Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments. — Tournament Committee

Vatya

10/5/2014 10:13 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Sanin

The fact that you are unhappy with the date for finishing the game has nothing to do with your opponent being 5 minutes late. And the fact that you are unhappy with your opponent's long turns is also not related to their lateness. So why did the lateness become the main reason for your refusal to play?

Roger DAltavilla writes "Based on a 4-minute delay, player Vatya demanded that he be awarded the victory and refused to finish the game."

1. My refusal to continue!!! Within the dates announced by the organizers!! Not to play!! Well, at least read more carefully...
2. Where did I write this? This is just the organizer's personal assumption.

I have repeatedly said that I am ready to finish the game with Dimа, but only under strict time constraints, say Saturday/Sunday for 5-7 hours straight. And I am ready to play from 1 PM to 3 AM Moscow time, i.e., 12 hours a day for 2 days, which is 24 hours in total. And if Dimа continues to take so long, then he will suffer the consequences. But judging by the game, I need about 50-70 hours to defeat him, and that is what I don't like.

I really don't understand... Either you are not listening to me or I am expressing my thoughts poorly?...

Added after 10 minutes
Anyway, what exactly am I trying to prove here...? I will wait for the introduction of a mandatory chess timer. Then let Dimа choke during the battle...

Ася 390383586

Осень-Зима 2013-14.

Nitro

3/16/2015 10:15 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Hello everyone! I am primarily addressing the AK (Administration Team), as well as all those who are concerned and interested.
I spent today playing a game with Redwait in the onlyXL2 tournament. We played 8xM12A. We started without any restarts. The game progressed normally. I had Claudius, Grindan, 2 hidden stacks of monks, and a hidden stack of marksmen. I was leading in army strength throughout the game. I acquired Town Portal, Fly, and Claudius was well-leveled. It was an interesting, more or less even game, until turn 142 (or 143, I don't remember), when Redwait, taking advantage of an exploit, gave himself 300k movement points.
In the 15 years I've been playing various online computer games, I've seen a lot of things: maphacks in the top 50 of the European Warcraft 3 ladder, speedhacks in top-tier PvE-PvP statics in WoW, item duplication in Lineage 2, and so on. In general, I thought I could distinguish a "feature" from a "bug".
So, the exploit used by Redwait is not a "feature".
The rules state that it is forbidden to use bugs, except for:

The use of bugs considered to be "features" of the game is permitted:
- weakening unupgraded neutral armies through repeated attacks;
- an infinite supply of ammunition for a ballista;
- positioning two-tile units on the tactics screen one tile further than possible (using autobattle);
- viewing the opponent's cities (this bug has been fixed in HoMM3 HD);
- "stalling" a monster under the effect of the "berserk" spell (this bug has been fixed in HoMM3 HD).

In addition, it mentions "fair play" and "mutual respect".
I ask the AK to consider this situation and answer the following questions:
1) Did Redwait violate the rules of fair play?
2) If so, what sanctions will be applied to the violator?
3) If not, does the AK guarantee that no sanctions will be applied to me (or anyone else) for using any exploits not described in the rules?
Thank you.
P.S. I sent a link to this post to all members of the AK in ICQ and as a private message on the forum.

ICQ 627769385

In reply to Nitro

Niemand

3/17/2015 7:21 AM UTC

Auto-translated

A certain Sutsai was relaxing naked in the coolness of the temple of the local God of Earth and caught a cold. After offering a sacrifice to the deity and recovering, the offended Sutsai wrote a detailed report accusing the God of Earth of tricking him into making offerings, and then burned the report in the temple of the spirit – the patron of the area. Not receiving a response, ten days later, Sutsai wrote a report accusing the patron spirit of neglecting its duties and burned the report in the temple of the Jade Lord. That night, Sutsai dreamed of a fiery inscription on the wall of his house, written in an ancient tadpole script: “The God of Earth, who has disgraced his rank, will be removed from office. The patron spirit will receive a reprimand. Sutsai, for disrespecting the spirits and his love of litigation, will receive thirty lashes in a month or so.” (c)

KobRa_RR

3/18/2015 10:55 AM UTC

Auto-translated

It's not the first time I've encountered players using different versions of a mod that are incompatible with each other (and also save files from different versions). Frankly, it's getting tiresome to spend time and energy on this every time. Is there a way to regulate this somehow? I see it like this: a new version of the mod is released, it's tested, the AK gives the green light, everyone is forced to switch to it, and so on.

zoog

3/18/2015 11:01 AM UTC

Auto-translated

+1, and also allow/disallow xvrulz.

