I try to only play non-anon when a group of reputable high-quality players set up a game, or when I'm about the last person to sign on and I can again see that everyone involved is respectable. Otherwise, I play anon every game. Although, it's not impossible for players to use "code" (or basically, specific phrasing to attract other players they know) or, as we've seen, for one player to have multiple accounts.

Unfortunately it's endemic on the internet. We have tools to try and defer this behaviour, and we try to keep an eye on things. The best way of dealing with suspicions remains that you report suspicious behaviour in the mod forum. We look into every case presented.

no-press anon is the way to go...

Mapu, you havent seen nothing yet. Loyalties to players, friendships, heck am starting to think that some can cast magic spells on others.

I agree that anon is the preferable way to go, and some invite games (we thoroughly enjoyed our last game even though I got my ass kicked).
no press is just to take your mind out of the game, not a game.

Sorry, but where's the fun if you cheat? I might try to mess people up in the same game if vengeance is all that's left, and there are people I won't knowingly play with, but really? Carrying alliances and emnities from game to game? Life's too short.

Yes, mapu, you have seen nothing, current game I am in I have never seen plays like this, it is modern map and the odds are 8-2, and it appears the two are the non deciples, maybe one other is not. Players with easy advantages are holding for no apparent reason then they just like sitting around, it's a joke.
Seriously considering just holding my units, what's the point, it's stacked.
Anonymous yes, or invite with players honest to the game.

1 vs 1 is the way to go...

@ DEFIANT :

This is a Diplomacy game ! Anything can happen !

Do you know that you have only written 2 (TWO !) messages to me during that whole game so far ! What do you expect ? Do you really hope to be succesful in a Diplomacy game with such a communication ?

Also, I would please like to remind you that it is against the rules to discuss an ongoing game.

Retillion I didn't way what game, I will deal with in the game.

Is this really a problem?

Sometimes, it makes sense to offer cross-gaming to motivate other players to draw out. For example, if you have 3 people with 5 SCs, 3 SCs, and 2 SCs, and the 2SC player is an idiot who wants to fight to the bitter end, the 3 SC player can offer to cross-game so the 2 SC player is motivated to team up and force a draw against the 5 SC player.

Argotitan,

I don’t know if your post was meant to be serious.
If it was, you may need to read the rules page of this website before joining some multiplayer game.
In particular the section:

http://www.vdiplomacy.com/rules.php
“
2. No Meta-gaming
You can't make alliances for reasons outside a game, such as because you are friends, relatives or in return for a favour in another game. This is known as metagaming and is against the rules because it gives an unfair advantage to those involved. If you are worried that you can't stab someone because you want to stay friends, then that's fair enough but you can't join a game with them.
“

Sadly this community is infected with an epidemic of cross-gaming encompassing incidents of revenge, favors, friendships, points, etc. It's sickening (pun intended), and even more disgusting that some of the "better' players here engage in it. It's extremely easy to spot, but nearly impossible to prove. The only way to stop it is to stop tolerating it as a community. As kaner406 has mentioned the moderators try to track this stuff, but it's very difficult because evidence of it doesn't necessarily occur through actual conversations on the site (yes, the moderators can read all of your messages). The reality is that while it's against the rules, there's next to nothing that the moderators can do to stop it unless they unearth overt evidence of quid pro quo behavior occurring across games.

Metagaming is the wrong word for it, because there are applications where metagaming is perfectly valid (tournaments, series of games, and SRGs). But Cross-gaming is just out and out cheating, and it destroys the integrity of the games and the community.

The answer to this is to build a community where players enforce this rule against cross-gaming thorough mutual respect of each other, and condemnation of the behavior when it goes on. There's no way to effectively penalize it officially, but if enough people cared about it passionately, the behavior would stop because you reputation in the community would suffer if you're observed doing it.

Ideally we could all just play on our honor and not do this. But they are many here who do not respect the game, and do not respect the rest of us as fellow players enough to give the common courtesy of playing each game with a clean slate, free of any off board influence.

I say that the problem is at an epidemic level when otherwise respected players here engage in this behavior routinely, and it goes unmentioned and unsanctioned. Everyone can always hide behind the' it's not allowed to discuss cheating on the forums' clause to shield them, thus killing any public observation of it. And then the only remedy is to approach the moderators, can only prove the sloppiest and most overt cases of cheating. I understand the reasons for keeping cheating accusations out of the public forum, but there's got to be a better solution than sweeping it under the carpet and saying it doesn't exist. It does exist, and it's destroying the community. But then again, there I go again assuming that anyone actually cares if this place has any respect for itself.

you're a bs player, Ruffhaus, and you should be penalized for slander. You're trying to justify your actions and accusations with these legitimate-sounding posts, but in the end, when things don't do your way, you contend that there are off-board agendas and cheating going on. Spill your beans somewhere else.

