Tournament Rules and Information

[sebnan12]

didnt mankl take some money from esoc (zooms words)?? why u allow him to play now

[sebnan12]

What I do know is that rotated buildings don't cause any sort of crashes, bugs, different pathing or anything, so the way in which the game operates on squared tiles doesn't really matter.
Oh, so maybe they forgot about the rotator mod, too?

he destroyed ur arguments badly @Garja

notification

[momuuu]

Rotator has some positive sides. It adds something to the game and prevents randomness from the rotation of the map. I also don't think I agree with the idea that it makes building placement too easy, I think it might just make that an actual feature. Its usually not really a big deal regardless.

Compared to auto-wall delete hotkey it really does add something positive too. Regardless of that, you can just enable certain modifications in EP of choice to nulify the "cheat" argument, so then its really all about if a mod adds something or not.

[pecelot]

didnt mankl take some money from esoc (zooms words)?? why u allow him to play now

*Neuron?

[zoom]

didnt mankl take some money from esoc (zooms words)?? why u allow him to play now

They both took money from ESOC. The only difference is that one case is called a retirement and the other armed robbery.

[zoom]

I'm lolling because the only post about building rotator was made some community manager guy and was about it being bannable or not. It is not bannable, that doesn't mean it's good for the game. It is not in fact.

I'm not referring to that, though. I distinctly remember an ES developer, in reply to why the BR is absent from the game despite the code being present, saying that it was originally intended to feature but was forgotten or misplaced.

As for the actual question, I've no idea whether the BR needs to be forbidden. It would be interesting to allow it in one tournament see the results. I consider this unlikely to happen, though.

[zoom]

Then where do you draw the line, gibson ? Is kynesie's stuff to make walls faster allowed for example ?

To me, it's simple: allow what is readily available to all players and considered a desirable and intended feature. In my opinion, Agra Fort hotkeys is an example candidate for these critiera, whereas Kynesie's home-brew macros are not.

[momuuu]

didnt mankl take some money from esoc (zooms words)?? why u allow him to play now

They both took money from ESOC. The only difference is that one case is called a retirement and the other armed robbery.

stop spreading lies haha. Mankl has done so much to support esoc.

[gibson]

Then where do you draw the line, gibson ? Is kynesie's stuff to make walls faster allowed for example ?

Not sure, and I'm not completely sure what kynisie has either, but you can't equate advanced hotkeys with revealing the entire map lol.

[Kaiserklein]

Not equating, just asking where we draw the line. To me this transparent UI where you can trade in market without even selecting it is already cheat, but for some people it's not. Just like rotator mod, extra hotkeys, whatever else... If you start saying "ok this mod is allowed" then a guy is gonna come with another mod, a bit more invasive, and say "is this allowed ? After all rotator mod is allowed" and etc etc, that's why I say in the end a guy comes with a mh and asks "why not ?". Ofc it's an exaggeration, but I think you got the idea.

[zoom]

didnt mankl take some money from esoc (zooms words)?? why u allow him to play now

They both took money from ESOC. The only difference is that one case is called a retirement and the other armed robbery.

stop spreading lies haha. Mankl has done so much to support esoc.

As has Neuron!

[zoom]

Rotator has some positive sides. It adds something to the game and prevents randomness from the rotation of the map. I also don't think I agree with the idea that it makes building placement too easy, I think it might just make that an actual feature. Its usually not really a big deal regardless.

Compared to auto-wall delete hotkey it really does add something positive too. Regardless of that, you can just enable certain modifications in EP of choice to nulify the "cheat" argument, so then its really all about if a mod adds something or not.

QP with cheese.

[Hazza54321]

Mitoe, jerom, bram, Jim and myself

A bunch of nubs then + noel

[Kaiserklein]

Royal with cheese*

[Jaeger]

I like how the finals are BO9 now. Maybe some of the other rounds should have more games too; the more, the better!

[lesllamas]

I'm somewhat disappointed the winner picks first CP method is still not being implemented. There is no logical reason to have alternating counterpick.


