spez0010 [cleared] BG

by **CMetternich** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:57 am

Accused:

spez0010

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number(s):

Game 12239573

Comments:

Both yellow (inchul64) and me suspect that this player has some sort of secret agreement with the blue player (mixalis), as he never attacked blue. This is hardly understandable, as they both shared a common border and blue was the leader through the last rounds of the game - but even then he continued to attack me (and yellow) and ignored the option to attack blue. I should add that I checked his ratings and he was more than once accused of "irrational behaviour".

by **stumeister69** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:40 am

If there was secret diplomacy there needs to be two People for this in your accusation (your only accusing Spez)
secondly bring some proof instead of one game assumptions othewise what can mods do?
Also a quick look and you would have found this is the only game they have ever played together
Foe move on.

by **Just_essence** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:28 am

Hunches can be right sometimes. It's better to report a suspicion than to not.

by **inchul64** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 1:43 pm

I absoluteley agree that pink (spez0010) and blue (mixalis) were colluding or are the same person.

Pink only attacked blue once and that was at the very beginning of the game. He took one region of blue. But after that, pink never attacked blue again. Unfortunately I didn't look to see if blue attacked pink or not.

Pink's game play was to conserve his armies for most of the game. I would accept his play but he would attack red and me (yellow) irrationally. If he was worried about troop count, he should have sometimes attacked blue because blue often had the most troops. But instead, he's coming after me or red which only reduces his troop count and ours which helps blue.

Their strategy (pink and blue) would have worked if it wasn't discovered and red and I reaIized that the only way we had a chance to win was to work together at the end. Red bordered pink's border early on so he was affected by pink early on. I came to red's border around the middle of the game. My experience with pink was that he would make sure to reduce my bonus but did nothing to reduce blue's bonus which had the chance to do every turn.

In my opinion, you couldn't find better collusion or a double player.

Inchul64

by **inchul64** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:05 pm

stumeister69 wrote:Why waste people time with these stupid accusations?
If there was secret diplomacy there needs to be two People for this in your accusation (your only accusing Spez)

secondly bring some proof instead of one game assumptions as it just waste people time looking.

Also a quick 30 seconds of your time and you would have found this is the only game they have ever played together
the point of this report is? what do you aim for this? Even if it was true all he gets is a Warning (Which it is not)

Foe move on stop letting these silly reports take over forums!

So are you saying we shouldn't waste our time reporting people who look like they've committed their first offensive because they're only getting a warning. By your logic, no one would be warned or kicked out.

When I spend so much time in a game, I'd like to know I have a fair chance to win it. Cheaters should be aggressively kicked out. I appreciate it if someone resports a serious case of cheating and hopefully others and the game administrators will appreciate those who take the time to make a cheating report.

Inchul64

by **inchul64** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:18 pm

stumeister69 wrote:Why waste people time with these stupid accusations?
If there was secret diplomacy there needs to be two People for this in your accusation (your only accusing Spez)

secondly bring some proof instead of one game assumptions as it just waste people time looking.

Also a quick 30 seconds of your time and you would have found this is the only game they have ever played together
the point of this report is? what do you aim for this? Even if it was true all he gets is a Warning (Which it is not)

Foe move on stop letting these silly reports take over forums!

Also, I'd like to say that if you look through the full game, you would totally understgand why an allegation of cheating was made. If you're going to make a judgment, don't take a few seconds and say our allegation is false. Every cheater in this game started with their first attempt to cheat, But most of the time I am guessing they're not caught when they first start. They take too many risks and a pattern evolves. We probably wouldn't have caught the cheating in this game if it wasn't blatantly obvious.

I'm not sure if you're an administrator of the cheating forum, but if not why are you wasting your time here? You say we're wasting your time, then you must be an administrator since it wouldn't be your responsibility otherwise.

by **spiesr** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 3:41 pm

Just_essence wrote:Hunches can be right sometimes. It's better to report a suspicion than to not.

When you are reporting someone for multiple accounts sure, as there are actually ways the Abuse Team can check for that. For secret diplomacy however they can't see anything more than you can. So unless you can somehow prove your accusations they can't do much more.

by **Just_essence** on Sat Feb 16, 2013 5:50 pm

True. The only exception is if you reported an attempt by whoever you accused to conduct secret diplomacy with you via PM, which means you have a PM the mods can't view unless reported.