encrypted in game messages

[solo1805]

A question about in game messaging.

Is it a violation of the rules to use an off site encryption program to send and receive in game messages?

[jonisilk]

A good question, not sure about the answer, but I wouldn't think so. No more so than sending a message in any other language I imagine.

Would come in handy in a stuff happens variant, as long as the message suggesting it to a potential ally wasn't leaked!

Though don't take my word for it.
Let a mod give you the lowdown first as there could be other problems that I might not have taken into consideration.

[redrak2]

Of course this would be a violation .

[super_dipsy]

I am afraid that it is necessary for Mods to be able to read in-game messages in case they need to check out a game to ensure it is all above board. So no, you cannot encrypt your messages.

[jonisilk]

That's a fair point. I didn't think of that.

But what is the position on using a different language? If two players are both fluent in the same second language, would there be any issue with sending messages this way? Of course, the message could be intercepted and perhaps decoded with google, but vital information could be lost in translation.

What if I chose to employ French in my messages with another player (I speak French like Del-Boy, so no fear of it actually happening), or are all messages limited to English only, as this is the common language of the moderators?

Actually, I think I might have answered my own question.

[asudevil]

English is the mod's common language...but we can send stuff through google translate as well.

There are mutiple people who I know do their coms in different languages.

[von Falkenhayn]

Well thinking of a foreign language as encryption really doesn't sync up. A foreign language "key" is widely available for most languages and Mods could "decrypt" it easily enough. However, would it be against the rules to decide on a code for messages? Like a substitution cypher? My thought is there would a written record of how to decrypt the coded message in that scenario for the mods to utilize.

[solo1805]

Right. Thanks for the info. I thought it would be a violation bit wanted to check first.

[jonisilk]

would it be against the rules to decide on a code for messages? Like a substitution cypher? My thought is there would a written record of how to decrypt the coded message in that scenario for the mods to utilize.

Is another interesting point. I suppose that if you agreed upon such a key in a message in the actual game, then it's there for the mod to see and utilize.

If I wanted to suggest such a key, then for ease of communications it couldn't be that complex or it could confuse the players using it, especially later in a game when they may have lots of units. so something simple that wouldn't be too obvious perhaps.

If there is no message containing the key then obviously the communication has taken place outside of the game and would be cheating, but if the key is there for the mods, then wouldn't it just be a prudent precaution against the leaking of a message?

For example, in a stuff happens variant where some messages can be leaked, if I decided along with one other player that we would refer to locations/territories as/by _____________ (if the answer is a No, I'll put the suggestion here and if not I'll use it), and we then continued to do so throughout the game as the key is readily available in an earlier message, would that be still be deemed as encrypted and thus illegal?

Or am I just muddying the waters here?

[britneykay]

would it be against the rules to decide on a code for messages? Like a substitution cypher? My thought is there would a written record of how to decrypt the coded message in that scenario for the mods to utilize.

Is another interesting point. I suppose that if you agreed upon such a key in a message in the actual game, then it's there for the mod to see and utilize.

If I wanted to suggest such a key, then for ease of communications it couldn't be that complex or it could confuse the players using it, especially later in a game when they may have lots of units. so something simple that wouldn't be too obvious perhaps.

If there is no message containing the key then obviously the communication has taken place outside of the game and would be cheating, but if the key is there for the mods, then wouldn't it just be a prudent precaution against the leaking of a message?

For example, in a stuff happens variant where some messages can be leaked, if I decided along with one other player that we would refer to locations/territories as/by _____________ (if the answer is a No, I'll put the suggestion here and if not I'll use it), and we then continued to do so throughout the game as the key is readily available in an earlier message, would that be still be deemed as encrypted and thus illegal?

Or am I just muddying the waters here?

If it is just for the mods to be able to read and understand, I don't think you need to use the proper names of the different centers.

For example, what if you and your ally decided to write an alphabetical list of the centers and then rotate the names - like two centers away by alphabet in all further communication? Or number the centers that are key in your plan, and use numbers instead of their names? Or if you agree to switch "attack," "hold," and "move?" It would be completely nonsensical if it was leaked in stuff happens. I don't think there is a rule against that. It would still be in English and exhibit coordination to prove there is no cheating. Though it would take some effort to set up and to remember to switch your words, but I don't think it would be against the rules like using an encryption is.