pg family guy[Busted]e84

by **afroaction** on Sat Nov 12, 2011 6:19 pm

<DELETE ME>
PLACE THE NAME OF THE ACCUSED IN THE SUBJECT LINE!!!

Replace or delete any xxxxxxx with the appropriate information.
Delete any accusations or entries which do not apply.

You can upload image attachments to your post by using the 'Upload Attachment' feature below [Preview] and [Submit] buttons.

Be sure before you accuse someone!
</DELETE ME>

Accused:

pg family guy
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx

The accused are suspected of:

Being Multis
Conducting Secret Diplomacy
Severe PM Abuse
Other: <Explanation>

Game number(s):

Game 10077613
[game]xxxxxxx[/game]
[game]xxxxxxx[/game]
[game]xxxxxxx[/game]

Comments:this guy is playing a perfect American Civil war game for a ? and 4 games under his belt. I could be wrong but i would appreciate you guys take a look. thx

by **Symmetry** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:46 am

Perhaps suspicious, but he might just be a smart guy who's played risk before. You might want to edit the report. I'm guessing you only wanted to report him as a multi.

by **afroaction** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 2:56 pm

Symmetry wrote:Perhaps suspicious, but he might just be a smart guy who's played risk before. You might want to edit the report. I'm guessing you only wanted to report him as a multi.

What's to edit? If you're posting shit just to post stuff, stop.

by **Gillipig** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 3:18 pm

afroaction wrote:Accused:
pg family guy

The accused are suspected of:
Being Multis

Game number:
Game 10077613

Comments:
this guy is playing a perfect American Civil war game for a ? and 4 games under his belt. I could be wrong but i would appreciate you guys take a look. thx

This is how your post should look like. Symmetry wasn't just posting shit.

by **Bones2484** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:02 pm

So have we all just resorted to making C&A reports against people who are beating us with absolutely no evidence to back up the case?

Good if he happens to be a multi... but really?

by **Symmetry** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 9:02 pm

Also might be worth pointing out that at the time of this (as in my) post they're still only on round three. So maybe a bit early to say that he's playing unusually well, let alone a perfect game. PG has only played two turns (difficult to say how many turns he'd taken at the time of the complaint, but certainly two or less).

by **Gold Knight** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 9:10 pm

Symmetry wrote:Also might be worth pointing out that at the time of this (as in my) post they're still only on round three. So maybe a bit early to say that he's playing unusually well, let alone a perfect game. PG has only played two turns (difficult to say how many turns he'd taken at the time of the complaint, but certainly two or less).

Agreed: a 1v1 unlimited game, perhaps the most luck-based settings you could throw out there minus flat rate spoils on a not-so complicated map. He could be a multi, not sure if this game warrants a C&A case alone though.

by **Symmetry** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 9:33 pm

Gold Knight wrote:
Symmetry wrote:Also might be worth pointing out that at the time of this (as in my) post they're still only on round three. So maybe a bit early to say that he's playing unusually well, let alone a perfect game. PG has only played two turns (difficult to say how many turns he'd taken at the time of the complaint, but certainly two or less).

Agreed: a 1v1 unlimited game, perhaps the most luck-based settings you could throw out there minus flat rate spoils on a not-so complicated map. He could be a multi, not sure if this game warrants a C&A case alone though.

Pretty much, and as a final thing- this was automatic deployment, and not manual, so there's luck there too. I can't see much of a reason to report the guy beyond that he played a couple of turns (at most) well.

by **afroaction** on Sun Nov 13, 2011 9:43 pm

Symmetry wrote:Also might be worth pointing out that at the time of this (as in my) post they're still only on round three. So maybe a bit early to say that he's playing unusually well, let alone a perfect game. PG has only played two turns (difficult to say how many turns he'd taken at the time of the complaint, but certainly two or less).

Once you've played that map over a thousand times like i have then you can comment, someone like him, 4 games under his belt, first time on that map played it perfect the first turn. Like i said, i could be wrong just asked to check him out. But in my experience, when newbies play like that they're 90% multis, the other 10% are just plain lucky.

And this bullshit argument that "I've played Risk the board game" and that makes me an excellent CC player just doesn't cut the mustard. Yes, playing the board game gives you a slight edge, knowing the basics, but it's not like playing more complicated maps that we have here on CC.

Read the log, it took him less then 2 to 3 minutes to set himself perfect up for the next turn and did not deploy his men in any wrong manner where he could not attack me, sorry but that's a little to good, and made me suspicious.