Start a new topic

Cheating vs Exploit

You should be careful accusing someone of cheating.

 -Two players ganging up on you is NOT CHEATING!

- One player playing two accounts is NOT CHEATING!

- BOTS tough one, but still saying the BOT has no actual cheats but just another account to try and give the player an edge. Not much dif. then having a second account. Still saying this is NOT CHEATING!

I calls these exploiting a games feature, and impossible to stop.

I have hundreds of games logged in Risk, and have not seen one person actual cheat, as in roll sixes every roll, control the game so no one can move but only them, GOD mode where you can't hurt them, etc. NOT ONCE!

I do see many players trying to get an advantage with a second account, but honestly most of them suck and need two accounts.

I see many posts about cheating, but I challenge any of you, prove they actual have cheats vs just playing a second player who also is not cheating rather then playing dirty.

1 person has this question

2 accounts is cheating. Matt L. should be under investigation. 

1 person likes this
“ Renate Ironside 7 “ and “ Dan Abdiel Garcia de Leon “ are cheaters .. don’t play with them .... the game needs to add an option to block them from future games you host at least ... common guys it’s not that hard

1 person likes this

Steven Conway,

My initial post wasn't to define the exact definition of cheating, your taking it out of context a bit.

My goal was to voice the difference or degree of cheating. To point out someone hacking the game and altering code to roll sixes ever roll and win 100% of every game they play. Cheating, and detrimental to the game! (Example...)

- On the other hand, you have two players who don't know each other, ally in the game, and have a motive to win the game together with an advantage from allying. Not cheating, I get it! Built in game feature.

- Same player(s), plays another game and every game with intention to ally with another player they don't know, but sole purpose (intention) to gain an advantage in every game to win using ally. Cheating, or just using a game built in feature, exploiting that feature.

- Same player plays EXACT same behavior, but actually know the other player. Intention is exact same, should we ban both examples? If yes, why have ally in the game ?

Per rules, two players can know each other and play in the same game as long as their intention is to win the game as a solo player, easy enough!

- Do I now need to attack my friend EVERY turn to prove I hate him and want to cream him off the map like I have a grudge?

...simply so you don't call me a cheater ?

Or can I not hate him so much, and attack others.

How often do you expect me to attack him? 

When do you start calling me a cheater, read the forums, matter of time ?

- Most posts I read are that dreaded "I suck, so you must be cheating", cheat!  It's wide spread.

Be a lot easier if SMG implemented co-op (team) mode, 2vs2's. Give me a place to play, and I wont play with my friend in your game. Cheating or not cheating... Allying! 

Just saying, asking (yes I posted suggestion for this, no votes)

To put this nicely, I THINK you all are crying wolf waaaaaaaaaaay too much, and SMG doesn't have the time to police players allying (babysit), and trying to decide who is and isn't... I see very little proof to what I refer to as REAL CHEATS, and think SMG is doing a good job to prevent this. Read the forums, most of you must disagree on this with the amount of cheater cheater posts. 

Same posts over and over, he's not playing fair... Still referred to players rolls the same dice, and same game code (un-altered) as everyone else. ZERO advantage, other than having a buddy, but we're trying to define does he know him or not to distinguish cheating.

Really ?

Wow long post, do what you want with this. (Not worth proofing, nothing mean or bad meant, pls take it as general friendly discussion - disclaimer)


1 person likes this

Matt L, I definitely cannot speak for SMG and the processes they use, but I own the website and have since 2000.  While I still own the site, I am no longer involved in the running of it, but as the head administrator over there for over a decade...banning people was a task/chore unlike anything else.  The problem is if you ban a user, you can delete the account.  

Well they'll just create a new one.

So then we give then an IP ban.  If they have any technical knowledge at all (and unfortunately, many of them did) even an IP ban super easy to get around by just  utilizing different VPN's.  To combat that, at one point we issued a blanket block for entire IP groups...but that cause a massive issue because a lot of those VPN's used IP addresses from regular groups, so that blanket ban caused accidental banning of accounts that were not trouble makers at all.

Unfortunately, unless some much new and improved technology is involved, it is an overall losing battle.  

However...this game has one thing on their side that we didn't have at fact you have to pay for the game beyond the 1 or 2 games you can play for free every few hours.  

The people cheating most definitely paid the $5 fee to play...and banning their accounts would be an effective deterrent, imo, because even if they did have to re-create an account, well Risk is going to have even more money flowing in.  People like this will likely see multiple bannings if they don't change their cheating ways, but Risk will reap the rewards of catching them as well.

