Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
We play according to the seasonal rules. If the seasonal rules change, the tournament rules will change accordingly.
Formally, you are right; if we follow the letter of the law, a restart shouldn't be given in this case. I was asked, and I advised giving one. I also said that it's an impassable block. In response, they started arguing that this block isn't that strong; now they say it can only be broken through on the third attempt...
In short: If player A, who ultimately lost, feels it's right to submit a report claiming a victory on turn 112, that's their right. I think player B will confirm it and won't argue. I would also accept it.
For the future, I would add a restart option for blocked situations and describe in the comments that there is a block and what its minimum parameters are (like a group of 4th-level creatures, a group of 3rd-level archers, etc.), otherwise, GG.