Posts from Controversial issues and their resolutions. Auto-translated

vbn ‎(1:14):
you are entitled to demand a technical victory

gentlemen, if you're going to demand a technical victory for something like THAT, you might as well not play at all:o just my opinion.

I have a question: were griffons the only guards? Or were there others?
If it was only griffons, then it's definitely an exploit. Whether or not to demand a restart depends on your relationship with the opponent. If you respect the opponent, load the save and let's go again.

P.S.: If your situation is worse, demand a restart :D

Griffins, judging by the screenshot, guard the passage between the grass and the snow. The guards of the elevator shouldn't be more than one cell away from it. So, they had to be defeated anyway.

Good afternoon...
I would like you to review the situation that arose between me and Alex R in a team tournament....
SEM_56 (red, Dungeon, Shakti) - Alex R (blue, Rampart, Ivor)

I ask that you pay attention, and if I am wrong, I will apologize to Alex and admit my defeat without continuing the game...

Roman, why would you apologize...

It's your right: either play a rematch, or...

But a rematch would be better!

guys, if you demand a technical victory for something like THAT, it's better not to play at all:o just my opinion.

But why not demand it? So, it turns out that you can use scouts to pass through a closed territory without breaking through the guard, and that's okay? And it's not difficult to figure out that this is a guard for the passage, not for the underground, because the guard for the underground should be standing right next to the entrance, cell to cell.

The situation would have been much more difficult to assess if it weren't for the proximity of the metro entrance to the passage from grass to snow.
When approaching the shifted guard, the player often cannot determine whether there was a double guard here before, which the opponent might have broken through, and therefore the shifted guard can be bypassed, or the opponent didn't break through anything, and the player needs to attack the shifted guard himself (in this case, the Griffons). Only the opponent can tell whether the shifted guard needs to be attacked. The problem arises when there is no certainty that the opponent saw this part of the map, as it is undesirable to discuss the situation with him, giving information about the map and his own actions.
In this case, the presence of a broken-through entrance to the metro nearby gave Blue confidence that Red had seen this passage and these Griffons. Therefore, Blue should have asked the opponent if it was possible to pass by them. Blue's mistake is obvious; the punishment is up to the opponent.

Thank you for enlightening me...
I apologize again, and if Alex has some free time for a game, I agree to play again. If not, I will accept it as my defeat...
Thank you for your attention...
P.S. I will try my best not to bring arguments out of the house in the future...

When approaching a shifted guard, the player often cannot determine whether there was a double guard here before, which the opponent might have broken through.

We can adopt the following rule from LT League:

If there are multiple guards between zones, it is sufficient to break through only one of them. If one of the players has already broken through one of the guards of a zone, and the second player sees this, then the second player does not need to break through the other guard and can go to another zone. Otherwise, the second player must break through one of the guards of this zone.

Thank you for enlightening me...
I apologize again, and if Alex has some free time for a game, I agree to play again. If not, I will accept it as my defeat...
Thank you for your attention...
P.S. I will try my best not to bring arguments out of the game...

Come on, don't worry. You did everything right. Besides, Alex likes to point out the rules to everyone, so as an honest player, he should either admit defeat or suggest a rematch. But it's definitely not your fault if you have to concede the game!

And one more thing, I really don't like the rule that if an opponent breaks through one of two staggered guards, the other might not break through!!!

Why is there such unfairness? Let the second part also break through...
Is this rule also applicable to Grand Order??

Does this rule apply to Heroes of Might and Magic as well?

I think "yes" - since it can be flown over at all. IMO, it should be left as is.

We could adopt the following rule from LT League:

If there are multiple guards between zones, it is sufficient to break through only one of them. If one of the players has already broken through one of the guards of a zone, and the second player sees this, then the second player does not need to break through the other guard and can go to another zone. Otherwise, the second player must break through one of the guards of that zone.

This rule seems quite reasonable, but with a large difference in the difficulty of breaking through the components of a double guard, for example, a double guard consisting of zombies and snipers, a nuance arises - you break through the zombies and can have a guaranteed exclusive access to the passage for some time, because for the opponent, it is completely blocked by the snipers.

Come on, man. You did everything right. Besides, Alex himself likes to point out the rules to everyone, so as an honest player, he should admit defeat or suggest a rematch.

