Conquer Club

Rule #2: No secret diplomacy

Any form of diplomatic discussion between opponents must be posted in the game chat in English or in a language that all opponents understand. Diplomacy includes, but is not limited to: proposing truces, negotiating alliances, and coordinating assaults. Secret diplomacy can be hard to prove, but if you suspect it you should leave the players in question appropriate ratings. If you feel certain about players engaging in secret diplomacy consider reporting them in the Cheating & Abuse Reports forum by posting a new topic.

My question :

Does this belong to Secret Diplomacy, if 2 players don't write anything in Game Chat and don't attack each other (or just attack each other in unimportant regions), but they attack other players, because these other players formed a Diplomacy or Cooperation??

Example : Player A and B formed a diplomacy agreement (usually truce on borders) and let the others know. Then player C and D stop attacking each other and attack only A and B. We can say C and D work together. But they write nothing in Game Chat. Does this belong to Secret Diplomacy??

No it sounds like they are making the smart play and not attacking each other because they know it is a team of 2 vs two singles. Secret diplomacy is when they are communicating outside of the game chat about the game

If players let the other players in the game know that they're cooperating and don't communicate further, that's not secret diplomacy. Secret diplomacy is leaving PMs and Wall messages or having an agreement before the game starts that two or more players will be working together without letting the other players know about it.

there's also a thing called implied truce, which is technically not cheating or secret diplomacy, but technically also not a true alliance. this s a the case when people do not keep adding troops to their mutual borders endlessly (but also do not leave them undefended) because they know that when they add troops to their borders, so will the other side add to their borders, so they have to add to their own borders again and it will be an endless 'cold war' so sooner or later one of them may stop adding troops and so will the other, and usually they will not attack each other even though they never formally agreed on a truce, then that's a case of implied truce. just because they know it is a benefit to both players to not attack each other until they are in a position to do so. but they will attack each other if they feel strong enough to beat the other player.

Thank you for the answers.

Actually I had expected the answer, just not sure 100%

At C & A-Reports, we see a lot of complaints about the Secret Diplomacy, which is similar to the example I gave (with a wide variety of course), like this one : viewtopic.php?f=5&t=159865

And I ask here, so it can be used as references, since this region is still gray for most people (including me).

And thanks to Zimmah who has added an other case, which also can not be classified to SD, where we also find a cooperation without notice in the Game Chat.

Maybe there are still additional examples from the others?
Our keywords are :
- Cooperation
- No Notice (in the Game Chat)
- No SD

Ty