Cheating to get to conqueror

[krusher]

DiM your an ass hole dude you feed on peoples missery your the lowest form of player in this site the guy who trys to kill the guy in top just because he cant get there him self.

[kwanton]

Someone's mad cuz they got caught

[Visaoni]

the rules dont say that u have to get to the top to be banned for secret alligances... they say if you do it you will be banned. and i take krusher's post a s a confesion

Nowhere did he admit guilt. He just said he thinks the allegations are stupid because it wouldn't have won him any points.

I just said that, secret alliance or not, by far the vast majority of his points appear to be fairly won. I hardly think loosing a few more points in 10 games would drop him down far.

why is cheating/abuse/bending the rules permited? i say permited because encouraged feels a little too harsh despite the fact that by not punishing the guilty you actually encourage future cheaters to do it.

i want a mod to ask the following question:

if tomorrow i take control of 1 other account (a friends account. easy to check by ip that we aren't the same) and play as a sitter with that account and mine at the same time will i be banned or receive a simple warning?

i want a clear answer because if i'm told a simple warning will be issued then i'll start doing it tomorrow, if i'm told i'll be banned then i request a ban for skyt and his accomplices.

It is called "bending the rules" for a reason. If it were illegal, it would be breaking, not bending them. It is impossible to remove the ability to bend the rules. I suppose it would be possible with direct statements that make no allowances, but then how do you incorporate many of the unwritten rules? Using such statements, losing because you aren't good at the game or misclicked could easily be grounds for banning. There would also have to be numerous other changes in the way the site runs for this to work.

You don't seem to understand something simple with SkyT. At the time he did what he did, it was not expressly against the rules. It was a grey area. Banning people for a grey area is rather harsh; you might as well execute someone for stealing a candy bar.

The rules have now changed. What he did is no longer legal. Is he doing it any longer? No! You can't change a law and then punish people for breaking it before it was a law. What if the mods made a rule tomorrow that said if you express discontent with the way then handle things you can be banned. They then proceed to ban you, citing this post as evidence. Is that fair? Hardly.

actually you're wrong here. there are 3 types of users.
1. cheaters. will do it anytime on any game
2. non-cheaters. they won't cheat even if everybody does it and they'd rather leave a game where everybody cheats rather than stay and join them
3. other users. they generally don't cheat but if they join a game where people cheat constantly and they realize the only way of being first is to cheat then they will do it.

what we have here is a player that got to #1 by doing something illegal. if a guy in the 3rd category sees he did that and he escaped then he will surely do it. it's like showing everybody how to cheat and get away with it.

Show me one. I have run into people that are against cheating and I have run into those that do it themselves. I've never seen anybody say they only cheated because they saw others doing it. Well, I have, but they also cheat in any other games I've played with them in so... I'd call them cheaters.

[DiM]

the rules dont say that u have to get to the top to be banned for secret alligances... they say if you do it you will be banned. and i take krusher's post a s a confesion

Nowhere did he admit guilt. He just said he thinks the allegations are stupid because it wouldn't have won him any points.

I just said that, secret alliance or not, by far the vast majority of his points appear to be fairly won. I hardly think loosing a few more points in 10 games would drop him down far.

why is cheating/abuse/bending the rules permited? i say permited because encouraged feels a little too harsh despite the fact that by not punishing the guilty you actually encourage future cheaters to do it.

i want a mod to ask the following question:

if tomorrow i take control of 1 other account (a friends account. easy to check by ip that we aren't the same) and play as a sitter with that account and mine at the same time will i be banned or receive a simple warning?

i want a clear answer because if i'm told a simple warning will be issued then i'll start doing it tomorrow, if i'm told i'll be banned then i request a ban for skyt and his accomplices.

You don't seem to understand something simple with SkyT. At the time he did what he did, it was not expressly against the rules. It was a grey area. Banning people for a grey area is rather harsh; you might as well execute someone for stealing a candy bar.

The rules have now changed. What he did is no longer legal. Is he doing it any longer? No! You can't change a law and then punish people for breaking it before it was a law. What if the mods made a rule tomorrow that said if you express discontent with the way then handle things you can be banned. They then proceed to ban you, citing this post as evidence. Is that fair? Hardly.

at the time he did that he new multiple accounts are off limits and what he did was really close to multiple accounts. he knew very well what he was getting into.

i have thought of several ways of cheating/abusing/bending the rules by simply looking for loopholes in the system. if i start doing this should i be banned or simply warned? would it be right to take advantage of such loopholes or should i report them to the mods so that they can change the rules and prevent exploitation of such loopholes?

skyt was fully aware that what he is doing is wrong and yet he continued to do it with the sole purpose of getting to #1. only because of this he should receive a score reset a blocking to play with his partners and a stern warning EVEN if this wasn't in the rules. he broke the first rule of any game FAIR PLAY. ever heard of that?

