Forum

This is a good reason to engage in the aforementioned “what if” modeling.

Situation #1

The host created a new template (e.g., Drunk Jebus :smile04:) and started running a tournament on it. However, after round 2, a bug was discovered in the template – the host disabled Dragon Utopia at the red player’s respawn but forgot to disable it at the blue player’s respawn (by the way, this is a real case from my experience).

//if you don't like this specific example, take any other one; the main thing is that it should be controversial//

The host suggested "fixing the template."

Then Lucky appeared and said: "Absolutely not! I spent a month grinding this version of the template, and only because of this nice bug did I sign up for the tournament! You can't change the template mid-tournament!"

Question – who is authorized to make a decision in this situation?

Situation #2

After four rounds of Swiss, Lucky had a score of -2, and his prospects of making it into the playoffs were uncertain. Then, while studying the logs of previous rounds, Lucky found that two of his competitors received +1 points, which they shouldn't have according to the rules of the Swiss system.

Lucky wrote about this to the host, and the host agreed that an error occurred but refused to correct it with the argument, "what happened, happened; you should have complained earlier."

Question – what will Lucky’s reaction be?

Situation #3

The host has the right to make any changes to the regulations and rules during the tournament if necessary.

Please register me for the tournament.

proof

Question – what motivated Lucky in making this decision?

(everyone can answer)