: http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Throwing games, aka suiciding, is what happened here. If your "definition" was in a past C&A ruling, link me it and I'll say you are correct in your definition of suicide and that blue didnt suicide, merely threw the game and ruined it

EW, just ignore the guy. He's just a wannabe troll as evidenced by his own words.

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:I'd be very proud if my actions had started another meltdown in the form of this thread.

Extreme Ways wrote:

Unwritten Rules
Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, holding players hostage, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new recruits and colluding with other players in any way to manipulate the scoring system.

Source: http://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules
Throwing games, aka suiciding, is what happened here. If your "definition" was in a past C&A ruling, link me it and I'll say you are correct in your definition of suicide and that blue didnt suicide, merely threw the game and ruined it

So how exactly was the game thrown? Blue went from 4th to 4th by his actions. Nothing was thrown.

Keep this up, its enjoyable.

For now, I don't think this is still not enough solid proof that he was targeting you to make sure you do not win the game. You have managed to arouse suspicions as how you described his last moves in these 2 games you mentioned but there is still room for doubt at this time. This report has been noted.

king achilles wrote:For now, I don't think this is still not enough solid proof that he was targeting you to make sure you do not win the game. You have managed to arouse suspicions as how you described his last moves in these 2 games you mentioned but there is still room for doubt at this time. This report has been noted.

How is it not enough solid proof? The only way to acquire more would be for him to express it himself in chat, which would inherently mean that ruining other people's games through suicide is allowed as long as you keep your mouth shut.

waauw wrote:

king achilles wrote:For now, I don't think this is still not enough solid proof that he was targeting you to make sure you do not win the game. You have managed to arouse suspicions as how you described his last moves in these 2 games you mentioned but there is still room for doubt at this time. This report has been noted.

How is it not enough solid proof? The only way to acquire more would be for him to express it himself in chat, which would inherently mean that ruining other people's games through suicide is allowed as long as you keep your mouth shut.

You must be trolling right now! Did you not ready any of my posts?

WingCmdr Ginkapo wrote:

waauw wrote:

king achilles wrote:For now, I don't think this is still not enough solid proof that he was targeting you to make sure you do not win the game. You have managed to arouse suspicions as how you described his last moves in these 2 games you mentioned but there is still room for doubt at this time. This report has been noted.

How is it not enough solid proof? The only way to acquire more would be for him to express it himself in chat, which would inherently mean that ruining other people's games through suicide is allowed as long as you keep your mouth shut.

You must be trolling right now! Did you not ready any of my posts?

I only read a tad of it and decided the rest wasn't worth a read.

You left the guy no choice, lol.

iAmCaffeine wrote:You left the guy no choice, lol.

How so? It was last round, he couldn't win the game nor could he gain any competitive advantage in the tournament. Any further attack was irrational.

waauw wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:You left the guy no choice, lol.

How so? It was last round, he couldn't win the game nor could he gain any competitive advantage in the tournament. Any further attack was irrational.

That's not true though.

iAmCaffeine wrote:

waauw wrote:

iAmCaffeine wrote:You left the guy no choice, lol.

How so? It was last round, he couldn't win the game nor could he gain any competitive advantage in the tournament. Any further attack was irrational.

That's not true though.

It is.