[DiM]

actually you're wrong here. there are 3 types of users.
1. cheaters. will do it anytime on any game
2. non-cheaters. they won't cheat even if everybody does it and they'd rather leave a game where everybody cheats rather than stay and join them
3. other users. they generally don't cheat but if they join a game where people cheat constantly and they realize the only way of being first is to cheat then they will do it.

what we have here is a player that got to #1 by doing something illegal. if a guy in the 3rd category sees he did that and he escaped then he will surely do it. it's like showing everybody how to cheat and get away with it.

Show me one. I have run into people that are against cheating and I have run into those that do it themselves. I've never seen anybody say they only cheated because they saw others doing it. Well, I have, but they also cheat in any other games I've played with them in so... I'd call them cheaters.

ok you edited while i was writing the post above so here goes.

best example. travian. have you ever played it?

it used to be a very nice game. now it's completely worthless because they introduced in game advantages that can be bought for real money. like if lackattack would introduce premium plus where you attack with 5 dice for 50$ per year.

anyway. i played travian for a few years and won the server (a game lasted ~1year then the server is reset) a few times.

we were a few players totally outnumbered but we had 1 thing, we were a very select clan made of romanians only and all of us were proven good players. unlike other clans that had loads of uncoordinated poor players from all over the world. so we kicked butt the first time. after the reset everybody knew our strength and despite our cunning ability at the game we had to come up with something extra because everybody was attacking us. so we started a phenomenon later called as "pushing". we picked a few players and artificially increased their strength. so we obtained some uber accounts that were actually controlled by up to 10 players that had huge armies 10-20 times more than anybody even dreamed of having. with such a strategy we won again.
at the next reset everybody was "pushing" there wasn't a single serious alliance that didn't use this tactic. so seeing this the mods employed new rules people were banned etc. so you see, because 50 people bent the rules and won 20 thousand more started doing the same thing because they saw no punishment was taken from the start.

[Visaoni]

at the time he did that he new multiple accounts are off limits and what he did was really close to multiple accounts. he knew very well what he was getting into.

i have thought of several ways of cheating/abusing/bending the rules by simply looking for loopholes in the system. if i start doing this should i be banned or simply warned? would it be right to take advantage of such loopholes or should i report them to the mods so that they can change the rules and prevent exploitation of such loopholes?

skyt was fully aware that what he is doing is wrong and yet he continued to do it with the sole purpose of getting to #1. only because of this he should receive a score reset a blocking to play with his partners and a stern warning EVEN if this wasn't in the rules. he broke the first rule of any game FAIR PLAY. ever heard of that?

The point is he didn't have multiple accounts. Damn close, yes, but the multi-hunters have determined them to be separate accounts. Therefor, it was not against the rules.

You can't go throwing around arbitrary words and phrases like "fair play" when it comes to rules. The rules need to say what is and what isn't fair play. Different people consider different things fair or not which is why it is up to the rules to determine fair and unfair.

According to the rules at the time, what he did was fair. Is it now? No. That doesn't change the fact that what he did, when he did it, was fair according to the rules of this site. The rules are what matter.

[firth4eva]

Why do you care?

[Piestar]

Wow, this topic braings so many threads I've been in together, but to me, it comes down to this.

The points and the ranks only serve to motivate negative behavior, but without the lure, a lot fewer people would want to play here.

Put those two ideas together, and it tells you a lot about the influence of the internet, and the anonymity it allows, on the ideas of fairness, and good sportsmanship.

Myself, I've never enjoyed playing people I could defeat easily, there is no value in a victory that was not a challenge... My most cherished games, particularly in Chess and raquetball, invloved defeating players who were better then me.

But I know many a leet individual who has MORE fun cheating, then actually in playing the game. The rankings only motivate poeple who sit on the fence on this issue to join the side of the cheaters.

CC attracts both kinds of players, but clearly the internet greatly favors those who find cheating more fun then enjoying a game.

And there is nothing the mods, or Lack, can really do about it. There is always a way around... you can even fake your IP, if you care enough. It's crazy...

Myself, I think I'm about wrung out in the games department, but I suspect I will stick around and try to design maps, and chat, because despite my poor showing in the games, I do find a lot of the people fun to talk to.

Oh well...

[Visaoni]

Perhaps I should make something clear, just so it doesn't bite me on the ass later.

I support DiM's ideas about cheating being bad, I just think he is going overboard. I did not play freestyle before due to the possible abuses. I tried it after and found it is still not to my liking. I prefer knowing who is going when etc.

