Nashlloyd & Jerry1111 [noted]

[Elijah S]

Accused:

Nashlloyd
jerry1111


The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
Game 4412025
Game 4412048
Game 4412039
Game 4412033



Comments:
In BrotherWolf's "in it to win it" Tournament, in which 4 players are in each game, these two have avoided attacking each other and, so far, one of them has won each of the 3 completed games in our bracket.

The only game still being played is #4412025, in which, after 12 rounds, there have been only 3 times total that one of them has attacked the other.
This prompted me to check into games they've played together and I found that they've been in 151 games together - AS PARTNERS.

I doubt anything will be done about this, but this is among the reasons CC is losing members and only validates that when my membership is up for renewal - I won't be shelling out the fee.

[Teflon Kris]

I concur with everything stated above, these two have made the occassional exchange of an easy territory to give the impression of fair play but their tactics are anything but.

A deal has clearly been struck here - these two are playing singles as if it is doubles. In the current game I have moaned at red for his tactics during this game - clearly the deal has involved green 'taking care' of blue with red 'taking care' of me (yellow)

As Elijah suggests, this kind of behaviour needs to be stamped-out. We are not in a court of law, CC can act as they see fit, which means that total conclusive evidence is not required.

A lack of action on these kind of incidents will result in losing honest members and many members taking the 'if you cant beat em join em' attitude by creating secret alliances of their own.

I previously raised an issue regarding two players playing many singles games together (almost exclusively). The response was that they might be good friends.

Surely CC is about meeting new people. Good friends can pick up a telephone or go onto facebook or MSN or something. Regularly playing together is clearly dodgy - I'm sure the community would back stringent rules about this.

I have a player who sometimes joins my games, he knows I take my turns quickly and prefers the same settings as me. I often feel a bit shabby about this as knowing his tactics gives me an advantage over other players that join. But there is a world of difference between this and deliberately playing with partners, helping each other out and sharing the hollow victories!

[Woodruff]

I would add that nashlloyd has been found BUSTED by this previously, with his "son or father or brother or somesuch".

You might also inform BrotherWolf of your suspicion, given that it is his tournament.

[KoolBak]

Dont know about the specifics in those tourney games (and it seems difficult to interpret with FOG), but I will vouch for nashlloyd and jerry as individuals for what its worth. I will happily defend them to any mods that wish information.

And the previous episode with nashtristen was total bullshit - they ARE father and son and it was cleared legitimately so dont be throwing that crap around trying to support your perceived injustices.

In the thousands of games I have played here I have seen my share of activity that has pissed me off and just recently tried to bust 2 people for what you are saying and their performance was obvious. It didnt happen.......yet I will keep shelling out the dough as I am now smart enough to ONLY play with my friends whether its DODGY or not. lol

[jerry1111]

I'm very offended by this! I have not been teaming up secretly with anyone. I have no control over the drops on a map, so should I have evenly attacked everyone? even if the they are across the map, and weaken my self so that I can be taken out of the game? . In the tournament brother wolf, it is true that I have won 1 game out of three. I play my game to win and I don't care who I beat, it's also true that nashlloyd and I do play a lot of doubles but we also play against each other in individual games, we do not secretly do anything in individual games. This is an individual tournament and that is the way I have played it!! So if that is the way it's going to be that just because you win a game and you have played games as partners in doubles games, your called a cheater. I'm really offended by this and not cheated in anyway!! Again I have no control over the drops in a game or the out come of the rolls of the dice. I have played all my games with honesty and truthfulness.

[Night Strike]

I don't know about this case, nor what the hunters will decide, but making comments that virtually amount to "find these players guilty otherwise I won't be coming back" really just hurt your credibility rather than help your complaint. Just state your complaint without adding in all the things about this destroying the site and what not.

[Woodruff]

[quote="KoolBak"]Dont know about the specifics in those tourney games (and it seems difficult to interpret with FOG), but I will vouch for nashlloyd and jerry as individuals for what its worth. I will happily defend them to any mods that wish information.

And the previous episode with nashtristen was total bullshit - they ARE father and son and it was cleared legitimately so dont be throwing that crap around trying to support your perceived injustices.[quote]

And yet, the "previous episode" I was speaking of was NOT with nashtristen, so I suggest that either you get your information in place or that possibly he's been BUSTED more than once.

[Woodruff]

I'm very offended by this!

