OFB-8 — Tournament History online

No ratings yet — be the first to rate!

Announcement

злой_романтик

12 years ago

Auto-translated

The time has come and so... drumroll... the qualifying tournament for FB-8 is declared open :smile44:

I. Regulations and Deadlines

The qualifying tournament will be held using the "Swiss" system

Start of the tournament: April 1, 2014; registration until March 29, 2014 inclusive

Time limit per round: 2 weeks - technical losses will be assigned without regard to opinions or authority (the sole exception is CIS-14 in Minsk)
Players have the right to arrange a convenient time among themselves, but if an agreement cannot be reached, the critical time for playing is the night from Saturday to Sunday of the first week. (if the game was not completed in one session, then during the second week). In case one player fails to show up at the set time, the other must write to the organizer or one of the judges, and when the tech result is assigned, this will be the main argument.
This clause is not subject to discussion.

7 players advance to the final stage.

II. Rules and Templates.

1. By default, games are played according to /topic/10593/
2. By default, the game version is SoD 3.2 (4.0); by mutual agreement, WT or any other version of HOMM3.

3.The template for each round will be determined as follows - during registration, each participant must indicate 5 favorite templates; from all these templates, 9 will be selected (depending on the number of participants and the number of rounds, respectively). Then the selected templates are randomly "shuffled" and a list is compiled (e.g., 1-2sm4d3, 2-mininoszta, 3-Jebus Cross, 4-skirmish, etc.). In the 1st round, players ban templates that "came up" under numbers 1, 2, 3 (i.e., banning occurs from 2sm4d3, mininoszta, and Jebus Cross). In the next round, banning occurs from templates 2, 3, 4 (mininoszta, Jebus Cross, skirmish), etc. In the last 7th (9th) round, banning will occur from templates 7 (9), 1, 2. Red starts the ban

4. Town selection: standard ban. Blue starts the ban. Colors are determined during the draw and do not change with restarts.

A win awards 1 point, a draw 0.5, a loss 0.
The winners, and accordingly those who qualify for FB, will be 7 people.
The winner is determined by the total number of points scored. In case of a tie in points, additional tiebreakers apply.
1) Buchholz Coefficient
2) Head-to-head result

III. Organizational Matters
1. The tournament is official and regular.
2. The tournament is conducted according to the Rules for Organizing, Conducting, and Participating in Tournaments.
3. Tournament Host: zloi_romantic (296524052)
Tournament Judges: Pit for LM (471401475), Dirty_Player (ICQ 408722873).
4. For each game played, participants must submit a report and confirmation.
5. Saves of all games must be kept until the end of the tournament and presented at the first request of the tournament hosts or any AC member.
6. Regarding controversial issues, if any arise, please discuss them outside the forum. To resolve them, contact the host or a tournament judge via ICQ and provide daily saves, ICQ logs, and other necessary information.
The judges' decision is made primarily based on the tournament rules. If the situation that arises is not regulated by the rules, then the judges will be guided by basic logic and gaming ethics.
7. All tournament games count towards the season rating. Reports and confirmations are written in this thread and will be copied to the "Game Reports and Confirmations Online" thread. I.e., there is NO need to duplicate reports in the seasonal thread.
8. The final part of the tournament will be held using a round-robin system.

IV. Participants
1. Experienced players from HW and other gaming resources are invited to the tournament.
2. Newcomers who have shown good results are allowed (applications will be considered on an individual basis).
3. Newly registered players are not allowed to participate in the tournament (exception: active players from other gaming resources; applications will be considered on an individual basis).
4. Players who have a BWP are not eligible to participate in the tournament. If any player is awarded a BWP during the tournament, they will be disqualified and their results annulled.
5. Applications from undisciplined players who have repeatedly "ditched" tournaments may be rejected.
6. The organizers reserve the right to refuse a user participation in the tournament without publicly explaining the reasons.
7. The Winner and 2nd-3rd place finishers of the FB-7 tournament are NOT allowed to participate in the qualifiers.
8. The tournament application must include:
- 5 most favorite templates
- convenient time for playing
9. Players Gomunguls, Aya, Maretti advance to FB-8 without a qualifier, while players Piterius and LeBron have a bonus of a byeslot for 1 round (if, of course, they wish to participate)

The randomizer arranged the templates as follows
1-2sm4d3
2-Spider
3-skirmish (played according to OFB rules, i.e., with a town ban and no color change, but by mutual agreement you can play according to seasonal rules, i.e., allrandom)
4-6lm10a
5-JC
6-8mm6a
7-anarchy
8-diamond
9-Mini nostalgia

Thus, in the 1st round Red starts the ban from templates - 2sm4d3, Spider, skirmish
In the 2nd round, the ban proceeds from templates Spider, skirmish, 6lm10a
In all rounds, Red starts the template ban

I repeat for everyone - if you have a problem with your opponent (cannot find a common time, being ignored, etc.), write to me on ICQ - we will sort it out
Draw

In reply to HellLighT

Wicc

12 years ago

Auto-translated

HellLighT

Diabler didn't break any rules, and I already provided an example of Heroin's violation, so the result is clear.

