Conquer Club

Accused:

Coach Woodcock

The accused are suspected of:

Being Multis

Game number(s):

Game 14872204

Comments: Clearly a 2nd/Fake account of someone I have blocked.

This person may indeed be a multi, but what makes you say "Clearly a 2nd/Fake account"? In the past couple of weeks I have had a plethora of NRs deadbeat, and this just seems to be the same thing.

He's not deadbeating. He tactically missed a turn to drop armies the next turn. He takes his actual turns extremely fast for a "newbie" as well (as in, less than a minute when he begins to end).

You know when someone is an actual new player, and you know when they aren't. To me, it's very clear. Let them run IPs and see what they find.

Gwaahjo wrote:He's not deadbeating. He tactically missed a turn to drop armies the next turn. He takes his actual turns extremely fast for a "newbie" as well (as in, less than a minute when he begins to end).

You know when someone is an actual new player, and you know when they aren't. To me, it's very clear. Let them run IPs and see what they find.

And you 'deliberately' failed to finish a turn - presumably because you wanted to delay him and make him miss another turn? Or perhaps it's wrong to ascribe a motive without the slightest scrap of evidence...
We'll see, but one miss in 7 rounds doesn't constitute evidence in my view.

It looks like he used that missed turn to his advantage, blockading his bonus. Shrewd move.

Doesn't look like an experienced player to me. Taking a turn in under a minute is very simple for anybody in my opinion, especially when you're only taking one territory in that turn. I usually go for under 5 seconds if I'm attacking one territory.

Gabriel13 wrote:Doesn't look like an experienced player to me. Taking a turn in under a minute is very simple for anybody in my opinion, especially when you're only taking one territory in that turn. I usually go for under 5 seconds if I'm attacking one territory.

Brand new players generally take several minutes to complete a turn.

nothing to see

Cleared

clangfield wrote:

Gwaahjo wrote:He's not deadbeating. He tactically missed a turn to drop armies the next turn. He takes his actual turns extremely fast for a "newbie" as well (as in, less than a minute when he begins to end).

You know when someone is an actual new player, and you know when they aren't. To me, it's very clear. Let them run IPs and see what they find.

And you 'deliberately' failed to finish a turn - presumably because you wanted to delay him and make him miss another turn? Or perhaps it's wrong to ascribe a motive without the slightest scrap of evidence...
We'll see, but one miss in 7 rounds doesn't constitute evidence in my view.

It wasn't a speed game, so how would me forgetting to finish my turn (while looking into how to report him) after an hour delay him? This is the most illogical argument I've ever heard.

Gwaahjo wrote:

clangfield wrote:

Gwaahjo wrote:He's not deadbeating. He tactically missed a turn to drop armies the next turn. He takes his actual turns extremely fast for a "newbie" as well (as in, less than a minute when he begins to end).

You know when someone is an actual new player, and you know when they aren't. To me, it's very clear. Let them run IPs and see what they find.

And you 'deliberately' failed to finish a turn - presumably because you wanted to delay him and make him miss another turn? Or perhaps it's wrong to ascribe a motive without the slightest scrap of evidence...
We'll see, but one miss in 7 rounds doesn't constitute evidence in my view.

It wasn't a speed game, so how would me forgetting to finish my turn (while looking into how to report him) after an hour delay him? This is the most illogical argument I've ever heard.

I was being ironic. I was trying to suggest that accusing you of deliberately failing to end a turn was just as justified (or if you prefer directness, paranoid) of you accusing him of deliberately missing a turn.
My point was that you had no justification whatever for making the deduction that you made. I was ridiculing your position by making an equally "illogical" deduction.
I'm obviously going to have to be more blunt in future.