Conquer Club

Scott-Land wrote:

TheTrust wrote:I am interested in hearing more of this "I suicided into a player last game, so he will suicide into you this game for me so that we don't play for another five hours" business.

Can someone (scott?) Clear that up for me?

Thanx hun.

I haven't pulled that game up but from the chat it looks like a stalemate game. a game in which the armies far exceed the cash value where there isnt a a tactical kill... one in which you will lose far more armies that you will ever recover. a standard tradition , that i did not start but have practiced. so all the players suicide on each other so the highest rank in the game gets the win..... so that all players lose the least amount of points. [u]prank, enelra and i[/u] for awhile there played so often that when the situation ora stalemate did arise , we [u]would take turns getting the win to try to make it as fair as possible[/u] since we were all somewhat close in rank. ive given far more stalemates away than ive received. so instead of playing infinitely and still no winner, we all [u]decided to suicide[/u].

it obviously doesnt happen on a regular basis but it does happen frequently enough to where we tried to make it fair for all involved. notice that i say we ... that's because all the remaining players must agree first before the intentional suicide occurs.


as a matter of fact, last week-- my last stalemate game poo-maker got the win....even though i was the higher ranked.

MOBAJOBG wrote:

Scott-Land wrote:

TheTrust wrote:I am interested in hearing more of this "I suicided into a player last game, so he will suicide into you this game for me so that we don't play for another five hours" business.

Can someone (scott?) Clear that up for me?

Thanx hun.

I haven't pulled that game up but from the chat it looks like a stalemate game. a game in which the armies far exceed the cash value where there isnt a a tactical kill... one in which you will lose far more armies that you will ever recover. a standard tradition , that i did not start but have practiced. so all the players suicide on each other so the highest rank in the game gets the win..... so that all players lose the least amount of points. prank, enelra and i for awhile there played so often that when the situation or a stalemate did arise , we would take turns getting the win to try to make it as fair as possible since we were all somewhat close in rank. ive given far more stalemates away than ive received. so instead of playing infinitely and still no winner, we all decided to suicide.

it obviously doesnt happen on a regular basis but it does happen frequently enough to where we tried to make it fair for all involved. notice that i say we ... that's because all the remaining players must agree first before the intentional suicide occurs.


as a matter of fact, last week-- my last stalemate game poo-maker got the win....even though i was the higher ranked.

Well, this practise is probably not the best of available honorable choices when there are different opponents involved in those games. Whereas other opponents than the 3 players would definitely lose because they are already pre-targetted without their knowledge.

Unless all those games consist of the same 8 players and have been clearly declared in the Game Chat of each games, I say such ill advice practises only propagate secret alliances. Nonetheless, I would leave negative feedback not for his brutal non-condescending in-game chat but for his resolute insistence on giving the game to another high rank player so that he may be rewarded in a different game, that's for sure.

Checkmate, Scott-Land by your own admission.

MOBAJOBG wrote:

Scott-Land wrote:

TheTrust wrote:I am interested in hearing more of this "I suicided into a player last game, so he will suicide into you this game for me so that we don't play for another five hours" business.

Can someone (scott?) Clear that up for me?

Thanx hun.

I haven't pulled that game up but from the chat it looks like a stalemate game. a game in which the armies far exceed the cash value where there isnt a a tactical kill... one in which you will lose far more armies that you will ever recover. a standard tradition , that i did not start but have practiced. so all the players suicide on each other so the highest rank in the game gets the win..... so that all players lose the least amount of points. [u]prank, enelra and i[/u] for awhile there played so often that when the situation ora stalemate did arise , we [u]would take turns getting the win to try to make it as fair as possible[/u] since we were all somewhat close in rank. ive given far more stalemates away than ive received. so instead of playing infinitely and still no winner, we all [u]decided to suicide[/u].

it obviously doesnt happen on a regular basis but it does happen frequently enough to where we tried to make it fair for all involved. notice that i say we ... that's because all the remaining players must agree first before the intentional suicide occurs.


as a matter of fact, last week-- my last stalemate game poo-maker got the win....even though i was the higher ranked.

Well, this practise is probably not the best of available honorable choices when there are different opponents involved in those games. Whereas other opponents than the 3 players would definitely lose because they are already pre-targetted without their knowledge.

Unless all those games consist of the same 8 players and have been clearly declared in the Game Chat of each games, I say such ill advice practises only propagate secret alliances. Nonetheless, I would leave negative feedback not for his brutal non-condescending in-game chat but for his resolute insistence on giving the game to another high rank player so that he may be rewarded in a different game, that's for sure.

