#Most Blatant Collaboration Ever

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

narrow cedar
#

I just had a game with 4 other players, 1 bot, in which on the first play the red player rolled the green players cap. I proceeded to then take the capital and then 2 or 3 turns later the pink player rolls the cap, leaves the pocket clean, leaves no troops on the capital allowing green to take it back the following turn. The two of them then go on to take me out then the last remaining player. This was the most egregious collaboration I've ever seen and what really sucks is the fact that it took me 3 wins to get the amount of points I lose from this 2nd to last place finish to a bunch of Novice-Experts. So my question or suggestion is, for games where collaboration is reported and confirmed (as I know this one will be), can you not implement a system to return the lost points to players who lost them unfairly?

If anyone's curious the Pink player was "General Kibe 15746" and the Green player was "Dorothy Cobra 20"

gray pendant
#

cheatinglink

mystic nicheBOT
#

Cheating reports are not handled via community chatrooms, to report cheating you need to do so in-game.
Process:

  • Click the avatar of who you wish to report on the right
  • Select the red triangle box on the left panel below the avatar in alliance window
  • Select the reason and hit send
    You will receive a reply within 30d regarding the outcome of the report.
Requested by lucibot#0 - <@448774951265239041>
narrow cedar
#

Yeah yeah yeah, if you had read the post you'd know I did that already. This is specifically regarding the skill points that are lost from collab games. Why not impliment some sort of system that removes the points from the violators and gives them to the people who lost points as a result? Or something to that effect? This is of course after it has been verified.

haughty path
#

Yeah that’s how it should work

wispy dove
#

They made a broken game, they likely have no intention of fixing it because to do so would end them making any money on this game whatsoever because they're fighting human biological propensity for tribalism and those with adhd dopamine issue cheats.

Fixing it would include a huge gatekeeping reprogramming which no one in their right mind would do for this game, because the cost in programmer hours and personnel would be more than the game is worth, let alone something similar like chess for instance.

It's obvious when you think about it and it's an industry wide issue, because it's a human issue.

Risk in RL works the same with favoritism, it's a thought experiment in hierarchal structures.. like poker, because it can never truly be fair.

You can likely up your chances for a win by being above 140 IQ, have a solid knowledge of psychology relates to power hierarchy (and gaming) and understand.

But it's not worth it for what should be a game worth $5 or less with a weak pay to play my C rated, unfair game.

In person risk is essentially a time waster between family and friends, online it's just begging to be abused by cheaters.

narrow cedar
#

I mean, I don't see why they couldn't simply implement a system to recoup lost points upon verification of collaboration or other cheating.

gray pendant
#

If bans were only manual that'd be fine (and for any permanent bans, that's what happens) - but since a lot of it's automated, and we do get false-positives - and some bans aren't for collab but things like spamming or stalling (where game result is much less likely to have been influenced by it) there's a lot more uncertainty