Conquer Club

The lamest ethics!

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.

The lamest ethics!

Postby General K on Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:52 pm

When a player takes control over the armies of another player, the least is that the substitute plays for a win.

the cheapest attitude is when a substitute takes control over an army that is not his, and intentionally suicide it into another player to lose the game later.

what happened in Game 2133824, is that after 40+ turns, poo-maker replaced codeblue, and decided to suicide me intentionally knowing that he will lose the game, giving the win to a player who also is a substitute!
I was the only one playing with my own armies and was relying on the 2 substitute to play with honor. seems poo-maker has no such thing!


so am I over reacting or there should be a code of ethics where a substitute plays to WIN!
User avatar
Colonel General K
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:25 pm

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby poo-maker on Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:18 pm

Look, as i said in the pm, i am sorry for suiciding. Not only for suiciding, but for suiciding with codes account and for the fact that 3 of my toughest competition ended up losing against a 2 striper (even though i wasn't thinking about this at the time). I made the decision on the spur of the moment, but was kinda encouraged by the threat i had made earlier in the round, the fact that you didn't move (but didnt ignore my threat) and the fact that the round was ending (4 secs left). It was a dumb decision I made on the spur of the moment and it wont happen again. Despite this, i understand if you don't want to play me again and if code and scott think I am a cheap player that will do anything to stay ahead of them. :P
Brigadier poo-maker
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:58 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby khazalid on Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:23 pm

its err.. tough at the top? yarhar.
had i been wise, i would have seen that her simplicity cost her a fortune
Lieutenant khazalid
 
Posts: 3413
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:39 am
Location: scotland

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby poo-maker on Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:25 pm

khazalid wrote:its err.. tough at the top? yarhar.

Haha, i know.... it looks sooooo bad that i gave the game to a low ranker, with code, scott and gk in the game :oops: :oops:

I didn't think about that when i autoed... :^o .................honest, i swear.... :wink:
Brigadier poo-maker
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 9:58 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby Hotdoggie on Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:26 pm

poo-maker wrote:Look, as i said in the pm, i am sorry for suiciding. Not only for suiciding, but for suiciding with codes account and for the fact that 3 of my toughest competition ended up losing against a 2 striper (even though i wasn't thinking about this at the time). I made the decision on the spur of the moment, but was kinda encouraged by the threat i had made earlier in the round, the fact that you didn't move (but didnt ignore my threat) and the fact that the round was ending (4 secs left). It was a dumb decision I made on the spur of the moment and it wont happen again. Despite this, i understand if you don't want to play me again and if code and scott think I am a cheap player that will do anything to stay ahead of them. :P


It was a bit unfair I must admit...especially cos' I blocked him in so he cudn't even move at the end - I was suprised when you did it tbh, I figured giving GK no option to move would mean you would leave him alone.
PERSONAL BEST...
Rank: Colonel
Score: 2802
Place: 120
Date: 16 / 2 / 2009
Lieutenant Hotdoggie
 
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:29 am
Location: Doodle Earth

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby MikeFromLux on Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:37 pm

Stirring up trouble eh K?
My self esteem is high enough, that I don't have to post stats here ;)
User avatar
Lieutenant MikeFromLux
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:53 pm

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby wrestler1ump on Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:39 pm

Neither Poomaker nor codeblue have the greatest ethics. And I think I'm going easy on them by saying that.
Private wrestler1ump
 
Posts: 779
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 4:27 pm

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby codeblue1018 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:28 pm

wrestler1ump wrote:Neither Poomaker nor codeblue have the greatest ethics. And I think I'm going easy on them by saying that.



Thank you Lack for the new option of blocking absurd responses by convicted cheaters yet we have bad ethics. Hmm, interesting concept. Nonetheless, great idea!
Lieutenant codeblue1018
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:08 pm

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby codeblue1018 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:37 pm

As far as Poo's game-play on my behalf; I trust his judgment and tactics regardless of the outcome. With this said, I stand by it and accept responsibility as it was me who asked Poo for this favor of taking my spot as something came up that needed my attention. Although I'd rather not have lost points, it is part of the game. GK, no hard feelings pal. Poo is a great player as I am certain you would agree despite what occurred during the game. Although I don't understand what exactly happened other than game chat/log. Bottom line, it is over, lets move on and enjoy many more games.
Lieutenant codeblue1018
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:08 pm

Re: The lamest ethics!

Postby Scott-Land on Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:16 am

ya-- that was pretty lame Poo- you bastard ! FOE of mine that is a Friend.....
User avatar
Major Scott-Land
 
Posts: 2423
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:37 pm


Return to Conquer Club Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users