Come on... I don't owe anyone anything :smile38: ... let just one person who I pointed out the rules to speak up...
I generally adhere to the principle of playing fairly first, and then following the rules, which is why I personally lost twice to Yakudza and Invisibl, and both times they were just desperately clinging to victory because they couldn't win fairly:smile01: (fact).
By the way, I never ask for or take auto-wins, but I ALWAYS give them if the situation is absurd or there's an unfair loss.... and only once did I refuse an auto-win to a player (I don't remember who) saying that I would explain why after the game.... he asked for an auto-win because he lost (I told him I wouldn't give him an auto-win, but I would explain why later), and when he lost a second time and admitted defeat, I explained that I had also lost before and was trying to recover, so giving my opponent an auto-win would be too much... and even then, I still felt a little guilty :smile43:

Regarding this incident, I was unpleasantly surprised by Sam's behavior yesterday, but I'm glad he came to his senses and found the courage to apologize. We agreed to a rematch.

And now, see how it looked from my side (I'm posting screenshots)
In the first one, you can see that someone needs to be attacked.
In the second screenshot, you can see that the path is now clear. Unfortunately, I don't have a screenshot with the red flag on that spot - but I think it's clear that the neutrals didn't fight each other!
...of course, when the save is opened, it's clear that the passage to the snow area is guarded by griffins (moved), and the air units were guarding the metro, but it's also clear that the map is buggy:
1) this metro leads to the opponent's respawn, but the road goes not to the castle, but to a two-way teleport at his respawn :confused:
2) there are 2 roads leading to the metro from my respawn and from the snow (the road is not a transit road - but an equal intersection, it's clear that to take the snow secondary town, I need to attack the moved griffins, but if I don't go to the secondary town - but dive into the metro, then I have to break through the entrance and exit of the metro, and the fact that the metro is not located clearly on the border of the respawns - but is shifted exactly one cell to the side - is a bug, because objects are not placed on the borders of the respawns.

At night, I don't cover myself; my motive is as follows:
I saw from 116 that the edge of the metro and that the reds came out of it and attacked someone... until 122, he appeared in the metro a couple of times - but I didn't see where he was going, so the decision was to dive in, and I didn't even think about infiltrating, because I was sure that he had cleared everything, moreover, I didn't go to the snow secondary town or the snow territory - but just dived in with a scout, after which the opponent wrote that I infiltrated without clearing it, Ivor was in a battle at that time - in the chat, he told me that I had violated the rules, because I didn't understand what the violation was, after which I, in a fit of anger, suggested firing the scout, and at the same time, Ivor was already going to that basement, but on the way, I still attacked the griffins and fired the scout.... passed the turn, the opponent thought for a couple of minutes and decided not to continue... you already know almost everything.

P.S. It's good that the discussion went without "going off the rails".... the issue, IMHO, can be closed and Nagan can be commended for a normal game, because even though I think I won, the map is clearly buggy and the situation is not equal

2) There are 2 roads leading to the metro from my spawn point and from the snow area (the road is not a transit route, but an equivalent intersection; it's clear that to get to the secondary snow area, I need to defeat the griffins. But if I'm not going to the secondary area and instead dive into the metro, I need to clear the entrance and exit to the metro. The fact that the metro is not located exactly on the border of the spawn areas, but shifted by exactly one cell to the side, is a bug, as objects are not placed on the borders of spawn areas.

The game doesn't provide for intersections. There are passages between zones. The screenshot shows that the passage to the metro is entirely on the snow territory. Therefore, to use this passage from the grass area, you must first get to the snow area, and to do that, you must definitely defeat the shifted guards (griffins). And it doesn't depend on whether the guards in the metro have been defeated or not. Using the descent into the metro with blue units already means entering the snow territory.

I think the LT rule in the league is not a good idea; in my opinion, it's better as it is, even if it means giving out auto-wins. The worst-case scenario is that guards are scattered far apart, and it's not even about the difficulty of defeating them, but rather that some of them might be located far away in a swamp, for example, and wasting turns getting to them is absurd. With GO, it's even worse – if the guards are not equivalent (e.g., hydras and wizards), then the player who defeats the hydras can constantly keep the main opponent on edge, if the turn length allows it.