By my own standards how SkyT got to the top is not what I'd consider fair play. I have no opinion on krusher as I really have not delved into the matter much. My statements so far have been off what himself and other's have said in this thread.

I'm just playing devil's advocate in a case where my own feelings and beliefs are being carried to an extreme.

The points and the ranks only serve to motivate negative behavior, but without the lure, a lot fewer people would want to play here.

Put those two ideas together, and it tells you a lot about the influence of the internet, and the anonymity it allows, on the ideas of fairness, and good sportsmanship.

I disagree. The points and ranks also serve to make people more competitive. It makes people play a better game. If people are just doing something to waste time, they might not care much about it. If there is some competition going on, they are going to play their best. Among friends this isn't needed, because there are only so many of you and you all have a pretty good idea of how the ranking goes. When you win you can also brag right then and there to their face.

Myself, I've never enjoyed playing people I could defeat easily, there is no value in a victory that was not a challenge... My most cherished games, particularly in Chess and raquetball, invloved defeating players who were better then me.

But I know many a leet individual who has MORE fun cheating, then actually in playing the game. The rankings only motivate poeple who sit on the fence on this issue to join the side of the cheaters.

CC attracts both kinds of players, but clearly the internet greatly favors those who find cheating more fun then enjoying a game.

Once again, I disagree. In all games and sports there are those that are willing to go further than others to be the best. Sometimes they merely bend the rules, sometimes they flat our break them. Look at pro sports, and tell me if you think more of them are or aren't following the rules about steroids?

I think CC attracts more people who want a good game than those who want to cheat. I'd actually argue that for the vast majority of games, but especially CC. This is a game of strategy and tactics, not just another FPS. Even for FPS's I'd argue more want a good game than to cheat. The cheaters are just the ones that annoy you more.

Myself, I think I'm about wrung out in the games department, but I suspect I will stick around and try to design maps, and chat, because despite my poor showing in the games, I do find a lot of the people fun to talk to.

Oh well...

You've played 17 games. Don't give up yet.

[DiM]

at the time he did that he new multiple accounts are off limits and what he did was really close to multiple accounts. he knew very well what he was getting into.

i have thought of several ways of cheating/abusing/bending the rules by simply looking for loopholes in the system. if i start doing this should i be banned or simply warned? would it be right to take advantage of such loopholes or should i report them to the mods so that they can change the rules and prevent exploitation of such loopholes?

skyt was fully aware that what he is doing is wrong and yet he continued to do it with the sole purpose of getting to #1. only because of this he should receive a score reset a blocking to play with his partners and a stern warning EVEN if this wasn't in the rules. he broke the first rule of any game FAIR PLAY. ever heard of that?

The point is he didn't have multiple accounts. Damn close, yes, but the multi-hunters have determined them to be separate accounts. Therefor, it was not against the rules.

You can't go throwing around arbitrary words and phrases like "fair play" when it comes to rules. The rules need to say what is and what isn't fair play. Different people consider different things fair or not which is why it is up to the rules to determine fair and unfair.

According to the rules at the time, what he did was fair. Is it now? No. That doesn't change the fact that what he did, when he did it, was fair according to the rules of this site. The rules are what matter.

ok so if i come up with a way to cheat and get 5000 points before i'm caught and then that becomes illegal i can say i played fair?

according to your judgement i am fair.

also you have to make a difference between fair and legal. what skyt did was legal (barely) but unfair.


earlier i posted this:

let's go back in time when a guy (can't remember his name) wanted to get to score 1 in order to get lots and lots of points from a win. what if that situation was not discovered in time and he actually would have gotten let's say a million points. do you think he would have been allowed to keep them? i highly doubt it. i believe he would have been given an immediate reset despite not cheating.

that guy found a loophole and he was trying to get lots of points before lack noticed and changed the rules to stop him. skyt was faster than the mods and managed to get to #1 before what he did became illegal. should he still be allowed to keep his points? in order to answer this question you must answer the previous one would the guy in the quote have been allowed to keep his million points?

[DiM]

Perhaps I should make something clear, just so it doesn't bite me on the ass later.

I support DiM's ideas about cheating being bad, I just think he is going overboard. I did not play freestyle before due to the possible abuses. I tried it after and found it is still not to my liking. I prefer knowing who is going when etc.

By my own standards how SkyT got to the top is not what I'd consider fair play. I have no opinion on krusher as I really have not delved into the matter much. My statements so far have been off what himself and other's have said in this thread.