1 person likes this
ATT. MATT L ANDRE THE REST OF YOU EXPLOITERS OUT THERE! If anyone would care to look up the definition of "Cheater" and "Exploiter" you will find, that it is pretty close. But you ARE grinding points on others behalf. Indeed everyone else could use two or accounts. And everyone else could find another way to chea-, I mean exploit of course. BUT THEY DON'T! To Cheat: "[...] Act in a dishonest way [...]" To Exploit (2): "[...] To use selfishly for one's own ends [...]" (And yes, - I AM aware of the OTHER definitions in the links :D)

1 person likes this
Matt, SMG can catch them, albeit after the game. Well several games anyway. Once they see a pattern of the same two players aligning in multiple games then the exploiter can be banned. Whether it's fixable or not (cheat vs exploit), isn't relevant, it's about what's fair, what's right. The other players will call the exploiters out-plenty of threads here showing that. As I said in another thread, it's like sitting down to a board game and one player gets to play 2 sets of armies. However, in the online version you often don't know until it's too late. And even if you do know, it's usually too big of a hurdle to overcome.

1 person likes this
Matt you must be a Cheater. Anyone who says 1 player playing 2 accounts is not cheating does not know fair play. That logic would also mean 1 player plaiying 4 accounts against 1 player PLAYING 1 account and by the turn 1 being over after every 1 matt is playing has attacked the same guy and he doesnt even get 1 trade in... Well i guess that makes you an cheating and probanly couldnt win any other way. Im guessing you are 30 or younger

1 person likes this
Fix the bugs or refund my money

1 person likes this
One thing they should do is block accounts created within the same google account from playing together. But after that some simple code could be used to figure out most cheaters. Checking for IPs of accounts playing in a game. How many times they play together. I suppose I've run across a few players that end up in my games once a night or something like that.

1 person likes this
Nothing wrong with that, but good luck consistently finding an ally that won't stab you in the back before you betray him, lol


1 person likes this

Matt L,

Nope, you're not cheating. And that won't show up as cheating either. There are many things SMG looks at. Mostly what it comes down to, if you're playing often with the same player and both of those accounts keep winning esp with one account always being "the winner" it's obvious that this isn't some random person you're allying up with as a strategy. "cheating" doesn't have anything to do with having an "ally." It's all about having a per-meditated accomplice before the game was even made. And they pull the trigger on that when it's made obvious.


There are some idiots who partially kill a player because they want to take a continent late in the game or are legit trying to beat down the dominating player. This is why you should not play beginners. The biggest thing SMG needs to do is help advanced players match up with each other. Because yeah, I'm not going to start sweeping a guy unless I know I can sweep him. There are obvious cheaters who use one account to half kill someone, or knock out that difficult to reach territory which is your defense about the other guy bothering to try and kill you. Those are usually obvious cheats and I report immediately or could be dumb novices who think taking North America for one turn before the game ends is going to do them any good. The really good cheaters will play it out like they are that idiot who just wants the continent so that you won't know they're collaborating. But why anyone who's actually good at the game would cheat is beyond me. Nobody gives a damn who makes what rank in this so without the self-pride of achieving it, what's the point?

1 person likes this

Seriously, man.  You spend A LOT OF TIME arguing this point to death.  The lady doth protest wayyyyyyy . too much.   

1 person likes this

Playing with a buddy isn't necessarily cheating in the game of Risk but it's against the rules as per SMG because there's a high chance you will favor that player over others in these ranked games. If you want to play with friends, you need to use the play friends method and not games meant for random match ups.

For any player who desires 2nd place, just "tyap out" from the beginning of the game. Don't collect cards and surely no one will kill you, unless someone is cheating and needs to kill you before killing his 2nd account. :)

1 person likes this


Yes sometimes just dumb players will gang up on you because you're winning. This is more common on the board game risk because there's no benefit to coming in 2nd and the players just have to hope that everyone will try to kill you but not benefit by actually taking your cards. I deal with this from time to time and do my best to be political on the board, such as not setting troops in an area where I will probably attack that player next or aiming that at the guy only who will have no way of trading cards or attacking me so that the other will think I won't touch him. Honestly, once a really big, impossible player to kill scenario comes up, I will personally work for 2nd place and just try to avoid being killed. But a lot of people will play like there is no 2nd place and yay that just means I can kill him to make sure I get the 2nd place. I am sure many are shocked when I choose to wipe them out instead of helping them take the top player down with them.

So yeah not always a case of cheating. It's more emotional based. And man this game is emotional for beginners. Revenge is only worth it if you can kill the player and end up with a lot of cards but not ending your turn with a lot of cards. Many players make the mistake of ending their turn with 5 cards after killing me off. I laugh at them for being the next lunch.

1 person likes this're a cheater.  I don't want to play with you.  Sorry.  Learn to pick up on sarcasm.

FYI Risk doesn't have alleys.  Or did you mean "allies"?

1 person likes this