Warned Pershing & celliottii[es]

[angola]

I would guess they will be blocked from playing with each other also. Not acceptable as far as I can tell.

Agreeing to end a stalemate is one thing, because everyone in the game agrees to it. This 'point-splitting' stuff is not OK. Steals points from others. Plus, all the point dumping 1v1 games.

[killboy108]

Finally, I use my limited time to not only play here at CC, but I am also a SoC teacher, run the SoC 1v1 Ladder, and (hopefully) will be a SoC Teams teacher. I find it appalling that a higher ranked player gets knocked out by a lower ranked player and then has the audacity to go digging around trying to find a nugget to his conspiracy theory.

I find it appalling that a Person who holds the prestigious position of a SoC teacher would cheat so blatantly. You should be setting the example of fair game play.

Then you have the audacity to deny that you have been caught cheating, and now you're trying to throw mud at one of your victims.

Very poor form celliottii. Not the conduct fitting of our SoC team.

[benga]

LOL cheaters even announced they will cheat.

What's here to think about?

[Koganosi]

I do not know any specific details from the games. That being said, I think the pertinent question is whether "point-splitting" is legal under the site rules.

From the Community Guidelines:

Point Dumping

If you are found guilty of Point Dumping, that is, the intentional losing of games via any means, with the intention of causing chaos in the form of griefing, passing points to other people, or manually "resetting" points to a lower score.

Note: Because of the nature of Point Dumping, your account will be suspended upon discovery, and will remain suspended to protect the account and the website during the investigation. The Investigative Suspension is not factored into Disciplinary Time Served.

Point Dumping Infraction disciplinary levels are as follows:
1. 1 Month Website Vacation
2. Permanent Website Vacation
Note: Users retain the right to rebuttal via E-tickets as with any Infraction.

It would seem that this action is in direct violation of this rule. It is not even in a grey area. It is not permitted now, nor should it ever be. There is too much potential for cheating and abuse.

Thanks,

J

While S&D might be a little harder to prove, the thing written by Jghost7 here, is a clear clean violation of the rule!

I dont even in the slighest think that splitting points like this is a good idea, just for this soul purpose! Especially also if this game wasnt in stalemate yet with the number of players in it. If people dont want stalemates like this they should go for round limits or escalating games, dont point split a game after 30 rounds, just never do it!!!

If in any case a stalement then go for the approved method of a tiebreaker game!

Urs

Koganosi

[Shannon Apple]

The big issue here is not the fact that there is points splitting (although this is not the right thing to do).

Actually, the big issue IS the point splitting, which I think that you need to realise as well as the others involved. Announced in chat or not, this is not within the rules to do. As Koganosi said above, the approved way to end a stalemate is a tie-breaker game like the example that I provided above. A game at 16 or 30 rounds is not in stalemate and you have no reason to do this.

This is happening just because someone doesn't want to risk points by continuing the game or coming up with a strategy to try and outfox the other. The game is based on the game "risk" for a reason. I beg to differ on your point (Pershing) toward that other guy that you win by good play. Someone with the gift of the gab is not necessarily a great strategist. Good diplomat, yes, but strategist they are not. A good strategist would be able to find their way out of a 12 player game without resorting to this kind of questionable behaviour. I'm not saying that you're not a good player, you could be great apart from this for all I know, but just putting it out there why "good play" does not describe any of this.

Pershing, you've seemingly been systematically doing this with various people, that's what makes it so wrong. You found a way that works for you in gaining points, but it's not a way that is fair to the other players in the game. No one joins a 12 player singles game to be ganged up on half way through by 2 people who will go on to win and split the points. There is only a "stalemate" in this case because you have formed an alliance and don't want to attack each other. A true stalemate happens when 2 or 3 people are still battling it out against each other at stupid round levels. (50+) I have seen stalemate games that were a lot crazier than mine. Something like round 400 and up. They could end those with a tie breaker, but I guess they just enjoy playing them for however many years that they've been playing them. I can't understand why people care about points this much. >.>

[willedtowin1]

Greed............


