Conquer Cup IV Round 5, Ponez [noted]

[betiko]

Ok I get that you guys don't want to open the pandora box, because if this passes you will have way too many reports accumulating here.
You still need to take the context into consideration. Last round of the semi finals of the only tournament you have t pay for. If you guys aren't protecting the players from this type of behaviours, no one will agree to join and pay. I think for the conquer cup 5 you guys need to write somewhere that "deliberately giving the game to another player" is punishable.

Come on guys, this is a way bigger offense that secret diplomacy or even point dumping imo. This is to me the biggest type of tolerated cheat on this site, it needs to stop.

also, in the only game I've playe vs ponez, he was this type of player:
Game 11093064

basically an assassin game where yellow was about to get killed and this idiot instead of protecting him kills him in the regions away from his assassin to get bonuses and not last one more round. He is basically the type of player that gives the game away when he has/thinks he lost all his chances.

[clangfield]

I would accept that paid-for tournaments may need to be considered separately. However, in regular games, given the lack of a suicide button (debated elsewhere, not here again please), what else is one supposed to do from a hopeless position? Whilst of course one playes generally for the fun of playing, it is about the points; and choosing to lose to a colonel rather than a cook is surely good, sensible, skilled play? As a freemium, given my games limit, it's in my best interest to finish a losing game asap and move on to the next one: so maybe I take out some neutrals so I can be eliminated more easily, rather than attacking the game leader. Is that "throwing a game"? What's the difference between attacking player A and in so doing help player B, and attacking player B and thereby helping player A?
What about when someone insults you, is it wrong to attack them to ensure that they don't win? Are you really expecting everyone to "turn the other cheek"? This is a warfare-based game, after all...

[betiko]

I would accept that paid-for tournaments may need to be considered separately. However, in regular games, given the lack of a suicide button (debated elsewhere, not here again please), what else is one supposed to do from a hopeless position? Whilst of course one playes generally for the fun of playing, it is about the points; and choosing to lose to a colonel rather than a cook is surely good, sensible, skilled play? As a freemium, given my games limit, it's in my best interest to finish a losing game asap and move on to the next one: so maybe I take out some neutrals so I can be eliminated more easily, rather than attacking the game leader. Is that "throwing a game"? What's the difference between attacking player A and in so doing help player B, and attacking player B and thereby helping player A?
What about when someone insults you, is it wrong to attack them to ensure that they don't win? Are you really expecting everyone to "turn the other cheek"? This is a warfare-based game, after all...

my problem with the current situation, is that yellow (ponez) was the first to play the last round. His best interest was to not attack anyone and have the highest troop count possible; let the other 3 chew up on each other, and who knows, with a bit of luck win if the others had bad dice when the other 3 evened up the troop count.
Anyway, this was the last round, so your point doesn't stand. no one had insulted that player or anything before, he just needed to start and end turn, this game wouldn't ve been of his concern anymore if you're talking about a "resign" button.

[Metsfanmax]

You still need to take the context into consideration. Last round of the semi finals of the only tournament you have t pay for. If you guys aren't protecting the players from this type of behaviours, no one will agree to join and pay. I think for the conquer cup 5 you guys need to write somewhere that "deliberately giving the game to another player" is punishable.

Just like for other tournaments, this is simply not a matter for the C&A forum. We're no longer discussing whether the action was against site rules, we're discussing whether there should be some repercussions in the tournament structure itself. As we've seen in clans and tournaments, sometimes the organizers and directors set rules above and beyond the site rules for receiving awards in the event. But then you need to bring this discussion up in the appropriate venue.

[jghost7]

You still need to take the context into consideration. Last round of the semi finals of the only tournament you have t pay for. If you guys aren't protecting the players from this type of behaviours, no one will agree to join and pay. I think for the conquer cup 5 you guys need to write somewhere that "deliberately giving the game to another player" is punishable.

Just like for other tournaments, this is simply not a matter for the C&A forum. We're no longer discussing whether the action was against site rules, we're discussing whether there should be some repercussions in the tournament structure itself. As we've seen in clans and tournaments, sometimes the organizers and directors set rules above and beyond the site rules for receiving awards in the event. But then you need to bring this discussion up in the appropriate venue.

Actually, Game Throwing is listed under Major infractions, and although suiciding is not specifically listed, it has also been ruled upon as an infraction in c&a as well.

