Teams 2 and 3 Possible Secret Alliance

[bcheng1988]

Suspected Users: Teams 2 & 3
Possible secret alliance, please investigate
Game URL: http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=396843

Comments:

Teams 2 and 3 haven't attacked each other and have been attacking only my partner and me (team 1) for the past several turns (except the occasional attacks on singles that they did against each other). This is especially suspicious because:
1) Yellow (of Team 2) and Pink (of Team 3) border each other. Yellow has held TWO continents/regions (Middle East and Russia) for a few turns, these regions have relatively unguarded borders with Pink (Russia was weakly defended until last turn, when Yellow moved all Russian troops away from Pink borders, and the Middle East borders have been only singles for a few turns now), and despite this, Pink has not bothered to take Yellow's regions away from him, even though they're neighbours.
2) Blue (of Team 2) and Aqua (of Team 3) are also immediate neighbours. Aqua has been the strongest player in the game for a while, holding all of Oceania, yet Blue seems unconcerned and has not bothered to attack Aqua.
3) My partner (Green) has been very weak for several turns, and yet Yellow has decided to attack him every single turn instead of focusing on Pink, who has held all of Europe on several occasions and is Yellow's immediate neighbour.

Please also check the chat logs, as these will shed even more light. Please pay special attention to recent chat messages (of past couple days).

I also mentioned in the chat log that Blue and Yellow (team 2) may be multis. I don't have anymore evidence than what I presented in the chat log, and that suspicion is not the primary concern of this inquiry. My partner and I would still appreciate it if you could look into that, though.

I apologize in advance if these suspicions turn out to be unconfirmed. These players' erratical behaviours, however, have led my partner and I to conclude that this situation would be better resolved by the community and the mods collectively.

Thanks and cheers.

[Sameereemas]

I would like to add a couple more concerns. Yellow and blue didn't write anything in the chat log for the first few days, and when we asked them questions, pink and aqua responded, arguing that our suggestions were unfair. Later, yellow and blue claimed that they were 'warriors' and pink gleefully supported them. I recognize that this concern is rather minor, but I believe it adds fuel to the fire.

Thank you very much for your time and I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

[wilderbeast]

I really dont know what you want done here. People should stop confusing secret alliances with mutually benificial pacts.

I am currently in a game where I control North and South america. A player controls africa with large army counts in Europe (although not owned) and the 3rd player of our game controls Australia and most of asia (with the exception of Kamtchaka and Middle east on which myself and player 2 have some armies....


Myself and Player 2 have come to an agreement, North africa will not attack Brazil and Brazil will not attack north africa. Does this mean we have a secret alliance? Hell no. Does this mean we have an alliance at all? Also hell no. We are constantly doing battle in europe.

Players may agree to a diplomatic decision wherein each individual feels the deal will allow them to progress further. Thats diplomacy, thats the game. I dont cry about it. If I dont get offered a deal I try to initiate one. If I feel a deal is made against my empire's interests, I will propose a counter deal. Diplomacy is an art and part of the game.

that said, do what you can to further your empire. Secret alliances arent cool I agree. But if an alliance is made public, dont hassle people because of it. Sometimes its an obvious choice, other times no. Sometimes its forced (if theres a clear leader) other times no. Just do what you can when you can

[bcheng1988]

I really dont know what you want done here. People should stop confusing secret alliances with mutually benificial pacts.

I am currently in a game where I control North and South america. A player controls africa with large army counts in Europe (although not owned) and the 3rd player of our game controls Australia and most of asia (with the exception of Kamtchaka and Middle east on which myself and player 2 have some armies....


Myself and Player 2 have come to an agreement, North africa will not attack Brazil and Brazil will not attack north africa. Does this mean we have a secret alliance? Hell no. Does this mean we have an alliance at all? Also hell no. We are constantly doing battle in europe.

Players may agree to a diplomatic decision wherein each individual feels the deal will allow them to progress further. Thats diplomacy, thats the game. I dont cry about it. If I dont get offered a deal I try to initiate one. If I feel a deal is made against my empire's interests, I will propose a counter deal. Diplomacy is an art and part of the game.

that said, do what you can to further your empire. Secret alliances arent cool I agree. But if an alliance is made public, dont hassle people because of it. Sometimes its an obvious choice, other times no. Sometimes its forced (if theres a clear leader) other times no. Just do what you can when you can

I agree with every word you say. If you look through my record, you'll find that diplomacy is a very big part of my game. In fact, my partner and I ourselves attempted diplomatic solutions earlieron in this very game.

If you look through the chat log, though, they did NOT announce anything (hence *secret* alliance -- believe it or not, I do know what 'secret'means ) Yellow made Pink an offer, but Pink never replied. No terms were stated or made public, ever. On top of this, for few turns Yellow has been attacking ONLY my partner, who is clearly the weakest player in the game right now and has been for several turns -- there is absolutely no reason for Yellow to focus on my partner and leave his borders with a stronger Neighbour, Pink, entirely undefended, while Pink has all of Europe (well, not right now because I spent all of my deployments last turn breaking Europe).

[bcheng1988]

When will someone get a chance to look at this? Check out what happened in the most recent round. We're not even the strongest team and the game has turned into a 4v2 against us, WITHOUT anything being declared publicly by the other teams. And check out all the undefended borders/bonuses they have with each other. I don't mean to be a pest about this, but this is getting a little ridiculous.

FYI:
Blue (Team 2) has Far East & Indian Subcontinent. All are relatively undefended, and Pink (Team 3) can easily take away these bonuses by rolling through a couple singles to get to Blue's own singles, and yet this hasn't happened.
Yellow (Team 2) has Russia (all singles) and Middle East (all borders with Pink are singles, while borders with my partner, who has only singles in Africa, are all stacked). Has repeatedly attacked ONLY my partner (or me) every turn, despite a much stronger and dangerous neighbour in Pink.
Aqua (Team 3), hasn't bothered to attack Blue at all for several turns.
Pink (Team 3) had all of Europe at several points in the game, and is close to taking all of it back after I took it from him last turn. Relatively weak borders with Yellow (Team 2) and has NOT bothered to attack Yellow's singles at all to break up Yellow's TWO region bonuses.

All of this seems quite abusive (essentially 4v2), but like we said before, our biggest complaint is that nothing at all was ever declared by any of them in public, and yet they've been playing 4v2 against a weak team.

Thanks and cheers.