Cleared Delf violating fog of war [tg]

[waauw]

You can photoshop snapshots. To post them into chat, you have to download them and turn them into url's readable by everyone.
.

This isn't true. See Game 16322278
I post a snap of round 5, everyone can see it. I didn't have to download it anywhere, I put my snap in the game chat that's it.

So it is possible to put a real snap in the game chat, and that one you can't photoshop.

Huh? How did you do that? I've never seen anyone do that before.

[Donelladan]

I discovered it by mistake orginally
When you click on snap, if you click 2-3 times in a row on the snap button, then the snap "code" appears in your typing chat box. Then unclick show teammate only, and click send.

[waauw]

I discovered it by mistake orginally
When you click on snap, if you click 2-3 times in a row on the snap button, then the snap "code" appears in your typing chat box. Then unclick show teammate only, and click send.

Oooooooh, now this is going to be fun
btw, why did you click 2-3 times in a row anyway?

[Donelladan]

Some lag probably, the snap didn't appear so I clicked again.

[GoranZ]

Would it not come under the not playing the game it is meant to be played. And making the site less enjoyable for others.

Ignoring the fact that those arent rules.

Lets look at how Fog of War "should" played.

1. Your troops should be spread out in such a way that no single player knows how strong you are.
2. You should take territories and continents in such a way that no single player knows how strong you are.
3. You should use the log and targetted attacks to gain as much information about your opponents as possible.

Now posting a screenshot.

- No single player should know your strengths, so posting a screenshot should not majorly affect you, but heavily disadvantage the player posting.

You lot are just overreacting because you havent seen it before and are acting in panic mode. The reality is its not normal because it isnt sensible player.

If that 450 stack is the only stack purple has, then he has failed point 1 of how to play fog of war and should be punished accordingly (according to Eddie anyway). I have far greater complaint with bad play than innovative play.

What are you talking about... the game is Trench and Unlimited reinforcements. Having one large stack when you need it provides good survival chances, and huge attacker advantage. The bigger the stack the bigger the advantage. Your 1 and 2 are useless in this game, and totally wrong.
3 is essential tho.

[BrutalBob]

I would disagree. This is 100% against the rules. Snaps are meant for private or team use and should not be spread in chat or otherwise. In my opinion this is going to far..

I agree with that.
But I don't think there is an official rule at the moment about it.

I think you're right. Time for precedent to be set.

Agree. I think this could almost be an oversight, the rules having been written before Fog was introduced.

Not everything has a written rule, but that doesn't mean it isn't illegal.

Actually you will notice that even the "unwritten rules" are in fact written...

https://www.conquerclub.com/public.php?mode=rules

[TeeGee]

After going through similar reports I do not see a similar case to this one. We will discuss this as a group. Please be patient

[TheForgivenOne]

Wing cannt remember the exact wording of the rule. But it is a rule. Posting a screen shot is abusing the game engine for how the game is played. It is bad enough chatting it. But screen shot is 2 far. Also there is a rule about making the site less enjoyable for others you will be removed (chat rule in chat guidelines) so posting a screen shot has made is less enjoyable for people who play fog. If you dont want fog dont join games with fog and ruin it for players who do.

You're taking the "Make the site less enjoyable for others" wording too far. Granted, it could use some tweaking, but that's not the original use of it. People will start using it for almost anything if you try and put it under this.

The only thing I could see coming from this, is it could be put under as a Minor Infraction. It's more annoying then " intentionally hurtful to a user, group of users, or the community in general."

[owenshooter]

Wing cannt remember the exact wording of the rule. But it is a rule. Posting a screen shot is abusing the game engine for how the game is played. It is bad enough chatting it. But screen shot is 2 far. Also there is a rule about making the site less enjoyable for others you will be removed (chat rule in chat guidelines) so posting a screen shot has made is less enjoyable for people who play fog. If you dont want fog dont join games with fog and ruin it for players who do.

You're taking the "Make the site less enjoyable for others" wording too far. Granted, it could use some tweaking, but that's not the original use of it. People will start using it for almost anything if you try and put it under this.

The only thing I could see coming from this, is it could be put under as a Minor Infraction. It's more annoying then " intentionally hurtful to a user, group of users, or the community in general."

