Secret Alliance, Rever & Thatguy99[warned]es

by **gaunt773** on Sun Jun 20, 2010 1:39 pm

Accused:
Revner
thatguy99

The accused are suspected of:
Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):
Game 7145912

Comments:
take a look at the game log and board... they have spend their past 3 turns focusing on me. no fair and no fun!

by **eddie2** on Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:36 pm

this is a open and shut case all of thatguy99 games are with him could maybe be a multi but i think more a friend or family member.

by **gaunt773** on Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:08 am

yeah, i will not be taking any more turns in that game... NO FUN

by **eddie2** on Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:18 am

still take your turns cause that is a rule break intentional d/beating

by **gaunt773** on Mon Jun 21, 2010 12:40 pm

okay.... sucks though, because now i have zero chance to actually win now, to no fault of my own

by **gaunt773** on Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:32 pm

we are playing real time now and they are CLEARLY teaming up on me, with focus on Thatguy99 to win.

i just examined the log again and these guys take their turns usually within minutes of each other and even missed a turn on the same day!

this game was no fair from the start... what does it take to have this game cancelled?

by **Archadias** on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:15 am

I'd also like to report those two as creating a secret alliance in game number Game 7185973. For three turns each of them refused to break each others bonus. they were right next to each other.

by **Revner** on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:29 am

We work on the same street, so we know each other, yes. I got him into this game. We have had no secret alliances, and if we ganged up on someone it was either coincidental or seperate strategy. Of course we play a lot of the same games, but if we chose to play with each other instead of against, we would play Doubles. We do not intend to make the game not fun for anyone, and apologize if that happened.

by **Archadias** on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:31 am

Also, from the game log it says:

2010-06-22 09:18:51 - Revner: We were not. We were considering a ceasefire, but had not actually planned anything, and if we had, we wouldve said so.

Stating they were talking S&T outside of the game.

I don't think anymore proof is needed.

by **Revner** on Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:40 am

Well, then, I'm sorry for not completely understanding the rules. I am pretty new. I was under the impression that it was an actual decision to make a treaty, and one was not made outside of the game. And as I said in the game, if we HAD decided anything, we would have announced it.

by **DJPatrick** on Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:23 am

Sorry Revner even proposing a treaty/truce/whatever is diplomacy...doing it without posting your discussions IS secret diplomacy...the fact that you work on the same street makes it plausible but does not excuse it...the rules are all on the site somewhere so not knowing them is not an excuse...slap on the wrist with a wet fish coming your way...

by **Darwins_Bane** on Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:36 am

CC Rules wrote:Rule #2: No secret diplomacy

Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in English or in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating assaults. Secret diplomacy can be hard to prove, but if you suspect it you should leave the players in question appropriate ratings. If you feel certain about players engaging in secret diplomacy consider reporting them in the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum by posting a new topic.

This means that even thinking about it if not to yourself isn't very fair. if I can talk to you outside the game, even if only to figure out that it isn't tactically advantageous to make an alliance, then i know at least that much, which is unfair because it's knowledge no one else has even a chance of having.

by **Revner** on Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:21 am

Well, we will certainly be more careful from here on out, but I can't believe that you're apparently not allowed to play against friends. If it's really competitive, like a Tourny, I can understand it, but we weren't working together to secure victory, nor where we purposefully ganging up on people so it would be a 1v1 match, because if that's what we wanted we would play a 1v1, which we have. I don't know, I just don't understand it.

Regardless, like I said, we will make sure to keep any discussion reflected in the game chat from here on out.

by **eddie2** on Wed Jun 23, 2010 2:40 pm

Revner wrote:Well, we will certainly be more careful from here on out, but I can't believe that you're apparently not allowed to play against friends. If it's really competitive, like a Tourny, I can understand it, but we weren't working together to secure victory, nor where we purposefully ganging up on people so it would be a 1v1 match, because if that's what we wanted we would play a 1v1, which we have. I don't know, I just don't understand it.

Regardless, like I said, we will make sure to keep any discussion reflected in the game chat from here on out.

lollolololololololollolol

i'm starting to think multi on a buisness server