Conquer Club

These are suspected Secret Alliances

Suspect users: roadwarrior

Game number: http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=1358911

Comments: He wrote me this pm to gain info on a FOG game to find out where people are and obviously says that if I cheat with him, then he'll remember me and return the favor based off of both his subject "quid pro quo" & his body text. I don't know if he got someone else to help him or not. Guess you'd have to check ev1s pms in our game (but if he did it this time with me...you think it's the first?) :

From: roadwarrior
To: luckywar
Posted: 10 Dec 2007 22:39
Subject: quid pro quo
Would you be interested to exchange some info regards troops deployments in our classic fog game?
If yes, then I will keep you in mind

EDIT: joecoolfrog confirms he received a similar message in game.

<luckywar>

I called him out in our game, he responded in a pm that I overreacted, and I responded it was my duty to turn him in because he's a cheater, so he called me a prig, "a person who demands pointless conformity", well, I don't think I should or the people of this site should stand for cheaters. Cheating is not something we should allow, and not adhere too, they must conform to the rules of this site.

Many of you read these msgs on a regular basis, did I fill out this form wrong? Or am I in the wrong for turning him in, a prig as he says? Or should he punished?

Since this is his first report for a case like this, this is noted. This case shall be seen as an "attempted secret alliance" against roadwarrior. Thank you for the report.

It is sad to see that so many people feel they can only get ahead by cheating. I am sure that roadwarrior is not the first to try this nor the last. I'm happy to see that one of my pals (luckywar) is NOT one of them. Thanks for posting this. I know I wouldn't want to play with roadwarrior if that is what he is doing.

Rule #2: No secret alliances

Any form of collusion between opponents must be announced beforehand in the game chat, in English or in a language all players understand. Secret alliances can be hard to prove, but if you suspect one you should leave the players in question negative feedback. If the players have a history of suspected secret alliances consider reporting it following the instructions at the top of the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum.

Luckywar, I am saddened that you have posted in the forum like this.

When I messaged you and Joecoolfrog, it was not my intention to get you both to be cheats or to cheat as you supposed. In your case, you just replied “Say what?” which did not inform me anything. That was why I said never mind since I was sure I will receive clarification later on (which came from Joe).

Joecoolfrog informed me that the condition is for any exchange of information must be divulged in the game chat and that seems fair to me too (I have only played the fog maybe a 3rd time and the rules are unknown to me unlike a more experienced player). The first was a 1 vs 1and the 2nd game was a triples format so that no situation has occurred to me before.

Now I know that If I were to divulge any info, I will let everyone know in the game chat as Joecoolfrog says.

This was why I told you that you have assumed the worst that an action is already commited before the actual. Could it be possible that you have jumped the gun here?

I do not think I need to say anything more since I know I am not a cheater and I simply just play the game in a fair manner.

come on... you know better than this, those rules doesn't just apply for fog wars, they are a universal rule in the game, if your looking for alliances or truces or ?? you do it in the gamechat, so it's open for everybody to read. PM someone in a game you are involved with asking them for favors is cheating.

Tyran72 wrote:come on... you know better than this, those rules doesn't just apply for fog wars, they are a universal rule in the game, if your looking for alliances or truces or ?? you do it in the gamechat, so it's open for everybody to read. PM someone in a game you are involved with asking them for favors is cheating.

Exactly Tyran!

Update, another person in our game admitted receiving a pm of asking where troops were! Amazing!

Update, another person in our game admitted receiving a pm of asking where troops were! Amazing![/quoted by luckywar]

Luckywar, please stop spreading lies like this. Nego has fooled you because it is easy to take advantage of your fantasies about a non existent secret alliance.

roadwarrior wrote:Update, another person in our game admitted receiving a pm of asking where troops were! Amazing![/quoted by luckywar]

Luckywar, please stop spreading lies like this. Nego has fooled you because it is easy to take advantage of your fantasies about a non existent secret alliance.

