Conquer Club

Accused: b00060

Game 19535319

In short, this guy was salty that he couldn't win the game. The winner of the game wins the tournament. To let out his frothing salty flavour, he decided to suicide onto me to stop me from winning the game as well. Therefore also giving the tournament win to someone else.

I was in line to win the game, and therefore the tournament. His move had literally no possibility of benefiting him whatsoever.

There are too many instances where round limits enable vindictive players like this to dictate who wins games and tournaments. I personally have lost a total of three tournaments because of players like this, who had nothing to gain for themselves. It doesn't send a good message to people competing in tournaments that this kind of behaviour is brushed off and allowed to continue. If vindictive plays like this aren't acted on, they'll just start happening more.

He did this for 2 reasons:

1. I pushed south during the game to stop him claiming another bonus and becoming a threat to me winning the game.

2. He's a little, insecure man who couldn't cope with not winning the tournament and acted rashly.

Precedent has been set on this kind of behaviour before: viewtopic.php?f=239&t=215325

looking into that game the way you talk to the member may have had a little bit to do with game play . wishing cancer on someones kids really caff?? then the c bombs too yikes!! not sure if the verbal diarrhea was before or after but can tell your frustrated .

sad part here is ya cant foe and move on. so i suspect when you meet up in the next tournament the spicy banter in game chat above may comeback to bite ya .

what did accused do other then attack the leader in the game ?? maybe explain it better how he took the win away ,, looking in to game sorry if wrong looks like he is playing to win . im not in the game you are but be specific on how he took you out of a win

personally if that was said to me in a game id take the punishment and attack the crap out of you this game and all others we were in.

zeus111

Your reply is stupid for multiple reasons, although I’m not surprised you’re the first to post. I didn’t say I hope his kids get cancer. You also got some other things wrong. Honestly your reading comprehension skills suck.

1. You can check logs to see the order in which things happened.

2. I explained he had literally 0% chance to win the game. It was 100% mine unless someone suicided. Yellow was in 2nd place with no way to overtake me.

3. Blue suicided into me to stop me from winning the game and therefore the tournament. I assume it was for the reasons given in my OP, however you can check chat and game logs to see he’s been in a bad mood for the entire game.

4. Yellow even asked pink not to hit me in the last round because it would be unfair. I’m sure CaronylKluster will be happy to state that I was in line to win that game, and it was impossible for blue to win.

This report will probably get warned at most. However, this has been happening ever since the introduction of round limits. It’s one thing to ruin a casual game, it’s another thing to intentionally prevent someone from winning a tournament with no personal gain for yourself.

It ruins the spirit of the game, makes the tournament prize a joke and has an impact on the tournament scene as a whole. This has happened to me three times now. I’ve already cut down on the number of tournaments I run and play already. The scene itself has been struggling for a long time. Hopefully we can set a precedent here to ensure that doesn’t escalate.

If it is decided here that vindictively preventing others from winning tournaments is acceptable, then who’s to say I can’t start joining tournaments just to suicide on people I don’t like and make sure they don’t win?

he wacked a stack in a round limit game giving yellow the win. ?? is this the issue?? so now as players we cant attack as we see fit ?? in trench games with round limits placing stacks that cant be hit needs to be part of your tactics .

as most 20 round multi player games go the distance its not such a good idea to allow enemies access to troops that can take the game away . how may troops did he hit vs the bonus you would have gained over the few rounds after the attack . meaning place the game changing stack behind a smaller stack to insure your victory , i feel a players right to attack a leader as u stated you were as fair game .

now one can argue it was your self that lost this game due to troop placement caff in trench a stack behind enemy lines cant be touched and in later rounds you must add bonus troop intake vs a stack attack ex u have 75 troops on a border in round 16 protecting a 6 army deploy in the four remain rounds its best to protect troops then a bonus . if he attacked a game changing stack is that not your fault for allowing that to happen ? if troops were placed one behind a border with a small defensive stack no way to take the win from you .sadly your opponent did not play your game and as you put it took your game away , i see it as a bit different .


