Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.Blitzaholic wrote:what do the mods say?
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.Blitzaholic wrote:what do the mods say?
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.
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.Blitzaholic wrote:what do the mods say?
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.
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
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?
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).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users