Conquer Club

These are suspected Secret Aliance

Suspect users: Paws1610 and Barbie

Game number: http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=67643

Comments: Well, the game was going quite normal: Barbie had Scandinavia and Paws had Western Russia. Both of them had a great number of armies at both sides of the border. Quite normal so far. Weird things began when they started using a lot of resources just to attack the other player (RICKYNY) and me in other parts of the map. That´s what the only thing they did: only attackig RICKYNY and me, exactly like a team would be doing. It was PERFECT TEAM WORK except for the fact that it was a standard game. OF course, no alliances or truce had been made public in the board. All their interests seemed to kill Rickyny and me, even if the had to spend much more resources than necessary. For any of them would have been much easier to attack each other than continuing attacking Rickyny or me. The weirdest thing at all was that yesterday Paws left his border completely unexposed but Barbie did not attack either... I mean, I can understand this if you have a declared truce... but if you have not, it is very hard to understand... so the only explanation that occurs to me is an illegal or secret alliance.



Matt2006

I sincerely do not think either of these players has an alliance going on.
Both are fine players with great strategy and know that if they attacked each other right now, it would just be suicide. The game looks fair to me, but there is the ignore list and the feedback options if you feel they deserve it.

AK_iceman wrote:I sincerely do not think either of these players has an alliance going on.
Both are fine players with great strategy and know that if they attacked each other right now, it would just be suicide. The game looks fair to me, but there is the ignore list and the feedback options if you feel they deserve it.

It´s fair you give your opinion but as far as I presume that you have not followed the whole round-routine of the game, you are just giving an opinion based on past facts. If it was just me who thinks that Paws and Barbie have a secreta alliance, OK, I could be suffering a kind of temporary paranoia but the other player in the game thinks exactly the same: very weird things were happening in this game...

Of course, it is my right to use the ignore list but it is also my right to try to clarify a situation with is certainly unclear.

Best Regards

My personal opinion is that Barbie would never play dishonorably - I know you are not looking for opinions....

I have seen play more times than I can recall that did not make sense to me; I have had people pissed at me more times than I can recall cause my play didnt make sense to them....that is the nature of the beast.

The unfortunate part is that even if you are right, the moderators do nothing about it; your ignore option is your only recourse. Good luck-

Hard to determine that barbie is a cheater with 63 positive feedbacks. Perhaps this conspiracy is larger than we are giving it credit for.

I've played with Paws many a time and I KNOW he would not play in such a way, I also do not think that barbie's feedback is a good representation of a cheater.

You say that they have not attacked each others borders, ok maybe that's true, but maybe you should try not to be so hypocritical, because if you look at the logs, you and RICKYNY have not attacked each other even though your borders are undefended, that strikes me as odd as well...

EDIT: Oh and looking further into it, they attacked RICKYNY because he's the strongest player, can you not see that?
Matt2006-65 Armies - 9 Territories
barbie-74 Armies - 12 Territories
paws1610-57 Armies - 7 Territories
RICKYNY-112 Armies - 20 Territories
RICKYNY also holds two continents, have you failed to notice that because you have been awfully focused on attacking barbie...

LOL!! Nice interpretation H...well done.

Haydena wrote:I've played with Paws many a time and I KNOW he would not play in such a way, I also do not think that barbie's feedback is a good representation of a cheater.

You say that they have not attacked each others borders, ok maybe that's true, but maybe you should try not to be so hypocritical, because if you look at the logs, you and RICKYNY have not attacked each other even though your borders are undefended, that strikes me as odd as well...

EDIT: Oh and looking further into it, they attacked RICKYNY because he's the strongest player, can you not see that?
Matt2006-65 Armies - 9 Territories
barbie-74 Armies - 12 Territories
paws1610-57 Armies - 7 Territories
RICKYNY-112 Armies - 20 Territories
RICKYNY also holds two continents, have you failed to notice that because you have been awfully focused on attacking barbie...

How easy is to give a free opinion and not see the whole picture. Of course Rickyny is the strongest now, but when he was the weakest, they continued their alliance and attacking us. Come on, if you haven´t followed the game round by round, your opinion is not more than that: a subjective opinion...

Obviously we can't tell from the current state of the game exactly what has gone on. But you have posted this on a public conference obviously looking for some kind of validation of your theory, and people are going to look at the evidence and draw their own conclusions.

Personally I have played several games with both of them, and found them to both be players of the highest skill and integrity (as evidently have many other members of this community), and don't believe they would ever cheat.

But putting reputation aside for a second, I have looked at the game and can see no evidence of any sort of alliance. As has been pointed out many times already, if you both have a large buildup of troops on one border then it can become against both players' interests to make the first move and you end up with a de facto cease-fire, but this is completely different from an actual alliance.

