The_Samurai-Wamd9060[Warned]TFO

[Kaskavel]

Accused:

wamd9060
The_Samurai




The accused are suspected of:


Conducting Secret Diplomacy




Game number(s):

Game 10786443


Comments: Samurai is an old player. Wamd is a new one. He has finished 119 games. 100 of those games are common with Samurai. About half of them (mainly the first ones) were team games and that's ok. At some point they started playing non team games with Wamd hardly ever playing without his friend. They have about 50 standard games together. I ignore if they have already been reported in the past. I also have not checked logs in those games for similar situations because of the big amount of those games.
In the game mentioned, it occured a very striking teamplay situation. Samurai occupied about 60% of the map quite early and no action was taken against him (both of those facts turns out to be easily explained as it will become obvious soon). I was isolated in Great Kingdom, with no boarders with him. Wamd was blocking my access to him for the whole game and dint take action against him. As events followed, it turned out that he did the same to the fourth remaining player, even after samurai had a certain victory. At some point Wamd's defences were low (10-15), so I passed through to find Samurai. I found no Wamd army bigger than 2, but after passing a little through, I found a stack of 100-150 (do not remember but more than 100) troops of Samurai. Wamd did not have troops next to him, he had all his forces positioned to block me and the other player. I had a bigger stack than Samurai and went in to eliminate it and take a castle. Next round both players (remember, one of them has half of the map, 4 castles, and is almost winning), attacked me and completely wipped out my whole east forces, which almost seemed imposiible to me (must have released each other's hidden stacks or something, they had no stacks boardering me). Then Wamd blocked me and the fourth player again, with big forces. We were unable to pass through and samurai is now cleaning the map. The fourth player also noticed the cheating but moved no further.
For me, it is obvious and I will block those players anyway, no matter what the verdict here, but I have to report such an obvious cheating (my first and I hope last report).

[TheForgivenOne]

Sorry for the delay in this case. I have been excessively busy with Real Life, and should have a verdict by tomorrow.

[TheForgivenOne]

Alright, I was looking through the log when the game was playing, and had my doubts at first.

However, after the fog lifted, I started to agree more and more with you. Pink (Samurai), had a very early chance to eliminate Wamd early in the game. Blue had invaded Wamd's area, and left him with only his Castle. Pink invaded in, taking out blue, but not touching his castle. The next turn as well, Pink even cashed and easily could have killed him, but instead decided to go after blue. After that, Wamd takes his territories back from blue and pink, and proceeds to head in the opposite direction of Samurai. They proceed to expand out, then Green proceeds to take out Wamd's castle and area, leaving him on G'ah and Xeu villages. Pink proceeds to eliminate green from the area, but once again, does nothing to hit Wamd. Pink proceeds to become the strongest threat in the game, and Wamd still proceeds to do nothing about it.

So after reviewing all of this, I am going to hand out Warnings to both The_Samurai and Wamd9060 for Secret Diplomacy.

[The_Samurai]

I would like to provide some insights on the above accusation since there was no intentional secret diplomacy between wamd9060 and myself.
In response to the above game analysis, it is correct that I had an early chance to eliminate wamd following the attack of Blue on the player. Wamd was indeed left with his castle and I did block Blue from having direct access to Wamd’s castle. My strategy was then to push Blue away (he was in a strong position at the time and Wamd was not a risk to me since I could see the exact number of troops he had) since eliminating Wamd would have weakened me and prevented me from resisting blue’s assaults. This strategy paid off and I repeated the same strategy against Green. Since Wamd was still weak and I was receiving much more troops than him, I focused on eliminated Yellow and expanding. In my view, Wamd had no other option than keeping a low profile and stay away from castle areas, which is supposedly why he expanded in the Xeu area. I knew by that time that teal (if I remember correctly) was up north and have had some good fights (and therefore was the next weaker player on the map), and that red and grey were in the West part of the map and were supposedly strong since they had taken part in no fights. After taking possessions of the castles up north, I was receiving over 40 troops per round. Thinking that Wamd9060 could have done anything to preventing me from expanding is unrealistic. I was then in a waiting position where I accumulated troops every round until I was strong enough to weaken all players over one or two rounds. If I had eliminated Wamd when there were 4 players left, it is quite obvious to me that the remaining players (red and grey) would have teamed up against me. By keeping Wamd alive, I was in a position to keep some doubts in red’s and grey’s minds about wamd’s strength at that time.
This is the strategy I adopted and it paid off. There was no secret diplomacy in place. I however take note of the warning received.

[Master Kai]

_____
Kai's Public Service Board
_____
Just providing my input in this case, I know a decision has been made, but I feel this is warranted as I have gotten to know both Fred (The_Samurai) and Laurent (wamd9060).