2020-01-15 12:28:59 - iAmCaffeine: hope you choke on cancer and your kids, if they're unfortunate enough to exist, never say goodbye

my bad i did read it wrong its just him you wish to choke on cancer. im am positive this will come back to bite ya in a future event your both in

zeus111

https://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=19467966 I have to agree with caff personally . He got upset with me when I tapped his stack of either 5 or 8 armies to 1 having 1 loss to myself.

jfm10 wrote:https://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=19467966 I have to agree with caff personally . He got upset with me when I tapped his stack of either 5 or 8 armies to 1 having 1 loss to myself.

2020-01-13 19:28:28 - b00060 played a set of Vila Real, Setúbal, and Barcelona worth 10 troops
2020-01-13 19:28:28 - b00060 got bonus of 2 troops added to Setúbal
2020-01-13 19:28:36 - b00060 deployed 25 troops on Cuenca
2020-01-13 19:28:37 - b00060 assaulted Valencia from Cuenca and conquered it from iAmCaffeine
2020-01-13 19:28:41 - b00060 assaulted Teruel from Cuenca and conquered it from iAmCaffeine
2020-01-13 19:28:47 - b00060 ended the turn and got spoils

round 19 the stack taken should have been behind on huesca with a troop count on the teruel border that would not effect caffs ability to win , he had the troops out for the taking poor troop placement . all he needed to do was keep troop count higher then all but opted to protect a bonus leaving the troops on border vulnerable to attack and the game in jeopardy.

it was round 19 this happened in by that round retreat to protect the troop count was the way to win you cant rely on anything but your own play with a 25 deploy attacking 2 spots cost the game for sure however poor troop placement cost caff the game and event just as much , it was easily avoided to protect the troops taken in the later round .

zeus111 wrote:

jfm10 wrote:https://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=19467966 I have to agree with caff personally . He got upset with me when I tapped his stack of either 5 or 8 armies to 1 having 1 loss to myself.

2020-01-13 19:28:28 - b00060 played a set of Vila Real, Setúbal, and Barcelona worth 10 troops
2020-01-13 19:28:28 - b00060 got bonus of 2 troops added to Setúbal
2020-01-13 19:28:36 - b00060 deployed 25 troops on Cuenca
2020-01-13 19:28:37 - b00060 assaulted Valencia from Cuenca and conquered it from iAmCaffeine
2020-01-13 19:28:41 - b00060 assaulted Teruel from Cuenca and conquered it from iAmCaffeine
2020-01-13 19:28:47 - b00060 ended the turn and got spoils

round 19 the stack taken should have been behind on huesca with a troop count on the teruel border that would not effect caffs ability to win , he had the troops out for the taking poor troop placement . all he needed to do was keep troop count higher then all but opted to protect a bonus leaving the troops on border vulnerable to attack and the game in jeopardy.

it was round 19 this happened in by that round retreat to protect the troop count was the way to win you cant rely on anything but your own play with a 25 deploy attacking 2 spots cost the game for sure however poor troop placement cost caff the game and event just as much , it was easily avoided to protect the troops taken in the later round .

I have no idea why you would quote me with that response as my link goes to my recent game with b00060

u agree with caff is why simple . not saying it didnt suck for him but feel it was his fault for leaving game winning troops vulnerable

Your comments here are useless zeus and have no official capacity, so I'm ignoring them.

b00060 wrote:SO you attack only me in round 18, round 17, round 16, round 15, round 14, round 13, round 12 and I am the ass? f*ck you asshole, you cost me the win, not the other way around you piece of shit!!!!!!

So I attack him in earlier rounds of the game, there is his issue. I played the game better than he did. I feel like he expects me to sit there, stack and do nothing while he picks up more bonuses? Then in the last round, when it was completely impossible for him to win, he suicides into me just to prevent me from winning the game and therefore the tournament.

I remember you, Caff, taking me out in a tournament game when it did not improve your position, but it cost me the win. I ended second and it wasn't you who won the game or the tournament.... The only difference is that I didn't know if you did it out of spite or if you were oblivious to the results of your actions.

