Rules Discussion

[zoom]

I find rules 1.4 and 1.8 respectively problematic. I also find (unique) random map pools problematic.

1.4 - When a player disconnects AFTER 2 minutes, the players can (when both agree) restart and replay the game. When the opponent does not agree to restart, the player who lost connection will be given a loss.

1.8 - Players must be respectable to each other when selecting civilizations in a game. Players cannot intentionally change to unfair match-ups, or otherwise be difficult to agree to a match-up. The tournament staff reserves the right to two possible outcomes. 1. If only one player is deemed challenging, then that player will be forced to pick their civilization first. 2. If both players are disagreeable then blind pick will be enforced. This decision is made by the staff.

Map rules: Unlike in previous tournaments the map pool for this tournament will not be played out in a set order. Our tournament staff will be announcing a unique map pool for each tournament match. This means that each BO3 in the RO256 will have different map combinations. We will accomplish this by using a program to randomly pull from the map pool to make map sets. This method will make sure the maps that are randomly selected are different enough.

Does anyone else find these stipulations problematic?

[bart331]

Players cannot intentionally change to unfair match-ups

Lol, so if someone comes up with sioux bullshit you cant go to japan?
Weird rules

[Mitoe]

The wording is somewhat awkward, but it's not intended to stop players from switching civs if they want to. It's there in case a player is intentionally dodging every matchup in an attempt to force either a super one-sided matchup or some kind of stalemate/blind pick, and refuses to play otherwise. At some point, the players do need to find a matchup they're both willing to play, and if that doesn't happen, that's when this rule may come into play.

I don't see what the problem is with the other two rules.

[iNcog]

Actually I'm going to break that second rule a lot, since my strategy is to force non-mirrors every game. Non-mirrors which are fair, of course, but non-mirrors nonetheless. It's only fair as high level players are looking to force mirrors every game, something which I'm not going to agree with, as a lower level player. For example against a Fr player I'm not going to mirror that, I'm going to play one of the three civs I like playing Fr against, which are also fair match ups, like Japan, India, Germany, China, etc. I will dodge every mirror possible, sorry.


Rule 1.4 is basically a rule that says that any player who disconnects will be awarded a loss. I don't agree with that either. Sometimes people have connection problems, as it's been shown yesterday in smackdown. There should be a rule in terms of score, e.g. if a player disconnects and his score is more than 15% lower than his opponent's, then he gets a loss. If the score is higher than that, then they replay the game. That is a more objective / fair way of dealing with disconnects rather than giving the player who dropped an auto-loss.

For instance, anyone who plays with me knows that I sometimes drop for 10-30 seconds (due to bad router...) but generally I come back before the minute is over. A tournament opponent will probably just drop me during that time period' it happens on ladder. I don't mind on ladder since I don't care for rank particularly and it happens rarely, however I'm going to be annoyed if it's done to me in a tournament match.

[[Armag] diarouga]

If you can't agree with your opponent, I think we should force mirrors, other MUs can't be 100% fair.

[iNcog]

Like hell am I going to play a fair match up against a better player than me. soz :p

[divine_moon]

Like hell am I going to play a fair match up against a better player than me. soz :p

quick tell me of more unfair matchups.. :whistling:i''m bad but i want to get past round 1 :clint:

[momuuu]

Maybe the disconnect rule could be altered a little. For example, allow a restart if the player who disconnected was ahead in score with more than 20% or something, unless the mods decide that he was clearly losing (because it can be kinda iffy with Fast revolts or opponents rushing really hard).

[_H2O]

I don't think personal setup problems are to be handled by the tournament rules. Take some time and responsibility to making sure your connection is stable and you won't fall into this situation.

Also your argument of "I know I am worse and should lose, so I need to be able to play a favorable matchup" doesn't resonate too well with the spirit of competition or a tournament. Last tournament tons of players played non mirrors that were fair. This rule really is only meant to cover 1% of tournament games so that admins have the authority to prevent abusive civ selection practices.

[iNcog]

i didn't say favorable match-up, just an asymmetric one.

and yeah my connection is unstable, it happens to everyone to drop now and then etc

i don't want to be dropped by someone if i have a 15 second cut in my connection

[Mitoe]

Rule 1.4 is basically a rule that says that any player who disconnects will be awarded a loss. I don''t agree with that either. Sometimes people have connection problems, as it''s been shown yesterday in smackdown. There should be a rule in terms of score, e.g. if a player disconnects and his score is more than 15% lower than his opponent''s, then he gets a loss. If the score is higher than that, then they replay the game. That is a more objective / fair way of dealing with disconnects rather than giving the player who dropped an auto-loss.

