Screenshot Discussion

[robust vector]

Discuss this screenshot here

[wraith spear]

Green and purple seem to be ready to go to war so they can just self destruct on eachother and red is just going to try to take you out since you are the weakest on the board.

I dont think it’s teaming but green and purple seem like it could be possible.

[compact minnow]

I'm talking about green and purple and green was the one to kill me.

[wraith spear]

I would say no then since red is the bigger threat and they both likely know that if they go to war with eachother red will just win. They may be trying to be allies to stop red from gaining more power.

[compact minnow]

just by this screen shot it doesn't tell the full story but I had north america but the second I attacked purple green also jumped me. I mean it could be just working really well as allies but they were ride or die then lol

[abstract gale]

It’s hard to tell from just a screen shot. I could see myself playing it as green or purple is if red had pissed me off enough or I was just that concerned with shutting red in or thought targeting Australia would advance the game.

As green I’d be willing to allow purple to have so much bonus and territory ( briefly ) to gain the positional advantage on Red.
But many players don’t understand the balance of the game or that alliances are not binding so they may over do it and support their ally when it is not necessary or not in their own interest at all.

This kind of play is “wrong” in the sense that winning is the goal and they “shouldn’t” play in a way that doesn’t advance towards that goal, but playing badly or having different goals than winning is not against the rules. So even the teaming on you is possibly just crazy ride or die ally stuff as you say and not rule violating collaboration. [Only communicating outside the game or collaborating with known players or through prior arrangement is against the rules (as I’m sure you know… just being thorough for new readers).]

As you describe events most likely explanation is stupid noobs over doing their alliance or other explanations and only after that in likelihood comes rule violating collaboration of the “innocent” variety (new people who don’t know better then to do it) and only after that comes least likely explanation of deliberate rule violating scum dwelling cheaters.

The “innocent” (honest mistake) variety almost always get reported and get suspension or warning messages quickly and hopefully return as better informed players. But, I’m afraid we lose quite a few of those new players who don’t understand their suspension or warning which is why I think SMG should add a play with friends and enemies / anything goes public casual mode just to give new players a place to start where they are free to do whatever without compromising the fairness of ranked play or getting themselves banned.

[visual estuary]

honestly if i were green i wouldnt attack purple here and if i were purple i wouldnt attack green

neither can really betray the other without feeling the wrath of god immediately and hand the game to red

in my opinion at least

[compact minnow]

purple got a suspension

[visual estuary]

oh no, does that make me a cheater?

[ionic belfry]

looks like it was collusion here but you can see similar situations without cheating, too

alliances can be used to agree to kill others first

[abstract gale]

A warning suspension doesn’t necessarily mean that any actual cheating took place. It only means that there were multiple reports or auto detection that triggered a suspension.
False warning suspensions can happen easily and it is unlikely that most players who that happens to even know how to file a ticket with SMG so I doubt those uncontested suspensions are ever looked at again to verify their accuracy.

[wraith spear]

General Styles 24553?

[compact minnow]

Yeah think so. Only reason i censored it is idk if its against the rules to post peoples tags

[abstract gale]

It is frowned upon to publicly shame. So censoring the name was probably a good call. I don’t think you’d get in any trouble just for posting a screen shot or just for saying I played someone who was cheating. It’s just that the combo of screen shot plus negative comments about a player adds up to calling them out directly which is not allowed. So yeah leave the name out and flame away.

Example “I played a purple player today and they were the worst Australian noob I have ever faced. Sadly they beat me utilizing the Sammy splitter 3 on each territory technique which I simply have no counter play for. I lose to this masterful play every time. I hate this Australian noob nonsense and would slam Siam if only I could get there.” This is a fictional story 😂😂