[These cases have been closed. If you would like to appeal the decision of the hunter please open a ticket on the help page and the case will be looked into by a second hunter.]
josko.ri wrote:they should be punished ONLY if it is proven their intention for point dumping, not just because of the reason that their points are low.
Agreed. I wasn't really trying to make a point as to why they shouldn't be punished. Just pointing out that CC's points have inflated pretty high over the years. I do agree with you to find some one guilty you need to have a decent argument for their intention or some how show they are doing it deliberately.
Oh no, of course. I'm not saying mindlessly punish anyone with a low score either. I understand that there's those out there that might not be as good at this game or may not care enough to take all their turns, etc. However, the point is that in order to fall to an extremely low point total, such as <100 takes a lot more than just consistently playing 1v1s versus people below you. If you check the games most of these players play - they are rarely if ever against people with even similar points.
Albiestar, for example, is in 177 games currently, and every single one is 5-8 player games. To consistently lose and lose and lose to the point where you hit 1 point just seems very unlikely to me.
Suppose for example, a player has 75 points. In a 5-8 player game, supposing an average player (who has ~1000 points) wins, he'd still only gain 1 point from this player (who'd also lose one and drop to 74). To drop to 1 would require losing mass quantities of games over and over and over.
Only alternative, I suppose, is if he plays team games and loses - where the potential for losing points is higher.
tennischamp5 wrote:Oh no, of course. I'm not saying mindlessly punish anyone with a low score either. I understand that there's those out there that might not be as good at this game or may not care enough to take all their turns, etc. However, the point is that in order to fall to an extremely low point total, such as <100 takes a lot more than just consistently playing 1v1s versus people below you. If you check the games most of these players play - they are rarely if ever against people with even similar points.
Albiestar, for example, is in 177 games currently, and every single one is 5-8 player games. To consistently lose and lose and lose to the point where you hit 1 point just seems very unlikely to me.
Suppose for example, a player has 75 points. In a 5-8 player game, supposing an average player (who has ~1000 points) wins, he'd still only gain 1 point from this player (who'd also lose one and drop to 74). To drop to 1 would require losing mass quantities of games over and over and over.
Only alternative, I suppose, is if he plays team games and loses - where the potential for losing points is higher.
I remember playing 30+ 8 player games in a tourney and not winning a single one, so I think it's quite feasible that a player is unable to win a single game in those types, specially if they have considerable less games than me
I have just joined CC and pretty much just scanned through this topic. Nowhere have I seen particular indicators as to whether or not people have been cheating. One such indicator for point dumping, would be who they are playing with. Perhaps, they are playing with a friend or have two separate accounts. In this instance, they may "point dump" by just trying to help one person win in every game in order to have at least one account recognized as being a good player. They obviously don't care about the account they are dumping with, so maybe they are just using it to benefit a different account. Has anyone looked into this?
Dunn Deegan wrote:I have just joined CC and pretty much just scanned through this topic. Nowhere have I seen particular indicators as to whether or not people have been cheating. One such indicator for point dumping, would be who they are playing with. Perhaps, they are playing with a friend or have two separate accounts. In this instance, they may "point dump" by just trying to help one person win in every game in order to have at least one account recognized as being a good player. They obviously don't care about the account they are dumping with, so maybe they are just using it to benefit a different account. Has anyone looked into this?
Dunn Deegan wrote:I have just joined CC and pretty much just scanned through this topic. Nowhere have I seen particular indicators as to whether or not people have been cheating. One such indicator for point dumping, would be who they are playing with. Perhaps, they are playing with a friend or have two separate accounts. In this instance, they may "point dump" by just trying to help one person win in every game in order to have at least one account recognized as being a good player. They obviously don't care about the account they are dumping with, so maybe they are just using it to benefit a different account. Has anyone looked into this?
yes
So verbose sir, so verbose.
Yeah, it's been looked into. In albie's case in particular, he's playing against completely random opponents. There's no rhyme or reason to his games, just that he joins a ton of 5-8 player games and performs sub-par in most.
I think that was a mistake. AAFitz original complaint was against many people, and the case against all of them taken as a class is unprovable. Whereas Doc Brown's complaint is against one specific player and thus may be provable.
“Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” ― Voltaire
I think that was a mistake. AAFitz original complaint was against many people, and the case against all of them taken as a class is unprovable. Whereas Doc Brown's complaint is against one specific player and thus may be provable.
In this case as in any other, each person is being looked at, but at least the mods know this is a class action suit so to speak. It sa group of players who might be dropping rank intentionally. Lets face it, getting to 1 is.. harder to do legally then getting to conqueror legally.
Chuuuuck wrote:The average number of points among active players is MUCH higher than 1,000. Conquer club experiences inflation in points over the years they have operated due to the countless accounts that are signed up and played for a very short period of time and then quit.
It is easy to realize this when you notice the % of total users that are majors/corporals/brigadiers/generals has gone up drastically over the years as well as the players at the top of leaderboards have gotten higher and higher scores.
It would be interesting to see the statistics on how many inactive accounts there are and how many total points they represent below 1000 compared to how many are inactive that were above 1000 and how many total points they represent.
you are right, I was wrong. I checked, and right now 55 players are below 400 points and 333 players are above 2500 points so my comparing was not good. but I have other argument which perfectly says why people with low points shouldnt be punished only because of reason that they have less points because:
josko.ri wrote:for example, player who has 1000 points choose to play only 1v1 games, and plays it ONLY vs players who has score BELOW his score (is that against rules?). so, if his winning % is 50% (assume that he plays equal than opponent and that they both try to win every game), he will for sure sometime come to 1 point because for every his win he will earn less points than he will loose for every his loose. true? does he break any rule with choosing to ALWAYS play vs lower ranked opponent?
they should be punished ONLY if it is proven their intention for point dumping, not just because of the reason that their points are low.
And my contention is that every single one is intentionally point dumping, and that it is obvious. At 400 points its perhaps not worth debating...at 300 its past the point of ponderance of proof, and at 200 and lower, youd be better off defending OJ as innocent.
I'm Spanking Monkey now....err...I mean I'm a Spanking Monkey now...that shoots milk Too much. I know.
I disagree joskro.ri. intentions cannot be proved, it is appearances. However, they have the right to defend themselves and it should be looked at. If there is no systimatic foul play, but e.g. just regular bad play then i'd have to say no penalty. I do however concur with fitz that it really does not look good. the 1 point player is simply ludicrious. I cannot find a better intetion of pointdumping then him..
Since this report is based on those players that are currently lowest in the scoreboard, I look in the updated list from the lowest up to the last player below 400 points (as per the report) and checked their games. This is more on lowballing than point dumping.
So far, I do not see a clear cut view that someone is deliberately losing his games to lower his score. Most of them are probably just having bad luck or bad gameplay. I took in consideration of those who are missing their turns and/or deadbeating their games as an indication that they might not be playing competitively. As such, the players below have been sent a friendly message that they should take better care of their games and to let them know that there is such a rule that we do not allow lowballing (deliberately lowering of score) in the website. They are advised to join the Academy Team or the SoC Training Grounds for assistance in their game strategy. Let's give them time to improve. For now this report has been noted in their records. Of those below 100, whether they miss any turns or not, deadbeat or not, they were given the same message to improve in their games and informed about the consequence if found guilty of lowballing.
albiestar Wind Talker Manic Om Farmer1 ceaser5943 racecardogs rettan Elizabeth Carter packernation7 jackfighter racecardogs ceaser5943 kralj matjaž mortalyobscure wildbill52 KingKadre jonny2 Commander Wu lord richard187 WRgamer4
nnpolarisns - got busted.
Please don't have more than 1 account. If you have any CC concerns, you can contact us here.
I dont know, maybe some are point dumping. Me, ya Im a cook I dont care. I enjoy the game. I try to win, but dont win often, but I have fun. Theres a ton more people here that take this game, WAYYY to serious. Just because someone has a low score, doesnt mean they are purposley dumping. With that said though, Im sure there are some out there. I dont see the purpose of it though, other than helping a buddy out or something.
king achilles wrote:Since this report is based on those players that are currently lowest in the scoreboard, I look in the updated list from the lowest up to the last player below 400 points (as per the report) and checked their games. This is more on lowballing than point dumping.