All that remains is to specify the rule that Heroin violated.

The claim "aren't you red-rushing?" is clearly not a violation – the player has the right to make any claim, and if the opponent disagrees, the matter is referred to the judge. In this case, the opponent agreed.

Even if Heroin intentionally bluffed towards Diabler, it wouldn't be a violation of the game rules, but merely unethical behavior. If he genuinely didn't know (and in the absence of a way to verify this, we should believe him), then game ethics were not violated either.

In reply to Dark

Aiwe

12 years ago

Auto-translated

darkello

What is this nonsense about unfair play? Unfair play is when you deliberately do something against a person and not according to the rules. The point is that BOTH players made a mistake. In this situation, I would either give extra time for another game (after all, the next round is the last) or take the saves from this game for judging (but objectively).

I completely agree :smile20:

In reply to Wicc

Heroin_HP

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

If he truly didn't know (and in the absence of a way to verify this, we should believe him), then no gaming ethics were violated.

If I had known, I wouldn't have placed him in the portal; I would have placed him in the portal so he could reach the hideout of the Barbarians on level 141 and beyond, and then teleport him to level 142. And I put him in the Dungeon so that no one would kick him out of the lairs, but Gosha got him with a rush....

In reply to Сатир

KobRa_RR

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Seriously, it's better to just declare a draw and end the match than to keep arguing like this. Award the save and be done with it. And for the future, both players should print out the rules and hang them up next to their monitors where they can easily see them:D
P.S. Vic in the last post (16:41) explained everything correctly:smile12:

In reply to KobRa_RR

Heroin_HP

12 years ago

Auto-translated

KobRa_RR

Seriously, it's better to just have draws result in one-hit kills than to keep talking nonsense like this. Just award the save and be done with it. And for the future, both of you should print out the rules and hang them up by your monitors where you can see them :D
P.S. Vic in his last post (16:41) explained everything correctly :smile12:

The game has already been played, so what draw are you talking about? If he had said something right away, I would have replayed it, but now, what's the point of this draw?

In reply to Heroin_HP

KobRa_RR

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Heroin_HP

The game has been played, what draw are you talking about? If he had written immediately, I would have replayed, but what's the point of this draw now?

Read the forum.

In reply to KobRa_RR

HellLighT

12 years ago

Auto-translated

No matter how much you argue, it's absurd when a game ends with a victory for one player due to some made-up reasons. I've already pointed out the rule: Unfair play, deceiving the opponent into giving away their password. You can't remember all the sub-rules, so you have to trust the person, especially if they're tired. And then comes the standard excuse: "I didn't know" (even though they came up with it), "It wasn't intentional," and "Let's just give me the win..." :smile52:

In reply to HellLighT

Heroin_HP

12 years ago

Auto-translated

HellLighT

Ranting is one thing, but when some person's whims lead to a game ending with a result in their favor – that's just absurd. I already pointed out the rule, Unfair play, deceiving the opponent into giving away their password, you can't remember all the sub-points of the rules, and you have to take someone's word for it, especially if the person is tired, and then comes the standard excuse: "I didn't know," "It's his fault," "I didn't do it on purpose," "Let's just let me win..." :smile52:

Why didn't he ask for a rematch when he realized there was no redraw?

In reply to Wicc

Roger-ua

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

All that remains is to specify the rule that Heroin violated.

The claim "isn't it a red rush?" is clearly not a violation – the player has the right to make any claim, and if the opponent disagrees, the matter is referred to the judge. In this case, the opponent agreed.

Even if Heroin intentionally bluffed towards Diabler, it would not be a violation of the rules, but merely unethical behavior. If he really didn't know (and in the absence of a way to verify this, we should believe him), then game ethics were not violated either.

Both didn't know the rules. Either it's a draw, or the decision is made based on the save.

Although, I also don't like the behavior of one of the opponents during the discussion.

In reply to Heroin_HP

злой_романтик

12 years ago

Auto-translated

OK, now it's my turn to speak :) At first, I was on Diabler's side, maybe because I had only communicated with him, but then I wrote to Heroin, talked, got the ICQ logs, and formed my own IMHO. The situation is, of course, ambiguous, but... I used to play chess, and I often saw this situation among young players: one declares checkmate, the other cries, drools, scrambles the pieces, but signs the score sheet. His coach comes over, they sit down and analyze the game, and then bam, there’s no checkmate at all—the king can escape... What to do? Run to the judge screaming "He cheated meeee"? And what is the judge supposed to do? Force a replay or continue from the same point? These weren't little kids playing, but experienced players with hundreds of games under their belts. Maybe personally, in Heroin's place, I would have acted differently, but I can't force him to replay or agree to a draw—it's his right. If they agree to a rematch, I'll give them time, no problem.
I'll take the risk of posting Pit's words on the forum, which were said in the AK section about this game, since it's unclear when he'll show up, and the situation is controversial. There's nothing secret here, apparently, just listen to the opinion of one of the most respected members of the community.