I'm just playing devil's advocate in a case where my own feelings and beliefs are being carried to an extreme.

playing devil's advocate is tricky and in the end you might get burned. don't do it.

i see you have again fastposted me about the fair/legal thing.
skyt was legal but unfair and i belive fairness should be the one supreme rule in every game. there should be just one rule. FAIR PLAY and everybody should no that it includes no multies no secret alliances and so on. unfortunatelly people want to cheat and to fully prevent cheating you actually must hire a lawyer and make a 100 page long manuscript with rules where he attends to each and every possible cheating/abuse/ rule bending scenario.
because CC lacks such a big rule book there's bound to appear more and more cheaters/abusers/rule benders that are willing to spoil the fun of all others just to get to #1.

i believe that lack and his mods are more than able to judge what is fair and what is not and apply the fairness rule.

FAIRNESS RULE:

if you do anything unfair (cheating abusing rule bending) you will be punished according to the extent of the damage you've done.

simple as that. if you feel you've been punished unfairly then just quit and go play another game. but i'm sure no unfair punishments will be done since randomly punishing innocents would be bad for business because people will leave.

[Visaoni]

ok so if i come up with a way to cheat and get 5000 points before i'm caught and then that becomes illegal i can say i played fair?

according to your judgement i am fair.

also you have to make a difference between fair and legal. what skyt did was legal (barely) but unfair.

Going by the rules of the game at the time that you acted, yes, what you did is fair. Chances are in my personal opinion it would not, but going by the rules of the game... Yes.

earlier i posted this:

let's go back in time when a guy (can't remember his name) wanted to get to score 1 in order to get lots and lots of points from a win. what if that situation was not discovered in time and he actually would have gotten let's say a million points. do you think he would have been allowed to keep them? i highly doubt it. i believe he would have been given an immediate reset despite not cheating.

that guy found a loophole and he was trying to get lots of points before lack noticed and changed the rules to stop him. skyt was faster than the mods and managed to get to #1 before what he did became illegal. should he still be allowed to keep his points? in order to answer this question you must answer the previous one would the guy in the quote have been allowed to keep his million points?

First I'd like to point out it would not be a million points unless he got in on a Battle Royal and managed to win it. From a 6 player game he would have won, at most, 500 points. A giant amount for one game, but that is still half of what he started with.

If lack had not changed the rules then I don't see why he shouldn't have been allowed to keep his 500 points.

In fact, couldn't he still do it? All he has to do is make stupid moves and if he is a private or lower nobody will question it. Eventually he will get down to 1 and be able to do it.

[Visaoni]

playing devil's advocate is tricky and in the end you might get burned. don't do it.

i see you have again fastposted me about the fair/legal thing.
skyt was legal but unfair and i belive fairness should be the one supreme rule in every game. there should be just one rule. FAIR PLAY and everybody should no that it includes no multies no secret alliances and so on. unfortunatelly people want to cheat and to fully prevent cheating you actually must hire a lawyer and make a 100 page long manuscript with rules where he attends to each and every possible cheating/abuse/ rule bending scenario.
because CC lacks such a big rule book there's bound to appear more and more cheaters/abusers/rule benders that are willing to spoil the fun of all others just to get to #1.

i believe that lack and his mods are more than able to judge what is fair and what is not and apply the fairness rule.

FAIRNESS RULE:

if you do anything unfair (cheating abusing rule bending) you will be punished according to the extent of the damage you've done.

simple as that. if you feel you've been punished unfairly then just quit and go play another game. but i'm sure no unfair punishments will be done since randomly punishing innocents would be bad for business because people will leave.

I like playing devil's advocate. It isn't done enough in my opinion. One position is great, but what about the opposite? Without both there is no way to get a clear picture.

Sorry, don't mean to be fast posting you. Get several things to respond to, long posts, and two people browsing at the same time and things get a little hectic.

There is a problem with lack and the mods deciding what is fair and what is not. That problem is simple: it isn't fair. I don't see them being unfair and I'd be honestly surprised if I disagreed with their decisions. But without guidelines, there is no way to ensure those decisions are consistent. The writers of the Constitution could have spelled out their basic ideas and said to Washington "here, go make your government like this" but they didn't. They planned for all scenarios. They put down all the rules they decided were needed, and provided for amendments in case things changed in the future. Hell, they provided for the American people overthrowing the government they themselves setup if it didn't work out at some point.

When punishments are handed out for breaking rules that are not very clear and concise to the general public what you have is a community that appears to be run by whim. That is not good for lack or CC.

[DiM]

stop editing your posts while i'm writing another one. just when i finish a long post i see a bit more appeared in yours

The points and the ranks only serve to motivate negative behavior, but without the lure, a lot fewer people would want to play here.