In all seriousness, jerry, there is no reason to feel offended. Someone opening a ticket of this nature simply means that they believe there is sufficient evidence for a moderator to take a look at it. It doesn't mean you're guilty and it certainly doesn't mean you're presumed guilty (there are far more CLEARED's than there are BUSTED's).

So just trust them, as they do know what they're doing and they're pretty good at it.

[Elijah S]

I don't know about this case, nor what the hunters will decide, but making comments that virtually amount to "find these players guilty otherwise I won't be coming back" really just hurt your credibility rather than help your complaint. Just state your complaint without adding in all the things about this destroying the site and what not.

I don't think it hurts my credibility in the slightest... AND, it's my purogative to state that I've seen many ways in which dishonest players have ruined the experience for me - and others.
Also, Night Strike - it's not your place to tell me in this thread that, basically, if I'm not a good little boy, and avoid stating that cheating on this site has taken away much of the enjoyment, that my credibility is in question. -Keep the lectures to yourself.
It is what it is - and players that have been doubles partners over 150 times should have the good ethics not to join standard games with each other and definitely not play standard games as if they were a doubles team.
In the time I've been on this site I've made ONE other post regarding what I perceived as a secret alliance and was proven to be wrong. IF this is decided the same I'll gladly apologize to the players in question, as I did in the case before. -But a review of the logs and fact that in all 3 of the completed games they concentrated on me and DJ Teflon, and were the last 2 remaining players in each game is evidence enough for me to have requested this be looked into.
I had no idea that one of the two players I've accused has had a previous bust for the same thing, but below is an except from nashlloyd's prior case:

"nashlloyd and joenash [busted]
Accused: nashlloyd joenash The accused are suspected of: Being Multis and Conducting Secret Diplomacy Game number(s): Game # 2948975 Comments: These two individuals finished first and second in the game, and given the..."

[Woodruff]

I don't know about this case, nor what the hunters will decide, but making comments that virtually amount to "find these players guilty otherwise I won't be coming back" really just hurt your credibility rather than help your complaint. Just state your complaint without adding in all the things about this destroying the site and what not.

I don't think it hurts my credibility in the slightest... AND, it's my purogative to state that I've seen many ways in which dishonest players have ruined the experience for me - and others.
Also, Night Strike - it's not your place to tell me in this thread that, basically, if I'm not a good little boy, and avoid stating that cheating on this site has taken away much of the enjoyment, that my credibility is in question. -Keep the lectures to yourself.

Way to get the moderator on your side...

[pistebasher]

Surely you can't get the moderators on your side - or against you - I'm sure they are totally impartial - aren't they?

[Woodruff]

Surely you can't get the moderators on your side - or against you - I'm sure they are totally impartial - aren't they?

They're human. Do you honestly believe that ANYONE is "totally impartial"? I don't, nor do I expect them to be. I'm certainly not, and my favorite television character of all time is Spock!

There's "hurting your case" and there's "helping your case" and then there's "not affecting your case". I'll leave it to the observer to determine which this individual might be doing with his comments toward Night Strike.

[king achilles]

When a moderator posts something in one of the C&A reports, please do take note that we are all here to help you and not to attack you. They take some time to be there for everyone. If you disagree with what the moderator said, as what Woodruff says, we are also human. NS has a point. We can't have everybody making a report and stating if nothing is done, I will do this or that.....

Going to the issue at hand, excluding the games where nashlloyd and jerry1111 played team matches, they have played 40 non-team games and it appears they play competitively.

In these 4 games that you are referring to, 2 games were won by nashlloyd and one won by jerry1111.

The remaining ongoing game happens to be a fog-of-war type and nashlloyd has already been eliminated.

From Game 4412025, you said that green let red grow and have his own bonus as he should have attacked him. You then checked their game history and saw they played a lot of games as partners before, which triggered the suspicion and this report.

Are there any obvious instances from the other three games mentioned that these two may have suspiciously gave the game to the other? Game History can help indicate the familiarity between players, but that does not necessarily prove they are cheating in their games. Otherwise, we should put a limit on how many games each one of us is allowed to play with one another. Right now, what we have is 1 game (4412025) and then their game history. I think we definitley would need more than this to warrant a block between these two. This is noted for nashlloyd and jerry1111 with a short-lease of getting blocked.

[Teflon Kris]

Strangely enough, once the two players were aware of suspicion they suddenly started playing normally and lost.

Its also interesting that there was a previous case regarding one of these players.

We have a cop film scenario here, the cops know the robbers are guilty but the evidence isn't massive enough for the law system.

