People from "Antarctica"

[Archisian]

So a player that doesn't have many games but a super high win-rate doesn't have off as even a little suspicious to you?

On Chess.com, if someone has a low amount of games but a high win-rate, or they go on a crazy winning streak, the moderators actually investigate those accounts to see if they used hacking software or a move calculator. If they determine there was use of hacking software or a move calculator, then that account is banned.

Do you believe Chess.com is being unfair?

No, that does not seem suspicious. Players often play and learn a game (and become very good) playing the physical game before playing on BGA. Is this really so difficult to imagine?

Wingspan - first round goal, all 4 goals - sometimes the cards and dice won't roll your way.

Okay, well you can keep assuming good faith. I'll still have suspicions.

[Archisian]

Okay, cool. Then why did the player(s) suddenly have their accounts closed shortly after I made the report? A legit person would probably feel no need to do so.

Any number of reasons. Maybe the person was banned from BGA and then made another account, which was caught because listing the country as "antarctica" doesn't actually mask the IP address. Who knows?

But if the account is banned (and it's possibly the same person), I think it's then unfair for a loss against that person to count against your record and whatever ELO you lost to be permanently gone because of that.

[Archisian]

On Chess.com, if someone has a low amount of games but a high win-rate, or they go on a crazy winning streak, the moderators actually investigate those accounts to see if they used hacking software or a move calculator. If they determine there was use of hacking software or a move calculator, then that account is banned.

Do you believe Chess.com is being unfair?

I assume Chess sites use software to gauge cheating. They can tell if your moves are too close to perfect (or at least too close to what the best computers would play). Even Grandmasters can get exposed this way because Chess is so hard.

There's nothing like that for Wingspan. Someone who plays Wingspan IRL a lot can come here and be really good. In Chess and Go, there's a level of play that's so high you must be either be one of the world's best players or be using a computer on the side. That's how they detect cheaters.

So it's impossible to cheat in games on BGA?

[FrankJones]

okay, I reviewed the game you posted.

1) I see several serious errors in the first round. Making that many major blunders will often result in being in a losing position halfway through the game.

2) The opponent appears to have gotten a somewhat lucky starting hand that had two migratory birds. With two migratory birds, yeah, that player is likely going to win the 3 goals that involve habitat birds/eggs.

3) That player's account has been closed, but the message that appears says the account was closed by the player, not closed down by BGA.

Were there any other allegedly suspicious games against an antarctica player, or just this one?

[FrankJones]

Okay, cool. Then why did the player(s) suddenly have their accounts closed shortly after I made the report? A legit person would probably feel no need to do so.

Any number of reasons. Maybe the person was banned from BGA and then made another account, which was caught because listing the country as "antarctica" doesn't actually mask the IP address. Who knows?

But if the account is banned (and it's possibly the same person), I think it's then unfair for a loss against that person to count against your record and whatever ELO you lost to be permanently gone because of that.

There is nothing to indicate the account was banned. Nor do I see multiple accounts.

[FrankJones]

On Chess.com, if someone has a low amount of games but a high win-rate, or they go on a crazy winning streak, the moderators actually investigate those accounts to see if they used hacking software or a move calculator. If they determine there was use of hacking software or a move calculator, then that account is banned.

Do you believe Chess.com is being unfair?

I assume Chess sites use software to gauge cheating. They can tell if your moves are too close to perfect (or at least too close to what the best computers would play). Even Grandmasters can get exposed this way because Chess is so hard.

There's nothing like that for Wingspan. Someone who plays Wingspan IRL a lot can come here and be really good. In Chess and Go, there's a level of play that's so high you must be either be one of the world's best players or be using a computer on the side. That's how they detect cheaters.

So it's impossible to cheat in games on BGA?

It's possible to cheat, sure. People can use computer software in abstract games (chess, Othello, Go, etc) to tell them the best move.

I am not aware of anyone hacking a game like Wingspan to cheat the dice rolls or card draws. Someone getting a lucky hand with 2 migratory birds hardly seems like evidence of cheating. Also, maybe you could have won that game if you hadn't made so many errors in round 1.

[BarnardsStar]

I am not aware of anyone hacking a game like Wingspan to cheat the dice rolls or card draws. Someone getting a lucky hand with 2 migratory birds hardly seems like evidence of cheating. Also, maybe you could have won that game if you hadn't made so many errors in round 1.

I’m actually aware of it happening once, in Can’t Stop. BGA never elucidated all the details but from what I could tell, the player figured out some debug code was still in the game.. probably an HTTP request parameter… it basically allowed them to undo the last dice roll when they went bust, but they could only use it in turn-based games.

I don’t see lightning striking twice here, I suppose it’s possible.

[Archisian]

okay, I reviewed the game you posted.

1) I see several serious errors in the first round. Making that many major blunders will often result in being in a losing position halfway through the game.

2) The opponent appears to have gotten a somewhat lucky starting hand that had two migratory birds. With two migratory birds, yeah, that player is likely going to win the 3 goals that involve habitat birds/eggs.

3) That player's account has been closed, but the message that appears says the account was closed by the player, not closed down by BGA.

Were there any other allegedly suspicious games against an antarctica player, or just this one?

Yeah, there were two. That first one you saw with the migratory birds and this one.

https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=815091393

[Archisian]

Any number of reasons. Maybe the person was banned from BGA and then made another account, which was caught because listing the country as "antarctica" doesn't actually mask the IP address. Who knows?

But if the account is banned (and it's possibly the same person), I think it's then unfair for a loss against that person to count against your record and whatever ELO you lost to be permanently gone because of that.

There is nothing to indicate the account was banned. Nor do I see multiple accounts.

When you check the replay, before choosing the player, you'll see that the username is wgwpmqmpmpmp for both accounts. Is this a standard thing on BGA for a closed account, or is it actually the same person? Because in the game replay, the usernames are different (J-IVELY and Feel_Special).

[FrankJones]

But if the account is banned (and it's possibly the same person), I think it's then unfair for a loss against that person to count against your record and whatever ELO you lost to be permanently gone because of that.

There is nothing to indicate the account was banned. Nor do I see multiple accounts.

When you check the replay, before choosing the player, you'll see that the username is wgwpmqmpmpmp for both accounts. Is this a standard thing on BGA for a closed account, or is it actually the same person? Because in the game replay, the usernames are different (J-IVELY and Feel_Special).

Same player. The name was changed, so, upon viewing game replays, it would appear to be a different player.