One thing that annoys me even more than blatant cheating is baseless accusations of cheating, so welcome to another ignore list matt.

I just went over a lot of that game and it seems like matt wasn't contesting rickny for his bonus at all. Barbie was the first to break up rickyny when he was holding a 5 point bonus and matt was off attacking paws...

Matt you let rickyny keep his 5 point bonus, cashed in the turn after he broke up your bonus and used your armies to attack a player with a 2 point bonus.

You should maybe learn how to play a little better before you accuse people of cheating. If anything I would say you were helping rickyny, but rickyny wasn't helping you.

After ricky broke up your bonus he was threatened by barbie and if you would've attacked him or moved troops into position to attack him he would be forced to leave your bonus alone unless he was willing to suffer great losses.

You let rickyny keep his 5 point bonus so paws let barbie keep her 4 point bonus to fight him off. If he didn't then rickyny would've worked his way through scandinavia and broke him up too. He couldn't go after barbie while you we attacking him on every single turn you made either because he was only getting 5 troops per turn.

The reason why it looks the way it does is because you never contested yellow for his 5 point bonus. If you would've made rickyny weak then paws would've done the same to barbie. Instead you decided to attack paws who was getting 5 troops per go and let rickyny who was getting 9 armies per go all go uncontested.

barbie ended up beating down rickyny and you moved into the near east for a bonus. Soon as you left your borders weak barbie broke you up and instead of fighting to get it back you ran scared into africa for an easy bonus. That is when rickyny broke up barbie and by you moving out of the near east so easily you're actually the one who made it easy for barbie to get an easy bonus back.

after that you decided to cash in your cards, break up barbie in the near east and blew your whole set of troops (by the looks of what happened afterwards) then paws tried to take the bonus from you and rickyny ended up with the bonus on his next turn.


After that you cried alliance and the game changed drastically....


granted I never saw troop numbers, but from what I did read from round 1 - 17 it doesn't seem to look like there was any alliance. If anything I would say it was your lack of aggression towards rickyny that made it look like they were playing as a team.

AndrewO wrote:Obviously we can't tell from the current state of the game exactly what has gone on.

So, if you can´t tell, why do you do it, then?

AndrewO wrote:One thing that annoys me even more than blatant cheating is baseless accusations of cheating, so welcome to another ignore list matt.

Oooooohhhh, no, no, no... pleaseeeeeee.... in your ignore list nooooooo.... please... I promise I will behave like a good boy... please, don´t put me in your ignore list... what am I going to do with my life now????



Well, jokes aside, considering how easy judgmental you are, I´d say that it is an honour to be in your ignore list. On this way, I avoid the nuisance to find you somewhere around.

Best Regards

Molacole wrote:I just went over a lot of that game and it seems like matt wasn't contesting rickny for his bonus at all. Barbie was the first to break up rickyny when he was holding a 5 point bonus and matt was off attacking paws...

Matt you let rickyny keep his 5 point bonus, cashed in the turn after he broke up your bonus and used your armies to attack a player with a 2 point bonus.

You should maybe learn how to play a little better before you accuse people of cheating. If anything I would say you were helping rickyny, but rickyny wasn't helping you.

After ricky broke up your bonus he was threatened by barbie and if you would've attacked him or moved troops into position to attack him he would be forced to leave your bonus alone unless he was willing to suffer great losses.

You let rickyny keep his 5 point bonus so paws let barbie keep her 4 point bonus to fight him off. If he didn't then rickyny would've worked his way through scandinavia and broke him up too. He couldn't go after barbie while you we attacking him on every single turn you made either because he was only getting 5 troops per turn.

The reason why it looks the way it does is because you never contested yellow for his 5 point bonus. If you would've made rickyny weak then paws would've done the same to barbie. Instead you decided to attack paws who was getting 5 troops per go and let rickyny who was getting 9 armies per go all go uncontested.

barbie ended up beating down rickyny and you moved into the near east for a bonus. Soon as you left your borders weak barbie broke you up and instead of fighting to get it back you ran scared into africa for an easy bonus. That is when rickyny broke up barbie and by you moving out of the near east so easily you're actually the one who made it easy for barbie to get an easy bonus back.

after that you decided to cash in your cards, break up barbie in the near east and blew your whole set of troops (by the looks of what happened afterwards) then paws tried to take the bonus from you and rickyny ended up with the bonus on his next turn.


After that you cried alliance and the game changed drastically....


granted I never saw troop numbers, but from what I did read from round 1 - 17 it doesn't seem to look like there was any alliance. If anything I would say it was your lack of aggression towards rickyny that made it look like they were playing as a team.