After going through similar reports I do not see a similar case to this one. We will discuss this as a group. Please be patient

agree with Forgiven, totally... and TeeGee... i truly hope you guys spend more time and make a better decision than you do with the intentionally throwing games in tournament elimination games/finals, etc... i cautioned you that a precedent set in that would be very difficult to uphold... this is an even slipperier slope... you can not rule against this member, because it is not against the rules. the site provides you with snaps, doesn't say they can't be shared. if you go with the "making the site less enjoyable to others", you head right into the totalitarian bullshit that Andy pulled with his bait/switch of the INTENT of the escalating punishment scale, the community fought for and worked on.

you guys make this an infraction, based on "less enjoyable for others," where does it stop. most of the petty offenses we have all seen for years, suddenly become punishable infractions. MISSING TURNS? "less enjoyable for others." salty chat? "less enjoyable for others." don't like a forum post from a forum goer? "less enjoyable for others." (might i add, a member attempted to get a major infraction against me using this same tweak of the rule). don't like how someone is playing? "less enjoyable for others." anything RonC does? "less enjoyable for others." offended in global? "less enjoyable for others." someone's political posts bother you? "less enjoyable for others." don't like a users name?! "less enjoyable or others." poor moderation? "less enjoyable or others."

unless you make it a major infraction to reveal troops in fog of war, which should never happen. this has to be treated as all other prior FOW complaints. this is not worthy of a rule change, there is not a violation or egregious bending of the rules!! has this player climbed the leader board with points gained from this practice?!! ugh... i can't believe this is even a debate. looks like a dunk to me from here. in no way is this a violation, because revealing location of troops is not a violation in fog of war games.

the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noir

CC FOW COMMUNITY

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

TeeGee - Take your time, and take into consideration what decision you would make if I was to start posting photoshopped screenshots in games.

[eddie2]

Guys bottom line is why join fog games if your not going to play fog. There does need to be a precident set with regards to this. Why should a player be able to talk all positions or post screen shots, making the games more sunny than fog ? Why should that player get a fog medal when they don't play fog as the game engine sets it.

Similar thing is nuc spoils players create games with unlimited forts then just time out after playing a full move so not to get spoils. Why should them players get medals for nuc spoils.

Games styles are made to be played the way they should be for the settings, if players dont want to play them the way they should dont join them simple as that,

[Dukasaur]

I agree with Owen here.

Also, I think that posting a shot of what you yourself can see is no different than describing what you see in words. It makes absolutely no difference whether I say "I have 50 troops on New York" or show you a picture of my 50 troops on New York. Similarly, makes no difference at all whether I say "TeeGee has 73 troops on Lagos" or show you a picture of TeeGee's 73 troops on Lagos. The information conveyed is the same, and the possibility of it being falsified is the same.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

[waauw]

Guys bottom line is why join fog games if your not going to play fog. There does need to be a precident set with regards to this. Why should a player be able to talk all positions or post screen shots, making the games more sunny than fog ? Why should that player get a fog medal when they don't play fog as the game engine sets it.

Similar thing is nuc spoils players create games with unlimited forts then just time out after playing a full move so not to get spoils. Why should them players get medals for nuc spoils.

Games styles are made to be played the way they should be for the settings, if players dont want to play them the way they should dont join them simple as that,

It would only 'not' be an integral part of the game if there weren't a chatbox. Yet there is one in every game. That makes in-game politics, and all of its comprising means, part of the game. Forbidding this would be as forbidding truces, forbidding alliances, or forbidding players to manipulate opponents. It's not part of the game ONLY IF you ignore the factor of human interaction.

[ConfederateSS]

I agree with Owen here.

Also, I think that posting a shot of what you yourself can see is no different than describing what you see in words. It makes absolutely no difference whether I say "I have 50 troops on New York" or show you a picture of my 50 troops on New York. Similarly, makes no difference at all whether I say "TeeGee has 73 troops on Lagos" or show you a picture of TeeGee's 73 troops on Lagos. The information conveyed is the same, and the possibility of it being falsified is the same.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

------There is a simple solution...Stop catering to cry babies...I.E...when I say what I am going to say...You will hear a uproar from the cry babies that need snap shots to play because it is easier...boo...woo...
------REMOVE SNAP SHOTS FROM CONQUER CLUB...GET RID OF THE CRUTCH...IF YOU TRULY WANT TO PLAY A REAL GAME. IF YOU ARE GOOD ENOUGH.WHICH I THINK MOST OF YOU THINK YOU ARE. YOU DON'T NEED SNAP SHOTS. WE GOT ALONG WITHOUT THEM FOR A VERY LONG TIME. THEY ARE REALLY NOT NEEDED. WHY DO WE HAVE THEM...BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN THE HIGH COMMAND CATERS TO THE CLIQUES,CLANS AND TOURNEY SHMOES. WE'RE LAZY...WE NEED THEM...THEY'RE USEFUL...BLAH...BLAH...BOO...WOO...LET THE CRYING START...GET RID OF THE CRUTCH...PROBLEM SOLVED. ...ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[waauw]

I agree with Owen here.

Also, I think that posting a shot of what you yourself can see is no different than describing what you see in words. It makes absolutely no difference whether I say "I have 50 troops on New York" or show you a picture of my 50 troops on New York. Similarly, makes no difference at all whether I say "TeeGee has 73 troops on Lagos" or show you a picture of TeeGee's 73 troops on Lagos. The information conveyed is the same, and the possibility of it being falsified is the same.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

------There is a simple solution...Stop catering to cry babies...I.E...when I say what I am going to say...You will hear a uproar from the cry babies that need snap shots to play because it is easier...boo...woo...
------REMOVE SNAP SHOTS FROM CONQUER CLUB...GET RID OF THE CRUTCH...IF YOU TRULY WANT TO PLAY A REAL GAME. IF YOU ARE GOOD ENOUGH.WHICH I THINK MOST OF YOU THINK YOU ARE. YOU DON'T NEED SNAP SHOTS. WE GOT ALONG WITHOUT THEM FOR A VERY LONG TIME. THEY ARE REALLY NOT NEEDED. WHY DO WE HAVE THEM...BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN THE HIGH COMMAND CATERS TO THE CLIQUES,CLANS AND TOURNEY SHMOES. WE'RE LAZY...WE NEED THEM...THEY'RE USEFUL...BLAH...BLAH...BOO...WOO...LET THE CRYING START...GET RID OF THE CRUTCH...PROBLEM SOLVED. ...ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

There were already snapshot tools long before CC itself incorporated it into the website. Getting rid of it would merely make it more exclusive to those who frequent the fora.

[MagnusGreeol]

I agree with Owen here.

Also, I think that posting a shot of what you yourself can see is no different than describing what you see in words. It makes absolutely no difference whether I say "I have 50 troops on New York" or show you a picture of my 50 troops on New York. Similarly, makes no difference at all whether I say "TeeGee has 73 troops on Lagos" or show you a picture of TeeGee's 73 troops on Lagos. The information conveyed is the same, and the possibility of it being falsified is the same.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

- OS does make sense.

- But the thing about introducing pictures of where a person is and how many troops they have there is way bogus! If I tell you where someone is and how many troops they have (which I never would), then you only have my words to take for it, I could be lieing, But showing a picture is totally different because now it's 100% confirmed. I'm a firm believer that revealing positions in Fog wars should be illegal, Its a coward move to divert attention, even lieing about positions in Fog wars is snaky and in my book scars honor and integrity.

- To each there own I guess, There will always be people who can kill people and people who can't, People who can kill animals and people who can't, People who like to live with honor and integrity, and people who don't, People who give away Fog positions, and People that won't. It's a big world of can and can't ")

-\MGM/-♎

[TheForgivenOne]

I agree with Owen here.

Also, I think that posting a shot of what you yourself can see is no different than describing what you see in words. It makes absolutely no difference whether I say "I have 50 troops on New York" or show you a picture of my 50 troops on New York. Similarly, makes no difference at all whether I say "TeeGee has 73 troops on Lagos" or show you a picture of TeeGee's 73 troops on Lagos. The information conveyed is the same, and the possibility of it being falsified is the same.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

- OS does make sense.

- But the thing about introducing pictures of where a person is and how many troops they have there is way bogus! If I tell you where someone is and how many troops they have (which I never would), then you only have my words to take for it, I could be lieing, But showing a picture is totally different because now it's 100% confirmed. I'm a firm believer that revealing positions in Fog wars should be illegal, Its a coward move to divert attention, even lieing about positions in Fog wars is snaky and in my book scars honor and integrity.

- To each there own I guess, There will always be people who can kill people and people who can't, People who can kill animals and people who can't, People who like to live with honor and integrity, and people who don't, People who give away Fog positions, and People that won't. It's a big world of can and can't ")

-\MGM/-♎

But as everyone has said, it is very very easy to photoshop a picture. So you're STILL going to have to take it with a grain of salt.

[ConfederateSS]

I agree with Owen here.