Put those two ideas together, and it tells you a lot about the influence of the internet, and the anonymity it allows, on the ideas of fairness, and good sportsmanship.

I disagree. The points and ranks also serve to make people more competitive. It makes people play a better game. If people are just doing something to waste time, they might not care much about it. If there is some competition going on, they are going to play their best. Among friends this isn't needed, because there are only so many of you and you all have a pretty good idea of how the ranking goes. When you win you can also brag right then and there to their face.

score and rank are good. they make competition tough but cheating is not good. in a game where everybody cheats scores are worthless. i'm not saying that everybody cheats here but we already have a problem with the score system we don't need to add cheating to it.

Myself, I've never enjoyed playing people I could defeat easily, there is no value in a victory that was not a challenge... My most cherished games, particularly in Chess and raquetball, invloved defeating players who were better then me.

But I know many a leet individual who has MORE fun cheating, then actually in playing the game. The rankings only motivate poeple who sit on the fence on this issue to join the side of the cheaters.

CC attracts both kinds of players, but clearly the internet greatly favors those who find cheating more fun then enjoying a game.

Once again, I disagree. In all games and sports there are those that are willing to go further than others to be the best. Sometimes they merely bend the rules, sometimes they flat our break them. Look at pro sports, and tell me if you think more of them are or aren't following the rules about steroids?

I think CC attracts more people who want a good game than those who want to cheat. I'd actually argue that for the vast majority of games, but especially CC. This is a game of strategy and tactics, not just another FPS. Even for FPS's I'd argue more want a good game than to cheat. The cheaters are just the ones that annoy you more.

actually in some games cheaters/abusers/rule benders are much more than honest people. read the travian example i gave you where the honest players were greatly outnumbered.

but anyway even if cheaters were very very few it would still be no reason to tolerate them.
at this moment unfairness is tolerated on CC. is that good is that bad?
my bet is on BAD. without stricter rules and harsher punishments it's only a matter of time before more and more people will start cheating/abusing/rule bending. and when the word gets out that CC is a cheaters paradise then i doubt anybody will ever join.

some time ago (3 or 4 years) i found a really interesting game a combination of rpg with rts. really nice idea. i joined in the middle of an age played for 2 weeks and learned the game. then the new age started. after a few hours of playing and doing it by the book i was third. then in just 4 hours ~20 people from the same clan had heroes 40-50 times stronger than everybody else. i asked around and found out they were using some kind of clicking script and nobody could prove it. i quit the next day after talking to a mod that said he can't do anything and that the game is starting to lose more and more people because they can't stop the cheating. i checked back i think 1 year later and i could no longer find that game. i think it ended and the site shut down because of cheaters.

[Piestar]

The points and the ranks only serve to motivate negative behavior, but without the lure, a lot fewer people would want to play here.

Put those two ideas together, and it tells you a lot about the influence of the internet, and the anonymity it allows, on the ideas of fairness, and good sportsmanship.

I disagree. The points and ranks also serve to make people more competitive. It makes people play a better game. If people are just doing something to waste time, they might not care much about it. If there is some competition going on, they are going to play their best. Among friends this isn't needed, because there are only so many of you and you all have a pretty good idea of how the ranking goes. When you win you can also brag right then and there to their face.

If the game itself is the reason to compete, then you have better games. If rank and score are the reason you compete, then game-related concepts, like fairness and competition, become secondary. I'm sorry, I played a similar game called Risk for many years, and we never had points or ranks, and our games were always competitive, and fun.

Myself, I've never enjoyed playing people I could defeat easily, there is no value in a victory that was not a challenge... My most cherished games, particularly in Chess and raquetball, invloved defeating players who were better then me.

But I know many a leet individual who has MORE fun cheating, then actually in playing the game. The rankings only motivate poeple who sit on the fence on this issue to join the side of the cheaters.

CC attracts both kinds of players, but clearly the internet greatly favors those who find cheating more fun then enjoying a game.

Once again, I disagree. In all games and sports there are those that are willing to go further than others to be the best. Sometimes they merely bend the rules, sometimes they flat our break them. Look at pro sports, and tell me if you think more of them are or aren't following the rules about steroids?

IIt seems you are agreeing, rather then disagreeing. Steroids? Are those common in games that are for fun, or games that are for money (points), status and rank; values beyond the actual game itself? I don't think so.

Even more to the point, look how people who use steroids are precieved. How many people here would be willing to be the top player, if it meant everyone assumed his victories were from cheating (aka steroids)? Personally, I don't know anyone who respects Barry Bonds Home Run Record. Do you?