Lx

I was the one about to win the game and tournament, not this crying asshole. He literally kept pushing south so I pushed back north. In fact he did nothing but literally hit me every single round in the end instead of pushing on yellow the leader that he could attack and letting me relax. I should file a complaint about you you piece of shit. You take the game from me and then whine that you lost? You have to be fucking kidding me.

Lindax wrote:I remember you, Caff, taking me out in a tournament game when it did not improve your position, but it cost me the win. I ended second and it wasn't you who won the game or the tournament.... The only difference is that I didn't know if you did it out of spite or if you were oblivious to the results of your actions.

Lx

I'm not a spiteful person, a dick yeah but not spiteful. Send me the link.

b00060 wrote:I was the one about to win the game and tournament, not this crying asshole. He literally kept pushing south so I pushed back north. In fact he did nothing but literally hit me every single round in the end instead of pushing on yellow the leader that he could attack and letting me relax. I should file a complaint about you you piece of shit. You take the game from me and then whine that you lost? You have to be fucking kidding me.

So what you're saying is that I played the game as I should have done i.e. stopped you from getting more bonuses and took a comfortable lead for myself, and in the final round it was impossible for you to win so you suicided into me out of spite? Correct?

You hadn't been in a winning position for over half the game. I have no idea how you can claim you were about to win the game and tournament. We can go check the logs and work it all out, and look at how you and green both got petty and hit each other repeatedly. Are you acting like that never happened and didn't affect your chances at winning too? I only then moved south because you beat green, and could've gotten more bonuses and threatened the lead I had. So I did that. It's called a good move, which is why I guess you don't understand it. Then out of pure salty bitchiness you decided to suicide onto me. Big man.

Yellow was never the leader until Round 20, after you suicided on me. I made him the 4th or 5th weakest in the earlier rounds by taking lots of his regions to get both my bonuses. He literally could not win without you acting the way you did.

That's why I stopped playing these types of tournaments, I only play 1v1, it doesnt matter the player, any aggressive movement against any player, results in players getting angry,I understand what caff says, but it's inevitable, I lost games and tournamente that way

[quote="iAmCaffeine"]Your comments here are useless zeus and have no official capacity, so I'm ignoring them.

the only useless thing here is yourself for posting this for poor tactics and an even worse attitude ,you leave troops out and they get smacked then go off on a member with a verbal diarrhea going so far as to wish cancer on him . post on this like a child when clearly you played poorly . looking into the log you attacked him in many rounds he attacks back and call the whambulance.

sorry sport i may not be a official mod m8 but can see poor tactics read the troop count and in round 16 i would have protected my game not a bonus and most certainly would not blame any one for the loss but my self .

ignore the truth all you want facts here are simple you played a piss poor end game left game winning troops vulnerable to attack protecting a plus 6 in round 19 vs playing smart pulling troops out of harms way in later rounds .then piss and moan like a child when your weak ass strategy fails in the second last round of not only costing you the the game but event as well . then post a game to be looked into with these comments in


2020-01-15 12:28:59 - iAmCaffeine: hope you choke on cancer and your kids, if they're unfortunate enough to exist, never say goodbye
2020-01-15 12:33:58 - iAmCaffeine: its not even one game its the whole fucking tournament win
2020-01-15 12:34:08 - iAmCaffeine: just 'cause you're salty about not being able to win yourself?
2020-01-15 12:28:06 - iAmCaffeine: this is why everyone thinks you're a cunt
2020-01-15 12:28:13 - iAmCaffeine: and you've never gotten into any half decent clan
2020-01-15 12:28:29 - iAmCaffeine: just make cunt moves like that which dont benefit you
2020-01-15 12:28:33 - iAmCaffeine: sad little cunt

this one kills me

2020-01-16 06:38:24 - iAmCaffeine: yes dude attacking you during the game is literally what you're supposed to do

yet when you get attacked its a federal case suck it up learn from mistakes and move on, you played 16 rounds great from looks at it but last 4 rounds for sure ya left troops the cost ya this on the front line example pals vasco 28 stack and the two stacks lost in round 19 . if from round 16 ish you stacked off the borders behind out of reach game was yours event was yours in a non fog game you had all the info needed yet chose to protect the bonus ultimately causing your defeat . blame away but if the troops were properly placed this would be a non issue

ill leave you all with this caff wrote

In short, this guy was salty that he couldn't win the game. The winner of the game wins the tournament. To let out his frothing salty flavour, he decided to suicide onto me to stop me from winning the game as well. Therefore also giving the tournament win to someone else.

