Galactic Magnate logo  
   
 
Forums Home Register FAQ Website  
 
 

Forums home Report cheaters, and other complaints AwefulCollusion
Display posts from previous:   
      All times are GMT  
Post new topic  Reply to topic

Mon Mar 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Author Message
OmniOwnage
Asteroid


Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 19

Post subject: AwefulCollusion Reply with quote

aweful.

OmniOwnage
Stigga
Naomikelly

gamestarted around 1600eastern
justfinished

Stigga and Naomi's entire game was based on setting up a bs trade.
iamnot posting this because i did not win.aweful.

OmniOwnage
Stigga
Naomikelly

gamestarted around 1600eastern
justfinished

Stigga and Naomi's entire game was based on setting up a bs trade.
iamnot posting this because i did not win.

only 1 purple and 1 red were left on the board. maybe shortly after 1630.

stigga landed his final red, and actioned.
naomibet200. she bought it. both players had money.
then

naomi lands final purple, and actions. stigga bets200, and there is no more betting, untill i bet. i drove it above 1400. naomi bought it. their original intention was for stigga to buy, then trade each other their respective 3rd properties for 2 free sets. my unexpected push on the purple forced their most blatant move. the final red was traded for 600. both players had cash. naomi had no chance at winning. naomi never played to win. the whole game was set up for stigga to win. and the only reason it wasn't even more obvious is because imthebest. but regardless,,, awefulbsplay.

only 1 purple and 1 red were left on the board. maybe shortly after 1630.

stigga landed his final red, and actioned.
naomibet200. she bought it. both players had money.
then

naomi lands final purple, and actions. stigga bets200, and there is no more betting, untill i bet. i drove it above 1400. naomi bought it. their original intention was for stigga to buy, then trade each other their respective 3rd properties for 2 free sets. my unexpected push on the purple forced their most blatant move. the final red was traded for 600. both players had cash. naomi had no chance at winning. naomi never played to win. then naomi auctioned her shiz when only stigga had money.,,,,twice. they have practiced this. it was very methodical. the whole game was set up for stigga to win. and the only reason it wasn't even more obvious is because imthebest. but regardless,,, awefulbsplay
ithankyoumuchly to investigate this
      Back To Top  

Tue Mar 10, 2009 2:21 pm
Author Message
trace567
Guest





Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok I've been through the game and have to agree something wasn't quite right.

The trade at start 35 for final red for 600 was some what low.
Due to the low amount of cash given, and the money both players had I do not see that this was beneficial to both players. A higher sum of money, and it would have been. Especially since green was owned.
The trade was by far more beneficial to stigga, as 600 with green and next red fully built wouldn't last long.

But, the trade offer came from NaomiKelly, who by the looks is not a very experienced player. Which does pose the question about how well they were able to read the board, and see what value the reds should have held.

However in defense of NaomiKelly, just before she/he went out stigga made a trade offer (which imo would not have altered the order the game would of finished for NaomiKelly). NaomiKelly did not accept this trade offer to keep themselves in the game.

Based on all of the above I have decided on the following:

25% points reduction for stigga
25% points reduction for NaomiKelly

Stigga was very recently involved in a cheat trade, so an extra warning stigga that you need to be more careful with trading.
      Back To Top  
Post new topic  Reply to topic

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


      Back To Top  

Page 1 of 1
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Avalanche style by What Is Real © 2004