Checkmate, Scott-Land by your own admission.

hulmey wrote:Well said and good point! this however also paints all other high ranking players with the same paint. They are then all guilty! Again this comes down to the highly ineffective points system!

TheTrust wrote:I can see MO's point in that....

If there are different players in different games, and the same 3 players are the ones rotating wins in the event of a tie, the other random variable entries into the games arent given a shot at winning via suicide. I get what your saying...

But Scotty boy has made it very clear this is not intentionally set up ingame to get to that point. These other players are not targetted without their notice and these 3 players fight each other as much as they fight everyone else, this condition scotty has told us about seems to only happen if the game is a stalemate. They dont go into the game looking to make a stalemate, they go in hoping to win.

a2zsteve wrote:Wow Scott looks like all the idiots have come out of the woodwork.

I will give you an idea of what Scott is talking about.

We were in a freestyle speed game (18018360), the game had progressed normally until it got down to 3 of us. Then we all seem to hit sets at the same time and the cashes built up but not as fast our armies. So we ended up having around 6000 armies each and the next cash was around 700.

No point in attacking 6000 armies to get a 700 cash. Stalemate

So 5 hours into the game we decided to end the game, if you read the chat several options were discussed but we decided to let me win and if the 3 of us were ever in that situation again one of the others would win.

What alot of people seem to be glossing over is that good players tend to be in the game at the end because they think about their moves and have better tactics. Therefore this is bound to happen at some point with the amount of games Scott plays and I think that after 5 hours in a speed game this is a fair end.

hulmey wrote:

a2zsteve wrote:Wow Scott looks like all the idiots have come out of the woodwork.

I will give you an idea of what Scott is talking about.

We were in a freestyle speed game (18018360), the game had progressed normally until it got down to 3 of us. Then we all seem to hit sets at the same time and the cashes built up but not as fast our armies. So we ended up having around 6000 armies each and the next cash was around 700.

No point in attacking 6000 armies to get a 700 cash. Stalemate

So 5 hours into the game we decided to end the game, if you read the chat several options were discussed but we decided to let me win and if the 3 of us were ever in that situation again one of the others would win.

What alot of people seem to be glossing over is that good players tend to be in the game at the end because they think about their moves and have better tactics. Therefore this is bound to happen at some point with the amount of games Scott plays and I think that after 5 hours in a speed game this is a fair end.

LOL, so you think your a good player? I havea higher score than you and i would never publicly say im a good player! lot of big heads coming out of the wood work!

hulmey wrote:Its happens and everyone knows it does. Just Scott-land publicly admits to doing it. He would rather lose not to many points to a higher ranked player than a SGt or Lt etc....

This is a form of cheating becuase the SGT or Lt thus would hardly stand a chance of winning with certain players in certain games!

This is a secret alliance (or unwritten rule!) wether pm'ed, msn or however !! Lets stamp out this bloody stupid behaviour and play Risk how its meant to be played!

i dont give a shit about rank-- GFY

hulmey wrote:Its happens and everyone knows it does. Just Scott-land publicly admits to doing it. He would rather lose not to many points to a higher ranked player than a SGt or Lt etc....

This is a form of cheating becuase the SGT or Lt thus would hardly stand a chance of winning with certain players in certain games!

This is a secret alliance (or unwritten rule!) wether pm'ed, msn or however !! Lets stamp out this bloody stupid behaviour and play Risk how its meant to be played!

firstholliday wrote:why don't u read it all..it's not three people pming eachother behind others backs





msn...

wrestler1ump wrote:I've got more evidence of scott-land being an arsehole. He had me on his ignore list for some reason back in 2007, but did his little thing at the start of 08 where he emptied his entire ignore list. I played many 8 player escalating freestyle speed games with him, and never was a problem. I didn't even win one of them, as I know he likes to ignore-list people if they win. Well recently I found myself on his intimidation list after I went down to cook. I didn't complain, but eventually I made it back up to Corporal. Just now I Pm'ed him politely letting him know that I was a corporal again. This is what he responded with:

i dont give a shit about rank-- GFY

All of the complaints sum it up. Don't join any games with him and his secret alliance mates, and maybe we should consider getting everyone to put this disease on ignore. People like him bring down the tone of this website. The fact that he's got multi's and secret alliances makes him even more outrageous. Ignore him now and don't turn back.