Basically, the problem in many of these cases is that in a fog of war game, such players can exchange token territories to give a semblance of attacking each other in the game log. Once the game is completed all that is left is the log. What the players witnessed at different stages of the game is gone. A classic example in this game involved green's tactics with a couple of territories which he had away his main battlefield (in the area red was attacking me in). Rather than leave his 3 in these territories to make life difficult for anyone trying to take over and gain bonuses, he pointlessly attacked larger troops with his 3. Nobody in their right mind would do that, unless they wanted those territories to be easy to take. The game log wont show that. Similarly, the game log for the other games in this series will no doubt be useless. I cannot remember full details of the instances of bizarre tactics, all I can remember is that I was surprised many times (too many games on the go at once).

In the long run it would be handy if more than just the log were available after a game - some kind of snapshot system would be great, the equivalent of cctv. Otherwise the potential for abuse is massive, especially in fog of war games.

I imagine such a system would be heavy on storage however.

At least the existence of the current investigation may have resulted in these players ceasing any surrupticious activity, for the time being at least.

Thank you for looking into the issue.

Lets hope Elijah still has some faith as we dont want to lose honest players.

Another idea, more preventative, might put many players minds at ease: If we had a tool, something like map rank, that shows regular partners and opponents, tournament organisers may be able to head-off many potential issues - I'll post the idea in the relevant forum.

[Elijah S]

To clarify a couple of things...

In the original post I said: "I doubt anything will be done about this, but this is among the reasons CC is losing members and only validates that when my membership is up for renewal - I won't be shelling out the fee."
To which night strike said that this put my "credentials" in question.
Considering the other player in the games (DJ Teflon) agreed to what I considered very valid reasons for posting the complaint, and the fact that one of the players in question has had a previous bust, I think I'm entitled to blow off steam without having a mod respond with an offensive comment.
To label the report as [noted] is what I expected would happen - nothing. It was "noted" when I started the thread.

A friend of mine here in CC has reported several instances of suspected cheating and each time has been told to just place the players on the foe list.
I'm not saying that the mods aren't doing their jobs, CC has a great crew of volunteers who effectively keep this site running and try to improve it, but to put my credentials in question because I state that cheating has taken away a great deal of the enjoyment, serves to benefit nobody.
CC has plenty of room for improvement and, as I see it, eliminating players who skate around the rules in order to gain an unfair advantage should be priority #1.
Priority #2 should maybe be some kind of training for mods on how to address certain issues without alienating members.

[Night Strike]

In defense of the hunters, I'm pretty sure that determining whether or not there is secret diplomacy is one of the hardest things to determine on the site. They have tools to catch multis, but there are no tools to read people's PMs, IMs, or personal conversations. It's hard to prove that 2 or more people are actually cooperating, and being blocked with each other is a fairly harsh punishment to dole out without solid evidence and several complaints.


Also, I'm sorry Elijah if my comment came off as harsh towards you. I just know that it puts all of us moderators, especially the hunters, in a difficult place when we are asked to investigate a situation where a user is convinced of someone breaking the rules but there is a lack of defendable evidence (which I never looked to see if there was or wasn't in this case).

[Teflon Kris]

I'm sure the community at large would be happy to support you guys getting more tools - particularly the ability to check PMs (maybe even recently deleted ones to make this worthwhile) and the ability to see through fog of war would be handy too I would imagine.

I dont envy you, it is a thankless task.

[lancehoch]

I'm sure the community at large would be happy to support you guys getting more tools - particularly the ability to check PMs (maybe even recently deleted ones to make this worthwhile) and the ability to see through fog of war would be handy too I would imagine.

I dont envy you, it is a thankless task.

lack has always said that PMs are personal and private. I do not believe that there would be anywhere near enough community support to change his mind. Fog of war would not be allowed either, lack cannot even see through it (as far as I know). If you all knew that I could see through the fog to bust people, would you ever play a fog game with me?

[delboy01]

I have to say that this accusation looks pretty weak to say the least.

Although the two have played a lot of games together in doubles, trips and quads. It does not mean that they are conducting secret diplomacy.

In the last of the games listed Jerry attacks nash first. In two others they seem to be at each other very early on.

And for two players that are supposed to be in cahoots their singles record when playing together would suggest otherwise.

17 defeats, 6 wins for jerry and 4 for nash.

That's 63% defeats, 22%, and 15% or well below average.

In other SD complaints I have seen figures in the high 80% for the combined wins of the two accused. And some of them were only noted!!