Conquer Cup IV Round 5, Ponez [noted]

[nvanputten]

Accused:

Ponez




The accused are suspected of:

Other: <Suicide to intentionally throw the game to one specific player>



Game number(s):

Game 12003360



Comments: To clarify, I do not have any reason to believe that the recipient of Ponez's actions coordinated in any way. That's why I didn't call this "secret diplomacy" because it appears to be one-sided. Nevertheless, I would argue that this is a severe abuse of the common sense rules of the game.

[Metsfanmax]

2013-01-01 14:34:56 - Ciglione: Yellow, I agree with green. I can't understand why you attacked me (mostly) and green given that you didn't have any chance to win the game.

If it is indeed true that he had no chance of winning this game (which is subjective; what he calls suicide, someone else might call a last-ditch effort to save the game), then how can you blame him for trying to lose the least points while doing so? Players don't have obligations to each other; rationally, they will do what is in their best interests.

[hmsps]

I think its quite different when its a Conquer Cup game. I suppose this is what you get when you put out shiny prizes.

[jghost7]

If it is indeed true that he had no chance of winning this game (which is subjective; what he calls suicide, someone else might call a last-ditch effort to save the game),...

Whilst I can, in general, see your point here.....

...
then how can you blame him for trying to lose the least points while doing so? Players don't have obligations to each other; rationally, they will do what is in their best interests.

...This part is dumb. Game throwing should never be justified by the potential point loss. The throwing of games just to reduce your point loss violates the spirit of the game and possibly the rules as well. It is a shame that there are players who still endorse this mindset.

I believe the expectations from players in a game are that each player plays to win. There are many different ways to achieve this and there will of course always be differing opinions on how this should be achieved. I think that the majority of players however will agree that the throwing of a game is at best bad form.

Thanks,

J

[Metsfanmax]

...
then how can you blame him for trying to lose the least points while doing so? Players don't have obligations to each other; rationally, they will do what is in their best interests.

...This part is dumb. Game throwing should never be justified by the potential point loss. The throwing of games just to reduce your point loss violates the spirit of the game and possibly the rules as well. It is a shame that there are players who still endorse this mindset.

I believe the expectations from players in a game are that each player plays to win. There are many different ways to achieve this and there will of course always be differing opinions on how this should be achieved. I think that the majority of players however will agree that the throwing of a game is at best bad form.

I take exception to your use of the term "game throwing," as if the player has no chance of winning (as red says) then this action is at worst simply helping to shape who the winner is, and at best a last-ditch effort to save the game.

Nevertheless, whether or not this is considered to be "bad form," it has consistently been ruled not to be an abuse of game rules. The best that can be said is to foe and move on, and be careful if you ever see this player in a future Conquer Cup game.

[king achilles]

With this round limit setting, so is it a "crime" for any player who may have a slim or no chance of winning, to make any attack to anyone who may have a chance at winning the game?

[eddie2]

With this round limit setting, so is it a "crime" for any player who may have a slim or no chance of winning, to make any attack to anyone who may have a chance at winning the game?

no it is no offense as to what you just said above, but i don't see the part of including a comment about round limits this game was in round 5...

one thing though the player misses a shot comes back and makes these comments.

2013-01-01 12:32:25 - Ponez: sorry for my missed turn(before his turn)
2013-01-01 12:40:27 - Ponez: gg all. wish i did better(straight after his turn.)

looking at the 2 players he took out they were the lower ranks of the 3 left. so obviously he threw the game to logiskal. and i agree this is a tactic used all the time in regular play casual games to save points, now here is the big but, Since you pay to play these games then someone should step in and put a stop to it..

if this was a tourney i was running i would.

1)ban ponez from taking part again
2)issue the other 2 players with a free pass to the next ccup.

this is only fair due to the fact you pay to play these games..

[king achilles]

So your saying he should have attacked the highest ranked player or should go after specifically for the high ranked player and no one else. Automatically, he is guilty of throwing the game if he didn't do that?

[nvanputten]

To clarify a couple of points here based on the conversation above:

The game was "Round 5" of Conquer Cup 4, not in the 5th turn of the game. It was the 20th turn, right before the limit expired.

Because of the turn limit, the winner was to be the player with the most troops on the board at the end of the turn. Ponez attack two players, killing about 50 and 75 troops respectively for each and losing around 120 himself. This means that he lost 50 troops compared to player 2, 70 troops compared to player 3, and 120 troops to player 1. The result was that his "chances" of winning decreased across the board with no potential upside. This wasn't a last-ditch effort to win, it was clear and intention suicide to "throw" the game to one player.