For instance, anyone who plays with me knows that I sometimes drop for 10-30 seconds (due to bad router...) but generally I come back before the minute is over. A tournament opponent will probably just drop me during that time period' it happens on ladder. I don''t mind on ladder since I don''t care for rank particularly and it happens rarely, however I''m going to be annoyed if it''s done to me in a tournament match.

I actually disagree with your assertion that this is a more objective way of dealing with disconnects: in fact, I think it''s the opposite. If you allow a player who drops with a similar score to his opponent replay the game, that''s only taking into account 1 aspect of the game at the given time, you ignore the other variables such as map control, resource distribution, player''s mental state, etc. This is actually abusable, since essentially any player who feels like he''s going to lose, despite having a similar score could just "drop" and be guaranteed to replay the game because of the way the rules work. As Ryan said, if you have an unstable connection that''s something you''ll have to fix yourself, we aren''t going to be changing the rules for all players just because a few might have drop issues. Also, I think in a tournament game people will actually be MORE likely to wait out the entire time (how would they know it''s not themselves dropping? ), so I don''t think you need to worry about that so much.

[iNcog]

as long as i don't get dropped as soon as drop screen appears

anyone who plays with me knows i have an unstable connection and they often see this : http://i.gyazo.com/4fff18f2f115e2a1644e732b851b2083.jpg

it WILL happen during tournament. during my games people often are polite enough to wait it out

not sure about tournament setting

however i agree with what you say

[Mitoe]

Do you use wifi or ethernet? I used to have a similar issue on my connection, where I would just randomly drop for 30 seconds and then be totally lag-free again: happened almost every game. However, once I switched from wifi to ethernet the problem disappeared.

[iNcog]

ethernet

just that my room is the farthest away from the router which is possible and the walls are really thick

in fact most computers and laptops we have don't even work in my room. for some reason my desktop does

i think we might need a better router but that's ?100 for something good and i don't know which routers are good at all

[Mitoe]

Wait how does your distance from the router matter if you're using ethernet? :S

[iNcog]

well you tell me what variable changes

i plug a laptop into my router it works fine

i plug a laptop in my sister's room, which is right above router's room, it works fine

i plug laptop in my room, which is physically far from router, and it doesn't work

[deleted_user0]

The wording is somewhat awkward, but it''s not intended to stop players from switching civs if they want to. It''s there in case a player is intentionally dodging every matchup in an attempt to force either a super one-sided matchup or some kind of stalemate/blind pick, and refuses to play otherwise. At some point, the players do need to find a matchup they''re both willing to play, and if that doesn''t happen, that''s when this rule may come into play.

I don''t see what the problem is with the other two rules.

This smells of garja, and its definitely problematic because its highly subjective and therefore it cannot be properly (as in fairly) enforced. A player whose civ choices coincide with that of the staff will automatically be favored.

[Garja]

well you tell me what variable changes

i plug a laptop into my router it works fine

i plug a laptop in my sisters room, which is right above routers room, it works fine

i plug laptop in my room, which is physically far from router, and it doesnt work

wait, do you plug your pc into the wall?
Right now Im playing with a 20m ethernet cable plugged in the router and its the same thing as using the 3m cable.

This smells of garja, and its definitely problematic because its highly subjective and therefore it cannot be properly (as in fairly) enforced. A player whose civ choices coincide with that of the staff will automatically be favored.

Im not an admin and I didnnt participate in gameplay rules.

[iNcog]

yeah into the wall,

there's an ethernet cable which traverses the house just like it would a standard electrical cable

[deleted_user0]

I know youre not, but the controversy over what happened between u and boneng definitely insprired this rule.

[zoom]

I know youre not, but the controversy over what happened between u and boneng definitely insprired this rule.

Interesting... please do tell, Ume?.

[zoom]

The wording is somewhat awkward, but its not intended to stop players from switching civs if they want to. Its there in case a player is intentionally dodging every matchup in an attempt to force either a super one-sided matchup or some kind of stalemate/blind pick, and refuses to play otherwise. At some point, the players do need to find a matchup theyre both willing to play, and if that doesnt happen, thats when this rule may come into play.

I dont see what the problem is with the other two rules.

This smells of garja, and its definitely problematic because its highly subjective and therefore it cannot be properly (as in fairly) enforced. A player whose civ choices coincide with that of the staff will automatically be favored.

Here we go again... whats with this targeting Garja? Damn, cut the kid some slack! : S

[deleted_user0]

I know youre not, but the controversy over what happened between u and boneng definitely insprired this rule.

Interesting... please do tell, Ume?.

Tell what?

[lemmings121]

well you tell me what variable changes

i plug a laptop into my router it works fine

i plug a laptop in my sister''s room, which is right above router''s room, it works fine

i plug laptop in my room, which is physically far from router, and it doesn''t work

Are you sure the cable that goes to your room is fine? maybe rusky plug, idk...
distance shouldnt be a problem here..