Methinks thou doth protest too much.... It not all about you Raro, and no one named you as part of the problem, except you of course.

no? Should we have the mods check out our correspondence?

If you want. That conversation is between the two of us and has nothing to do with this conversation. If you think they need to see it fine. I don't care. I've got nothing to hide. In the meantime, you're trolling here, so offer something on the topic at hand, or zip it.

Raro,
Ruffhaus is right, you have multiple players saying the same thing, some really good players are saying it. You have a community supporting only anonymous or invite only games, why is that? There is alot of time spent on these games and to find out it is fixed or stacked is just horrible. We just had a game where I was doing well(finally) and got cancelled due to cross gaming.

I am not one to run to mom because it is unfair, like to handle it within the game format but sometimes you just can't.

I don't dispute the fact that some players act unfairly in games. I've seen it myself, and been a victim of it before. I guess I was just quick to throw out a response, because I've been accused of cross-gaming totally without warrant, and nothing could be further from the truth. I start every game with a clean slate and open to diplomacy with each and every player. Right or wrong, my actions derive only from the scenario in each game. I think that just sometimes people are paranoid and throw out accusations much too carelessly, not saying that sometimes they are not warranted. I, too, prefer anonymous games, but the catch is that you're more likely to run into blatant meta-gaming in anon games, and there's no way of knowing whether or not you're playing with quality players. Nothing is more annoying than dedicating months to a game only to find out afterwards that you've been cheated the whole time. With non-anon, you can at least see who might by guilty of suspicious activity, and confront it head-on rather than after the fact. I guess it is just a risk that we all take by playing diplomacy online.

However, it should be said that not all claims of cross-gaming are legitimate. I was recently accused by someone in this very thread of doing just that and it was complete and utter BS. Being an ally with a player in more than one game does not necessarily equate to cheating.

that's correct raro, it can happen anytime(anonymous or non) and your answer is the textbook protocol to playing the game. It is just less likely to happen in anon, IMO, because you can't use your buddies to form a grand alliance to walk the board.

That's the other little stickler, is someone sore that they got stabbed or is it cross gaming like bluecthulhu said. We all get along with different personalties on this board, we work well with some and not so well with others. So when you get into a game, you are "naturally" more likely to work with players that you get along with, you see things the same way. That's why it is so hard to distinguish between cross gaming and players just playing well together. For instance, lets take the most recent Raro/Ruffhaus situation, they are not too happy with each other right now, those feelings will carryover into another game, can't help it, but i also know that if they were situated into a position that enhanced both their strengths in the next game, they would jump at the opportunity. That's the way this has to be played. Anything less corrupts the game. It happens to all of us, sometime you don't even realize you are doing it, but it needs to be pointed out by others players when it occurs.

@Retillion,
no matter what diplomacy you have done in a game the moves in the game me and Defiant are talking about, are just plain sick! I lost plenty of games, but to be targeted so obviously..

@bluecthulhu no it is not cheating t have the same ally, but it is cheating when someone or wo-three others target one person.

I dont mind if one person, i.e bluecthulhu is targeting me in a game because I didnt make a good first impression to him, but a good player should see beyond that. In a new game I would gladly open talks with him if the situation is beneficial for both of us / Now if he is willing to do so that is another matter. another example Ruffhaus, Mapu have been ruthless enemies to me and prevented solos but can also be my best allies in other games. Can you do that?

Cypeg: Is that addressed to me? If so, I really do want to make it clear that I never attack someone because of grudges held from previous games. But, like Defiant said, there are players who naturally get along and those who dont. I would gladly work with you if that was the smart thing to do. I honestly dont hold a grudge vs anyone on this site. Furthermore, I have no problem attacking anyone on this site, friend or otherwise. I love to stab!!

Oh and I didnt really understand your point about three others targeting one person.
Three players are not allowed to ally? Were you referring to something in particular?

@Decima Legio

I'm not exactly sure, but I think Argotitan is just mis-interpretting the meaning of "cross-gaming". It's sounds like he may just mean switching alliances to force a draw. I'm not sure though, perhaps he can clarify. If he did in fact mean "cross-gaming" in the sense that it is negotiating future games, then I agree it will be important for new players such as these to understand the rules considering such actions.

@Argotitan, can you please explain what was meant by your post?

Blue: I just took you as an example. not addressing you per se.
A 3way alliance of course can take place, but would you feel it is ok if this 3way gang was in a 6 man game, made truce with the other two, and target one player in particular?

Hmm. If all those events happened naturally within the game, then I would not have a problem with it at all. The two players in your example would be the ones at fault for not trying to reestablish balance and I would consider them the "bad" players in the example. While it may not be the most fun game, I don't see any cheating in that case. Of course, If they decided to kill the solo player before the game even started, then that is clearly cheating.

http://vdiplomacy.com/board.php?gameID=15134
A good anon, wta, game that hasnt filled for 10 days now.

