Cheats
malbec
REGISTERED
Game: freecell
Game #: 1668349657
What would you like to see?
Much better dfisqualification of cheats needed. It's hardly worth playing freecell anymore. You do manage to 'disqualify' some scores but I have just been beaten by someone who apparently made 102 moves in 12 seconds!! It happens over and over again.
Comments
malbec ...These players are not cheating. They're playing the game ...albeit quickly...to a point where they can hit the "auto finish" icon. The computer counts these rapid moves also. Using tools that are available to everyone doesn't make them cheaters. Keep playing...you'll get it.
Here we are again!
Here we are again!
Happy as can be.
Easy, folks. When a player is new, the times posted for winners can be off-putting. It takes time to understand all the shortcuts in the games, even longer to master them. Most newer players don't know the amount of time the 'fast' players put into learning how to BE fast. It's irritating to a newer player.
I know it took me a while to figure out that folks are NOT cheating. Only thing that kept me from complaining about it is that Silver Hawk can't post! LOL Took me a long time to figure out why, that name is 2 words with a space. Those names can't post.
Enjoy the games.
Malbec, as an avid free celler, I had to learn all the moves since it was first time in a long time that I had played the game elsewhere , some folks are just better and faster, and can solve the game more quickly, I am not here to beat the high scores, tho recently I did place second with a low score on number of moves which you can click on Moves or Time, you can also in right corner click on game number# clear that and type any numbers from 1-999999999 and click enter ,and play any free cell game, as mentioned not as good as some ,thou I am here to play for fun, Cheats NONE here, it's just skill some have and others like me are here to enjoy a relief from everyday situations that develop I can not control, Play ON! Give it time, you may get to where you can beat those scores,
Hello Everybody
Just practice more and stop trying to get someone to tell a shortcut to getting faster. I am not one of the fastest and can do it in 12 seconds without cheating even if I knew how to cheat.
Malbec, you peaked my curiosity and so I checked #1668349657. I agree that it's frustrating to see low winning scores in the teens in terms of number of seconds required to make over 100 moves. The winning score of 16 seconds by balduindrossel is certainly possible if you are able to locate enough super moves to get your click-count down to 15 or 16. Personally, I have never been able to score better than a click-per-second, but finding enough supper moves to get my click-count down to 16 for that particular game (an easy game with many super move options) appears possible. I only tried that game 5 or 6 times and was able to get to 21 clicks. I do not have a touch screen, so the physical limitations of a touch pad or mouse prevents me from achieving a faster rate. My strategy has always been to mess around with a game, ignoring the number of seconds expended, until I'm confident I've found the minimum number of clicks required. If I am able to get my click-count equal-to or less-than the number of seconds posted by the current leader, then I know I can become the new leader. While attempting to find the lowest click-count required, my scores are typically in the 2-4 minute range. Once I've settled on a low click-count, it takes me up to a dozen tries to hit the click-per-second threshold. Therefore, I agree with the other comments in that, for this game, there was no cheating involved. When I have more time, I will go back and try to post a lower score than the current winner, but it will be close. Finding a 16-click solution will be the tough part.
52 of those moves are the deck going up. I use autofinish and it can clear a deck in about 3 seconds. Also i am a touch screen user because arthritis makes using a mouse painful. Light taps and faster moves.
Now...I use a secret decoder ring...but I don't get high scores so nobody seems to mind.
I may have been rather flippant with my previous comments but fellow players shouldn't be called cheats just because they use whatever means at their disposal to play a game.There is no cheating on this site.I may add that,when asked,fellow players are always ready to give less experienced players advice and support which is in the true spirit of the game.When all is said and done,the only way to improve your game is to play regularly and consistently.
So I was able to boil it down to 13 clicks (game # 1668349657) and then after a few practice runs, get it down to 15 seconds with 91 moves. I am now the current leader and could probably go another second or two lower with a little more practice. Didn't "cheat" and don't have a touch-screen unit; strictly finger moving on touch pad. If someone comes along and goes below 9 seconds, then I'd be suspicious too.
Malbec.Very nice wine.Play on and enjoy yourself.It's only a game.
The subject of cheating gets pretty tiresome, and I agree there is no evidence that there is cheating. This would go away if the leader board were ranked by number of moves (IMHO the true measure of the "best" game). I can't imagine that anyone would complain of cheaters based on low number of moves.... Are you listening David (the Green Felt Guy)????
The original complaint WAS about number of moves in a quick time. "Score" is the measure of the player..."# of moves" and "time" are the tie breakers. In baseball, they don't say "oh...we scored fewer runs but we ended the game with 10 less pitches...so we win." These people just don't like to lose without at least thinking they can win. All we can do is reassure them that the possibility exists
...and then laugh behind their backs.
The thing is, i dont think that ranking by # of moves will make everyone happier. People who want to be on the leaderboard will figure out how to do so. I learned how to be faster so i could get up there. If i want to be there, and i have to figure out how to be more efficient to do so, then i will. I mean i'm not saying i would, but i could see it that way. And then time would be the tie breaker.
I don't think a leader board ranked by moves will make everyone happier, it would just reduce the number of complaints about *seemingly" impossible times. I can't imagine anyone blaming low number of moves on "bots" like they often do with low times. I agree that time and number of moves are really tie breakers -you win by playing all the cards to the foundation piles. BTW, the baseball analogy doesn't make much sense to me - if they wanted to eliminate extra innings, they would come up with some arbitrary tie breaker that the baseball world would argue about endlessly - sound familiar? B^)
I play Seahaven Towers to relax and am rarely in the top 20 let alone the top !0 on the leader board, I tend to rank higher in number of moves but I suppose that might change if players obsessed about reducing their moves. That being said, I still think the number of moves would make for a better leader board.
I also play Calculation which is not on the leader board and up until recently was almost always in the top ten - sometimes only a handful manage to solve the daily puzzle = and, guess what, when there are more than 10 winners, I am often pushed off the list B^)
@dbwoemer ...you got me hooked on Calculation now. Cool game.
I think we're all in agreement. We just can't seem to decide on how to make it stop. And ...of course...the answer is that it will never stop. Newbies come and go ...and in every new batch there are 1 or 2 who will get upset about not being listed on the leader board after two whole days. The old homedoggy would have insulted their thinking that somebody would hack into a fairly secure site for the sole purpose of posting the best score on a game that doesn't pay out. But this is a kinder, gentler homedoggy And now...after all this discussion...we're back to malbec...you remember malbec...who hasn't logged on to see any of this.
But it's been fun bouncing it back and forth we you good folks
The Aliens, got him! Dilly! Dilly!