Quote:
Message from злой_романтик
In the OFB, during the Diabler-Heroin game, another controversial situation has arisen on the topic of PR...

What kind of controversial situation is this?
Heroin complained to me today, I saw the logs of their conversations...
This is not called a controversial situation—it's catastrophic noobery.

Diabler admitted defeat, the situation has been played out, the saves have been opened. What is there even to discuss?

Who's to blame that we start learning the rules after the game, not before?

OK, so we don't know the rules. We did something, we ourselves don't know what...
There's no need to open saves, no need to admit defeat. You need to go to the judge and find out what the rules actually say and how to interpret them in this specific situation.

And let them set HeroesWorld rules. Even Satyr and I played a final with a patch, largely to have a reminder about PR, which on Jebus Cross can, from my point of view, really screw you over.

Generally speaking, it's easier to learn the rules once and follow them than to rewrite them every two weeks for a specific situation, causing other disputes. People also can't constantly read news about rule changes. I do major revisions no more than once a year. I add minor clarifications all the time.

Not once in any final of any tournament I've participated in (and there were 2-3 dozen such finals) have the rules contributed to one player's victory and another's defeat. What matters is skill, mistakes, and the generator. And the rules are the same for both players

In reply to Dima Surmay

R55Max

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Dima Surmay

At first everything is difficult, there is little gold, only one road, I had to bypass the ranged guards, but then I got rolling, the external market helped. In the second week there was a close passage to the opponent, we skirmished a bit with low-tier troops and he surrenders, which is correct in principle because in 2 days Eyelyn would have visited there and there would have been nothing to oppose against meteorite and a decent amount of mana.
Thanks for the game.

On the 1st comp I first routed an accelerating Kyrre, who could have gotten going at least somewhat, then with the same comp Tas barely came out with 5 Lizardmen. And there is absolutely no gold. I think I placed a Wyvern in the Citadel. No prospects beyond that.

Thanks for the game

In reply to R55Max

Nitro

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Regarding the Diablo-Heroin game. In my opinion, this is simply an abuse by a much more experienced Heroes player. For something like this, at least a yellow card should be given. And even better, a temporary ban should be imposed so that it wouldn't happen again. I have encountered situations more than once where the opponent starts putting pressure on the psyche by inventing rule violations (and in the heat of the moment, you can fall for it). Such behavior should not be left unpunished, in my opinion.

In reply to Heroin_HP

Kashchei

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Heroin_HP

Why didn't he ask for a rematch when he realized there was no redresh?

But why didn't Heroin offer a rematch when he realized he had falsely accused his opponent of RR? How can you claim something when you yourself don't know for sure whether you're right or wrong? Maybe the ICQ chat changes the situation somewhat, but overall I think Diabler doesn't deserve to lose.
And in general, the RR situation was and remains the most vulnerable spot in the rules. I think we need to strongly urge the HW rules to be revised to increase the number of RR warnings — for example, when double-clicking on an opponent or their castle for an attack, notify that RR is possible, and accordingly require tournaments to be played with HW rules enabled.
But to do it properly — just scrap this red rush rule altogether. It seems to me that controversial RR situations arise much more often than anyone could actually exploit it. SM is played very rarely, and on Jebus Cross the game rarely reaches the 3rd week, and claiming that growth specifically determines stacks is a stretch.
And overall, guys, let's play by skill rather than pointing out violations that don't actually affect the outcome of the game. Originally, the RR rule was invented to balance troops in FB, hence all the additions to the rule to make it properly understood — but alas, as always, this only causes more disputes. I had a moment in a game with Rasim when I picked up an outside Angel from his respawn on day 1 and attacked his castle. He immediately said it was RR, even though there were only 1-stacks in the castle and I already had 7 Angels in my stack. I believed him, but to be sure I decided to double-check. In the end, I also learned about the rule of unimpeded attack through monoliths, etc

In reply to Kashchei

Heroin_HP

12 years ago

Auto-translated

Kashchei

Why didn't Heroin suggest a replay when he realized he had wrongly accused his opponent of using replay review (RR)?

After Romantic informed me about this situation, I wrote to him on ICQ, but he didn't respond. Although, after the opponent wrote to the admins instead of me, I didn't feel like communicating much, but nevertheless...

In reply to Heroin_HP

Dirty_Player

12 years ago

Auto-translated

In reality, the situation is not pretty and not easy for the judges to resolve (it's not as simple as many think). Essentially, each player is right in their own way: one spoke without knowing the rules, and the other agreed without knowing the rules. In fact, neither of them knew the rules, but the save files have been checked, which means the game is over. Ideally, the game should be replayed (that would be the fairest outcome, IMHO). But due to the tournament format and the lack of time for a replay, the result has to stand as it is. :smile32: