Briatwork and sideshowrob8 [noted]

by **bucs4846** on Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:47 pm

Accused:

Briatwork
sideshowrob8

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):

Game 4356256

Comments: I have warned several times stating the policies on diplomacy and they fail to aknowledge or change actions

by **Briatwork** on Tue Mar 10, 2009 5:39 pm

Please check me for common patterns of cheating. You will clearly not find any. You will however find that bucs4846 had an opportunity to take out luvlee_blonde in this Terminator setting which would have given him points, but elected to attack me instead. I do not accuse him for cheating in return, but I do accuse him for poor game play and complaining. I would like to report bucs4846 for being a sore loser and making his unneccessary comment below.

by **king sam** on Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:10 am

These 2 have played 35 games together, both on teams, against each other in teams, and all settings and styles you can think of.

This will be an interesting case that will take time to research. You will need to be patient with the hunters on this one, unless its an obvious multi.

I'll provide my insight later.

Best of Luck
King Sam

by **Briatwork** on Wed Mar 11, 2009 8:22 am

Hi King Sam,

Please note that in this game, bucs4846 complained after I attacked him from Mexico, subsequently taking over his Australia. At that point, I either could've attacked sideshowrob or bucs4846 but elected bucs4846 since he had accumulated a substantial army next to Mexico, where sideshowrob appeared to be less of a threat.

In my attack, I successfully took out his large army in Hawaii and Australia entirely, which proved to be the correct move on my part. I was also able to have a army large enough to prevent sideshowrob from an easy attack to my North America.

Yes, I've played with sideshowrob on many occasions, leading me to know his style, which is another reason I made this move. My style is always to attack the person that posts the greatest immediate threat to me. In this case, it was clearly bucs4846.

If you also note on the transcript, you will eventually find that bucs4846 forgot that this was a terminator game. In addition to the reasons above, I focused on bucs4846 because I wanted to take him out and take the points.

Bucs4846's single initial complaint in the beginning of the game was unjustified and annoying, but this forum post is just unneccessary and unwarranted. You'll have him to thank for wasting your time.

by **Darwins_Bane** on Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:40 pm

This thread seems rather confusing so far....to clear up some of this...sideshowrob8 and Briatwork have played 35 games together (out of 66 that Briatwork has played). The other accusation in the game of yellow and the OP for secret diplomacy would be harder to prove as that is the only game they have played together. Many of the games between briat and sideshowrob have also been private games. Thats just to help clear this up a little.

by **king achilles** on Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:15 am

If we are going to base this according to how many games they have played alone, that is going for a long shot. I have checked Briatwork and sideshowrob8 and they are not multi accounts with each other. We would need more than one game of strong evidence of malicious plays involving the same players to warrant a block.

by **sideshowrob8** on Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:03 am

The moderator(s) are definitely welcome to review this game and any of our other games. I can assure you that there has been no unfair game play. Just to note that during this game, I did stop Briatwork from getting his North American bonus. I know I could have continued my attacks on him, however, I know it would not have gotten me anywhere as Briatwork was pretty strong himself and pink was getting stronger and stronger as well. Any chance of me winning or at least eliminating one player (as it is a terminator game) I would need to take out one of the weaker opponents, which I did.