HeroesWorld

Posts from Турниры HeroesWorld Cup & World Cup - 2012

Tournament History online Closed Topic
3.7 (3 ratings)
In reply to Pit for LM
User Avatar
Offline Javdet
Registered:
Posts: 3,172
#498
Auto-translated
From the aforementioned thread on the forum, I would like to quote Old Man: "Heroes is a game that is not immune to cheating. To combat it, there are judges and their personal opinion, confirmed by evidence or arguments. Phrases like 'if you're not caught, you're not a thief' are only relevant when there are strict legal ways to define cheating and other violations."
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Gomunguls
User Avatar
Offline Neoandy
Registered:
Posts: 216
#499
Auto-translated
Gomunguls
Here they are /topic/at/557277/ Pit showed them in this same thread!

Then I just need to post save files for the Thinkeera games with Mike_HP and Javdet.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Medium_HP
Offline rebellious
Registered:
Posts: 1,257
#500
Auto-translated
Medium_HP
...and it seems he messed up this tournament, so he had no reason to get upset.

Timeline
May 26 - my third game with Pit ended.
May 28 - Neo contacts me on ICQ at the initiative of "foreigners" (black_knight) regarding saves with Pandora, Craig, and Ivore.
May 31,
16:32 - Sticky publishes the saves on HW.
16:37 - Sticky writes to me on ICQ, asking for clarification on my reasoning, with a focus on the saves of Tazar with the dungeon, Utopia of Orange, and he already read about the others (i.e., from Neo).
June 1, 21:42 - Sticky informs me on ICQ that he is banning me from the championship with the wording "I really don't like your explanations."
June 2, 00:11 - my "freakout" began. It was already after that.

Judges/Judges, list on the organizer's website
StickyFingaz - 465786677
black_knight - 418200606
Pit for LM - 471401475
Tiamath - 604764851
Spell5632 - 641391788

Questions to the organizer.
1. If there was a vote among the judges regarding my question, what were the results and the final wording (why is this information closed)?
2. Did interested parties - black_knight and Pit for LM - participate in the decision to ban me?
3. If the opinion of "not the least important people in the community" was used in making the decision to ban me, then again - who and how expressed their opinion, and with what conclusions?
4. If the saves were published on HW, was it assumed that the discussion would be linked to the decision to ban me?
5. Even if it's post-factum, how (criteria, characteristics) were the judges selected? (I'm almost afraid to ask) Who is Spell5632?
A general question, regarding the regulations of all tournaments. Why are some players punished with technical defeats for in-game violations (red-rush, using a banned hero...), while others are given rematches? Who decides this, and what is the motivation? After all, the cost of a minor violation is far from comparable to the result of an entire game.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to rebellious
User Avatar
Offline Alone
Registered:
Posts: 316
#501
Auto-translated
rebellious
Timeline
[
June 1st, 21:42 - Stiky informs me via ICQ that he is banning me from the Championship with the explanation "I really don't like your explanations."
My complaints about the judging, which largely coincide with the position of... the majority.
1. Complaints must be objective and separated into points! If a person doesn't explain the accusations, ban them. But not before!!! presumption of innocence!!! It seems they have forgotten about it in relation to Reba.
2. The rules must be the same for everyone! Ban everyone for similar reasons!
3. We should not take priorities and nationality into account!

If these are not observed, DEATH to online tournaments!!!!
1
⚖️
0
In reply to rebellious
User Avatar
Offline Piterius
Registered:
Posts: 815
#502
Auto-translated
rebellious
Timeline
May 26 - My third game with Pete ended.
May 28 - Neo contacts me on ICQ at the initiative of "foreigners" (Black Knight) regarding saves with Pandora from Crag and Ivor.
May 31,
16:32 - Stiky publishes the saves on HW.
16:37 - Stiky writes to me on ICQ, asking for clarification on my thought process, with a focus on the saves from Tazar with the dungeon, Utopia of Orange, and the rest – he has already read about them (i.e., from Neo).
June 1, 21:42 - Stiky informs me on ICQ that he is banning me from the CM with the explanation "I really don't like your explanations."
June 2, 00:11 - My "mental breakdown" began. It was already after this.

