[cleared]

[magpies]

Comments:

[Mr Changsha]

This will (almost certainly) not be considered cheating due to the fact that the diplomacy is open. Unless you think diplomacy itself is cheating? However, if you could prove that these players always work together in their games (or work together with other high-rankers in numerous games) then you might have a case.

Good luck with the research!

Mr (balance in all things) C

[jammyjames]

changsha, it would be considered as deliberately throwing a game... deliberately helping out opponents in order for them to win the game. however this could be got around fairly easily as there is no concrete evidence.

[BoganGod]

No proof, so no case.

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

this is as good as the Stringy thread I just got responding too.

[Bruceswar]

Wow... This is another lame one.. Ugh not even sure what to say other than clean. Lock this quick!

[hwhrhett]

dishonorable - yes.

cheating or abuse - no.

foe list/very bad rating.

[Bruceswar]

dishonorable - yes.

cheating or abuse - no.

foe list/very bad rating.

If you have ever played with Mhennigan you would not say such things. He just wants to make sure people do not go crazy on him in escalating games.

[mhennigan]

magpies do I really have to explain all this again? thai and I went through it in the game log so what is it you don't understand?? we were both trying to take a continent and agreed that we would move our men out of each other's target continent in order to avoid losing loads of armies. This is not cheating, just sensible play - you should try it. We needed to coordinate in order to get this done in 1 round rather than 2. You also seem to have a thing about a 'double turn advantage' meaning presumably that you can finish a round and then have another go early in the next round. WELCOME TO FREESTYLE! if you prefer nice predictable games where everyone takes turns in order then it exists; it's called sequential. Lastly as thai pointed out this is the first game I've ever played against him so accusing us of being multis is a bit odd. If you've noticed that other high ranked players do this sort of thing then shouldn't that be telling you something?

I don't mind a bit of confusion during a game and explaining all this to you then and there, but publicly accusing us of cheating is way over the top. I suppose that's why they have foe lists - welcome to mine!

Michael

[hwhrhett]

dishonorable - yes.

cheating or abuse - no.

foe list/very bad rating.

If you have ever played with Mhennigan you would not say such things. He just wants to make sure people do not go crazy on him in escalating games.

<sarcasm>thats understandable, he must go the extra mile to make sure he doesnt lose his precious points.. maybe i should find someone to play my public games with so that i dont have to risk as much. and we can aide each other so that neither of us has much to worry about losing. </sarcasm>

[Bruceswar]

dishonorable - yes.

cheating or abuse - no.

foe list/very bad rating.

If you have ever played with Mhennigan you would not say such things. He just wants to make sure people do not go crazy on him in escalating games.

<sarcasm>thats understandable, he must go the extra mile to make sure he doesnt lose his precious points.. maybe i should find someone to play my public games with so that i dont have to risk as much. and we can aide each other so that neither of us has much to worry about losing. </sarcasm>

LOL that is rather funny... even if you meant as sarcasm some will take it the other way. On a serious note MHennigan does not need anybody to help protect his points. He has been near the top of the scoreboard for as long as I can remember and playing mainly public games. He will join private games if invited. I cannot say that for some others.

[roZero]

I was part of that game and there were no signs of cheating, only diplomacy.

[hwhrhett]

LOL that is rather funny... even if you meant as sarcasm some will take it the other way. On a serious note MHennigan does not need anybody to help protect his points. He has been near the top of the scoreboard for as long as I can remember and playing mainly public games. He will join private games if invited. I cannot say that for some others.

i am well aware of both of these players, they are both excellent players, and both more diligent than i.

im just saying, anybody can win a public game that way, and neither of these two need to do that to win.. more than likely, one of them was going to win anyway...

[BoganGod]

magpies do I really have to explain all this again? thai and I went through it in the game log so what is it you don't understand?? we were both trying to take a continent and agreed that we would move our men out of each other's target continent in order to avoid losing loads of armies. This is not cheating, just sensible play - you should try it. We needed to coordinate in order to get this done in 1 round rather than 2. You also seem to have a thing about a 'double turn advantage' meaning presumably that you can finish a round and then have another go early in the next round. WELCOME TO ESCALATING! if you prefer nice predictable games where everyone takes turns in order then it exists; it's called sequential. Lastly as thai pointed out this is the first game I've ever played against him so accusing us of being multis is a bit odd. If you've noticed that other high ranked players do this sort of thing then shouldn't that be telling you something?

I don't mind a bit of confusion during a game and explaining all this to you then and there, but publicly accusing us of cheating is way over the top. I suppose that's why they have foe lists - welcome to mine!

Michael

He can't fill in the form, so do you think he could understand your explanation...........

[king achilles]

You can rate them accordingly and put them on your foe list if you want.