Accusation: Secrete Diplomacy

"Wamd is a new one." Wamd9060 joined 5 months after the accuser. I don't see how this relates. What may not be understood is that they both joined the same clan, and it would make sense they play a lot of games together. Because wamd9060 chooses not to have as many active games as the accuser, does not give any evidence supporting the accusation.

"Pink (Samurai), had a very early chance to eliminate Wamd early in the game"I looked at this game as well, and while I can how this strategy might cause frustration for other players, I don't see how this is a secrete diplomacy. Just because I have an opportunity to kill someone, its not ESC, so often times I won't kill someone. This is a strategy I wouldn't expect someone whom rarely plays team games in 3k+ games to understand (accuser). So I don't see this strategy being an indicator of a secrete diplomacy. As indicated, when Pink had the "opportunity" to kill Orange, he could have run out of troops not allowing him to finish him off. "Pink even cashed and easily could have killed him, but instead decided to go after blue."Another option to consider is that, blue was right there too, and If orange wasn't posing much of a threat, and blue had another stack potentially heading back behind me where people are often weak, I might switch targets. If the cash is only 10, and I have to go through 10 to kill him, but I have other fronts with players getting larger deploys, has a larger stack, or has spoils that potentially could go behind me where I am weak, it would make sense I leave OJ alone. Using 10 troops for a kill that makes me weak against another player is a logical and rational decision.

"After that, Wamd takes his territories back from blue and pink, and proceeds to head in the opposite direction of Samurai."You also mentioned that wamd9060 did not "go after pink." Well, if I am pink and strong and not worried about being eliminated by wamd9060, then this strategy might cause someone to NOT go after pink, hoping to stay alive. This again is especially advantageous for pink, if blue is building up on another front.

"Pink proceeds to become the strongest threat in the game, and Wamd still proceeds to do nothing about it. " If a player is weak, then they're thinking about survival, and stacking up. Which could explain why wamd9060 did not attack pink. Pink did not attack OJ but still knows OJ is not much of a threat. If I have multiple fronts, and one has blue and another yellow, and they're stronger, again, that sounds like a good move to leave the weak guy alone and go after the stronger people. Rationally this is the best move, and and makes the best logical strategy which many of us have done before.

Fred comment's about that he felt that other people may be strong is a valid argument. It wasn't until Round 11 until red was hit by gray and most of the attacks between him and other players were single attacks. Like in other battle's we don't know how large those stacks were so that may have indicated the size of the stacks.

As I see it, the game chat might provide the best support for a secrete diplomacy, that Orange (the weaker player) was blocking access to pink. I still don't see anything conclusive.

As a disclosure, I am the clan leader of these two players and we have a very strict rule that requires players to not only adhere to the rules, but also not to instigate arguments and "show" any bad sportsmanship.

Final thoughts, TheForgivenOne, thanks for looking into this. Ultimately we need to determine if a secrete diplomacy occurred, and I still cannot see this occurring. Even if there was an "unwritten and independent decision not to attack each other," everyone in that game has played enough games to know that they've participated in such strategy as well. You leave each other alone until it becomes advantageous to start going after one another. Rebel and Warlords are two of the toughest starting positions in that particular game, and leaving someone alive is a valid strategy used by most veterans in multi-player games.

Conclusion: Secret diplomacy cannot be established in this game. As this was the accusation this is the only rule being considered for violation.

Suggestion: Send notification to both The_Samurai and wand9060 reminding them of the rule.

[TheForgivenOne]

If you don't agree with the ruling, send an eTicket to king achilles appealing the decision.

[Master Kai]

I figured I would try to get an explanation, rather than just immediately trying to go over your head. I do not want to start an problem.

I am Just looking for clarification on the rules, as if those reasons provide the base for a rules violation, then I am most likely in violation as well and would rather not get into this predicament.

We respect the process and do not believe anyone is purposely trying to be mean. I figured you might provide some more insight that I may have overlooked, but if you would rather I submit a ticket then I can do that as well.

Thanks for your time.
.mk

[Kaskavel]

Master Kai, I read carefuly what you said, and believe me, I do not accuse someone easily, it is my first report in thousand games in CC.
Maybe what you say is true, maybe not. And there is also a grey area in between. When you play with a friend or clan ally, you naturaly tend not to think straight sometimes. You always tend to keep in mind in the back of your head that "blue is my friend" and this may unconciously lead to unfair play.
I played that game. And I had the constant feeling that I was being cheated, one way or another. Wamd's play was so far away from just being unprecise that I had no option other than reporting. What would you have done if it had occured to you and then you discovered those players have a 100 common games? In best case senario that there is no intentional cheating, I will restrict myself saying that friends and allies should avoid playing flat rate-no spoil games together.