if we take this comment due to caffs attacking blue could not win the game causing him to be as its put salty now if caffs moves took blues chances from winning in earlier rounds and as he states took yellows chances too how is it he can post on blue / b00060 for attacking the troop leader in round 19 . by this logic attacking anyone in a game is wrong .

unofficial zeus111

"the whambulance"



Zeus made a funny!

Can you post a snapshot of round 18 and 19 Caff ? Otherwise it's tough to judge.

Are people - namely b000 and Zeus - so stupid that they can’t see the difference between the following situations:

1. Attacking players to try to win the game in earlier rounds

2. Suiciding the leader in round 20 even when its impossible for you to win

Zeus you really don’t see the difference?

I’ll post screenshots later.

I'm not convinced the case in your OP and this one are the same. In that case, Confed attacked seemingly at random the leader bcuz they deadbeated and to punish you, which was deemed wrong. He also took actions against someone in that game that were unrelated to the game at hand (he attacked x because of issues in other games)

However in this case, it wasn't a random targeting just to punish you. I believe (could be wrong) similar cases in the past have also happened where two people got into it, and someone suicided into the other to keep the person who ruined the game for them from winning. The statement was something akin to "this is part of diplomacy, don't make enemies that can keep you from winning".

In the confederate case, KA has the following to say:

This still doesn't prohibit people from making attacks to whoever they want to in a game. Most of you have this set of thinking that just because you have the lead in a round limit game, and it's getting in the last round, the win is already assured. We all think that whoever who has no or little chance in winning making an attack on the leader should be punished. This is not always in black & white and we always need to evaluate the situation and take it from there. It is in the nature of the game to get attacked by an opponent. It happens. It's a game.

Just because you were leading the game, doesn't mean its rest assured to be yours.
Honestly not going to spend a ton of time (and don't care the outcome) so people who care more about it can argue, I just don't see them as apples to apples cases. Here b00060 attacks the one not to keep you from winning, but because you're the one he views as the reason he didn't win himself. Not suiciding, just leveraging his remaining troops to keep the person he didn't like in the game from winning.

IMO, in this situation it would be ok (unless he continued to do so in other games as continued punishment that were unrelated to the current game), since he's responding to actions taken in the actual current game.

Well IcePack, if your judgement ends up aligning with that of the C&A Team, then a precedent will be set that playing to stop someone else from winning is acceptable, in favour of playing to win yourself.

The difference with how I played, is my goal was to win the game and therefore the tournament. b00's aim was simply to stop me from winning because he's a sore loser with the mental fortitude of a dead moose.

Snapshots are below.

Round 17:


Round 18:


Round 19:


Round 20:

I'd honestly rather the precedent be set that you can stop someone from winning, especially if that person has such a problem separating an online game and real life that they wish cancer, death and painful emotional trauma on them and their kids.

Kudos though, I don't think I could have such a blatant, emotional and outright offensive outburst, accuse them of cheating at the same time, and then come onto the forums and start calling other people that disagree with you stupid. It says a whole lot about who you are as a person, and to put that on display for everyone to see and judge is quite ballsy.

the snaps of the board show what im saying caff u left the stacks open for attack then 25 deploy on 4 stack 29 took 25 plus 9 sexy dice did ya in man . you have no one to blame but yourself here its real simple to have protected the troops taken taken but you didnt . to say a player cant attack you at this point is just not rational thinking considering the early on slot of attacking you placed on b0060.

