perhaps not allow the concede option unless you are below (say) 10 per cent might be a fair compromise, and the effect of taking it would just autoskip the person who took the option, in the same way as missing a turn would, without the 24 hour wait

One suggestion might be, that players have an option of not playing anyone below (say) 400 points. This could default to yes - prevent players below 400 from joining my games.

then these players throwing games would run out of partners

ok I will

no-one can lose more than 100 points. if the calculations say otherwise than the loss is limited to 100

your example is the very reason this rule is necessary

in please

The definition of a "multi" is clear. MORE THAN A ACCOUNT FROM THE SAME ADDRESS.

sigh, wrong again. If that were the case then they are plenty of multis playing. The rule is - only 1 account per person, not per ip address.

I knew from earlier posts you were a bigot, now you have just proved ...

Being on an international platform, I can see the problem.

In some countries $25 is 2 weeks wages.

Who here would pay 2 weeks wages for premium?

Can't really suggest a solution though, subsidising the third world would be messy and complicated.

PS. I never accused you of anything brother. Only stated the facts- You were caught with multi account. PERIOD.


No I was not! look, I will try once again to get this message inside your skull.

I joined to play a few games, my wife joined to play a few games....perfectly legal. The mods ...

Not true, He was proven to have multiple accounts. However, his multi accounts were apparently NOT in any of the same games together.

eh? I beg your pardon.... If I were a proven multi then both this account and my wife's account would be perma banned, both have been reinstated on investigation ...

Not true, He was proven to have multiple accounts. However, his multi accounts were apparently NOT in any of the same games together.

eh? I beg your pardon.... If I were a proven multi then both this account and my wife's account would be perma banned, both have been reinstated on investigation ...

I would have to agree with AAfitz, after all it was the appeals process that got me back in the game.

I wonder what is the protocol for banning players from the same ip, is it automatic when 2 players join together on the same ip or does it go on discretion of the hunters, perhaps swayed by logins ...

Yes, multi hunters, like real life judges have a very difficult job to do. But you would not see a real life judge sentencing anyone until they have been allowed to defend themselves.

My wife and I were sentenced (banned) first then got an opportunity to defend ourselves and thus convinced the ...

What would you guys suggest for some additional FAQ items to go along with the ones we currently have about playing from the same computer with a family?


--Andy

In retrospect, what i should have done is contacted a multihunter and explained the situation before we got banned.

At the time ...

http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?mode=find&submit=Search&p1=KLOBBER&p2=KLOBBER2

Yes of course these guys should be banned immediately and the key thrown away, but compare that to my game m the multi hunters should really be able to appreciate the difference and act accordingly.

Supposing I ...

One of the biggest problem with allowing busted multis to continue their games, is that there have been people in the past who have decided to target one player with a series of multis. They would join every open slot in every game the player had waiting, in order to do as much damage to their ...

haggispittjr wrote:you gotta admit it was pretty suspicious, two people joining near the same time, same place and then playing games together.

ah no, I made a point of not playing games together. We played separately, never in the same game. check out the games

once in a while someone gets booted that was legitimate. but every day dozens and dozens of people get busted legitimately, probably more...

you think that they should change the rules to effect hundreds and hundreds of true cheaters, just to appease the small portion that gets busted mistakenly ...

once in a while someone gets booted that was legitimate. but every day dozens and dozens of people get busted legitimately, probably more...

you think that they should change the rules to effect hundreds and hundreds of true cheaters, just to appease the small portion that gets busted mistakenly ...

#1_stunna wrote:e ticket

doh, why do you think I am back and able to apologise.....besides how many of the players in the games that were ruined would see an eticket!

This is not a complaint but an apology to the players whose games were unecessarily ruined, please explain how an eticket would achieve that?

blakebowling wrote:No.

explain please, why not?

my wife (jenny1976) and myself would like to apologise to the players whose games got ruined because of the over zealous multi hunters.

We only joined 2 days, started a few games and just as they got interesting we were both banned without being asked for an explanation presumably because we share ...

<DELETE ME>
PLACE A CONCISE DESCRIPTION OF THE SUGGESTION OR BUG IN THE SUBJECT LINE!!!


Looking through the forum it seems that at one time busted multi's were allowed to finish their games for the benefit of other players. This was changed in June because players did not like playing against ...

wonder if someone could help me. just installed bob 4.8.2 (first time used) and the stats screen is so strongly highlighted so as to obliterate the stats, have i done something wrong?