I think CC attracts more people who want a good game than those who want to cheat. I'd actually argue that for the vast majority of games, but especially CC. This is a game of strategy and tactics, not just another FPS. Even for FPS's I'd argue more want a good game than to cheat. The cheaters are just the ones that annoy you more.

I honestly don't have enough of the big picture to have a solid opinion on the ratio of cheaters to honest players, but it could be as little as 1 in 10, and still be enough to poison the entire pool. If you play 6 player games, that means you would have (on average) at least one cheater, every other game.

Myself, I think I'm about wrung out in the games department, but I suspect I will stick around and try to design maps, and chat, because despite my poor showing in the games, I do find a lot of the people fun to talk to.

Oh well...

You've played 17 games. Don't give up yet.

Thanks for the encouragement.

[DiM]

ok so if i come up with a way to cheat and get 5000 points before i'm caught and then that becomes illegal i can say i played fair?

according to your judgement i am fair.

also you have to make a difference between fair and legal. what skyt did was legal (barely) but unfair.

Going by the rules of the game at the time that you acted, yes, what you did is fair. Chances are in my personal opinion it would not, but going by the rules of the game... Yes.

no it is not fair. it is legal but not fair that's what i'm trying to explain.

earlier i posted this:

let's go back in time when a guy (can't remember his name) wanted to get to score 1 in order to get lots and lots of points from a win. what if that situation was not discovered in time and he actually would have gotten let's say a million points. do you think he would have been allowed to keep them? i highly doubt it. i believe he would have been given an immediate reset despite not cheating.

that guy found a loophole and he was trying to get lots of points before lack noticed and changed the rules to stop him. skyt was faster than the mods and managed to get to #1 before what he did became illegal. should he still be allowed to keep his points? in order to answer this question you must answer the previous one would the guy in the quote have been allowed to keep his million points?

First I'd like to point out it would not be a million points unless he got in on a Battle Royal and managed to win it. From a 6 player game he would have won, at most, 500 points. A giant amount for one game, but that is still half of what he started with.

If lack had not changed the rules then I don't see why he shouldn't have been allowed to keep his 500 points.

In fact, couldn't he still do it? All he has to do is make stupid moves and if he is a private or lower nobody will question it. Eventually he will get down to 1 and be able to do it.

actually you are wrong here.

at the current sistem a guy can get only a max of 100 points from a defeated player. when that guy i'm talking about tried this there wasn't such a rule. he would have gotten all the points from that guy he defeated. and a lot more extra.
it's like this i have 1 point and you have 2000.
i win you lose and i get (2000/1)*20=40,000 points.
because of him lack added the 100 point max limit.
the question is would he have been allowed to keep his million points if he managed to get them? i highly doubt it. i'm 100% sure lack would have reset his score as punishment despite the fact he played by the rules.

[DiM]

There is a problem with lack and the mods deciding what is fair and what is not. That problem is simple: it isn't fair. I don't see them being unfair and I'd be honestly surprised if I disagreed with their decisions. But without guidelines, there is no way to ensure those decisions are consistent. The writers of the Constitution could have spelled out their basic ideas and said to Washington "here, go make your government like this" but they didn't. They planned for all scenarios. They put down all the rules they decided were needed, and provided for amendments in case things changed in the future. Hell, they provided for the American people overthrowing the government they themselves setup if it didn't work out at some point.

When punishments are handed out for breaking rules that are not very clear and concise to the general public what you have is a community that appears to be run by whim. That is not good for lack or CC.

actually the rule of fairness is very simple. common sense, decency, etc.

don't do to another what you don't like to be done to you.

in other words if you don't like to be cheated then don't cheat on anybody else.

[Visaoni]

If the game itself is the reason to compete, then you have better games. If rank and score are the reason you compete, then game-related concepts, like fairness and competition, become secondary. I'm sorry, I played a similar game called Risk for many years, and we never had points or ranks, and our games were always competitive, and fun.

That was my point. In the board game Risk you usually play with the same group, or very nearly the same group. Everybody has an idea of who is the best, 2nd, and so on. After you win a game you also get to brag to their face if you wish, rather than just being happy you won while alone or with other's in the same room as you who have no clue about what's going on.

Online, you are playing with people you probably don't know. In a single game most people are competitive enough to try to win. But without the ability to prove yourself to be a higher caliber player, and also the ability to know who other's of your skill set are, chances are your going to end up with people who aren't a match for you. That isn't really as fun as you yourself pointed out.

IIt seems you are agreeing, rather then disagreeing. Steroids? Are those common in games that are for fun, or games that are for money (points), status and rank; values beyond the actual game itself? I don't think so.

Even more to the point, look how people who use steroids are precieved. How many people here would be willing to be the top player, if it meant everyone assumed his victories were from cheating (aka steroids)? Personally, I don't know anyone who respects Barry Bonds Home Run Record. Do you?