Just the opposite, molacole, just the opposite. I had to stop attacking yellow when I realized that Paws and Barbie were playing Team Game. Till this very moment, I attacked yellow all the time. In fact, he had to abandon The West because I blocked his border in Spain. At this moment, we both (rickyny and I ) realized that something was wrong. Rickyny could be here to explain it... but I will copy what he said during the game...


2006-09-22 22:50:11 - Matt2006: one question: why green and blue have not attacked each other in russia-scandinavia border in all game? just for curiosity...
2006-09-22 22:51:49 - Matt2006: may be there is some important strategic reason to justify it that I cannot understand... will someone give me a clue? Thank u
2006-09-23 05:28:09 - RICKYNY: I also would learn a lot in strategy if someone could explain it to me^^
2006-09-23 05:28:48 - RICKYNY: now, as I am a stupid strategist, I won't attack you for a while matt...
2006-09-23 19:03:55 - RICKYNY: still I understand it's not an alliance but result is the same, you're both against us

2006-09-24 09:43:32 - RICKYNY: reds, arguing is clueless, barbie and ken, oh sorry matt, won't change their behavior^^

2006-09-27 17:58:18 - RICKYNY: ok strange move pows, the good thing is if greens don't attack Arkhangelsk, ther will be little doubt left about your relation...

2006-09-28 16:28:43 - RICKYNY: I'd really like the tone of this chat to lower a little bit. True there is a quasi alliance blues/greens which was undeclared and it would be a good idea to recognise this matter of fact. Ture also that there is a reasonable tactical logic behind this

i have played paws several times now and he is an honest skillful player, he never alliances with anyone and this accusation is ubsurd.

Matt this is from your game log:

round #1

2006-09-11 11:37:17 - Matt2006 attacked Albania from Italy and conquered it from jinntann

#2

2006-09-12 11:40:33 - Matt2006 attacked Hungary from Austria and conquered it from paws1610

#3

2006-09-13 11:22:57 - Matt2006 attacked Tunisia from Libya and conquered it from jinntann
2006-09-13 11:23:15 - Matt2006 attacked Saint Petersburg from Finland and conquered it from barbie

#4

2006-09-14 11:56:02 - Matt2006 attacked Sardinia from Italy and conquered it from jinntann
2006-09-14 11:56:32 - Matt2006 attacked Tunisia from Sardinia and conquered it from jinntann

#5

2006-09-15 14:17:12 - Matt2006 attacked Algeria from Tunisia and conquered it from barbie

#6

2006-09-16 11:56:40 - Matt2006 attacked Morocco from Algeria and conquered it from paws1610

......

#7
2006-09-17 19:17:11 - Matt2006 attacked Egypt from Libya and conquered it from barbie
2006-09-17 19:17:54 - Matt2006 attacked Slovakia from Hungary and conquered it from barbie


2006-09-17 22:12:12 - RICKYNY receives 5 armies for holding The West
2006-09-17 22:12:12 - RICKYNY receives 4 armies for 14 territories
2006-09-17 22:12:59 - RICKYNY deployed 4 armies on Spain
2006-09-17 22:13:05 - RICKYNY deployed 2 armies on Switzerland
2006-09-17 22:13:16 - RICKYNY deployed 1 armies on West Germany
2006-09-17 22:13:24 - RICKYNY deployed 2 armies on Spain
2006-09-17 22:14:13 - RICKYNY attacked Morocco from Spain and conquered it from Matt2006
2006-09-17 22:15:05 - RICKYNY gets a card

#8
2006-09-17 22:50:12 - Matt2006 attacked Bulgaria from Greece and conquered it from paws1610

#9
2006-09-18 14:52:31 - Matt2006 attacked Turkey from Greece and conquered it from barbie

#10
2006-09-18 21:56:24 - Matt2006 attacked Slovakia from Hungary and conquered it from paws1610
barbie broke up rickyny

#11
2006-09-20 00:21:13 - Matt2006 attacked Austria from Croatia and conquered it from paws1610

#12
you finally attack RickyNY...


I'm not quite sure what you meant by "Just the opposite, molacole, just the opposite. I had to stop attacking yellow when I realized that Paws and Barbie were playing Team Game."

Because you didn't attack him for 11 rounds lol

I love it when someone accuses one of the CWC of cheating...

We all turn up (Why the f*ck can't we all turn up and have a game?)

Anyway - I've never played PAWS before but he looks well moody. I've stuck him on my ignore list just based on your single complaint.

Really, sometimes due to the nature of the game a person may CHOOSE not to attack an individual because at that time it is not advantgeous for them. on the other hand the player they CHOOSE not to attack may also not find it reasonable to attack them. This is all basic strategy if you ask me.