@nekodrugi:
I am indeed a noob - but I also know how to read the forum and look for answers, which I did extensively before submitting my report to IO and before complaining about *current* IO policy on the matter on the forum. Just because I have not played IO for years on end does not mean I am quite as dull as you seem to think.
I also resent the implication that noobs should sit down, shut up, and take it like noobs. I imagine IO is quite happy to have noobs discovering and playing the game, or it would probably only be the same 10 people playing who first created the game. Making fun of noobs is part of gaming, I know... But was there not a time when you were a noob? Would any game have success if there were never any noobs? Does being new at something mean one should accept cheating by more experienced players, and never say anything?
No. 1 -
It *is* true that IO will not check reports on cheats. Read this first.
http://forum.imperiaonline.org/int/index.php?topic=18367.msg193636#msg193636 Also read the response I received from the report which I did submit three days ago:
"Hi,
"player report checks are temporarily suspended
http://forum.imperiaonline.org/int/index.php?topic=18367.msg193636#msg193636"Best regards,
"Krum, IO Support"
For your info I already knew about IO officially telling players they won't check cheat reports, because I did read that announcement before submitting my player report and complaining about IO policy in this forum. Actually, I seem to have already known more about it than you, as I knew the announcement was made in November, not "something like summer time." And I have it straight from Krum's keyboard less than 72 hours old. Obviously the IO policy of not checking player reports is still current, and the notice you link to was a re-posting of old reporting procedure rules by a community manager and not a new announcement from IO that IO has resumed investigating such reports.
Second thing is your mis-reading (or non-reading) of my complaint about IO investigation policy and assumption I am an idiot who does not understand that it is "not that easy to prove from [my] side." Of course it is not easy for me to prove. I can only work with the tools I have, which is the information a player receives through the IO gaming interface. You imply that complaints must contain absolute proof, and that is not part of any official complaint/investigation system anywhere in the world. It always starts with reasonable suspicion, followed by investigation by more experienced investigators with better detection tools. Under your model, no crime or offense would ever be investigated.
With that in mind, of course the similarity of names is not absolute proof. It is, however, evidence. And these names are more than "similar" ... they are as close to each other as it is possible to make them without getting "that user name is not available" message while creating an account. "Sassafrax12" and "Sassafraxx12" (my fictitious but exactly parallel examples) are more than "similar," they are "almost identical." And yes, again, it is suspicious, and not proof, but it is *one part* of the information which I was able to gather as a mere player, whether noob or not.
Third thing is, of course IO *can* "check all activities those 2 accounts did and if they are overlapping more than usual they would do what is needed," just as you say. This is exactly why I submitted a player report of possible cheating - so hopefully IO would follow up with more definitive investigation.
But again, my concern is that IO is saying they will not check the activities at all, so nothing will be done.
As for your own little tale of cooperation and accusations, that is all well and good, but nothing to do with me and the person I suspect of cheating. Other than the mere coincidence of the "Do your best" messages. Uncanny. Really. But does that one coincidence between my story and yours prove that my suspicions are un-founded? Fact is, I placed the "Do your best" quote rather low on my list of evidence, and acknowledged that in itself it is not much - all I said is it is "not exactly a denial." I did not say it was "clear proof of guilt beyond all doubt."
So yes, there is a similarity in that one circumstance with your tale of innocent cooperation. But were there other similarities? Was your user name one letter off from those of your several friends? Did your friends alliance consist only of two accounts with names only one letter different from each others and your own? Were you spying on a target well outside your 2x range that you had never had any dealings with before? Were you launching stronger spies within 14 seconds of your weaker friends spies failing? Did you leave your army at home yet make sure to watch your friends attack two hours later, then send a taunting message (but no following armies) to the capitulating victim the moment after he capitulated to your friend? And did you and your friends repeat the exact same pattern the next day against a different target? Were you in the 25k point range in a top level powerful alliance, and your "similar named" friends in the 3k point range of a 5-day-old alliance that had only one member until 3 days before when another "similar named" account joined him to make 2 less-than-4k point players in the alliance?
OK, everything I have listed, even all put together, may not be, by itself, absolute proof... I acknowledge (as I already did in previous post) that, as you say, "that's not that easy to prove from [my] side."
I don't have the video of some guy in a city 6,000 miles away working on two computers whose screens show that he is logged in to IO on two different accounts while attacking myself and my alliance member. I do not have a message from the guy saying "Ha Ha, I beat you down using my three different accounts on IO at the same time!" I do not have IP addresses for the accounts, because I am not an illegal hacker. I do not have records of the activities of the 3 accounts over time showing a pattern of use for the same reason.
All I have is the tools I am given. That is why I am complaining about the IO policy that IO, which does have more tools,
will not even look at any player reports of possible cheating. As I acknowledge already in my above post, I understand there are many factors in determining whether someone is actually cheating, and that it can be a difficult call, and I thank you for reminding me of what I have already said.
But do you really think that all of the circumstances I described, put together, do not even warrant an investigation? Or even a player report complaint?
Just what kind of evidence could a player acquire that might meet your standards? The video? The confession message? An affidavit from his mother? My point in my original post in this forum is not to prove or disprove my suspicion in this particular instance, but is instead to point out my concern that the IO announcement and *current* policy of not investigating leaves cheaters a blank check, and players like me with no recourse, no matter how strong the evidence.
Even if I had the video, the confession and the affidavit, IO's current policy would be to take no steps to investigate the matter, since the information comes from a player and not from some computer-based random cheater-probability algorithm they run themselves. I certainly think the facts I presented in my player report (more detailed even than my above post - including exact times and sequences over two days and two different attacks on two different players by three accounts with almost identical names using the same simultaneous pattern) rise above a mere "Oh me oh my, two players spied and attacked me, they must be multi-accounting, please investigate."
What kind of evidence (that a player can acquire) would be enough to meet your *experienced* standards for something that should be further investigated? Whatever your heightened experienced-IO-player standards might be, it would still not be enough because IO is *not* currently (and for the past 3 months and for an indefinite future) investigating *any* player reports. [/u]