Jerom wins Game 1
Kaiserklein wins Game 2 on his counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 3 on Jerom's counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 4 on his counterpick

Result: Player B wins in the event of a single break, with 2 of his own counterpicks

@umeu

notification

@Jerom

notification

@zoom

notification

guys pls we went over this how did you come to this conclusion

[deleted_user0]

lol i got nothing to do with tournament rules.

[Gichtenlord]

I'm somewhat disappointed the winner picks first CP method is still not being implemented. There is no logical reason to have alternating counterpick.


Jerom wins Game 1
Kaiserklein wins Game 2 on his counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 3 on Jerom's counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 4 on his counterpick

Result: Player B wins in the event of a single break, with 2 of his own counterpicks

@umeu

notification

@Jerom

notification

@zoom

notification

guys pls we went over this how did you come to this conclusion

If jerom fucks up his counterpick, then it is definitely not unfair

[momuuu]

I'm somewhat disappointed the winner picks first CP method is still not being implemented. There is no logical reason to have alternating counterpick.


Jerom wins Game 1
Kaiserklein wins Game 2 on his counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 3 on Jerom's counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 4 on his counterpick

Result: Player B wins in the event of a single break, with 2 of his own counterpicks

@umeu

notification

@Jerom

notification

@zoom

notification

guys pls we went over this how did you come to this conclusion

The others are stubborn.

[lesllamas]

I'm somewhat disappointed the winner picks first CP method is still not being implemented. There is no logical reason to have alternating counterpick.


Jerom wins Game 1
Kaiserklein wins Game 2 on his counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 3 on Jerom's counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 4 on his counterpick

Result: Player B wins in the event of a single break, with 2 of his own counterpicks

@umeu

notification

@Jerom

notification

@zoom

notification

guys pls we went over this how did you come to this conclusion

If jerom fucks up his counterpick, then it is definitely not unfair

This is such a bullshit line of reasoning. Competitive counterpicking rules are and should be designed to account for all possibilities and outcomes. It's completely retarded to just ignore instances of a player losing on their own counterpick/winning on their opponents' by saying "lol u should just win ur counterpicks".

If that's your fucking position, then why don't you just hand the series win to whomever wins the first neutral game? The fact remains that in an alternating counterpick system, any series BO5 or longer (BO3 it doesn't matter because alternating would play out exactly the same way as winner picks first in every instance), there are outcomes where players win sets, having accessed more counterpicks than their opponent. In BO5, this can occur when the winning player wins 2 of the requisite 3 games on their own counterpick, while the losing player only gets 1 counterpick game. In BO7, you can have the same instance, except with 3/4 and 2, in BO9 4/5 and 3, ad infinitum.

Winner picks first is a system that will never, under any circumstances, allow any player to win a set having accessed more counterpicks than their opponent. Similarly, winner picks first does not punish the winner of a game (as is the favorite H20/Garja contention that doesn't stand up under any kind of scrutiny) over the course of a set, and winning games will never set a player behind in counterpicks. Additionally, losers of a series have even less room to complain about unfair auxiliary conditions, as they have the fullest opportunity to use all of their counterpicks to try and eke a game out. 3-0's are more convincing and indicative of a thoroughly outclassed opponent.

[momuuu]

Well we face other problems, for example that having a first pick on certain maps or in certain cases is much better than in others.

[lesllamas]

Well we face other problems, for example that having a first pick on certain maps or in certain cases is much better than in others.

That is indeed a problem, but it is also separate. Neither winner picks first nor alternating counterpick solves this issue. Depending on what the map set is for a particular round, and which ones get (randomly?) chosen for each series, the maps that provide extremely strong counterpicks are arbitrarily distributed through a set anyways. There's just as much chance for a polarizing map to appear in games 2/3 as there is for it to appear in games 4/5. No ordering of the counterpicks is going to be more or less fair in this area, unless the counterpicking rules are expanded to take maps into consideration (map bans? map agreement? caster decides? I truly don't know what the optimal decision is here).


Just to quickly illustrate: let's say there's Maps, A, B, C, D, E, F, and G and on the table for a 5 game series.