if we start saying we cant attack who we feel like just confuses a simple game . if you cant see your mistakes with leaving troops on a front line in a game limit trench setting thats on you , but to then out right cry out when it happens to have rules changed to suit piss poor late round play is as stupid as this case . it was non fog u saw troop count how did u not realize leaving troops open to attack in the late rounds was just not smart m8 . bonus you needed till the rounds the troop count was in your favor move stacks away from attack card if possible for the last possible set and ride the remaining rounds worry free but no you left 25 and 9 and 26 on the front line and that mistake alone cost you this event , if blue didnt hit you yellow was going to asking green to move his stack tells ya that , they couldn't hit them if placed behind simple as that .

does it suck b0060 hit those of coarse it does but its not against any dam rule who ya can and cant attack at any stage of the game . like i said earlier learn from this mistake become a better player but in no way has any rule been broken here well maybe a chat issue on your behalf but as for b0060 decision to attack you is not out side of any current rules site has .

ka words m8 This still doesn't prohibit people from making attacks to whoever they want to in a game

i will give you this b0060 s move 100 percent took the win away but feel the poor troop placement allowing that to happen is on you . as you cant foe and move on cause torneys open to all , i bet you it happens again for the verbal assault so prepare for fargin war feel free to wall me games id love to see that unfold!!


zeus111

lol, zeke wins this thread... - never thought i'd ever say such a thing.

riskllama wrote:lol, zeke wins this thread... - never thought i'd ever say such a thing.

you actually read his posts? that's a fat L. I read like 2 sentences from his last 2 posts.

how I placed my troops is pretty irrelevant. i'm well aware of how i could have played the final rounds differently. although b00060 saying "gg red, well played" after round 17, lead me to believe he wasn't about to suicide just to stop me from winning. he couldn't win from his move. it was pure spite.

the decision here is whether or not it's acceptable to suicide your troops into someone else to prevent them from winning a tournament when it's impossible for you to win. if he suicided me and had a chance to win the game himself in doing so then fair play, but he didn't. big difference.

if the outcome of this report is that b00060's actions are deemed within the rules, then i guarantee my intention in tournament games going forward will be highly susceptible to change if i'm against players i don't like. because if there is no punishment issued here, then we're saying it's okay to play with your goal being to prevent someone else winning, and your goal doesn't have to be playing to win yourself.

i'm not gonna waste more time on "you can attack who you want" or "you hit him earlier but dont like it when he hits you" arguments because you're missing the entire point of my report.

iAmCaffeine wrote:

riskllama wrote:lol, zeke wins this thread... - never thought i'd ever say such a thing.

you actually read his posts? that's a fat L. I read like 2 sentences from his last 2 posts.

how I placed my troops is pretty irrelevant. i'm well aware of how i could have played the final rounds differently. although b00060 saying "gg red, well played" after round 17, lead me to believe he wasn't about to suicide just to stop me from winning. he couldn't win from his move. it was pure spite.

the decision here is whether or not it's acceptable to suicide your troops into someone else to prevent them from winning a tournament when it's impossible for you to win. if he suicided me and had a chance to win the game himself in doing so then fair play, but he didn't. big difference.

if the outcome of this report is that b00060's actions are deemed within the rules, then i guarantee my intention in tournament games going forward will be highly susceptible to change if i'm against players i don't like. because if there is no punishment issued here, then we're saying it's okay to play with your goal being to prevent someone else winning, and your goal doesn't have to be playing to win yourself.

i'm not gonna waste more time on "you can attack who you want" or "you hit him earlier but dont like it when he hits you" arguments because you're missing the entire point of my report.

lets wrap this up . you play a bad late round game lose as a direct result of it and feel we need to change a rule because of it . now you want a players ability to attack whoever they wish whenever they wish to change ?? regardless of a player intentions to limit them from attacking is just wrong, its the games very one draw attacking who ever they wish . suck up the bad play move on cause if a rule is ever put in place prohibiting attacks this forum best get more mods cause the wambulance will be packed i can see it now . i was in the lead and got attacked punish that member !!! as fing if