Are you mental? Seriously. Now you're saying that not only did I misunderstood you in your pm (that is above for anyone to read and your intentions are obvious, and already ruled by the MOD "attempted secret alliance"), but also 2 other people that received the same pm AND REFUSED YOU as I did made it up? And they openly accused you of cheating just to fool me? This is what you're saying? Why not say a butterfly flew into your ear and took control of you for a day, and that cheating ass message you wrote wasn't really you. That would make more sense! You may want to stop typing in the forum showing everyone how you are a pathological LIAR and CHEAT.

luckywar wrote:

roadwarrior wrote:Update, another person in our game admitted receiving a pm of asking where troops were! Amazing![/quoted by luckywar]

Luckywar, please stop spreading lies like this. Nego has fooled you because it is easy to take advantage of your fantasies about a non existent secret alliance.

Are you mental? Seriously. Now you're saying that not only did I misunderstood you in your pm (that is above for anyone to read and your intentions are obvious, and already ruled by the MOD "attempted secret alliance"), but also 2 other people that received the same pm AND REFUSED YOU as I did made it up? And they openly accused you of cheating just to fool me? This is what you're saying? Why not say a butterfly flew into your ear and took control of you for a day, and that cheating ass message you wrote wasn't really you. That would make more sense! You may want to stop typing in the forum showing everyone how you are a pathological LIAR and CHEAT.

Actually I am being accused falsely by you and it you who is the liar and a self righteous prig. See below for your false accusations.

007-12-12 15:33:23 - luckywar: So, now you've asked 3 people in one game to cheat with you...wow.

Actually I am being accused falsely by you and it you who is the liar and a self righteous prig. See below for your false accusations.

007-12-12 15:33:23 - luckywar: So, now you've asked 3 people in one game to cheat with you...wow.

LIAR AND A CHEAT
I'll spell it out for you.

1st person
2007-12-11 07:34:44 - joecoolfrog: I got the same message and replied that all information must be openly discussed here on chat

2nd person
2007-12-12 03:19:36 - negoeien: well roadwarrior , you should clearly realis you are wrong here. I also got your >PM and you would've exchanged information if i agreed.
2007-12-12 03:20:12 - negoeien: However I play the game with honour and not with cheap tactics. Honestly I had expected more on your behalf

3rd person
see first post, that's me!

I can go round for round with you. You're making yourself look worse and worse. Can you add? There's 3 people there! Why in an accusation of YOU CHEATING do you profess about me lying about 3 people? You just argue to try to save yourself about small trivial points. And I"M STILL RIGHT!

Now everyone can see 3 people accuse you of attempting to cheat. GFY

Actually, during the game, nego played a trick on luckywar about a message from me. I do not know why Nego would want to trick Luckywar, maybe he thought it was fun to trick a moron.

Nego showed no proof because there was no such message in the first place. Even without proof, Luckywar was eager to believe nego, as he was fond of accusing me. So he falsely accused me of forming secret alliance with nego in the game chat (of course there was no such thing). So look for yourselves:

2007-12-12 15:33:23 - luckywar: So, now you've asked 3 people in one game to cheat with you...wow.

If the game chat was not enough, Lucky showed how malicious he was to accuse me in the forums too. That is why I said that luckywar is a liar and a false accuser and prone to fantasise about secret alliances. I do not know why he is so "secret alliances" centric to the point of imagining nonsense. Regards the attempts to form secret alliance with him and one other, well they don't exist and just boils down to his own fantasies in the same fashion above.

I do not know if at the end of the game whether luckywar realised how stupid he was to make such false accusations.

i'm pretty sure the mods got it correct.-0

roadwarrior, a liar and cheater ...no way. I'm sure this is just a misunderstanding which could have been handled in an amicable manner.

According to the historical games, roadwarrior preferred to play against opponents of somewhat equal or higher strength. This clearly demonstrate that roadwarrior can survive to win such challenges, sometimes.

I am a regular of roadwarrior's triples team, road would take great pains to lay down each and every minute details of our battle plan for all the rounds fervently (like Blitzaholic ) in the Team's Game Chat and dictate only the hottest pace which are highly efficient and effective.

roadwarrior has most of the prerequisites if not all already, to excel in this game without resorting to break CC's rules guidelines intentionally.

what do the mods say?