Also, I think that posting a shot of what you yourself can see is no different than describing what you see in words. It makes absolutely no difference whether I say "I have 50 troops on New York" or show you a picture of my 50 troops on New York. Similarly, makes no difference at all whether I say "TeeGee has 73 troops on Lagos" or show you a picture of TeeGee's 73 troops on Lagos. The information conveyed is the same, and the possibility of it being falsified is the same.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

------There is a simple solution...Stop catering to cry babies...I.E...when I say what I am going to say...You will hear a uproar from the cry babies that need snap shots to play because it is easier...boo...woo...
------REMOVE SNAP SHOTS FROM CONQUER CLUB...GET RID OF THE CRUTCH...IF YOU TRULY WANT TO PLAY A REAL GAME. IF YOU ARE GOOD ENOUGH.WHICH I THINK MOST OF YOU THINK YOU ARE. YOU DON'T NEED SNAP SHOTS. WE GOT ALONG WITHOUT THEM FOR A VERY LONG TIME. THEY ARE REALLY NOT NEEDED. WHY DO WE HAVE THEM...BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN THE HIGH COMMAND CATERS TO THE CLIQUES,CLANS AND TOURNEY SHMOES. WE'RE LAZY...WE NEED THEM...THEY'RE USEFUL...BLAH...BLAH...BOO...WOO...LET THE CRYING START...GET RID OF THE CRUTCH...PROBLEM SOLVED. ...ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

There were already snapshot tools long before CC itself incorporated it into the website. Getting rid of it would merely make it more exclusive to those who frequent the fora.

------NO!!!!!!!!!!....I'm talking about in settings...Before there were just a few...Then more and more...The last time they added a whole shit load...All of mine are set to NO/or OFF except Game Invitations at the bottom of the list...Why they keep adding more and more God only knows. We can do without them...
------LIKE I SAID...C.C. NEEDS TO UNINCORPORATE THIS SETTING FROM THE LIST...BAN IT'S USE...A true WARRIOR can play without it.....ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[Delf]

MAYBE THE FACTS ARE NEEDED TO BE KNOWN


The player Lonous - directly inferred I was a lair, regarding his troops massing on my border - He openly stated I was lying and on meds - The only way I could prove my integrity was to show (after his allegation and turn) that I had in fact not lied. (the clip showed ONLY the troops he said I lied about)

The player Lonous, in calling a player a liar in chat, inderectly asks that player to prove his inocence and clear his name. It was not his first allegation nor his first lies against me. I had every right to prove my innocence to the other players in the match that he had convinced I was lying, that I was not liar and he was the player that was falsly accusing me of lying. - (the clip showed only the troops in question - not the board or other players troops)

When one openly infers or implies or directly states a person is a liar - then he in the act of doing so, is giving the other person permission to prove their innocence. Therefore I did not violate the rules of the game nor the spirit.

Accusing another member of lying or implying they are of poor integrity has to afford the other player a chance of proving thier innocence..

David Marshall

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

Go easy on the guy, he's suffered enough. He lives in Hull.

[Delf]

There is so much truth in that statement about Hull - lol

The question I would like to know is:-

What was Lonous's real complaint - Was it being proven a lair ?? Or that I prove my innocence?

[Donelladan]

The player Lonous, in calling a player a liar in chat, inderectly asks that player to prove his inocence and clear his name. It was not his first allegation nor his first lies against me. I had every right to prove my innocence to the other players in the match that he had convinced I was lying, that I was not liar and he was the player that was falsly accusing me of lying. - (the clip showed only the troops in question - not the board or other players troops)

You are so wrong.
Lonous calling you a liar is normal and totally acceptable.
What is the purpose of fog of war according to you ? The purpose is that you do not know how many troops other players have or where they are.
By telling in the chat where and how many troops Lonous had, you were revealing information, by calling you a liar Lonous was just making other people have doubt about what you were saying.
Since no one except both of you knew the truce, that was normal way of doing from Lonous side.

Now by showing picture you totally break the purpose of the fog of war. This is so out of the spirit of the game.
Like other have said here, you want people to know everything, just play NO FOG game.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

Thing is, it's so difficult to do so, probably 90% at least of CC players have no idea how to do it, therefore everyone would believe it for being the truth, and it would be in most of the case, making impossible for the players whose troops/position have been revealed to cast some doubts on those snaps. Which is exactly why I am opposed to people being able to put pictures or snaps in the game chat.
Fog of war setting is all about deception, hiding, and if you are using the chat, then it's about lying. Otherwise do not use the chat. or play sunny. But if everyone can reveal anything using snapshot, what's the point of the fog of war setting ?