So far, I do not see a clear cut view that someone is deliberately losing his games to lower his score. Most of them are probably just having bad luck or bad gameplay. I took in consideration of those who are missing their turns and/or deadbeating their games as an indication that they might not be playing competitively. As such, the players below have been sent a friendly message that they should take better care of their games and to let them know that there is such a rule that we do not allow lowballing (deliberately lowering of score) in the website. They are advised to join the Academy Team or the SoC Training Grounds for assistance in their game strategy. Let's give them time to improve. For now this report has been noted in their records. Of those below 100, whether they miss any turns or not, deadbeat or not, they were given the same message to improve in their games and informed about the consequence if found guilty of lowballing.
albiestar Wind Talker Manic Om Farmer1 ceaser5943 racecardogs rettan Elizabeth Carter packernation7 jackfighter racecardogs ceaser5943 kralj matjaž mortalyobscure wildbill52 KingKadre jonny2 Commander Wu lord richard187 WRgamer4
nnpolarisns - got busted.
Are you going to follow up with these in the future or is it up to the community AGAIN to police these people?
king achilles wrote:Since this report is based on those players that are currently lowest in the scoreboard, I look in the updated list from the lowest up to the last player below 400 points (as per the report) and checked their games. This is more on lowballing than point dumping.
So far, I do not see a clear cut view that someone is deliberately losing his games to lower his score. Most of them are probably just having bad luck or bad gameplay. I took in consideration of those who are missing their turns and/or deadbeating their games as an indication that they might not be playing competitively. As such, the players below have been sent a friendly message that they should take better care of their games and to let them know that there is such a rule that we do not allow lowballing (deliberately lowering of score) in the website. They are advised to join the Academy Team or the SoC Training Grounds for assistance in their game strategy. Let's give them time to improve. For now this report has been noted in their records. Of those below 100, whether they miss any turns or not, deadbeat or not, they were given the same message to improve in their games and informed about the consequence if found guilty of lowballing.
albiestar Wind Talker Manic Om Farmer1 ceaser5943 racecardogs rettan Elizabeth Carter packernation7 jackfighter racecardogs ceaser5943 kralj matjaž mortalyobscure wildbill52 KingKadre jonny2 Commander Wu lord richard187 WRgamer4
jakewilliams wrote:Are you going to follow up with these in the future or is it up to the community AGAIN to police these people?
If you feel someone is breaking the rules by all means point it out to us. In the case of all the names in this thread I would like to thank you jake for all your hard work.
Heh...very funny. It suggests to me old homosexuals in a roman bathhouse with their age-induced lowballs swinging away.
It is a little known fact that by the age of 73 most men's testicles are so low that they hang around the knees.
omigod... that reminded me of 'ole uncle eddie *shuts eyes tight*
I have a horribly vivid memory, from when I was about nine or so, of being taken sailing on a class trip. There were maybe three or four of us on this little boat with this basically old naked chap in control of the thing. He was very tanned, shirtless, shoeless..wearing just a pair of rather loose fitting shorts. Most worryingly, he had no underwear on. I'll never forget sitting next to a girl named Nicola (who I had a huge crush on), staring together at this old chap's incredibly enormous testicles. He displayed them proudly for the entire time...and they seemed incredibly big, gargantuan in their scope. We were transfixed by his testicles, absolutely captivated by their scale, and even now I am convinced that all old men must have balls bigger than their heads.
hmmmm.. who cares? i dont think anyone (with few exceptions) below 400 or 100 or whatever point number does it on purpose. Who has that kind of time? They probably just suck. Who cares if they miss 50 percent of turns? They probably dont care that much. Should CC become a site simply for hard core rickers? Doesnt it advertise the 'cashual gamer' on its home page? Worst case in CC history ever Fitz is just bitter with all the accusations against Thota and feels that the rules here re crap. I dont blame him. But leave the cashual riskers go even if they suck, their 2 points given to high ranks per loss do matter.
I ended up with Albiestar on my team in several games. I sent him PM's messages in the team chat, and frequently tried to get feedback, or at least some sort of teamwork out of him/her. Albiestar did not respond to any of the messages sent, and missed the majority of his turns which got him kicked out of the games and left me and others to fend for ourselves. He seems to join team games only, much to the detriment of everyone on his team. I honestly feel as if something should be done about this player.