It's great how quickly everything happened, according to the laws of wartime. And on June 4, according to Shurik, the Neo-Pete match is already being streamed:smile09:
rebellious

2. Did the interested parties – black_knight and Pit for LM – participate in the decision to ban?

Pete has already written that he did not participate, and BK shouldn't have, in theory. And logically, it would be better to replace these two rather than exclude them, which is probably not specified in the regulations.
Хаос - это порядок, которым сложнее управлять.

icq: 407907277
skype: piterius_i

0
⚖️
0
In reply to Piterius
User Avatar
Offline Mizrael
Registered:
Posts: 1,830
#503
Auto-translated
Here's some more info about the Chinese player: I recently played a balanced game on WCL with one, and he reached the Treasure Chamber earlier and cleared it. I had to attack the Guard Outpost to get in, and I managed to cut off his main hero from the Treasure Chamber (he bought his way out with a speed boost, but the treasure remained with the scout in the Treasure Chamber). Naturally, I started taking his cities and always maintained a chain of control to the connecting Castle near the exit of the Treasure Chamber. He then went straight into the Darkness, across the desert without any scouting, and reached the portal, which helped him retrieve the treasure just before the final stage (he even ignored everything else along the way, like the Pandora's Box guarded by a hundred Gnomes). I don't care about the rating, so I didn't even ask him why he did that, but it seems like Chinese players treat random maps as fixed scenarios – they generate it, open it, and whoever executes it better wins.
http://www.twitch.tv/mikevalentine/
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Pit for LM
User Avatar
Offline Pit for LM
Registered:
Posts: 3,038
#504
Auto-translated
rebellious
This is a general question that applies to the regulations of all Tournaments.
I will answer as the tournament curator on Hv. Everything I write applies only to our Tournaments. What happens on other resources and in the World Championship is not within my area of responsibility.
The rules regarding judging are still very poorly developed. Tournaments at a good level on Hv have only been running for 2-3 years. The judges and commentators do not yet have much experience. We are trying to develop a unified approach for standard situations and are constantly communicating with each other. Recently, a collegial approach has emerged in complex cases.
I am working on the section of the rules "V. Non-standard and controversial situations. Judging." In the near future, I plan to upgrade our Rules to version 3.0 and work on the Judging and Rating Tournament Rules sections. The process is constantly being slowed down by endless discussions of the same things, pointless surveys, disputes, urgent matters, etc. Therefore, many controversial situations are now being considered not on the basis of the Rules, but on the basis of Traditions.
rebellious
Why are some players penalized for in-game violations (rush, using a banned hero...) with technical defeats, while others are given rematches? Who decides this, and what is the reasoning?
The judge's decision is made primarily on the basis of the tournament rules. If the situation that has arisen is not regulated by the rules, then the judges are guided by elementary logic and gaming ethics.
This point is stated in many of our Tournaments.

Very often, players decide for themselves what to do when one of them violates the rules, without the intervention of the judges. Sometimes, the violator immediately admits defeat. Sometimes, the players agree to a rematch. Sometimes, they agree to a draw (usually if the violation was minor, and as a result, the violator won). In these cases, the judges do not interfere. Perhaps because of such cases, there is an illusion that the judge does not know what he is doing.

If the parties cannot agree, then the judge makes the decision. Usually, the player against whom the rules were violated demands a technical defeat, and he gets it because the decision is made primarily on the basis of the rules. Any violation of the rules is punished with a technical defeat.

It often happens that both parties violate the rules. Then the technical defeat is given to the one who violated the rules first.

In complex situations, when the rules can be interpreted ambiguously or the situation is not described in the rules at all, the judge is guided by "elementary logic and gaming ethics." Here, the judge's experience and competence decide. And then, quite often, a "wave of public outrage" arises because the "affected" player has friends/defenders, and there are also plenty of people whose only joy in life is to troll and argue on the forum. Therefore, of course, the more controversial situations are regulated by the rules, the easier it is to judge, and this is what we need to work on.

A violation of the fair play rule is usually punished by annulment of the results and disqualification from the tournament. Then the materials are transferred to the Arbitration Committee, as only it can make a decision on the World Championship.

PS. Yes, I forgot to mention. If a judge is playing in a tournament, then he judges only the matches in which he did not participate and in the outcome of which he is not interested. This is stated in our Tournament Rules:

1. The organizer is obliged to:
b) if he himself is a participant in the tournament, involve a neutral person - a Judge - to resolve disputes that may arise in his matches or in situations where he may be interested in a decision in favor of a particular player....
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Pit for LM
User Avatar
Offline =Stinger=
Registered:
Posts: 914
#505
Auto-translated
Besides the judges who made the decision to disqualify Rebellius, is there anyone else who agrees with the ban based on the provided save files? I understand that the judges' decision doesn't require this, but I'm still interested in hearing arguments for and against.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to =Stinger=
User Avatar
Offline Neoandy
Registered:
Posts: 216
#506
Auto-translated
=Stinger=
Besides the judges who made the decision to disqualify him, is there anyone else who agrees with the ban on Rebellius based on the save data? I understand that the judges' decision doesn't require this, but I'm still interested in the arguments for and against.