27% General General =/

Username:
Pershing
Rank:
General General
Score:
3500 (Range: 2049-3500)
Games:
1702 completed, 462 (27%) won

[Will Lee]

"Obviously any gross abuse of the game is forbidden. This includes but is not limited to: throwing games or deliberately benefiting from thrown games, intentional deadbeating, holding players hostage, serial teammate killing, hijacking accounts, systematically "farming" new recruits and colluding with other players in any way to manipulate the scoring system."

The above is a direct copy from the rules as set out by CC. As you can see there is no mention of it being legal to "split points" just because it is discussed openly in the game.

ANY manipulation of the scoring system is against the rules.

Pershing's immediate answer is always "all the good players do it" and "you're just a sore loser" because that was his response when I suggested it was against the rules in a game we were involved in. Because of a death in the family of one of the other players in the game I stopped all discussion of what was under those circumstances a rather trivial matter.

I have played many games with many excellent opponents. The fact that this is the first I heard of this happening in CC argues against the point that "all good players do it".
If Pershing wants to compare quality of play I'll compare my won/lost percentage against his any time.

As far as being a sore loser I know that in my case I had already lost by the time I raised my concern about his suggestion of "points splitting". To tell the truth, he had sent me a couple of invitations to games and as I normally do I just clicked on "Accept All Invitations". When the games started I'm sorry to admit that I wasn't really interested in playing those games and just went through the motions. That is wrong as well but hopefully not yet against the rules. But because of my lack of interest there can be no chance of being a sore loser.

I believe that, once you start with these kinds of actions it becomes increasingly easy to just go to the point splitting scenario. I know that in the game I was involved with the suggestion of it being a "stalemate" came very early on. I also believe that there can be no real stalemate in any CC game. As long as luck and randomness in rolls is part of the game there has to be an eventual winner.

Perhaps the real word that should be used in these cases is "frustration" or "boredom". I suggest you substitute one of those words for "stalemate" in your argument, Pershing and see if your argument still holds up.

[iAmCaffeine]

If this goes unpunished and is not classified as gross abuse of the game I know exactly what I'm doing for the next few weeks, or however long it takes to get to Conqueror doing this, obviously.

[jltile1]

Look at the last 20 games of general cheats alots. Look like more guilty people will be added to the case. They are just handing games to him.

[iAmCaffeine]

Look at the last 20 games of general cheats alots. Look like more guilty people will be added to the case. They are just handing games to him.

I saw a load of 1v1 games when I was searching for some to join, all on Classic with Pershing inviting aglenist and winning them all but 1 in 3 to 5 rounds. 20 games in total. Every game I checked has comments like the following:

Game 14342936
2014-04-25 22:15:59 - aglenist: so who wins this ...you i think?
2014-04-26 16:38:54 - Pershing: yes

Game 14355222
2014-04-28 22:37:19 - Pershing: I will win this one

Game 14355229
2014-04-28 22:24:05 - Pershing: You win this one
2014-04-29 15:03:33 - Pershing: Actually I need to win this one. Sorry
2014-04-29 18:20:17 - aglenist:

Game 14355231
2014-04-28 22:32:45 - Pershing: you win this one

Game 14355234
2014-04-28 22:28:04 - Pershing: You win this one
2014-04-29 15:11:45 - Pershing: I need to win this one
2014-04-29 18:23:39 - aglenist: best dice ive ever had:)
2014-04-29 18:40:17 - Pershing: Yeah too bad that doesn't happen when you really need great dice. LOL
2014-04-29 18:41:50 - Pershing: Place you guys where there are big neutrals and attack all of those but try not to capture anything.
2014-04-29 19:56:56 - aglenist: thats what i was doing believe it or not!
2014-04-29 19:56:59 - aglenist: hahaha

[cpm]

This whole case sounds a lot like a player who used to be on CC: rommel539. He used multis to "share" points and also did the same by recruiting real players and using secret diplomacy. I know b/c he invited me to a couple 1v1 games before I realized what the heck was going on. Rommel539's writings are eerily similar to Pershing's. I have old PM's to compare. rommel529 was eventually banned in Nov. 2011.

