jdbush chapcrap [noted]

[IcePack]

If you took a turn CC, against yourself, then that is a major offense. Levels of honest play don't even come into it.

This isn't what happened. He did NOT take the turn against himself. Him happy and bush are RL friends.
He saw happy was about to miss, so since he COULDN"T take happy's turn - he asked their mutual RL friend bush to cover.

IcePack

Essentially the same thing.

Actually its not... the same thing would be chap logging in and playing. Something entirely different would be alerting happy's friend / back up sitter and asking him to cover since chap was facing happy. Totally different.

IcePack

[GoranZ]

Perhaps a better course of action for chapcrap would have been to wall message happyfeet instead of an account sitter. It was not chapcrap's place to ask an account sitter to sit a game for another player. (Especially considering that chapcrap was an opponent in that game!) There is an absolute conflict of interest regardless of intentions.

Opinions aside, the facts are very clear. Chapcrap solicited someone to take the turn of his opponent. (See attached screenshot of jdbush's wall located in first post.) It's pretty direct meddling. This act (however well intentioned) had an adverse effect on the game.
Moreover, happyfeet (friends with chapcrap as claimed by both parties) made the comment that chapcrap has previously engaged in this behavior.

he [chapcrap] asked others in our clan to cover games for me in which we were against each other

If happyfeet is correct, this is not chapcrap's first offense.

wow... easy with the accusations. One thing is accusing someone completely different is proving it . For now your accusation is going in a dead end according to me. I see no evidence that chap played specifically to be eliminated before your turn, so I can presume(based on little observation on the game chat) that he didn't knew that you will cash in in first place.

Question: Why chap left 2 units on Bogota before he was eliminated by his teammate if he knew what cards you had? Risky according to me.

Can someone provide us with picture of the actual units distribution after happyfeet's problematic turn or something useful so we wont guess what was going on from game chat?

Is this relevant?

you don't have screenshot, other team has one.

According to me chap was not preparing him self to be eliminated(reinforcements to Lima to preserve greens territory count up and leaving 2 on Bogota) which means he didn't had any idea what cards did blue had.

[Flow520]

[The extension jpg has been deactivated and can no longer be displayed.]

So, I added a link to the picture: Game Board: Round 8. Green's turn. Set at 15.

As requested, here is a screenshot of the board just after I used my set to take out the rest of red. Had the sitter (requested by chapcrap) followed the plan laid out in game chat (deploy 3 on Mexico city and take Bogota) and had it succeeded (which had high probability), then I would have had 6 cards, traded for 15, hit green, and ended turn with 4 cards. Green would not have been able to respond because he only had 2 cards.

[Edit: added link to the uploaded file]

[IcePack]

You're upset that someone didn't read chat? You know how often that happens?
A poor move played by a sitter who wasn't chap, perhaps. But that doesn't mean its some grand conspiracy to make you lose.
Even happy has come to say chap and bush are his sitters and asked for chap to watch the account while he was gone etc.

Pretty sure your trying to read way to much into this.

IcePack

[happyfeet]

Round8Board.JPG

As requested, here is a screenshot of the board just after I used my set to take out the rest of red. Had the sitter (requested by chapcrap) followed the plan laid out in game chat (deploy 3 on Mexico city and take Bogota) and had it succeeded (which had high probability), then I would have had 6 cards, traded for 15, hit green, and ended turn with 4 cards. Green would not have been able to respond because he only had 2 cards.

so chap took his turn. you take out chap leaving him next to green. green cant cash because you say he only has to cards. then, maybe you should have set me up to take out red? but you went and didnt even ask for a new game plan.

[jgordon1111]

Round8Board.JPG

As requested, here is a screenshot of the board just after I used my set to take out the rest of red. Had the sitter (requested by chapcrap) followed the plan laid out in game chat (deploy 3 on Mexico city and take Bogota) and had it succeeded (which had high probability), then I would have had 6 cards, traded for 15, hit green, and ended turn with 4 cards. Green would not have been able to respond because he only had 2 cards.

But you didnt bring up the shot previous to that one which shows I was lined up on yellow pretty good,ergo he stopped one of my terts to make it difficult to take him out.

And why on earth did you follow thru with a plan that was busted that allowed me to finish the game? You handed us the game with your turn,Why?

[Flow520]

You're upset that someone didn't read chat? You know how often that happens?
A poor move played by a sitter who wasn't chap, perhaps. But that doesn't mean its some grand conspiracy to make you lose.
Even happy has come to say chap and bush are his sitters and asked for chap to watch the account while he was gone etc.

Pretty sure your trying to read way to much into this.

IcePack

I'll repeat.
It was not chapcrap's place to ask an account sitter to sit a game for another player. (Especially considering that chapcrap was an opponent in that game!) There is an absolute conflict of interest regardless of intentions. Opinions aside, the facts are very clear. Chapcrap solicited someone to take the turn of his opponent. (See attached screenshot of jdbush's wall located in first post.) It's pretty direct meddling. This act (however well intentioned) had an adverse effect on the game.

[jgordon1111]

You're upset that someone didn't read chat? You know how often that happens?
A poor move played by a sitter who wasn't chap, perhaps. But that doesn't mean its some grand conspiracy to make you lose.
Even happy has come to say chap and bush are his sitters and asked for chap to watch the account while he was gone etc.

Pretty sure your trying to read way to much into this.