Any set of those 5 can be distributed through games 1-5 in any order. It can punish the winner of game 1 under alternating pick, the loser of game one under alternating pick, the winner of game 1 under winner picks first, or the loser of game 1 under winner picks first. If polarizing super strong counterpick map comes up in game 3, it favors the winner of game 1. If it comes up in game 4, it favors the loser of game 1. And so on and so forth.

I'll bring it up again, but melee is the same way. If each map were randomly set over the course of a series, there would be some instances where counterpicking got super weird and certain players of certain characters would have strangely large advantages in some instances, regardless of the counterpicking rules. Hence, in melee counterpicks include the map. Winner bans 1 map, loser counterpicks out of the 5 remaining choices, winner selects character (having the benefit of knowing what map they're going to), loser selects character. But AoE3 is different and there are far more maps with a less established metagame, so I have no idea how to optimally create a map picking ruleset.

[zoom]

I'm somewhat disappointed the winner picks first CP method is still not being implemented. There is no logical reason to have alternating counterpick.


Jerom wins Game 1
Kaiserklein wins Game 2 on his counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 3 on Jerom's counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 4 on his counterpick

Result: Player B wins in the event of a single break, with 2 of his own counterpicks

@umeu

notification

@Jerom

notification

@zoom

notification

guys pls we went over this how did you come to this conclusion

I'm confused. Are you of the idea that I have some sort of authority over the matter?

[lesllamas]

I'm somewhat disappointed the winner picks first CP method is still not being implemented. There is no logical reason to have alternating counterpick.


Jerom wins Game 1
Kaiserklein wins Game 2 on his counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 3 on Jerom's counterpick
Kaiserklein wins Game 4 on his counterpick

Result: Player B wins in the event of a single break, with 2 of his own counterpicks

@umeu

notification

@Jerom

notification

@zoom

notification

guys pls we went over this how did you come to this conclusion

I'm confused. Are you of the idea that I have some sort of authority over the matter?

Oh I thought you were one of the autumn tournament people. Whoopz

[momuuu]

Well we face other problems, for example that having a first pick on certain maps or in certain cases is much better than in others.

That is indeed a problem, but it is also separate. Neither winner picks first nor alternating counterpick solves this issue. Depending on what the map set is for a particular round, and which ones get (randomly?) chosen for each series, the maps that provide extremely strong counterpicks are arbitrarily distributed through a set anyways. There's just as much chance for a polarizing map to appear in games 2/3 as there is for it to appear in games 4/5. No ordering of the counterpicks is going to be more or less fair in this area, unless the counterpicking rules are expanded to take maps into consideration (map bans? map agreement? caster decides? I truly don't know what the optimal decision is here).


Just to quickly illustrate: let's say there's Maps, A, B, C, D, E, F, and G and on the table for a 5 game series.

Any set of those 5 can be distributed through games 1-5 in any order. It can punish the winner of game 1 under alternating pick, the loser of game one under alternating pick, the winner of game 1 under winner picks first, or the loser of game 1 under winner picks first. If polarizing super strong counterpick map comes up in game 3, it favors the winner of game 1. If it comes up in game 4, it favors the loser of game 1. And so on and so forth.

I'll bring it up again, but melee is the same way. If each map were randomly set over the course of a series, there would be some instances where counterpicking got super weird and certain players of certain characters would have strangely large advantages in some instances, regardless of the counterpicking rules. Hence, in melee counterpicks include the map. Winner bans 1 map, loser counterpicks out of the 5 remaining choices, winner selects character (having the benefit of knowing what map they're going to), loser selects character. But AoE3 is different and there are far more maps with a less established metagame, so I have no idea how to optimally create a map picking ruleset.

Aoe3's map are kinda extreme from time to time. On arkansas+hudson bay etc the maps are relatively uninfluential. But we also have Tibet, High Plains, Cascade Range, Indonesia, which all have a different meta.

Fortunately the counterpicks aren't extreme counters as of yet so its not really truly problematic either way around.