For me, the pertinent thing about cross-gaming is the fact that we do build up models of each other in our minds before each game. If Player A has stabbed me in the 1st five turns of every game for the last ten games, it would be foolish to not incorporate that information into your decision making process. That does mean that I will be more defensive towards Mapu or Cypeg even on the very first turn. It is not done from emotion or revenge or malice but a rational model of expected behavior. Is that cross-gaming?

that's precisely where the blurry line occurs, and where invite-only anon games are preferable.

I agree to a certain extent. While I definitely want more people signing up for anon WW4 games (hint, hint, hint), I really do enjoy interacting with the personalities on this site and seeing if I can use the caricature model that I have built up to accurately predict player's moves. Those are probably the most satisfying moments that I have had playing this game; when you just know that a player is gonna act a certain way based on many games of experience - ya feel smart and you own that other player!

Of course, with my zero victories on my record to date, that feeling is mostly hypothetical :)

You should play some 1v1s blue

Ha! Where is the diplomacy in that??
Nope, win or lose, I really like the crazy dynamics of large maps. My dream is for us to take it to the next level and construct a 60 or so player world map.

ten or so would cd, meta-gaming would probably occur on a grand level, and that's even if you could ever start one. I think 24 players sounds like a good template, as was recommended in an earlier thread.

yep. it is certainly a fantasy for now...

wasnt the mars map nearly that big?

is still couldnt get the point you were making, cypeg...why not gang up against a single nation?

It's not that 24 players makes a better variant, it's that we can not get 35 serious players for the WW4 games. It wouldn't be bad to have a 24 player variant, but developing one should not preclude the exploration of large maps.

Crossgaming and civil disorder/game abandonment is already rampant across the community, so it wouldn't be any better or worse in a 60 players game. It's a given that it's going to occur. It would simply be proportionate to the size of the map.

cypeg you are still not allowing for the possibility that you are just wrong in the case you are referring to. I've given you my reasons for my moves, and whether you agree with them or not they are purely based on the circumstances of that game. You are painting everyone involved with a very broad brush and it is unfair and irresponsible. I don't disagree that there are problems, and I don't disagree that there may well be problems in this case, but you are too quick to assign labels and blame, holding onto what supports your case while ignoring any evidence and arguments to the contrary.

Discussions like this are absolutely needed and should continue, so that everyone can understand what the issues are and we can come as close to a consensus as is possible, so players new and old understand what codes of conduct they are expected to uphold. It's next to impossible to achieve on an internet forum, but progress is only going to come from clear, reasoned discussion. When you leap immediately to judgement and start pointing fingers with a narrow focus, you're only going to diminish the strength of your arguments.

I think in this thread some people are confusing the various forms of meta-gaming. I think Mapu makes a good point and maybe cross-gaming is actually a better way to describe the actual cheating-quadrant that resides in the metagaming sphere. I think that if you are playing non-anonymous games there are parts of it that exist because they need to.

Personally, I do not believe it is against the rules to consider what you know of your opponents from past experience when making decisions. If you are playing with people you know, of course you need to think about what you know about those people. Otherwise you're at a disadvantage.

That being said, this is way different than using from your pre-conceptions to guide your goals. This is against the rules. As is refusing to accept current press and to stagnate relationships. I believe this is against the spirit of the game.

Playing non-anon in press, in my opinion, is the best way to do it. Because it does add another layer of complexity to the game. The caveat is if people diplom cross-games or opt to play for anything other than a solo first, stopping it second they can ruin games.

As an aside, I don't believe I have ever encountered meta-gaming in any of the press games I've played on this site.

lets all get along and play giraffe gameID=15134

or join this other sweet game http://vdiplomacy.com/forum.php?viewthread=45970#45970

then we can get past this cause itll be anon.

ANON IS THE ANSWER dun dun duuuunnn

i agree with what the anon guy two posts above me just said. good call

I get cross-gamed all the time and the HoF is to blame. (or rather people who can't figure out a way to improve their HoF score other than targeting people higher on the HoF than they are).

If you want a fix: Let's all just group hug and draw every game so that you all don't have to complain about listening to all the whiners (either from the cross-gamed crowd, or the cross-gamer crowd).

Anyways, I've been told I can be picked out of an anon crowd like a hippie at an NRA convention, our community isn't big enough for anon to be truly anon.

So, I'll just keep playing games I enjoy and ignore people I don't enjoy and of course I'll try to remember to pack my towel. See you on the other side of the galaxy!

Hi all,

Please try to refrain from referring to specific examples in this thread. While the general discussion of such issues is not against the rules (and can help the community) making veiled cheating accusations is. If you have suspicions, please report it in the ModForum so we can look into it for you.

Feel free to keep discussing this, but please keep the conversation clear of cheating accusations!