IcePack

I'll repeat.
It was not chapcrap's place to ask an account sitter to sit a game for another player. (Especially considering that chapcrap was an opponent in that game!) There is an absolute conflict of interest regardless of intentions. Opinions aside, the facts are very clear. Chapcrap solicited someone to take the turn of his opponent. (See attached screenshot of jdbush's wall located in first post.) It's pretty direct meddling. This act (however well intentioned) had an adverse effect on the game.

I dont get the conflict of interest part,all 3 are friends,are you saying J intentionally hurt happy for chap to win? I dont think so,played chap several times never got the idea in any way he was or is dishonest.

Are you one hundered percent sure happy would not have made the same play,considering how I was set around him?

[IcePack]

You're upset that someone didn't read chat? You know how often that happens?
A poor move played by a sitter who wasn't chap, perhaps. But that doesn't mean its some grand conspiracy to make you lose.
Even happy has come to say chap and bush are his sitters and asked for chap to watch the account while he was gone etc.

Pretty sure your trying to read way to much into this.

IcePack

I'll repeat.
It was not chapcrap's place to ask an account sitter to sit a game for another player. (Especially considering that chapcrap was an opponent in that game!) There is an absolute conflict of interest regardless of intentions. Opinions aside, the facts are very clear. Chapcrap solicited someone to take the turn of his opponent. (See attached screenshot of jdbush's wall located in first post.) It's pretty direct meddling. This act (however well intentioned) had an adverse effect on the game.

Happy clearly has used bush in the past, and are friends and comfortable with him being sat by either chap or bush. Chap couldn't take that turn, so if he knows bush is the other sitter its natural to ask him to cover that game.
Not that hard to comprehend mate, if I know your sitter is Bob, and for some reason i can't sit for you or dont have the PW i would message Bob if you were low on time and get him to cover. The fact he's an opponent in the game only strengthens the point chap had to ask one of happy's other sitters.

IcePack

[GoranZ]

Round8Board.JPG

As requested, here is a screenshot of the board just after I used my set to take out the rest of red. Had the sitter (requested by chapcrap) followed the plan laid out in game chat (deploy 3 on Mexico city and take Bogota) and had it succeeded (which had high probability), then I would have had 6 cards, traded for 15, hit green, and ended turn with 4 cards. Green would not have been able to respond because he only had 2 cards.

jgordon1111 had 1 unit on Sao Paulo before your turn(tho it doesn't matter how many units did it had there, I presume more then 1 if he doesn't attack down to 1) and your teammate had 4 in Mexico City. So that leaves only 1 way for you to eliminate chap if he knew that you were able to cash in, and that is threw Sao Paulo... So why chap didn't reinforce Sao Paulo but he reinforce Lima and leaving 2 units on Bogota? Personally if I was on chaps place and I knew that you had a set I would have reinforced Sao Paulo(probably with all my units on Bogota).

[happyfeet]

has anyone pointed out that chap bush and happy all were roommates in college? because i still dont think that flow understands that friends help friends out. even if it is a game against you. i wouldnt want to win a game because someone missed a turn. and yes i would have made this one but i missed atleast 14 games in which i got help.

yes, bush didnt do what flow wanted so flow cashes and kills chap leaving chap a target to green. then, green kills chap and cashes thats what really costed us the game.

[Symmetry]

has anyone pointed out that chap bush and happy all were roommates in college? because i still dont think that flow understands that friends help friends out. even if it is a game against you. i wouldnt want to win a game because someone missed a turn. and yes i would have made this one but i missed atleast 14 games in which i got help.

yes, bush didnt do what flow wanted so flow cashes and kills chap leaving chap a target to green. then, green kills chap and cashes thats what really costed us the game.

I think that Flow has been pointing out exactly that for pretty much this entire thread- that you felt an obligation to help each other win a game and screwed over the neutral player.

[IcePack]

has anyone pointed out that chap bush and happy all were roommates in college? because i still dont think that flow understands that friends help friends out. even if it is a game against you. i wouldnt want to win a game because someone missed a turn. and yes i would have made this one but i missed atleast 14 games in which i got help.

yes, bush didnt do what flow wanted so flow cashes and kills chap leaving chap a target to green. then, green kills chap and cashes thats what really costed us the game.

I think that Flow has been pointing out exactly that for pretty much this entire thread- that you felt an obligation to help each other win a game and screwed over the neutral player.

Except for the fact its flows poor play that lost them the game and not friends throwing the game. And the fact that chap and happy are two of the most honest players i've met on the site. chap contacted happy's other sitter when he couldn't take the turn. Pretty sure thats SOP for most people.

IcePack

[happyfeet]

has anyone pointed out that chap bush and happy all were roommates in college? because i still dont think that flow understands that friends help friends out. even if it is a game against you. i wouldnt want to win a game because someone missed a turn. and yes i would have made this one but i missed atleast 14 games in which i got help.

yes, bush didnt do what flow wanted so flow cashes and kills chap leaving chap a target to green. then, green kills chap and cashes thats what really costed us the game.

I think that Flow has been pointing out exactly that for pretty much this entire thread- that you felt an obligation to help each other win a game and screwed over the neutral player.

and the fact that there are two neutral players not just flow

[happyfeet]

this is a tournament game in which you play with different people. chap doesnt play with his partner anymore than i play with flow. the only thing i see here is a group of people that dont like lossing. the competitive nature that keeps CC going. but there was nothing done to screw flow. back to back misplays cost us the game. i do admit i probably would have taken the turn different. but thankful for the support from my friends.