Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team

It's a natural feeling to help people in the same group as you win if you can't win yourself.Caymanmew wrote:This is happening in the Conquer Club Olympics which has a tribe scoreboard. It makes sense to help a tribemate win if you yourself can't. Most people in high ranked clans/tribes value their clan/tribe results over their own personal results. That just the nature of competitive team mentality. I'd blatantly help a teammate win a game if I am not in a position to win myself, especially if it helps the team win the main event. No need to talk it out either, it is simply a natural move for a team first oriented player.
Tribe event results >>> personal event results.
This is my opinion, not an official Team CC or Community Team stance
yes. this. i'll continue to wave this dying flag but you cannot legislate the thoughts and strategies of players, whether you agree with them or not. you can legislate cheating, secret diplomacy, multis, actual game throwing, abuse and all of that but you cannot tell a player how to play the game. it seems that certain players (and at least one mod) would like anyone who they deem unable to win a game to simply stop playing the game, but not to deadbeat so basically just take your drop and don't do anything. there are times when you are toast but you still have an obligation to help to determine the outcome of the game. maybe someone screwed you early on and you have an opportunity to pay it back, maybe you like one player more so you hit the others, maybe someone tried to help you earlier so you repay the favor - are those scenarios game throwing or secret diplomacy? no. they're playing the game.The only thing he said in the chat was that yes, he'd rather djelebert win if he can't, which is not secret diplomacy, and even not saying he would actually act on this wish.
As you said, it is a natural feeling. No spoken alliance is needed and without any spoken agreement it can't be secret diplomacy. Unless someone can prove they talked about this outside of game chat there is no case. As for game throwing, That is ridiculous. If you can't win the game you can't very well throw it. Once victory is no longer an option any logical player looks to see what they can still effect in the game that could benefit them in the tournament.Jdsizzleslice wrote:It's a natural feeling to help people in the same group as you win if you can't win yourself.Caymanmew wrote:This is happening in the Conquer Club Olympics which has a tribe scoreboard. It makes sense to help a tribemate win if you yourself can't. Most people in high ranked clans/tribes value their clan/tribe results over their own personal results. That just the nature of competitive team mentality. I'd blatantly help a teammate win a game if I am not in a position to win myself, especially if it helps the team win the main event. No need to talk it out either, it is simply a natural move for a team first oriented player.
Tribe event results >>> personal event results.
This is my opinion, not an official Team CC or Community Team stance
However, unless they posted in the game chat an alliance had emerged, it is definitely classified as Secret Diplomacy, and may also be considered Tournament Game Throwing, because they are specifically targeting the other players.

If that all happened in the same game, then, no, it is not secret diplomacy. It is just a matter of paying attention to who screwed whom and keeping a tally sheet till you can exact revenge. That's fine. But their collaborative play was not due to in-game or reasonably knowable actions.there are times when you are toast but you still have an obligation to help to determine the outcome of the game. maybe someone screwed you early on and you have an opportunity to pay it back, maybe you like one player more so you hit the others, maybe someone tried to help you earlier so you repay the favor - are those scenarios game throwing or secret diplomacy? no. they're playing the game.
This is why I say that it should have been clear that they were on the same tribe... wearing the same uniform. There was no such indication on the event leader board or in the game.in this case it's even more ridiculous - i'm not up on it but it seems to me if you're in an individual competition with a team scoring aspect to it, of course you want to do things to help your teammate win if you cannot. there is so much precedent for this, ANY team racing sport whether it be biking, running, car racing, etc employs this exact strategy. if cc doesnt want this to be a possibility, then either don't put on a competition that works this way or stop teammates from being in the same game.
That is different. You're not trying to win those games, your trying to let your father win. That is game throwing / secret diplomacy. Now if you were in an assassin game for example and both you and your father's target are near dead, leaving it a fight between your father and someone else for the win. Then sure, you kill your father's target and help him win. Kinda dirty but your not breaking any rules on secret diplomacy or game throwing. Playing multiplayer games with family is generally considered somewhere between not cool and against the rules though.ESQuire wrote:
This brings to mind games that I play with my father. We play on the same team in doubles games, so it is clear we are a team. If we ever played in a singles game of, say, 4 players, and he and I played as a pair without divulging our relationship, would that be fair? If so, I know how to gain him the rank improvement he so desperately wants. We'll play assassin and take out one or the other of our targets from out of the blue.

I have 2 problems with this 'confession':The admittedly biased Donelladan says there was only one place where fairman said anything in chat. Actually, there was another exchange in Game 20039288 where he replied to me thusly:
2020-06-10 15:28:06 - ESQuire: Fairman.... you're not claiming to be playing without a bias away from attacking dje, are you?
2020-06-10 17:42:54 - fairman: no, just saying that I attacked him in some other games
This implicitly admits his covert bias. I asked him to deny it. He said he didn't deny it. He just said that there were times in other games where he attacked his tribemate. A token attack here or there only serves to try to throw off suspicion
I don't think you can call taking 6-7 territory a token attack. Especially when like in one of the games, both accused get eliminated right after attacking each other.Esquire wrote:A token attack here or there only serves to try to throw off suspicion.
That's right you can think it's weird. But it can be because fairman and you were fighting and he decides to just let play it out. If you are going to retaliate on fairman, why would he bother doing so in a 3 player game ?FuegoFuego wrote: Its just weird that if for instance Djelebert moves last, he takes on me having just +4 and not his mate having +20 with an open place to attack a bonus.
No that's breaking the rule. You would probably be blocked from playing multiplayer game together if it goes to C&A with such a case, or/and get a warning for game throwing.Caymanmew wrote:Now if you were in an assassin game for example and both you and your father's target are near dead, leaving it a fight between your father and someone else for the win. Then sure, you kill your father's target and help him win. Kinda dirty but your not breaking any rules on secret diplomacy or game throwing. Playing multiplayer games with family is generally considered somewhere between not cool and against the rules though.
I don't think you can call taking 6-7 territory a token attack. Especially when like in one of the games, both accused get eliminated right after attacking each other.Esquire wrote:A token attack here or there only serves to try to throw off suspicion.
That's right you can think it's weird. But it can be because fairman and you were fighting and he decides to just let play it out. If you are going to retaliate on fairman, why would he bother doing so in a 3 player game ?FuegoFuego wrote: Its just weird that if for instance Djelebert moves last, he takes on me having just +4 and not his mate having +20 with an open place to attack a bonus.