And you expect that now everyone will start writing posts like "Ivanov - For. Petrov - Against."?

I already wrote that you could create a purely informative poll on the issue and see how many people support or don't support the judges' decision.

For example, like this:

1. I looked at the saves - I don't support the disqualification.
2. I looked at the saves - I support the disqualification.
3. I didn't look at the saves - I don't support the disqualification.
4. I didn't look at the saves - I support the disqualification.

My subjective opinion is that options 3 and 4 will gather the most votes. :)
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Neoandy
User Avatar
Offline =Stinger=
Registered:
Posts: 914
#507
Auto-translated
I am counting on consistent judging. And I asked the question solely because of your previous post.
Neoandy
You should start by posting all the saves from all the games of this Chinese player here (fortunately, there are already quite a few of them). Then, look at each game, list the points of contention, see the overall picture, the trends, the player's habits – all for a complete analysis.

Because so far, only 3-4 people have looked at more than one game, and the rest are just rushing in with their swords, following the general movement. This is the easiest thing to do.

It is more difficult to then argue your position in a reasoned way, rather than just blowing bubbles as a result of emotional, hasty decisions.

Wasn't it the same with Rebellious, as you described in this post? Only 3-4 people looked at it, and then everyone rushed in with their swords. Which was the easiest thing to do. ))) And the decision regarding the chronology was also quite hasty.
You said A, now say B. Ban the Chinese player. Or is what happened with Rebellious not enough in this situation?
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Pit for LM
User Avatar
Offline Gomunguls
Registered:
Posts: 3,778
#508
Auto-translated
To analyze the matches, Roman asked to upload his games as well!
Attachments 2
2 files attached • Total size: 4.9 MB
Удача любит подготовленных!!!





Стримы и обучение тут:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWlnXU5R5RLCMuWzIpBc65Q
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Pit for LM
User Avatar
Offline R55Max
Registered:
Posts: 1,932
#509
Auto-translated
At the moment, given the status of the tournament, this is the most controversial tournament of its kind on an international level. Its conduct, the rendering of decisions, and the explanation for those decisions must be as transparent as possible and clearly formulated (it is possible that a resolution will take several months).
Otherwise, there will be a Schism in the Community, toward whose union many figures and those wishing these figures well in their work have strived.

This topic of conversation is very important, and it is even better that it appeared at an early stage of interactions with the Chinese side. The plus side is that even if they play with an open map, they see how we play on equal terms with a closed one, and therefore there is something to learn from, meaning it is not profitable to lose this instructional guidebook. The fight against cheating has already essentially been streamlined; over time, as organization improves, it will likely become even more difficult.

I carefully examined the miner; 215 is missing for a projection of the ideal trajectory, taking into account the jump at start 214.

Essentially, it's a very strange move on 211, but on 214, looking through the air shows 4 arts in the dark; personally, having 2 jumps, I would most likely have jumped up toward where the Dragon Utopia is, then down. You need to have 215 to see how much mana is left—if rebel was looking at the ground, the air, or jumped blindly, it makes a big difference. But even jumping blindly when you see an advantage in the tavern is quite explainable as a way to find something somewhere by chance when you need to jump.

In short, a person is not required to prove their innocence; the judges are required to PROVE his guilt, and do so in such a way that it cannot be justified. If the evidence does not have such substance, then it is merely circumstantial.

Personally, I am for banning all cheaters, and if rebel cheated—it must be proven; if it's not proven—then he didn't cheat.

I really appreciate rebel's manner in requesting that absolutely all the cooked-up evidence be provided to him and the public (although personally, I consider this grasping at straws while falling off a cliff). He has every right to know who, for what, and in what manner and on what basis a verdict was reached, just as everyone else does.

Cheating must be fought with more than just the nonsense I read from ja's link; there, a gang of buddy-opponents (except for a couple of people) were talking rubbish. Poor billy-cheater, he was out-cheated; there are already realistically 7 wt (censorship)shniks who once played with an open map (willy, billy, dilli, gayka, rockfor, chip and dale)

In general, to have a proper analysis of situations, it is necessary to create direct online interview conversations with recordings of the judge and the player; otherwise, everyone will find something to answer each other. Then everything will be much clearer
МУДРЫЙ - не обязательно старый, ОПЫТНЫЙ - не обязательно мудрый... обладатель и того и другого всегда должен помнить слова НАПОЛЕОНА БОНАПАРТА: Война состоит из непредусмотренных событий; В каждом большом деле всегда приходится какую-то часть оставить на долю :smile33: СЛУЧАЯ...
0
⚖️
0
In reply to =Stinger=
User Avatar
Offline Neoandy
Registered:
Posts: 216
#510
Auto-translated
=Stinger=
I expect consistency in judging. And I asked the question solely because of your previous post.