Exactly. They aren't common, but it does happen. Those are the ones willing to break the rules. Does it make you not watch sports because a few bad apples are using steroids or breaking the rules some other way?
[/quote]

I honestly don't have enough of the big picture to have a solid opinion on the ratio of cheaters to honest players, but it could be as little as 1 in 10, and still be enough to poison the entire pool. If you play 6 player games, that means you would have (on average) at least one cheater, every other game.

I have yet to run into one obvious case of a secret alliance or a multi. Mostly just people who don't understand the game and try to play esc like no cards or some such.

[Visaoni]

no it is not fair. it is legal but not fair that's what i'm trying to explain.

I think we agree, we're just expressing ourselves differently. Personally I would not consider it fair. The rules however would have to, or it would be illegal.

From the rules point of view, if it is legal it is fair. From a human perspective it is very different.

actually you are wrong here.

at the current sistem a guy can get only a max of 100 points from a defeated player. when that guy i'm talking about tried this there wasn't such a rule. he would have gotten all the points from that guy he defeated. and a lot more extra.
it's like this i have 1 point and you have 2000.
i win you lose and i get (2000/1)*20=40,000 points.
because of him lack added the 100 point max limit.
the question is would he have been allowed to keep his million points if he managed to get them? i highly doubt it. i'm 100% sure lack would have reset his score as punishment despite the fact he played by the rules.

After I posted I realized that may have been the case. I didn't know as I haven't been around here that long.

I'm still going to have to stick to my argument though. I don't find it fair, but at the time, the rules did. Lack changed that before it became an issue though. This is my whole point.

What we consider fair can be different from what we consider legal. If you just look at the rules, and decide purely off of them without considering anything but the rules, what is fair has to be what is legal.

There are sometimes problems with what is legal or illegal, so it gets changed. After that then from purely a "by the rules" perspective the thing that was fair is now unfair.

This has always been a problem with laws, and it is the reason why laws are continually being updated and changed.

Perhaps I'm doing a bad job of conveying my thoughts accurately.

[DiM]

actually you are wrong here.

at the current sistem a guy can get only a max of 100 points from a defeated player. when that guy i'm talking about tried this there wasn't such a rule. he would have gotten all the points from that guy he defeated. and a lot more extra.
it's like this i have 1 point and you have 2000.
i win you lose and i get (2000/1)*20=40,000 points.
because of him lack added the 100 point max limit.
the question is would he have been allowed to keep his million points if he managed to get them? i highly doubt it. i'm 100% sure lack would have reset his score as punishment despite the fact he played by the rules.

After I posted I realized that may have been the case. I didn't know as I haven't been around here that long.

I'm still going to have to stick to my argument though. I don't find it fair, but at the time, the rules did. Lack changed that before it became an issue though. This is my whole point.

What we consider fair can be different from what we consider legal. If you just look at the rules, and decide purely off of them without considering anything but the rules, what is fair has to be what is legal.

There are sometimes problems with what is legal or illegal, so it gets changed. After that then from purely a "by the rules" perspective the thing that was fair is now unfair.

This has always been a problem with laws, and it is the reason why laws are continually being updated and changed.

Perhaps I'm doing a bad job of conveying my thoughts accurately.

you tend to get stuck on the rules thing.
basically what you say is that if it's not forbidden by the rules then it must be ok. when actually it is not. we're on the internet we form a virtual community where we have the chance of creating something better than reality. in real life if you find a loophole in the law you're ok. the law is changed but you're untouched. that's wrong. because we form a small virtual community we can change things we can achieve a "crime" free community where everybody can have fun and not have to deal with cheaters abusers and such.
the rules on CC are very very schematic, probably lack tried to appeal at the decency of people. it's like "look man i'm giving you a nice game where you can have fun, there are very few rules because we want to be a big happy family where we understand eachother and play fair" well this worked well until cheaters came along and said "i don't give a f*ck about your happy family concept you stupid hippie, i want to cheat and i can do it cause the rules you made are too schematic to include all the possible cheating scenarios i can come up with"

there are 3 ways for CC from this point:
1. remain like it is now - very bad, loopholes exist, cheaters will find them and will use them.
2. make a really really large rule book that includes any kind of cheating methods, and enforce the law as the rules say.
3. make one rule (the fairness rule) and let lack (and mods) decide when a player breaks the rule and punish him.

2 and 3 are fine by me, even though i'd much rather go for 3.

[sully800]

Visaoni: I think you are doing a great job explaining your opinions and I find myself agree with you almost completely.

