Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team
I looked at his last ratings, not how many games he played in the last yearsFrox333 wrote:from looking at his ratings, he has seemed to give 3 bad rating b4? hmmmm
Edited part: Also, you are using a game that is from 2 years ago your evidence. that shows slight desperate-ness....
Yes, exactly. And after I was already called a m***f*** for winning games on this site, I think that the time is right to do something against sore losers.Gabriel13 wrote:He just got pissed off at you guys and rated you badly.
These were probably the games he won.Gabriel13 wrote: It's not like he's been rating everybody in game after game badly.
A truce is allowed as long it is not a secret one (look at the rules) he has no right to rate us badly. Look at the other game, he complained there too and afterwards gave bad ratings. No truce there, still he rated others (spilseth/ joe theriault) badly.bahrain wrote:i dont actually see whats so wrong with the ratings he left, some hate when others make truces and rate badly because of that. and just by reading game chat it seems like you suicided in to him to end the game.
after all you were the only one who got 1 star from gameplay
you and green got 1 star from fair play (that would be for the truce)
and both you and green had a bad attitude so thats why you both got 1 star for the attitude
thats what i think he rated, i was not in the game so

Rubbish. Unfair? He was on the verge of winning, then in the GameChat we openly decided to stop him instead of handing him over the easy victory.bahrain wrote:he has every right to rate you badly if he feels you 2 played unfair against him, thats why there are different ratings like fair play.
and the other game you posted looks the same as this 1, 1 player killed him and lost so he maybe suicided against him to end the game like you did.
bahrain wrote:i took the facts from the game chat. maybe you should read on the forum about truces there is alot of players against it so i dont blame him for rating you bad because of it. after all only noobs need truces to win
bahrain wrote:i took the facts from the game chat. maybe you should read on the forum about truces there is alot of players against it so i dont blame him for rating you bad because of it. after all only noobs need truces to win

You're right, a truce like you said is well within the rules, but depending on circumstances, it is also bad sportsmanship. If you truce, you run the risk of a bad rating. You are within your rights to truce, but he is also within his rights to rate you down if he feels it goes against what he believes is fair play.CMetternich wrote:
A truce is allowed as long it is not a secret one (look at the rules) he has no right to rate us badly. Look at the other game, he complained there too and afterwards gave bad ratings. No truce there, still he rated others (spilseth/ joe theriault) badly.

I just don't know if I am writing Aramaic or nobody reads my posts.king achilles wrote:When it comes to ratings abuse, we would need a lot more examples than just 2 or 3, but let's not include games that have been over for years already. Although I can agree with the point you are trying to convey, you guys just wanted to survive the game and did what was needed. Put yourself in the other shoe and we also wouldn't be surprise if this does not go well for you. There will always be a risk when you form a truce with another opponent to weaken another player, don't expect 'high fives' from that player. One of you may eventually win the game but of course, let's not be surprised if the other player didn't take the truce against him positively. Some won't mind and understand but some won't. Try to contact him and settle this between yourselves.
Guess you didn't quite read his post either. You need at least 5 cases of the abuse happening. Or else we are just going to get a bunch of people in here complaining about 1 bad rating.CMetternich wrote:I just don't know if I am writing Aramaic or nobody reads my posts.king achilles wrote:When it comes to ratings abuse, we would need a lot more examples than just 2 or 3, but let's not include games that have been over for years already. Although I can agree with the point you are trying to convey, you guys just wanted to survive the game and did what was needed. Put yourself in the other shoe and we also wouldn't be surprise if this does not go well for you. There will always be a risk when you form a truce with another opponent to weaken another player, don't expect 'high fives' from that player. One of you may eventually win the game but of course, let's not be surprised if the other player didn't take the truce against him positively. Some won't mind and understand but some won't. Try to contact him and settle this between yourselves.
I contacted him before I opened this thread and I asked him why he gave me this rating. He bluntly told me that -in his opinion- I didn't used my ressources accordingly by attacking him.
For the truce once again: He himself had an alliance with another player in this particular game and in other games as well. He himself suggested it, the other player agreed to that. He is absolutely fine with alliances - as long as he is the profiteer.
But okay, from now on it is clear one can do whatever he wants if he lost a game. Rate them down, calling other players M*****f*****, everything is okay and allowed here, as long as it is just now and then and not in every game.
Great news.