Conquer Club

Accused:
Awoodness

The accused are suspected of:
Tournament scoreboard manipulation

Game number(s):
Game 21553225

Comments:
Going round 20, I'm contending for 1st place. Then grey decides to make his tribemate a favor and let him run away with the win by taking away 40 troops of mine for no gain of his own (that move placed him 6th, 70 troops away from the lead, so no point in him trimming me like that). Since I finished with 81 troops, I would have been well in reach of the winner, who finished with 122 (I would have had 81+40+4 in bonus)
That gave the warrior65 the win, and pushed me to 5th place in the tournament, while he moved up to 4 (therefore him getting a bronze and me getting nothing)

After my turn round 19:
Before my turn:

This game was freestyle and trench with unlimited forts, if you thought you had enough to win why did you not take your turn earlier (ensuring your full bonus of 11) and move your troops to a safe region. At most silver would only have been able to take 2 troops from you. You would have had 121+11-2=130 so you would have won without having to rely on people not attacking you. You lost due to poor judgement/timing, nothing else.

Scarlet Lady wrote:This game was freestyle and trench with unlimited forts, if you thought you had enough to win why did you not take your turn earlier (ensuring your full bonus of 11) and move your troops to a safe region. At most silver would only have been able to take 2 troops from you. You would have had 121+11-2=130 so you would have won without having to rely on people not attacking you. You lost due to poor judgement/timing, nothing else.

While I would follow this reasoning it doesn’t excuse a « suicide » move to give the game to someone else who is in the same tribe, we crossed that bridge in past and it was deemed against the rule.

This may end up manual point correction at the tribe & individual ranking if C&A team confirm my words above. In the event correction can’t be achieve by webmaster I will get a separate final scoring and award prizes accordingly at the end of the event.

Unless specified differently within a tournament thread and as the tournament handbook states, CC rules applies in all game/tournament.

I’m not trying to be hard on anyone, but if we let chaos happening then such event will be out of control and gaming becoming unpleasant for more than one player.

If someone wants to wait until last second to get full spoils in freestyle games, he better be prepared to expect some retaliation. I wouldn't put troops in harms way if I didn't want them to be attacked. Play smarter dude. One manipulates rules to his favor but gets upset when it's on him, what a hypocrite. Play smarter and quit whining about it.

Awoodness wrote:If someone wants to wait until last second to get full spoils in freestyle games, he better be prepared to expect some retaliation. I wouldn't put troops in harms way if I didn't want them to be attacked. Play smarter dude. One manipulates rules to his favor but gets upset when it's on him, what a hypocrite. Play smarter and quit whining about it.

There's been ample precedent supporting my claim that if you can't win, you can't just decide to play kingmaker, and the time at which I played has nothing to do with it. If you're speaking of me slowplaying our pearl harbor games it has no relevance to this case whatsoever.

Btw scarlet you factored in my base drop of 7 twice so your math is wrong, it would have been much closer than that.

Thanks for all your inputs but I would still take this as Game Throwing since the accused made that assault in the last round that made an impact on who would win the game while he had no chance being the winner. I will repeat, to clarify, if there was a considerable difference and you really had no chance in winning and the situation is like players A > B > C and C attacks A on the last turn of the game, reducing his troops below B, so that B wins, C had no chance of winning as he was already last, it's a classic case of game throwing.

As for any possible tournament ruling, I leave this to the Tournament Organizer to handle this, if any.

Give me a break, the dude is crying all the time, and I did have a chance to win. there are more to these tournaments than just one game. Don't accuse me of game throwing, that's just wrong. I really don't appreciate it. Some dude cries when he gets beat and this is what we are doing? If you don't want people to try to win, don't have a game.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Looks like someone got mad for being reported and decided to give me material for another report
More coming soon

I could have done the same to Clanlord Carl and made sure *pixar* beat him in our edition of this tournament. Though, I firmly believe that would have been the correct move to help my tribal mate in a tribal event, I chose not to as I knew what the precedent was and what the ruling would be. Its a dumb rule, but still a rule.

shoop76 wrote:I could have done the same to Clanlord Carl and made sure *pixar* beat him in our edition of this tournament. Though, I firmly believe that would have been the correct move to help my tribal mate in a tribal event, I chose not to as I knew what the precedent was and what the ruling would be. Its a dumb rule, but still a rule.

I looked at all the games in this particular series and ZaBeast is constantly accusing players of Game Throwing. Awoodness ignored his constant goading but it looks like he'd had enough by the end of this game and gave ZaBeast what he had coming to him (I'd have certainly been tempted to do the same). I think the fact that the winner was on the same tribe had little to do with it, there was nothing in any of the games chats even from ZaBeast to suggest any collusion between the GFG players.

I knew what the precedent was and what the ruling would be. Its a dumb rule, but still a rule.

This may end up manual point correction at the tribe & individual ranking if C&A team confirm my words above. In the event correction can’t be achieve by webmaster I will get a separate final scoring and award prizes accordingly at the end of the event.

We are a new tribe and weren't aware of any precedent, it certainly is not clear in the rules about point correction and I've trawled through other C&A's and can't see where other tribes have been penalized in this way. I don't think the win should be taken from The Warrior, he had no part in this and would likely have won it anyway.

The obvious way to stop all this happening again is to only allow one player per tribe to join each iteration, CC should stop dangling the carrot!

Scarlet Lady wrote:The obvious way to stop all this happening again is to only allow one player per tribe to join each iteration, CC should stop dangling the carrot!

