Dirty_Player
Auto-translated
Instead of clarifying the rules, are you trying to take it out on the players?
I wrote this in a completely different context. People who write about the rules of fair play didn't even bother to read what fair play means. And the organizers should sometimes monitor the rules and periodically update them to reflect current realities; even the constitution has been changed :smile07:
And regarding "didn't like it," it's better to ask Zhopa. He had a game crash on СНГ at turn 111 after the blue player's turn ended, and he found Alamar after loading the red player's battle save. Even the great Zhopa couldn't repeat all the moves exactly as he did the first time (and I'm not talking about Alamar here), although the commentators noted this.
Everyone strives to play fairly, as they understand it; no one cheats on purpose, especially when the game is being streamed and an organizer is watching. And saying that someone deliberately crashed the game because they didn't like the move is complete nonsense.
You can't write everything in the rules. If a controversial situation arises in the game that is not documented in the rules, the players must turn to the judge, and the judge will make a decision.
Regarding Shopa. As a normal player, he immediately wrote in the chat that Alamar appeared to him. The opponent had no objections. So everything is okay.
In the tournament on MT_Jeb, a situation arose that was the opposite, and at turn 111, he got good heroes, but he had to replay due to a crash. The players turned to me, and I said that they should play as is.
There's no need to brag about how "it didn't work out" when replaying a turn; the heroes play a very important role. Obviously, when replaying turn 111, it is highly unlikely to buy all the same heroes as in the previous attempt. Just like in the late game, when a player digs up a strong hero, the presence of that hero can have an even greater impact on the game (as was the case in FFA). The judge assesses the degree of influence on the process. And his decision will be decisive. In some cases, you can replay a turn; in some cases, you can load a single save and dig up a hero "on demand," as I suggested in the case of very critical situations; in some cases, you can simply dismiss the necessary number of units and continue. You can't write in the rules exactly what to do in each case (for example, if there was an attack by a strong hero from the tavern, it would be silly to demand that the attack be repeated with any other hero) - the judge decides.
Regarding the game situation that occurred in the game, when Gomunguls attacked with Kasmetra instead of Luna, a dispute arose. This is a situation that could harm both players, so it's up to the judge. The video shows that Gomunguls wrote that "Yar allowed me to play differently." This implies three options:
1. This is true, so there can be no complaints.
2. This is not true, and Gomunguls is lying.
3. Yar said this for a different situation, and Gomunguls took it to mean that it can be done always.
In fact, Gomunguls replayed the turn completely differently, gaining a decisive advantage compared to the turn that was in the previous attempt. Yar, however, made the right decision that the turn should be replayed and completed as it was before. Gomunguls agreed with the decision without arguing. Savitar was not satisfied with the judge's decision.
I believe that if you sign up for someone's tournament, you should abide by the judge's decision or try to persuade him. To take a stand and say that you will not play is the last thing to do.
Disqualifying Gomunguls for a violation, as Savitar demanded, was not correct in this situation, because this violation in a controversial situation was immediately fixed.
Regarding mutual disrespect, everyone was good in their own way, each participant was wrong in his own way, and many unnecessary words were said and written. I think the players already understand everything and will sort it out among themselves. Only the viewers are still burning...