The deadline for RO64 was January 22nd. You showed up on January 20th-21st and said that you were busy with other tournaments at first, and then your computer stopped working. Nitro was trying to contact you at that time and managed to get in touch for a game, which he told me about. Given that the tournament was extended due to ODD and the language barrier, I decided not to immediately award a technical loss, especially since Nitro was ready to play, and you agreed on Friday. You played a total of almost 7 weeks on HL+U, and you did it in two days. I don't think you should complain about your opponent here, but rather thank him for dedicating so much time to the game, which, with proper "grinding," he might not have even played. The fact that you chose 6LM10A instead of a quick template that could actually be played in 7 weeks of game time, I consider to be solely your personal tactical miscalculation, that's just my opinion. Initially, I wanted to judge based on the saves, and I told you that and asked you to send the saves and password, to which you replied that if we look at the saves, we could declare Nitro the winner, but you said you have your own plan on how to win this game. Nitro wasn't online on Skype at that moment. I wrote to you that you should wait until the evening, and I would contact you later after I think it over. After 30 minutes, you left Skype and didn't show up again. Nitro came a little later (an hour after you left). There's no point in asking one player for saves without the second player's password. The next time you were both ready to continue was Wednesday (January 29th). Is it worth mentioning that it would be, to put it mildly, unfair to the other participants in the tournament to set strict deadlines for them and make an exception for you? Considering the above, I believe that the reason for the technical loss – missing the tournament deadline – is more than fair and understandable in all aspects.

But this isn't all the details. I'll explain again that the tournament allows not only those 5 days when I wasn't available but also other 8 days. The deadline was from the 9th to the 22nd! He didn't write to me until the 16th either. I'm saying that, in principle, we could have not played from the 17th to the 20th, inclusive! That's only 4 days of downtime from the moment he tried to contact me! It's not always possible to get in touch with everyone immediately and start playing. Many people agree on Monday to play on Saturday or Sunday. There could be other reasons; for example, he could have played on the 17th, and I could have played on the 18th, 19th, and he only on the 20th, and in the end, our common date could still have been only January 21st. That is, the player is not to blame for not being able to play on certain dates when his opponent can play. If Nitro had written earlier, and I had postponed it, that would be one thing, but it turned out that he wrote when I had a force majeure. The fact that he chose HL+U is not an argument. Remove these templates then, don't point out that they can't be chosen, or specify in the rules that HL+U should not be chosen if you start the game 3 days before the deadline, for example. Thirdly, during the game on the 3rd week, I misclicked and accidentally retreated with the entire army, except for the skeletons left with the scout, on some difficult mummies. The army was already quite large, and it all just disappeared. We would have simply finished the game on the 4th week, but the auto-win was not given for obvious reasons, so I had to grind the skeletons, and the game was prolonged. This is to say that the game would not have been prolonged if it hadn't been for the misclick, so there's no need to talk about miscalculations here either. Fourthly, as soon as we started playing, I tried my best to accommodate and meet the deadline. All the game saves up to the subsequent date were from the opponent. At this rate, we could have played, say, on the 16th or 17th (when he first got in touch), 19th, 21st, and still not finished in time if I hadn't had a force majeure. Therefore, in this situation, it is precisely your miscalculation in determining that I am solely to blame for the fact that we did not finish in time! Regarding the so-called "proper grinding" - This is the wrong approach on your part. I advise you not to talk about such things for your own good, because you might end up creating unnecessary organizational problems for yourself. Yes, he probably could have not played, but according to you, he should not have played on the 21st and 22nd even if he could have played on those days. By the way, on the 22nd, he couldn't continue and try to finish in time when I could have continued. This smells a bit fishy... So, according to your logic, whoever writes first is right, regardless of whether his opponent can play or not? This is wrong. I advise you to add the following point to the rules: 1. No later than 5 days after the start of each round, players must contact their opponents and agree on a date and time to start the game. - If the game is postponed, agree on a date to resume it. But for now, there's no mention of this. You are awarding a technical loss for missing the deadline, and I disagree with this. It's not true, and that's where my disagreement lies. If neither of us wrote to each other until the 16th, then from the 16th to the 20th, he could have played (hypothetically, all the days when I couldn't), and on the 21st and 22nd, I could have played (he had 3 hours; essentially, he couldn't). So, he wins because he could hypothetically play on more days. This is not how it's done. First of all, you need to consider the days when both players could play. Moreover, the tournament was extended, and this is definitely also an official permission and an invitation to play in the following days, during which we spent another 2 attempts on January 24th and 25th! In total, 3 attempts, and all of them were within the deadline because the extension also adds days to the tournament! You should first consider all 3 dates of the game that I wrote about above, that I tried to finish the game as much as possible! And now, when I spent almost a day of pure time on the game, you tell me that I didn't finish in time and that I am to blame? What the hell? Why then did I have to waste my time and my opponent's time (he could have been in my place, for example) if you are now starting to remember what happened before? This is again the wrong approach on your part. If you were awarding based on the save, I would have told you that Nitro has the advantage, but I can't say for sure how things really are. But you chose a different wording.