Yep, they really do need to organise these tournaments better. I'm not sure how this particular tournament played out, but instead of having the final 8 people play in the same game, make them all play a series of 1v1/poly games against each of the remaining people. There has to be a way for them to have their cake and eat it.

Not putting clan/tribe people together would be a start of course. I don't get it anyway. If someone from my clan or tribe asked me to do something like that, I'd say no. But it's only wishful thinking to assume that everyone is going to play things fairly.

Shannon Apple wrote: I'm not sure how this particular tournament played out, but instead of having the final 8 people play in the same game, make them all play a series of 1v1/poly games against each of the remaining people.

That would completely miss the point of what tribes are about. Tribes were supposed to be about getting back to competing in real games.

In the real world, you would never play Risk unless you had six people available, or at least five. 1v1/poly games are an abomination that this site has unleashed on the world, and three quarters of what goes on here is dominated by them. Tribes were conceived as a way to get back to competing at playing the real game. Every time a Tribal event degenerates to 1v1/poly shit, the whole point of the existence of Tribes is being missed.

Games should only contain one player from each Tribe.

Dukasaur wrote:

Shannon Apple wrote: I'm not sure how this particular tournament played out, but instead of having the final 8 people play in the same game, make them all play a series of 1v1/poly games against each of the remaining people.

That would completely miss the point of what tribes are about. Tribes were supposed to be about getting back to competing in real games.

In the real world, you would never play Risk unless you had six people available, or at least five. 1v1/poly games are an abomination that this site has unleashed on the world, and three quarters of what goes on here is dominated by them. Tribes were conceived as a way to get back to competing at playing the real game. Every time a Tribal event degenerates to 1v1/poly shit, the whole point of the existence of Tribes is being missed.

Games should only contain one player from each Tribe.

I do agree with the 1 player per tribe, but then you would be forced to run tournaments of less than 16 players as there are not enough tribes around. I don't know if the coding can be done that 2 tribal mates are entered into different games within the same tournament.

Tribes has brought this system with one member per tribe in a single game, in 2 events already, Snakes & Ladders and Tribal Tears. Now we have Tribe Melee started few weeks ago using that thought process.

Bringing this to the Olympics would bring other complaints such as; auto tournament iteration not filling quick enough thus preventing enough renewal to give a chance to many other player to join during each auto tournament schedule.

So while you may win one battle you lose another. Olympics is meant to gather several players disregarding their tribe affiliation, for this particular event the only option would be to remove completely the tribe ranking and only keeping the individual ranking. Not really a fan of removing Tribe ranking…Why? Because here again Player are missing the whole point of Tribe:

“Stand together, fight alone”

It is the results of each individual player that makes a tribe winning…

The only reason we are keeping event with 1v1/Poly is because a current tribe majority wants that…but with the introduction of more new event playing multiplayer we are able to slowly even out the variety of game type throughout the year demonstrating Tribe can have fun beyond 1v1/Poly. This year we will introduce few Team game type to Tribes as well but I said “few”!

Mad777 wrote:

Scarlet Lady wrote:This game was freestyle and trench with unlimited forts, if you thought you had enough to win why did you not take your turn earlier (ensuring your full bonus of 11) and move your troops to a safe region. At most silver would only have been able to take 2 troops from you. You would have had 121+11-2=130 so you would have won without having to rely on people not attacking you. You lost due to poor judgement/timing, nothing else.

While I would follow this reasoning it doesn’t excuse a « suicide » move to give the game to someone else who is in the same tribe, we crossed that bridge in past and it was deemed against the rule.

This may end up manual point correction at the tribe & individual ranking if C&A team confirm my words above. In the event correction can’t be achieve by webmaster I will get a separate final scoring and award prizes accordingly at the end of the event.

Unless specified differently within a tournament thread and as the tournament handbook states, CC rules applies in all game/tournament.

I’m not trying to be hard on anyone, but if we let chaos happening then such event will be out of control and gaming becoming unpleasant for more than one player.

When you do this, you need to be very clear in your wording. If both orange, yellow, red were still to play when grey attacked, I dont think you can reasonably take the win away from warrior. Warrior had ample agency to hit Astana otherwise and with that in mind, yellow and red are close third that can involve themselves if something would happen.

Now that they all already played before grey did, we can calculate whether cyan would have won without the hit from grey so it's justified enough.

also @zabeast I come to the similar-enough math results as SL. In your screenshot I count 114 units. You drop 15, means you have 229. Warrior can only hit you for 3 territories, with an expected loss of 1.53 troops. Assuming that - with all due respect - the players with a solid rating do not behave like assholes, that would have ensured the victory for you. Maybe I miscounted, and the blame isn't on you to not get suicided upon, but I do feel like you couldve put this game to bed by playing that way.

This isn’t the place to debate what tribes are / aren’t. Please only post related to the case & facts

Extreme Ways wrote:also @zabeast I come to the similar-enough math results as SL. In your screenshot I count 114 units. You drop 15, means you have 229. Warrior can only hit you for 3 territories, with an expected loss of 1.53 troops. Assuming that - with all due respect - the players with a solid rating do not behave like assholes, that would have ensured the victory for you. Maybe I miscounted, and the blame isn't on you to not get suicided upon, but I do feel like you couldve put this game to bed by playing that way.

It would have been closer than that because warrior took the neutral 8 in south korea. That doesn't change the game throwing issue since Awood played after him, when I was in the lead and he was the only one who could change that. I had some room to hit warrior since others where some distance behind, but in no way would I have been confortably in the lead (but truth be told, I just played at a convenient time for me) (he had a small lead, would have been something like 134-129 if I counted the troops from the screen right)