IMO, these should be removed from the rules altogether as they infringe on a players right to play the game as they see fit. Still, they remain and are only enforced irregularly.

Thanks,

J

[eddie2]

ok one case is this it was only cleared because it was a player doing it to win a tourney from what i remember. this is the case here it is a tourney....

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=138479&hilit=game+throwing+tourney&start=15

night strike has said it himself in his verdict of the case... and this is a tourney.

The site rule regarding throwing games is in place to keep people from tossing points to other players or for retaliations for actions in that game or other games.

In tournaments, the ultimate goal is to win the tournament, so if that means a player settles for not winning a particular game in order to win the entire tournament, that is perfectly acceptable. This case is where a player is competing in a particular manner to help himself win, which is allowed. If someone else were to suicide into players to purposefully give the tournament to a different person, that would not be allowed.

brandoncfi is cleared of any tournament wrong doing and should be cleared by the hunters as well.

read what is in the red and tell me that the player acussed did not toss the game to another player taking himself out of the running.

then this from evil semp when he finally closed the case...

I am not convinced that brandoncfi threw the game. If brandoncfi had eliminated murphy would we even be discussing this?

If I thought that brandoncfi didn't have a chance to win the game I could agree with this report, but like I said I have not been convinced.

Brandoncfi is .

well this player could not win the game and threw it to another player...

[betiko]

well for example I've been in a tournament with 6 players per board and 3 games per round (official easter tournament this year) and I see nothing wrong in "throwing" a game in that case because it's all about the ranking on the 3 games put together, and if you need to kick the shit out of a certain player so you take his spot for the next round even if it gets both eliminated on the given game, you are not doing anything wrong (that's what I understood about your post eddie).

[eddie2]

well for example I've been in a tournament with 6 players per board and 3 games per round (official easter tournament this year) and I see nothing wrong in "throwing" a game in that case because it's all about the ranking on the 3 games put together, and if you need to kick the shit out of a certain player so you take his spot for the next round even if it gets both eliminated on the given game, you are not doing anything wrong (that's what I understood about your post eddie).

ah you missed the point the player in this case had lost the game and suicided into 2 players taking them out of the game which night strike has said would not be allowed in a tourney... the case i used was a correct verdict because he done it to win the tourney where as this player in this case did not.

so there has to be some form of compensation to the players eliminated through his suicide throwing of game to highest rank.. i can understand them not wanting to issue 2 free passes but can they not at least do a rematch on 3 player setting. 20 round limit would only delay it by about a week.

[chapcrap]

See this: viewtopic.php?f=89&t=183844&start=0

[Chariot of Fire]

I've looked at the game and I fail to see where yellow actually 'threw' the game in blue's favour. He attacked red & green but not blue (and green was by far the biggest troop holder). By the time blue's turn came around she was lying 3rd in total troop count. The deciding factor was blue holding a 3 card set which allowed her to finish with more troops than either red or green (if it wasn't for the set she'd have finished 3rd).

Last turn in a game with a round limit, what do you do.....resign yourself to not winning at all, or attack the players with the most troops and hope that something might happen in your favour in the 3 turns (by others) that follow?

Agree yellow's move may not have been the smartest, but there was nothing malicious or underhand in it. The odds against blue holding a 3 card set were 67% - a bet that any rational person would take.

Part of the risk of joining a tourney such as this is you'll end up in games with players who don't always make the right moves. What about the countless other games that have gone before where someone tried a long-odds sweep and failed? Do all the losers in those games also get a free pass for the next tourney? No, of course not.

[nvanputten]

what do you do.....resign yourself to not winning at all, or attack the players with the most troops and hope that something might happen in your favour in the 3 turns (by others) that follow?

Both Red and I turned in sets that turn as well. Which meant that on Ponez's turn, blue was in first and he attacked the 2nd and 3rd placed players. If he had not done so, Blue would not have won- the set would have been irrelevant.

[Chariot of Fire]

Yep, understood (re troop count and lead) although you were holding 5 cards and had a definite trade so would be the guaranteed troop leader during R20. He wasn't to know red & blue held 3 card sets. As I say, tricky one, but on looking at it I just think he played more through carelessness than with any malice or deliberate attempt to let the highest rank win.