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

Gussie,


Not sure if I'm missing something, but...

It looks like purple is killing the easier kill, the one with only ONE territory. (Yellow)

Sorry, MattL...but virtually everything you described in your initial post IS considered cheating.  SMG even made a post specifically pertaining to points you made that it IS considered cheating and is subject to banning from the game.


1 person likes this

To Gussie:


" 2. Remember to activate the ignore requests option as the game progress,"


I actually do that the moment the game starts.  I immediately put everyone on ignore (I wish that was an option to choose before the game starts so we don't have to manually do it).


I don't want any alliances.  Personally I wish they would do away with that option altogether.


My typical game scenario...I nearly always host (I got tired of trying to join other games only to be kicked out for no apparent reason...my rank didn't matter whether it was high or low) and I almost always do it with the intent of having 5 players.  4 human players, including myself, and 1 computer player.  I want the computer player for the sake of keeping everyone at least somewhat honest as you can't ally with the AI (assuming someone hasn't found an exploit, of course).



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)


Matt


1 person likes this

Using 2 accounts to gain an advantage is flat out cheating. Two friends playing together with the purpose of making one or both accounts come at the top to gain points is cheating. 2 friends playing in the same game isn't necessarily cheating, but without a way to tell the actual intention, it is labeled as cheating. If SMG sees two players who appear to be related always playing together, you will be banned because you're most likely cheating to gain points.


Note that in normal board game risk, there is only one winner. There are no rank points, so it hardly matters if someone teams up to win because in the end, only one wins in a free for all. With the ranking system in Risk online, this is sketchy. It's fine if in the game 2 players work together for a while, but if it's per-medidated before the game even started, it's cheating.


Your attempt to define cheating vs exploit is invalid. I could very well argue that modifying the game code is just an exploit. They left the code there to modify, so I change it, and it's "exploiting" what I was given. Better to just call all of this cheating. The point of ranked games is you're supposed to start on your own with the intention of you winning, not to help someone else win or both of you take the 1 and 2 spots. And you are cheating if you modify the game as it's given in any way. Exploit = cheating, don't waste our time trying to create this arbitrary argument. We don't need to bother with you trying to justify your "exploitation" of the game so you can cheat for a higher rank.


2 people like this

So I ally with a total stranger with intention to gain an advantage, and use that advantage to the fullest to win. I then repeat this every game, new stranger, intent to gain an advantage and win.


Am I cheating ?


Note, random example, but common style of play for many.

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
SMG designed the game in a way that in alliance, the 2 allies can send each other secret instruction to attack certain player. Not the names of territories, but player color only. Therefore rightfully, they can’t coordinate themselves in such a way as example here. Player A and player B are not ordinary allies.4 other players are in play.one particular player, player C occupies Australia, Greenland and South Africa. Player A in a single turn takes Greenland and South Africa in a very deliberate move, travel across many territories just to reach there. When it comes to player B, he trade his cards, and eliminate the player in Australia. Is this possible for an alliance between strangers? I don’t think so. Second example, you and a stranger is allied, you are stronger than him but you got a common enemy around the same size as you.would you go all out to eliminate the enemy even if You know that it is suicidal and it will cost you the chance to win the game as your ally will gain the enemy cards instead?Again, an alliance between strangers, where each man for himself will not have let this happen. But again and again, we saw “selfless” players make such “sacrificial” moves that got me wondering why such “saints” and “martyr” even bother to play such a game. Shouldn’t they join Red Cross, WWF etc and save the world instead?that is why when such strange moves happened, people are shouting cheating, it is either an alliance between friends using WhatsApp as communication tool or someone using multiple accounts in the same game. I wanted to really believe that there are “saints” and “martyr” who play the game to let other win, but I am just not naive enough.

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.

Gussie,


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
I find I am getting randomly attacked much more often now. Sometimes after I knock out an opponent or two one of the remaining players will attack several territories including large armies even though it is not possible for them to kill me. Also sometimes an opponent will just randomly knock one of my larger armies off for no good reason (no continent for them to take there or anything). I may just need to play more aggressively and try more risky kills to keep them from ganging up on me. Cheating could be part of it but I think dumb strategies are also becoming more prevalent.
Another sign of cheating is that from the very start, one player decided to be Second to another player. He will do anything and everything to let his ally win the game. Would you decide that once alliance between a stranger is made, you will aim to be Second? Strangers don't do that, they will milk the alliance and try to come out first.if you are the guy who aim second each time, I did lIke to be your ally, tell me your name, time andthe game u in, I be happy to join and be your ally always.
So in short, anyone thinking that he can achieve the same desired results as playing with multiple accounts or a willing accomplice by making alliance with strangers will be greatly disappointed in the end.it just not the same and you should not think that alliance with stranger is the same with playing with your buddy

You guys are funny, so determined to call out everyone as cheaters if any doubt by your judgement! 


Two questions come to mind... 

- Any chance you miss-labeled someone a cheater ?

- Also, I want to play with my buddy who lives in a dif. state. I'd love to hear your guidelines to avoid you labeling me as a cheater? (Not meant as sarcasm)



Do I have to attack him every turn, every other turn...

Do I have to kill him before anyone else...

What if I attack or kill others first...


For the record, I don't recall ever seeing a company actually ban a paid player.

One suggestion, Separate trial accounts from paid accounts, helps minimize double players

Hi Matt, i wish to help, set a game of 6players, I will join and see if I can identify your buddy from the game. If I can't, it means you are doing OK. Writing too much is tiring.
Or if my suggestion is too tedious, why not try below bold and transparent move. You may post a public ddeclaration sounded like this, "I Matt L using account xxx will be playing with my buddy yyy. Players who decided to remain in the game despite this disclosure is welcome and aware of the risk involved. I also pledged that I will treat my buddy yyy as fair as I would to other players in the game and vice versa. Any alleged bias can be posted here where I will present my case to dispute any allegations." I bet real cheaters will not do such a declaration. So there you go, a way for you to play with your buddy.