I would argue that the assumed behavior is for every player to maximize their chances of winning. Anything that could conceivably be seen as a pursuit of that end is justified (breaking treaties, intentionally skipping a turn, lying about troop placement, etc.) In contrast, I would argue that this behavior aligns closer to rules against farm accounts and secret diplomacy. The different is the lack of coordination between players, but the similarity is that one player's actions are specifically intended to benefit another player, rather than his/her own self interest in winning.

(I'm glad that people have joined this conversation, thank you for your input)

[KraphtOne]

The best that can be said is to foe and move on, and be careful if you ever see this player in a future Conquer Cup game.

You cannot "foe and move on"... Foe lists don't exist in conquer cup...

With this round limit setting, so is it a "crime" for any player who may have a slim or no chance of winning, to make any attack to anyone who may have a chance at winning the game?

In this specific situation... yes

these people paid money to play in this specific tournament. And this player intentionally threw the game towards a certain player... i can't imagine spending another dollar if this happened to me with no compensation to myself or punishment to the player in question...

i agree with the "both players should get a free entry into the next cup" and shithead should be banned from cups... (although CC would probably rather have the 5 bucks than the integrity if i had to guess)

[eddie2]

So your saying he should have attacked the highest ranked player or should go after specifically for the high ranked player and no one else. Automatically, he is guilty of throwing the game if he didn't do that?

no king a what i am saying is that he attacked 2 players stacks (which were the lower ranked players.) leaving the highest ranked player with all his troups. some could say he tried to win but would he not of went to eliminate one of them for a extra cash.or hit all players equally

[shoop76]

This is the problem with round limit games. The last player gets to decide who the winner is. Unfortunate incident, but not cheating with the rules the way they are.

[SaMejoHn]

The best that can be said is to foe and move on, and be careful if you ever see this player in a future Conquer Cup game.

You cannot "foe and move on"... Foe lists don't exist in conquer cup...

With this round limit setting, so is it a "crime" for any player who may have a slim or no chance of winning, to make any attack to anyone who may have a chance at winning the game?

In this specific situation... yes

these people paid money to play in this specific tournament. And this player intentionally threw the game towards a certain player... i can't imagine spending another dollar if this happened to me with no compensation to myself or punishment to the player in question...

i agree with the "both players should get a free entry into the next cup" and shithead should be banned from cups... (although CC would probably rather have the 5 bucks than the integrity if i had to guess)

+1

[Metsfanmax]

these people paid money to play in this specific tournament. And this player intentionally threw the game towards a certain player... i can't imagine spending another dollar if this happened to me with no compensation to myself or punishment to the player in question...

No one has made a coherent argument for why it should be disallowed for someone to shape the winner in a situation where they have no chance of winning, they've just said that they would be annoyed if they were the one who lost as a result of it. Well, sometimes you lose in this game due to factors outside of your control. If you aren't willing to risk your money given that this is true, then don't enter the Conquer Cup. The fact that you paid money to enter the tournament doesn't mean the rules of the game should change. Ponez paid money to enter the tournament too, and is probably disappointed that the other players played in such a way that forced him to lose. Should he be compensated too? Of course not, because you have no obligation to assist others in how you play.

[hmsps]

these people paid money to play in this specific tournament. And this player intentionally threw the game towards a certain player... i can't imagine spending another dollar if this happened to me with no compensation to myself or punishment to the player in question...

No one has made a coherent argument for why it should be disallowed for someone to shape the winner in a situation where they have no chance of winning, they've just said that they would be annoyed if they were the one who lost as a result of it. Well, sometimes you lose in this game due to factors outside of your control. If you aren't willing to risk your money given that this is true, then don't enter the Conquer Cup. The fact that you paid money to enter the tournament doesn't mean the rules of the game should change. Ponez paid money to enter the tournament too, and is probably disappointed that the other players played in such a way that forced him to lose. Should he be compensated too? Of course not, because you have no obligation to assist others in how you play.

I do wonder at times of the constant willingness to support bad gamesmanship. I'm not saying there should be punishment as its not against the rules but it is pretty bad form in the CC especially when people pay hard cash as an add on tournament. At the very least there should be a couple of free slots available for the next tournament