Conquer Club

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!

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.

its err.. tough at the top? yarhar.

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

I didn't think about that when i autoed... .................honest, i swear....

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.

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.

Stirring up trouble eh K?

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

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!

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.

ya-- that was pretty lame Poo- you bastard ! FOE of mine that is a Friend.....