Secret Diplomacy: honeyspider & Hoofdschudder [cleared]

[mr91mr]

Accused:

honeyspider
Hoofdschudder

The accused are suspected of:

Conducting Secret Diplomacy

Game number:

3429914

Comments:

I certainly don't have a history of complaints or being vindictive because of a loss, but I think this game needs to be examined further for irregularities. The accused players each attacked one another once or twice in the first few rounds to establish their bonuses. However, they then enjoyed their bonuses and continued to share adjacent, unfortified borders for more than 20 rounds while they took turns eliminating the other players in the game.

I noticed that they refused to attack each other even when the timing was right to do so and they could have easily broken the other's bonus. I thought maybe they just forgot to announce their partnership, so I wanted to give them a chance to do so without directly accusing them of wrongdoing. That sentiment led me to post the following comment:
mr91mr: "yea, i've noticed that you and pink rarely ever attack each other. you guys realize this isn't a doubles game, right?"

Another player started to catch on too: ekivolos: "Yellow, it looks like you and pink are a team. Please acknowledge! If that's the case, Green, I suggest a truce!"

By that point evikolus was on the verge of defeat, so a truce with him was pointless. Another turn went by, and yet passed another opportunity to attack each other. I again commented on the situation: mr91mr: "another turn where pink and yellow coexist peacefully. interesting"

Again, I'm not some sore loser out to bring the victors down, and I think I have a pretty good reputation, although brief (73 games), of good sportsmanship and competitive spirit. It was just frustrating to play a game for more than 30 rounds and continue to be stifled on all fronts because my strongest opponents were colluding. If they were colluding, then the collusion should stop. If they really weren't using secret diplomacy, then I certainly retract my accusation and congratulate Hoofdschudder on his well-earned victory.

Thanks for looking into this matter,

-mr91mr

[sgsmob]

this does look pretty suspicious; pink and yellow only attacked each other once prior to the elimination of red and blue. It is also noteworthy that they only denied the accusations once, and very mildly too.....

[honeyspider]

Pfft.

All I can say to this is whatever. You asked, I said no.

If you are asking again, the answer once again, is no. I am not a cheat. If I was I'd hope to have a better record.

[e_i_pi]

Hi, I'm honeyspider's flatmate. He asked for me to look at this game every now and then for him and give him advice (which, by the way, is not against the rules). My main points of advice were:

• Protect your bonus even if it is small, as it will yield higher returns than other players in the long run
• It is Terminator, so if someone is weak, build up near them, and strike when the time is right.
• It is Terminator, the idea is not to win the game, it is to take out as many players as possible, so don't worry about being the most powerful
• Terminator games yield the best results if you use gunboat diplomacy, especially with higher ranked players, as they understand this tenet

Comments:

I certainly don't have a history of complaints or being vindictive because of a loss, but I think this game needs to be examined further for irregularities. The accused players each attacked one another once or twice in the first few rounds to establish their bonuses. However, they then enjoyed their bonuses and continued to share adjacent, unfortified borders for more than 20 rounds while they took turns eliminating the other players in the game.

This is in line with the advice I gave him regarding gunboat diplomacy. Attacking a strong opponent that borders you does nothing for you in a Terminator game. You can check my record of Terminator games if you like, Iplay a fair few of them, and have acquired a great many points. I have done this by utilising this tactic.

Also, when you post stats on someone accusing them of something, make sure you get your stats right, otherwise you may look to be aspersing their character. The periods of no attacks prior to first establishing bonuses were rounds 6-8 and rounds 10-21. Not the 20 rounds you quoted.

I noticed that they refused to attack each other even when the timing was right to do so and they could have easily broken the other's bonus. I thought maybe they just forgot to announce their partnership, so I wanted to give them a chance to do so without directly accusing them of wrongdoing. That sentiment led me to post the following comment:
mr91mr: "yea, i've noticed that you and pink rarely ever attack each other. you guys realize this isn't a doubles game, right?"

It's called gunboat diplomacy. It is the sort of tactic used by advanced and skilled players. You will notice that high ranked players will not break you round after round. High ranked players will leave it up to someone else to do the breaking. The main reasons for this are:

• It's a waste of armies breaking someone
• If someone else breeaks, it's wasting their armies instead
• Breaking someone's bonus invites similar reprisals on oneself

Another player started to catch on too: ekivolos: "Yellow, it looks like you and pink are a team. Please acknowledge! If that's the case, Green, I suggest a truce!"

By that point evikolus was on the verge of defeat, so a truce with him was pointless. Another turn went by, and yet passed another opportunity to attack each other. I again commented on the situation: mr91mr: "another turn where pink and yellow coexist peacefully. interesting"

Just to put it in context, here's the game chat prior to those two comments:

2008-10-24 02:03:48 - honeyspider: oops. totally attacked the wrong person then :/
2008-10-24 03:40:51 - mr91mr: yea, i've noticed that you and pink rarely ever attack each other. you guys realize this isn't a doubles game, right?
2008-10-24 06:39:44 - honeyspider: nah, i just figure pink for the winner so id rather not piss him/her off

Some points to note here... when honeyspider said he attacked the wrong person, that was when he attacked you mr91mr, meaning he intended to attack someone else. Also, his followup to your accusation states clearly that he does not want to piss off Hoofdschudder, which is in line with conducting gunboat diplomacy.

Again, I'm not some sore loser out to bring the victors down, and I think I have a pretty good reputation, although brief (73 games), of good sportsmanship and competitive spirit. It was just frustrating to play a game for more than 30 rounds and continue to be stifled on all fronts because my strongest opponents were colluding. If they were colluding, then the collusion should stop. If they really weren't using secret diplomacy, then I certainly retract my accusation and congratulate Hoofdschudder on his well-earned victory.

Equally, I'm not a sore friend of the accused, and I also have a pretty good reputation, having helped bust about 15-20 multis, contribute to the Map Foundry, and assist in statistical analysis of dice.

If honeyspider was intent on getting more points, then he and I would play doubles games together, which is also not against the rules. He plays his own game, and certainly doesn't rely on collusion to retain his almighty rank of "Private"

[e_i_pi]

this does look pretty suspicious; pink and yellow only attacked each other once prior to the elimination of red and blue. It is also noteworthy that they only denied the accusations once, and very mildly too.....

They attacked each other 4 times prior to the elimination of Blue, who was in fact eliminated by Red. After this, in round 13, green accused purple and yellow of cheating, after which there was only 1 attack between Red and Green for the remainder of the game.

It is also noteworthy that they only denied the accusations once, and very mildly too.... that's what innocent people usually do. It's guilty people that deny over and over with passion that they have cheated.

[king achilles]

Given that e_i_pi has offered an explanation for honeyspider's side and the fact that he also declared their 'relation' with each other to us in the past, his explanation is believable. Plus, this is honeyspider and Hoofdschudder's first game played together so far. As what's been said before, we would need more than one game involving the same players where they may have had some secret agreement from a number of games to warrant a block. If you feel they had a secret coercion, feel free to give the appropriate ratings.

[mr91mr]

That's fine. I'm glad it turned out to be nothing. Like I said, I wasn't trying to be some sore loser looking to drag someone's name through the mud. I simply thought game warranted further examination by you all, the experts.

Thanks for all your help.

-mr91mr