As Visaoni has said, the problem with rules is making them clear so that people can understand what is allowed and what is not. You cannot make a rule that says "Play fair" and then punish people if you feel they didn't play fair, because thats a completely subjective decision. You need to define fairness and legality as clearly as possible, or this entire site turns into a oligarchy where a powerful few can punish people for any reason they feel appropriate. We are not lenient on cheating, we try to establish an appropriate punishment whenever someone is proven to have stepped out of line. No decision can please everyone and there any many circumstances which complicate cases. Simply banning people who may have stepped out of line is not fair because innocent people will be punished accidentally. Not punishing people for cheating is obviously not fair to the honest players on this site. We really do our best to make things "fair" as DiM has requested, and whats more important is that we need to clarify for all players what constitutes the meaning of fair play.

In the case of SkyT: It's a huge gray area which explains all the controversy. What he had been doing was not explicitly illegal, and therefore it is hard to punish someone because of it. Hence, we warned them not to share turns to gain an advantage (in other words, not to abuse account sitting privileges) and said they would be blocked from playing together for any future offense. Now that the precedent has been set, anyone can be blocked for breaking the rule in this manner, because now a clear rule exists. So yes DiM- If you adopt several other accounts you would be blocked from playing with them and your score would possibly be reset. Similarly, if SkyT or anyone else does the same thing now they will receive the same punishment.

Krusher's case has not officially been decided but I don't think it will take much longer. There is tons of evidence against him (including admission in several PMs). The real step is determining the appropriate punishment for such a case. For those who have been around a while, you know there have been other "high profile" cases that have garnered much more attention than your standard multi report: Stevegriffiths23, MedalofHonor, JTKalltheway, Corman, dugcarr1 etc. There are many people who find creative ways to bend the rules or flat out break them. We always due our best to mitigate these problems and establish precedents to limit cheating in the future. But since every case is unique, some take an extended period of time and therefore create a big ruckus on the site. That is exactly what is happening right now (then again the krusher case is very new so please be patient).

DiM: I tried to go back and find the quote, but I failed and I don't want to re-read every post in here again. But the quote where you said you know of several unwritten ways to cheat, and that you might employ them to get to the top: I'm sure you were exaggerating because you seem like an honest guy, and one who cares about preventing cheating. So how can you help? If you think of a way to gain points that seems to be against the spirit of CC, report it before someone uses it! You can make a suggestion about how to stop problems of cheating, and then it will be illegal before someone tries to do it.

Of course we always have the new "gross abuse" rule that allows punishment for very unique cases, but its always nice to know about problems before they actually occur. Thanks everyone for you concern about matters such as cheating, and please continue helping us in the future!

[/ridiculouslylongpost]

[Visaoni]

Visaoni: I think you are doing a great job explaining your opinions and I find myself agree with you almost completely.

Thanks Sully.

Krusher's case has not officially been decided but I don't think it will take much longer. There is tons of evidence against him (including admission in several PMs).

Thanks for correcting me on that as well. As (I hope) I said earlier, I really didn't know anything about it and was just going off what was said in the thread.

[DiM]

....

i haven't quoted anything you said cause it was really long


anyway i'm gonna talk about 2 things:

1. if lack and a few mods take subjective decisions of what's fair or not and punish people yes the power would be in the hands of a few that can punish anybody as they like. BUT do you really think lack would allow simple random punishments? 2-3 cases where the mods are proved to have acted out of spite, revenge, jealousy, etc are enogh to brand this as a stupid place where the mods are nazis and everybody will leave costing lack a lot of money. i'm sure that he will do his best to not allow such a thing to happen. he has nothing to gain from banning randomly. he has only to lose. that's why i feel this system would work really well.

2. the cheating/abuse/rule bending i mentioned exist (i can guarantee that) but i didn't say i will use them to get to the top. i don't have the time and i'm not the kind of person to do it. i just want to know what would happen if i did such a thing. what if i cheated/abused/bent rules on my way to the top. would i be banned or punished in any way? or would i be allowed to keep my points, be given a warning and then the rules changed?

because it seems that a simple warning is what skyt got and to be honest i'm actually tempted to get to the top just to take a screenshot and if i had the time i could do it. i probably wouldn't though. but it's actually really easy. i'm at 2100-2400 points and i think with enough time on my hands i could get to 4000 in ~1 month or even less depending on several factors. damn my wife my frirnds and my job, they take all the time and i can't cheat my way to #1.

[JOHNNYROCKET24]

I will take care of the wife for you....again

[DiM]

I will take care of the wife for you....again

you really feel up to the task? what if i tell you're wife about this? think she'll use the nut cracker...again?
cause remember last time she used it you talked like a little girl for over a month