leekstep: i cheat

Everyone enjoys watching the drama unfold of a devastating cut. Will it hold or fold? how will it impact the game. But most players enjoy watching this from a distance, ie, when THEYRE not involved.

Too often there's a pivotal round where someone knows they can make a massive cut but opts not to and instead seeks friendship - if there was a POINT incentive to make cuts then it could change the game for the better.

The top player culture (if it leans towards sometimes favoritism) exists because the raw fun factor is lost at times cuz the values are on the points rather than the action.

A solution to possibly both problems would be some sort of bonus points or rewards for playing and making cuts. I can't imagine how the hell this could be coded in, but a bonus point system for making cuts, and a special bonus if it leads to a large kingdoms demise. This might cause more people to risk their necks and it sure as hell would make for more interesting games.

The number one most depressing type of game to play is when a leader starts talking to others and places are doled out. That bores me to tears and (sure I'm a dreamer, but) I'm not the only one.

Something ive been thinking about for quite some time but until I have it in a logical, (and implementable) format I wont really mention more than the general idea.

ive said this over and over again...ryan, it's pertinent for you to lay down rules, if you want them enforced. saying pga is cheating is good. but we've yet to learn what exactly is pga. is pga throwing someone games to help them gain alot of pts, or is it simply being nice to a player you see all the time...if it's the latter, then 90% of the top players, if not all, are guilty. by my own personal definition of pga (which is being nicer to ppl you know) it's a strategic tool. no i don't think you should throw ppl games. I think that's lame. but if it comes down to three players and i know im going to see one again in the future, and i have to make a decision between second and third. im going to choose the one i see more often. or the person i can rely on in the future. the game itself reinforces that. it's a more organize way of gameplay, and i don't see it as cheating. now once again, i stress that i believe throwing someone games is ridiculous. however, in the fourth or fifth round, if i am choosing to 6v5 someone ive never seen before over someone i play with everyday,to connect, im going to choose to 6v5 the person ive never seen before. it's simply a smarter strategy in this type of gaming. montly competition positively reinforces this. and tbh i think competition in general reinforces this.

monte wants to be a mod so bad, please make him one

While it's amusing watching the inmates run the prison with their reformed speeches and new-found commitment to fair play, I would like to point out one useful and simple tool that would have kept the true warriors of kDice quality control from getting thrown under the bus by the anti-anti-PGA cabals of times passed:

RECORD THE GAMES, INCLUDING CHAT, AND ALLOW FOR PLAYBACK REVIEW.

Ryan, the only time the community undertook a witch hunt to punish the PGAs, all it did was enourage teams and more PGAs.

It isnt hard to find out which people are going to cheat.

Some people have spent a lot of time recognizing these tendencies. The only to way stop them is by asking other people to join your cause and punish the cheaters. So basically you are forming a second PGA to beat the first PGA.

Just let BCMATT and Monte go around giving 30 minute no-sits to all the PGAs they see, then RC the accounts on second notice, then longer no-sits for repeat offenses.

Most people dont even recognize the PGAs. I have gone out of my way to notify the community about cheaters, I have gone as far as participating anti-PGA squads to defeat the PGAs (two wrongs dont make a right).

Yet still despite being open an honest about my activities, most of my biases go undetected and I constantly get false accusations.

Your mods have their heads buried in the sand. Please appoint periodic mods who have the knowledge and experience to effectively detect and adjudicate unfair play.

Each game should have competitive integrity, based primarily on the actions of the gameboard and chatbox. I think Montecarlo, Dasfury, BC, MadWilly would be fantastic candidates for the job.

Font make each month come down to groups of people backing one guy over another for the win, because they think someone cheats more or less.

Asking the community to actively consider pre-existing relationships in an effort to stop people from considering pre-existing relationships just doesnt make sense.

Backstab anyone who tries to help you cheat. It keeps them honest...

>> I personally find tourneys much more fun than the regular game because there's more skill involved. I'd kill the person with the highest score, or an elite player because I know that they're the biggest threat.

XC, I don't think that this is a correct rule to play. I see more threat from noobs that don't know how to play and just ruine the gameplay.

OK, Ryan, first of all, count me in for being interested in helping to change the culture at the top tables.

Your short term solution is obvious: more moderators + some clear guidelines for new mods for what offenses they can ban

long term solution 1: game recording. players(at the very least the mods) should be able to save game+chatlogs to send to you (or a moderator panel) for review. If you don't have the time, at least 3 mods should evaluate and if 2/3 see an offense, bans are possible.

long term solution 2: I can't find the email I sent you about this but in short: allow judges to "sit in" in 5k tables/MTT. They don't play that game but have the ability to activate warning buttons similar to xsketch. If a minimum of the sitting judges warn a player/team they get kicked out of the game/MTT.

long term solution 3 for MTT (very tricky, probably has just as many disadvantages as advantages but maybe this idea can just start as a brainstorm inscentive):

keep some of the payers that join a tourney out of the competition and have them judge it instead. 50 player MTT -> 5 judges; 100 ->8. Assign them to a random table and give them the xsketch warn button. If they press it, pull 2 other random judges from other tables and have them look into the offense. If 1 more agrees, the player/team is kicked out. As the tourney progresses more judges/table are present. Regular mods can always sit in as extra judges to reinforce the judge team. Players that get assigned to be judge should loose at least their ante for refusing to do their "jury duty". Players that stay present as judge the entire MTT should get a (small but significant enough) point reward for doing their job.

This system would also work for high stake tables but there are always so few players willing to play this table so it will be even harder to fill when 3 more players would be needed to sit extra. My idea: 10 players sit and then 7 random ones can play, 3 remaining judge. Variant: 7 players sit, nothing changes there. But watchers can "sit in" as potential judge. When game starts, a random part (also depending on the size of the group) of the judge candidates gets actual "judging powers".

make the judges be assigned random names too or call signs so that nobody knows who the judge is. its i pretty good idea jurg