Anyway, it's clear that Pershing is breaking the rules and should be punished for both point manipulation and secret diplomacy. Pershing is even admitting it in his posts in this forum.

[regan the great]

if they are found guilty of cheating lets hope they get the correct punishment,,,the big boot out of cc.

[Pershing]

The premise that I am contacting someone and saying hay let's gang on on some players and split points is absurd. I go into each game to win it solely by myself. You people are creating all kinds of misinformation here. Everyone makes treaties in a game to further their interest I do the same with everyone I can not just one player. Also I am playing on a huge map with 11 other people. It takes a lot more than luck and treaties to end up at the end of this thing. I requires skill. And I am sure many I have played with would back me up on this and tell you I am very skill full. Most people commenting here do not have all the facts and should probably not be commenting. Scotthansen1 lost because he was outmaneuvered by me who exploited his vulnerability. I eliminated him and he called me a cheater for beating him. I eventually won this game by myself. Just poor player crying about losing. Let's stick with facts I admit I took or gave points as a way to end a game that I felt was deadlocked just like you admitted to do the same in your deadlocked games suiciding yourself and giving your points to another player based on an agreement made on the outcome of another game. I did the same thing. Where is the consistency here? Who determines when this should happen? If it is 30 rds or 40 or 100 set a rule that says that otherwise it is up to the players to decide. Nobody wants to give up there points but sometimes it is done but almost everyone at CC. The big problem I have about this whole thing including these accussations is the idea I contacted Cellioti or anyone specifically and said let's play a game and team up on everyone else. That is total BS! Never happened. And I will tell you on this USA 2.1 map with 12 players even if 2 people could play together that is no assurance you would end up together at the end. You have to do a lot of other things in this game to be one of the last men standing. Treaties I love them! I make them with everyone I can. All the good players do this and are more successful. Who I make them with or why changes from game to game. KB complained even though he was involved with 2 pt splits himself because I beat him fair and square through good strategy and more firepower. Now he was to complain and say I cheated? ridiculous. He loves to bully, manipulate and get his way. Just did'nt happen this time. Have you guys played this map? Do you realize how much skill it takes to get to the end of this thing? Give a guy some credit and please do not create false conclusions based on limited information. P

[Evil Semp]

Locking this. To many comments that don't add anything to this thread. If anyone has any information that they think is needed just send me a PM.

[Evil Semp]

Point sharing is an agreement which two [or more] players from a multi player game agree to let one of them win and then let the other win multiple 1v1 games to even out the points from the multi player game. Deliberately throwing a games is not allowed and is considered a major infraction.

Pershing has received a WARNING for game throwing. This is his second major infraction so he will also receive a 1 MONTH VACATION from CC.

Doing our research we found several more members of CC who engaged in this activity with Pershing. Ciglione, aglenist and celliottii also have received WARNINGS for game throwing. All players mentioned here have also been blocked from playing any ore games together.

There may or may not be more warnings issued as we dig further into this sink hole.

[killboy108]

Point sharing is an agreement which two [or more] players from a multi player game agree to let one of them win and then let the other win multiple 1v1 games to even out the points from the multi player game. Deliberately throwing a games is not allowed and is considered a major infraction.

The cheating & abuse report I lodged specifically mentioned "secret diplomacy" along with evidence to prove it.
(these players made this agreement outside of the game chat, involving eliminating the other remaining players, in a game that was not in stalemate)

Is the Cheating/Abuse Team still investigating this?

I believe that raising a separate punishment for "secret diplomacy" should also be applied to both of the accused players.

Thanks for your time you've put in to investigate & provide an outcome.

[killboy108]

The premise that I am contacting someone and saying hay let's gang on on some players and split points is absurd.

"But Cellioti decided it was better to make it a one on one with me. Then we discussed one on one or split."THIS WAS NOT IN THE GAME CHAT
2014-05-25 07:17:26 - Pershing: "Cellioti go for the Gusto!" (ie, "this is you're win buddy, as you've already given me my share of the points with the 1 on 1 wins").