648050691

злой_романтик

3/21/2015 12:21 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Regarding the Redwhite-Nitro AK match, a decision has been made: the match must be replayed, and the hat bug is now prohibited.

296524052
Весна 2012.

Redwhait

3/21/2015 12:47 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I would like some specifics.
Which rule was violated, leading to the decision to replay the match?
And why is the decision to change the rules made by the Arbitration Committee (AK), rather than through a general vote as it always has been?

Sanin

3/21/2015 1:46 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I would like to point out that Nitro's appeal did not raise the issue of a replay; it raised the question of whether Redwhite violated the rules of fair play.

ICQ 423164784

zoog

3/21/2015 5:15 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Ah, they’ve ruined all the romance. “Just in case something goes wrong.”

648050691

In reply to Redwhait

Dark

3/21/2015 6:20 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Redwhait HP

I would like some specifics.
Which rule was violated, leading to the decision to replay the match?
And why is the decision to change the rules made by the Arbitration Committee (AK), and not by a general vote as it always was?

To be honest, you should be glad. There were two possible outcomes: either your victory would be annulled and the match replayed, with a subsequent ban on using the bug, or the result would be changed to a loss, as it was clearly a bug that you exploited. There is no reason to discuss any kind of absurd vote about whether to remove the bug or leave it in the game.

лето 2012.

Hiwanna

3/21/2015 8:54 AM UTC

Auto-translated

The funniest and most absurd decision made by the Arbitration Committee in 2015.

twitch.tv/hiwanna

In reply to Hiwanna

Dark30

3/21/2015 9:18 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Hiwanna

The funniest and most absurd decision made by the AK in 2015 (:

Hold on, it's too early to give out ratings, the year has just begun))).

404498871

In reply to Redwhait

scorp

3/21/2015 12:41 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Redwhait HP

I would like some specifics.
Which rule was violated, leading to the replay?
And why is the decision to change the rules made by the Arbitration Committee (AK), and not by a general vote as it always was?

Well, I didn't find a ban on cheating in the current version of the rules, but something tells me that even without this point, anyone will be disqualified for cheating (and there is no such point in the rules) - or am I wrong, and they will let the cheater keep the win?!

In your opinion, according to the current rules, did you win fairly?

In reply to scorp

Redwhait

3/21/2015 12:52 PM UTC

Auto-translated

scorp

Well, I didn't find any prohibition against cheating in the current version of the rules, but something tells me that even without this clause, anyone would be disqualified for cheating (and there is no such clause in the rules) - or am I wrong, and they will let the cheater win?!

In your opinion, according to the current rules, did you win fairly?

2.13. Bugs:
2.13.1. It is forbidden to sell Artifacts or Magic Scrolls at prices that do not correspond to their actual price at the Artifact Merchant in the Tower, Conflux, and Dungeon castles.
2.13.2. It is forbidden to use the bug of viewing the opponent's hero.
2.13.3. It is forbidden to use a hero without an army (there must be at least one unit in the army). Before dismissing, you can take the entire army.
Comments.

2.14. Actions that are not prohibited/restricted by these rules are permitted.

Fair play
The most important point: players must play fairly and respect each other.
- It is forbidden to use cheat codes during the game, programs that are not allowed for use, and bugs that arise as a result of using additional programs and files.

I did not violate any of these points! So why should I replay the game, and on what grounds was such a decision made? So far, no one has explained this to me.

zoog

3/21/2015 1:19 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Rules for online games in HoMM3 - Version 1 (XI.2007-XI.2010)

- It is forbidden to use cheat codes and all kinds of "bugs" during the game.

Rules for online games in Heroes III... Effective from June 1, 2013.

2.13. Bugs:
2.13.1. It is forbidden to sell Artifacts or Magic Scrolls at prices that do not correspond to their actual price at the Artifact Merchant in the Tower, Conflux, and Dungeon castles.
2.13.2. It is forbidden to use the bug of viewing the opponent's hero.
2.13.3. It is forbidden to use a hero without an army (there must be at least one unit in the army). Before dismissing, you can take the entire army.
Comments.

2.14. Actions that are not prohibited/restricted by these rules are permitted.

In my opinion, this is a clear permission for all other bugs (like moving on the tactics map) in the new edition.

648050691