Posts from Voting FOR candidates for the Arbitration Committee.

Specifically in that story, Redwait had 2 serious arguments - the absence of a direct prohibition in the rules (even though the bug was known) and unofficial permission from 2 members of the administration.

In such a situation, refusing to use the bug could result in post-game comments like "well, you're a fool, you missed an easy victory."

It's interesting, why do you think that your perception of the world is more adequate?

The heroic tradition is that bugs are considered features until they are prohibited at the level of the rules. That is, you can use it once, but not anymore.

Do you even realize what you're saying? You acknowledge that the player exploited a BUG (not a feature!) and then say that, in theory, you would have done the same if you had the opportunity? :smile21: :smile21: :smile11: :smile07:
To put it simply, I don't know if your brilliant mind will understand this phrase: "In that situation, I wouldn't even think about using this bug because it wouldn't occur to me."

Since members of the Arbitration Committee have to make judicial decisions, it would be nice to see members with an adequate perception of the world in its composition.

For starters, tell me, or draw a diagram, how you personally define "inadequate" people.

There's a similar precedent – I remember DirtyPlayer once capturing a refuge with 50 Titans and buying them all with his money. However, he lost in the end, so it's hard to say what would have happened if he had won. Nevertheless, he was a respected member of the Arbitration Committee.

As a similar example, I remember DirtyPlayer once capturing a refuge with 50 Titans and buying them all with his money. However, he lost in the end, so it's hard to say what would have happened if he had won. Nevertheless, he was a respected member of the Arbitration Committee.

I probably would have won the game, but my conscience got the better of me. :D

Haha, I remember that game. It seems like during the Bay Cup, you lost due to greed in the Utopia or something similar, and then it turned out that 50 Titans had arrived for you. His conscience bothered him :D

Let me tell you a secret: a "feature" is a small, unconventional action that helps you in a particular situation. As Nitro used to say, "I sit for 10 minutes, watching a mulligan run past me to the left, I sit for another 10 minutes, watching a mulligan run past me to the right, another 10 minutes up, another 10 minutes down." I can simplify the task for your brain: moves are one of the most valuable resources in the game (especially considering playing on HotA). So, by creating, let's say, infinite moves for yourself, you're simply breaking the rules of the game.

This is a very delicate matter. For example, transferring the last unit before dismissing a hero using the standard method is impossible. But there is a way to transfer it; it's more of a bug that the developers overlooked. However, this bug was deemed acceptable.
How should we interpret moral principles? This is a minor issue; this is acceptable, but that is not...:confused: :confused: :confused:
Based on experience and seeing dozens of times how berserk, gaps, and other bugs were used unpunished in tournaments, I would conclude that using naval artifacts is also acceptable. It's not about moral principles, but about human adaptation to situations: "people have used it so many times... so it's okay."

Does having infinite moves seem normal to you?

No, this isn't normal. And thank goodness this bug was banned, and other bugs are also being fixed.
It's just a pity for Redwait, here, as they say, "last one in is the daddy." Before him, it was used and everything was fine, but with him, people went crazy. And that's it, he's like some kind of outcast, and everyone will remember him and talk about moral principles, while other similar cases have already been forgotten.