Wasn't the situation with Rebellius as you described in this post? Only 3-4 people looked at it, and then they immediately started making decisions. What could be simpler? And the decision regarding the timeline was quite hasty.
They said A, so they should say B. Ban the Chinese player. Or is what happened with Rebellius not enough in this situation?

Firstly, the decisions were made exclusively by those who were authorized to do so, after carefully reviewing the save files and Rebellius's explanations for each episode. If Rebellius's explanations were not available on the forum, it doesn't mean he didn't provide them. And the judges based their decisions on those explanations, not on what people are trying to formulate here after the fact.

Secondly, the timeline regarding Rebellius omits an important fact: it started not a week before the verdict, but even after the games with BK in the first round. As I understand it, the person was given another opportunity to "prove himself." After the games with Pete, the second round began, and the decision was made based on the overall situation. Therefore, there was no rush.

Thirdly, the fact that the Chinese player is not being banned immediately does not mean that the judges have forgotten the alphabet. He still has 1 or 2 games in the current round, which could provide good additional information, supplementing the save files already received. As a result of a ban, he will face the same fate as Reba. So why deprive him of the opportunity to obtain additional save files? - that's right, there's no reason to. Therefore, there is no need to provoke anyone; everything is proceeding as it should (at least, that's how it seems to me; I am not part of the judging panel, but only as an active player, I express my opinion, including on the save files, which (opinion) does not obligate anyone to anything).

P.S.: Our task here is to discuss the save files, to express all the pros and cons. There is an opportunity to do this, as the "suspect" does not read this forum. Instead, some people, hopefully unintentionally, reduce everything to the slogan: "if there is a complaint, a ban is needed!", implying inconsistency in decision-making if this is not done. At the same time, they do not take into account the different stages at which this process is.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Neoandy
User Avatar
Offline Piterius
Registered:
Posts: 815
#511
Auto-translated
Andryusha, you're being evasive.
Neoandy
as an active player, I'm expressing my opinion, including about the save files, which (opinion) doesn't obligate anyone to anything.
You've taken a clear and firm position on one side, and you're trying to openly justify this judging decision. Honestly, I don't understand why you need to do this. What timeline are you even talking about, and what stages are you referring to? There was only one episode that could be criticized. Everything else is far-fetched. Is this the result of two and a half months of work? Just finding something, patching it up, and stretching it out? Well, it was done well. It really was a "process." But everyone is used to public opinion, voting, and so on. And here, they simply gave him a dismissal in two days and called him a cheater worldwide. But in reality, at most, it's a "disqualification on suspicion of cheating." It's good that it's happening from a distance, right? You can do whatever you want. If someone did this to me in person, I don't know, I might punch them in the face, let alone ignore their explanations. We can keep arguing about this endlessly. The decision is made, so why justify it? Everyone has weighed its value for themselves. What's needed is an analysis of the mistakes, not a distorted justification of the process.
Хаос - это порядок, которым сложнее управлять.

icq: 407907277
skype: piterius_i

0
⚖️
0
In reply to Neoandy
User Avatar
Offline MerlinTheMagician
Registered:
Posts: 1,073
#512
Auto-translated
Neoandy
Thirdly, the fact that the Chinese player isn't immediately banned doesn't mean the judges have forgotten the alphabet.
Let me add my two cents. To clarify, I haven't looked at the save files of either the Chinese player or Rebellius. It's enough to read the last few pages to understand that there are complaints about both. BUT! Neo stated that the Chinese player has one or two extra games in the current round, and a decision will be made after that. The Chinese players, of course, don't read this forum and, naturally, won't be able to understand what's being discussed and play fairly from now on... And what can we get as a result? As a result, we might get a post-factum disqualification of the Chinese player, and the player who played against him will be awarded the victory. And, as was noted, everyone who played against him before will get nothing. Although, as a result of a complete reset of all the cheater's games, everyone who played against him would have won, which means that the situation in the next round would be completely different for the one who was awarded the victory. You can sing as many songs as you like about how this is standard practice and blah blah blah... On the other hand, "Truth is worth waiting for!" (from the movie "Garage")
0
⚖️
0

Statistics

12k / 1.15M Discussions 699 Wiki pages 1.8k Maps
55k Members

Library

Welcome our newest member: artem

Users Online 3 users 1473 guests

Today's Visitors 9