[MagnusGreeol]

The player Lonous, in calling a player a liar in chat, inderectly asks that player to prove his inocence and clear his name. It was not his first allegation nor his first lies against me. I had every right to prove my innocence to the other players in the match that he had convinced I was lying, that I was not liar and he was the player that was falsly accusing me of lying. - (the clip showed only the troops in question - not the board or other players troops)

You are so wrong.
Lonous calling you a liar is normal and totally acceptable.
What is the purpose of fog of war according to you ? The purpose is that you do not know how many troops other players have or where they are.
By telling in the chat where and how many troops Lonous had, you were revealing information, by calling you a liar Lonous was just making other people have doubt about what you were saying.
Since no one except both of you knew the truce, that was normal way of doing from Lonous side.

Now by showing picture you totally break the purpose of the fog of war. This is so out of the spirit of the game.
Like other have said here, you want people to know everything, just play NO FOG game.

Even Donelladan's point about site snaps being unfalsifiable is probably wrong. I'm sure they can be edited and faked. I would have no idea how, but I'm sure there's tons of techies on the site who could figure it out.

Thing is, it's so difficult to do so, probably 90% at least of CC players have no idea how to do it, therefore everyone would believe it for being the truth, and it would be in most of the case, making impossible for the players whose troops/position have been revealed to cast some doubts on those snaps. Which is exactly why I am opposed to people being able to put pictures or snaps in the game chat.
Fog of war setting is all about deception, hiding, and if you are using the chat, then it's about lying. Otherwise do not use the chat. or play sunny. But if everyone can reveal anything using snapshot, what's the point of the fog of war setting ?

+1 for the Don

- Revealing position and troop count in Fog wars is the lamest. And I personally believe it should be a punishable offense. After 1st offense you can be banned from the fog ")

-\MGM/-♎

[Delf]

That is hypocritical, Read what you have written! You talk about integrity of fog and yet then go on to say actions that are punishable in law are acceptable. Either you have an understanding of integrity or you do not.

Maybe you should think hard of what a game of Risk is suposed to be. A group of FRIENDS sitting around a table and having an honest and pleasurable game. The fact that on CC the game is in cyberspace does not allow for behaviour displayed by Lonous. Players on Conquerer Club deserve to be treated with respect. When a Player calls another player a lair and then goes on to convince other players to believe the other player to be a lair too, then that behaviour is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.

If I started publishing that you are a peadophoile, a lair or even insulting your sexuality I would be at fault and you deserve every opertunity to prove the falsehood. FOG of war is NOT and excuse for insulting a members integrity or demeaning their charactor - If you believe that not to be the case, then obviously your understanding of FOG is completely different to most.

Lying is a personal choice - Accusing others is not. It is a liabious act and as such the LAW allows me to prove my inocence, I do not need nor desire your approval.

Maybe you should read the rules regarding behaviour - they are quite specific - and then re-post. Either ALL the rules should be enforced or none. Anything less is hypocracy!

I did not post a full map, I posted a clip "It showed just the troops in Question" after the turns had been taken, (Should OLD games of FOG be deleted off the system?) furthermore it was NOT used to show up a lair - but a player that chose to call ME a LIAR and also insult the fact I am on medication"

If you are of the opinion that I displayed a whole map OR even gave out tacticle information that would have a detrimental effect on the other player. Then I would I tend to agree that I exceeded fair play. But this is not what I did. I took care not to spoil the game but prove my inocence - Do I have to receive Negative feedback as a Lair, Untrustworthy and furthermore suffer defomation of charactor.

Let's be honest, If this game had been around a table. I would demand either an appology or would be giving the lying twat a smack in the mouth!

For some people integrity means all. Sorry but I fall in that class and I am proud of it!

I appologise for any gramatical or spelling mistakes but I am on 180mg of Morphine every day, The reason for which was fighting for my Country - Servicemen of any nation concider their integrity as everything they have! Lets be tottally honest here - It's the ONLY thing we can actually own. For your information Insults, Racisism, Sexism and threats and profanity and even being rude are against the rules. Once Lonous had broken the rules, he was in no position to complain.

I realise that he is a young member - but he had been given plenty of warnings. He is not complaining that I gave out tacticle information that ruined his game - he is complaining to cause trouble, as he is a PROVEN liar.. Further - he did not have to Name me in this Post - Most wouldn't have done so in the heading.

But By all means - Allow the LIAR to use this post to cause trouble. I notice that he fails to mention that throughout the game, he was telling everyone in chat my troop strengths - Oversight perhaps??? I'll let you decide...

[TeeGee]

Locked

Nothing more is being added here to assist us

Start a discussion in another part of the forum if you want to debate this