Blitzaholic wrote:what do the mods say?

Since this is his first report for a case like this, this is noted. This case shall be seen as an "attempted secret alliance" against roadwarrior. Thank you for the report.
king achilles
Staff


not sure how it can be just an "attempted secret alliance" just on the fact it was his first time. That really doesnt make any sense. Either it was an attempt or it wasnt. If it was, than a punishment needs to be enforced. Not sure why we are turning the cheek when there are multi parties claming that he tried to cheat with them. I guess I will never figure these things out.

I think he's a liar... personally (no offence to anyone)

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:

Blitzaholic wrote:what do the mods say?

Since this is his first report for a case like this, this is noted. This case shall be seen as an "attempted secret alliance" against roadwarrior. Thank you for the report.
king achilles
Staff


not sure how it can be just an "attempted secret alliance" just on the fact it was his first time. That really doesnt make any sense. Either it was an attempt or it wasnt. If it was, than a punishment needs to be enforced. Not sure why we are turning the cheek when there are multi parties claming that he tried to cheat with them. I guess I will never figure these things out.

No Johnny- you are right on. Yet another terrible ruling. It was indeed obvious that he tried to cheat. It didn't work because all parties declined to participate. They turned him in instead. Ruling is garbage.

3 very credible sources- LuckyWar, Negoeien, and JoeCoolFrog. If any one of these came forward it would be extremely credible but all three? That's a pretty solid case.

Scott-Land wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:

Blitzaholic wrote:what do the mods say?

Since this is his first report for a case like this, this is noted. This case shall be seen as an "attempted secret alliance" against roadwarrior. Thank you for the report.
king achilles
Staff


not sure how it can be just an "attempted secret alliance" just on the fact it was his first time. That really doesnt make any sense. Either it was an attempt or it wasnt. If it was, than a punishment needs to be enforced. Not sure why we are turning the cheek when there are multi parties claming that he tried to cheat with them. I guess I will never figure these things out.

No Johnny- you are right on. Yet another terrible ruling. It was indeed obvious that he tried to cheat. It didn't work because all parties declined to participate. They turned him in instead. Ruling is garbage.

3 very credible sources- LuckyWar, Negoeien, and JoeCoolFrog. If any one of these came forward it would be extremely credible but all three? That's a pretty solid case.

Scott-please read the thread and avoid putting out misinformation like this. The mods have ruled in your case and based on your own standards, you are a cheat. Remember by the measure you mete out on others, expect the same to be meted out you. I shall not dignify your malicious accusations further

When roadwarrior said that there was no pm to negoeien, then I believe that's the truth.

If luckywar or joecoolfrog would decide to accept the exchange of territorial info., I'm sure roadwarrior will definitely provide those details in the Game Chat period ...that's the standard procedure to follow.

roadwarrior wrote:

Scott-Land wrote:

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:Since this is his first report for a case like this, this is noted. This case shall be seen as an "attempted secret alliance" against roadwarrior. Thank you for the report.
king achilles
Staff


not sure how it can be just an "attempted secret alliance" just on the fact it was his first time. That really doesnt make any sense. Either it was an attempt or it wasnt. If it was, than a punishment needs to be enforced. Not sure why we are turning the cheek when there are multi parties claming that he tried to cheat with them. I guess I will never figure these things out.

No Johnny- you are right on. Yet another terrible ruling. It was indeed obvious that he tried to cheat. It didn't work because all parties declined to participate. They turned him in instead. Ruling is garbage.

3 very credible sources- LuckyWar, Negoeien, and JoeCoolFrog. If any one of these came forward it would be extremely credible but all three? That's a pretty solid case.

Scott-please read the thread and avoid putting out misinformation like this. The mods have ruled in your case and based on your own standards, you are a cheat. Remember by the measure you mete out on others, expect the same to be meted out you. I shall not dignify your malicious accusations further

Hehee-- by your own reasoning.... noted is guilty?