Let's stick with facts I admit I took or gave points as a way to end a game that I felt was deadlocked

THE GAME WAS NOT DEADLOCKED! (Every round players were still attacking)…. very weak to suggest this game was deadlocked.

you admitted to do the same in your deadlocked games suiciding yourself and giving your points to another player based on an agreement made on the outcome of another game.

Yes, an agreement to play a decider game, made in the game chat, agreed on by all remaining players, in a game where everyone agreed it had reached a deadlock.
THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO!

The big problem I have about this whole thing including these accussations is the idea I contacted Cellioti or anyone specifically and said let's play a game and team up on everyone else. That is total BS! Never happened.

"But Cellioti decided it was better to make it a one on one with me. Then we discussed one on one or split."
2014-05-25 07:17:26 - Pershing: "Cellioti go for the Gusto!" (ie, "this is you're win buddy, as you've already given me my share of the points with the 1 on 1 wins").

[jltile1]

Great job , but sure a point drop right? You cannot let him have those point right ?

[Evil Semp]

Great job , but sure a point drop right? You cannot let him have those point right ?

That is up to admin to decide.

Point sharing is an agreement which two [or more] players from a multi player game agree to let one of them win and then let the other win multiple 1v1 games to even out the points from the multi player game. Deliberately throwing a games is not allowed and is considered a major infraction.

The cheating & abuse report I lodged specifically mentioned "secret diplomacy" along with evidence to prove it.
(these players made this agreement outside of the game chat, involving eliminating the other remaining players, in a game that was not in stalemate)

Is the Cheating/Abuse Team still investigating this?

I believe that raising a separate punishment for "secret diplomacy" should also be applied to both of the accused players.

Thanks for your time you've put in to investigate & provide an outcome.

I blocked these players from playing any more games together because of the secret diplomacy. I am sorry I didn't make that distinction clearer in my post.

[killboy108]

Pershing has received a WARNING for game throwing. This is his second major infraction so he will also receive a 1 MONTH VACATION from CC.

2014-06-03 13:43:26 - Pershing ended the turn

When does Pershing's 1 Month vacation start.... He's still taking his turns!?

[Shannon Apple]

He's not permabanned, so he can still take his turns. He can't start/join new games, or post on the forums for that month.

[killboy108]

He's not permabanned, so he can still take his turns. He can't start/join new games, or post on the forums for that month.

Really!?.... That's not much of a punishment. I sometimes go a month without joining a game or posting in a forum.

This is a guy who has been caught (For the 2nd time) systematically illegally stripping points off players (as shown in this forum).

I assumed he would have at least had his points levelled out from his ban making him deadbeat in any outstanding games he was active in.

Well.... It's not my decision to make....

Maybe the 3rd time he is caught with a major infractment from the rules he can receive another month's break from posting in a forum/joining a new game

[Koganosi]

He's not permabanned, so he can still take his turns. He can't start/join new games, or post on the forums for that month.

Really!?.... That's not much of a punishment. I sometimes go a month without joining a game or posting in a forum.

This is a guy who has been caught (For the 2nd time) systematically illegally stripping points off players (as shown in this forum).

I assumed he would have at least had his points levelled out from his ban making him deadbeat in any outstanding games he was active in.

Well.... It's not my decision to make....

Maybe the 3rd time he is caught with a major infractment from the rules he can receive another month's break from posting in a forum/joining a new game

3 major infractment is a perma ban, then he is done, cant even finish his games!

Urs

Koganosi

[jghost7]

I do not know any specific details from the games. That being said, I think the pertinent question is whether "point-splitting" is legal under the site rules.

From the Community Guidelines:

Point Dumping

If you are found guilty of Point Dumping, that is, the intentional losing of games via any means, with the intention of causing chaos in the form of griefing, passing points to other people, or manually "resetting" points to a lower score.

Note: Because of the nature of Point Dumping, your account will be suspended upon discovery, and will remain suspended to protect the account and the website during the investigation. The Investigative Suspension is not factored into Disciplinary Time Served.

Point Dumping Infraction disciplinary levels are as follows:
1. 1 Month Website Vacation
2. Permanent Website Vacation
Note: Users retain the right to rebuttal via E-tickets as with any Infraction.

It would seem that this action is in direct violation of this rule. It is not even in a grey area. It is not permitted now, nor should it ever be. There is too much potential for cheating and abuse.

Thanks,

J

While S&D might be a little harder to prove, the thing written by Jghost7 here, is a clear clean violation of the rule!

I dont even in the slighest think that splitting points like this is a good idea, just for this soul purpose! Especially also if this game wasnt in stalemate yet with the number of players in it. If people dont want stalemates like this they should go for round limits or escalating games, dont point split a game after 30 rounds, just never do it!!!

If in any case a stalement then go for the approved method of a tiebreaker game!

Urs

Koganosi

There is a question involving the punishment scales and how this is not covered under the point dumping rule here.


Thanks,

J

[jghost7]

Note: I have moved focus here from the other thread as it pertains more to this case....

This case was point dumping which is a special infraction, which has its own escalation scale

I didnt' handle the other case, but it was for game throwing. That is a major infraction and follows the Warning, 30-day, permaban scale.

Weve got Major, Minor, or Special. I hope that helps.

Thanks BG. It does somewhat. However, I don't understand how it got classified only under game throwing. How was it determined that it fit there as opposed to the point dumping rule? There was obviously intent to 'pass points to other people', which is clearly defined within the point dumping definition.

I do not know any specific details from the games. That being said, I think the pertinent question is whether "point-splitting" is legal under the site rules.

From the Community Guidelines:

Point Dumping

If you are found guilty of Point Dumping, that is, the intentional losing of games via any means, with the intention of causing chaos in the form of griefing, passing points to other people, or manually "resetting" points to a lower score.

Note: Because of the nature of Point Dumping, your account will be suspended upon discovery, and will remain suspended to protect the account and the website during the investigation. The Investigative Suspension is not factored into Disciplinary Time Served.

Point Dumping Infraction disciplinary levels are as follows:
1. 1 Month Website Vacation
2. Permanent Website Vacation
Note: Users retain the right to rebuttal via E-tickets as with any Infraction.

It would seem that this action is in direct violation of this rule. It is not even in a grey area. It is not permitted now, nor should it ever be. There is too much potential for cheating and abuse.

Thanks,

J

I also see where game throwing and illegal point collecting are listed as major infractions as well, but they are listed separately. I would assume from this as they can be done independently from one another and hence have their own charge. So, if you classified this in the major infractions category, would you then be charged with 1 count of game throwing, and 1 count of illegal point collecting? If guilty would you then skip to the second step of the punishment scale?

But since this is more clearly and comprehensively covered in the point dumping rule, would it not be more prudent to cover it under this rule? Wouldn't the result, if fairly applied, be the same?

Here is another question;

Point Splitting, or 'Point Sharing' as ES labeled it, was not directly addressed under his reply to the charges. I am assuming since he stated after defining it, that deliberately throwing games is illegal, then by definition 'Point Sharing' is also illegal? I think that this is an important point from that case, his quote below:

Point sharing is an agreement which two [or more] players from a multi player game agree to let one of them win and then let the other win multiple 1v1 games to even out the points from the multi player game. Deliberately throwing a games is not allowed and is considered a major infraction.

Pershing has received a WARNING for game throwing. This is his second major infraction so he will also receive a 1 MONTH VACATION from CC.

Doing our research we found several more members of CC who engaged in this activity with Pershing. Ciglione, aglenist and celliottii also have received WARNINGS for game throwing. All players mentioned here have also been blocked from playing any ore games together.

There may or may not be more warnings issued as we dig further into this sink hole.

I would just like to know so that when it comes back up again, we will know what to expect. I can see how it could be classified under both special and major, but I would expect in the case of Point Splitting or 'Point Sharing', either designation would end up with similar punishments.

I think that it specifically needs to be stated as such in order to deter future instances of it.

Thanks for the help,

J