For me- there are games that are supposedly in question- this noted is because it was your first time being caught. A huge difference-- where no evidence but allegations were put forth against me, you on the other hand were found guilty and because it was your first time , they gave you a slap on the wrist as JR put it.

There wasnt a secret alliance from what i can see. Accused was asking for information where other parties where in a fog game! this is not an alliance. Simply an exchange of information. If accepted by other player than it still wouldnt be alliance becuase they arent attacking an other player or joing forces to attack another player.

Furthermore, maybe after swapping information the said players might have declared it in chat. Who knows. Nobody coz an alliance wasnt formed and information wasnt swapped!

lets stop draggin up old topics and move on. whoever dragged up this topic should be forum banned or warned for TRolling

can we have a ruling on this trolling , please mods?

hulmey wrote:There wasnt a secret alliance from what i can see. Accused was asking for information where other parties where in a fog game! this is not an alliance. Simply an exchange of information. If accepted by other player than it still wouldnt be alliance becuase they arent attacking an other player or joing forces to attack another player.

Furthermore, maybe after swapping information the said players might have declared it in chat. Who knows. Nobody coz an alliance wasnt formed and information wasnt swapped!

lets stop draggin up old topics and move on. whoever dragged up this topic should be forum banned or warned for TRolling

can we have a ruling on this trolling , please mods?

The mods ruled this as an "attempted secret alliance". This means, that roadwarrior tried, but failed to make a secret alliance. The fact that RW was asking for information in a FoW game isn't against the rules, but the fact that he used pm's to try to achieve this, is. Theres no other way around it. Roadwarrior tried to cheat by pming people in his games for FoW information.

Who knows, maybe he actually did end up with a secret alliance with someone? This, in my opinion is more likely than your suggestion about a player and roadwarrior declaring in the gamechat that they had exchanged pm's regarding the positions of people in a FoW game (which is against the rules).

poo-maker wrote:

hulmey wrote:There wasnt a secret alliance from what i can see. Accused was asking for information where other parties where in a fog game! this is not an alliance. Simply an exchange of information. If accepted by other player than it still wouldnt be alliance becuase they arent attacking an other player or joing forces to attack another player.

Furthermore, maybe after swapping information the said players might have declared it in chat. Who knows. Nobody coz an alliance wasnt formed and information wasnt swapped!

lets stop draggin up old topics and move on. whoever dragged up this topic should be forum banned or warned for TRolling

can we have a ruling on this trolling , please mods?

The mods ruled this as an "attempted secret alliance". This means, that roadwarrior tried, but failed to make a secret alliance. The fact that RW was asking for information in a FoW game isn't against the rules, but the fact that he used pm's to try to achieve this, is. Theres no other way around it. Roadwarrior tried to cheat by pming people in his games for FoW information.

Who knows, maybe he actually did end up with a secret alliance with someone? This, in my opinion is more likely than your suggestion about a player and roadwarrior declaring in the gamechat that they had exchanged pm's regarding the positions of people in a FoW game (which is against the rules).

Surely that's after the fact Poo ? If any one of them accepted Road's offer, it wouldn't had been declared in chat. It was a way to cover his own ass when he got rejected?

Ha. Well if this was a legitimate attempt to form an alliance it was an incredibly incompetent one. Why weren't these proposals made in chat? Why over PM? If two or three players had agreed and then it was announced in chat, as roadwarrior claims would have happened, it's only natural that everyone would be pissed off to realize they were all suddenly feeding info to one player. And what are the terms? There ain't nothing here but a vague promise of quid pro quo. There properly ought to have been a proposal to share info of a definite value, e.g. troop number for troop number, enemy position for enemy position, with specific countries and frequency of occurrence e.g. one info for one info. Otherwise disagreements on relative information value are inevitable. You basically asked a player to let them be taken advantage of.

Seriously, roadwarrior, if you are legit learn to make better alliance proposals in the future. It's no surprise at all that people find this fumbling attempt shady.