Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments. — Tournament Committee

Nitro

10 years ago

Auto-translated

Starting this April, =Stinger= left AK (he lost interest in Heroes for now). Amiloo kindly agreed to take his place. Amiloo received the most votes (the highest number of votes) among those who didn't make it into AK.

ICQ 627769385

In reply to Nitro

vitalic

9 years ago

Auto-translated

I would like to submit a request to the Arbitration Committee (AK) to review the game [TOURNAMENT] One for All and All for One 5.
Report: 22.12.2016 R@sIM (Blue, Castle, Caitlin, Charna) def vitalic (Red, Fortress, Tazar, Tazar) 8mm6a 137
I request that you consider the description. I have a save file, screenshots, and ICQ logs from both my computer and mobile phone – I am ready to provide any information if needed. Is my opponent justified in leaving the game without warning and refusing to finish it?

Description:
During the game, my opponent left the game three times during his turn (without explanation or warning) – each time he took a screenshot (the screenshots show the game window, ICQ, and Hamachi). Since this is a team game, after the first disconnect, I asked him to send a save file to the judge (for review if necessary after the game). According to my opponent, he sent the save file, but due to distrust, he lost the desire to continue playing. After that, I waited for a month for him to be willing to resume. And when we started playing again, there were a couple more disconnects – but I didn't ask any questions, I just took and saved screenshots of the screen during the disconnects.

On turn 137, I attack my opponent in the field (after saving before the final battle),
I have Tazar, he has Charna, both heroes have expert Earth skills. He hides 26 pixies and 300 skeletons in the corner using a tactical formation. I have 2 angels, 20 pixies, 15 great basilisks, 150 gnolls, 90 lizards, and 1+40 Dragonflies (golden flies) – I'm writing the number of troops from memory. Using the +1 speed from the artifact, after a mutual slow, I killed the pixies, shot down the skeletons, and moved all my troops closer to him – I was preparing to attack all the stacks on the skeletons first. I also managed to remove retaliation from the skeletons with a dragonfly and attack them. There were no other maneuvers in the battle; after the mutual slow, both I and my opponent cast spells, he on the pixies, and I on the skeletons.
Then, my one-year-old son reached over, and the computer started to shut down. I immediately wrote in ICQ from my mobile phone, asking my opponent to take a screenshot so that we could repeat the moves exactly.
My opponent did not want to repeat the moves or finish the game. He told me that (the funny thing is, he wrote to the judges that I left because of a misclick and asked to replay the battle. I draw your attention to the ICQ logs from the computer and mobile phone – there is nothing like that).

List of game materials/attachments:

The file "rasim" is a screenshot after the first disconnect; you can see the Hamachi window, and there is a small ICQ log. Unfortunately, as I wrote above, although he did log in to the server, the game continued a month later due to his attitude.

The file "rasim_vilet" is the second disconnect; he leaves (without warning), then writes that he had a system overload and tells me to log in, but I draw your attention to the Hamachi window – he did not have a system overload; he was online all the time...

http://my-files.ru/uw85du
Save file before the final battle - GL(red) password: .R-0'0[Yq'J0iWjr

The file "icq_history_Rasim.txt" is the ICQ log from the computer.

This is a screenshot of ICQ from the phone (I don't know how to copy the entire log. I am ready to send it or demonstrate the entire log live.)

P.S. I apologize in advance for the inconvenience (since one of the members of the AK, Dirty_Player (who is also a judge in the tournament), has already refused to consider the case, stating that I did not immediately contact the judges, but only after a month. I didn't plan to contact them because the situation is standard, and I thought my opponent would agree to finish the game before the end of the tournament. I contacted them when my opponent said that he no longer wanted to play. This is a team tournament, and I ask that you consider it.

In reply to vitalic

Dark

9 years ago

Auto-translated

A game of favorites.

I want to inform you in advance that due to some unpleasant life circumstances, I was offline for about a week, maybe slightly more.

Dark Vs Mizrael (Castle vs Castle)

We started playing and developed. We are playing smk. On turn 114, I'm running with my "loser" hero along the road down from the castle. I see some cursed necro-horses and the road to the green respawn—that's down and left; to the right of the horses, 4-5 free cells is a path into the grassy wilderness—down and right. It seemed to me based on vision that this was my own respawn, so I ran there with my "loser" hero; I think I gathered a couple of resources within a range of several cells, and out of the corner of my eye to the right, I saw some grey ones who also seem to be ГО. I stop. Then I pass my turn. On his turn, Mikhail runs out from below exactly then, and sees the situation just as I did, probably only mirrored; he thinks it's his respawn—which is normal, BUT then he immediately attacks my "loser" hero and immediately exits the game without saving. An argument ensues, blah blah blah))) as Heroes players love to do... In ICQ, I eventually suggest that we both make concessions and not make a mountain out of a molehill: load an auto-save on our ends and consider this territory neutral, for example, or reach some kind of consensus, like moving this "loser" hero away or something similar. Mikhail's answer: I am reaching a consensus by proposing a re from the meeting.

Then I turn to the tournament judge SKD and the tournament organizer Dirty. From SKD, I receive an answer in which he says that in this situation Mizrael could have given an auto-save for example, I skip my turn repeating his but without stepping forward, not entering this territory by those couple of three cells and not taking resources, or as a last resort without an auto-save, delete my "loser" hero. And again, as I understood from SKD's words, the violation on my part was first—if it even existed—unintentional, because it wasn't clear whose territory it was and I could have thought it was mine. And second, it is not critical.
From Kostya, I receive an answer that I apparently entered a territory that wasn't mine, but certainly not intentionally. But he suggests giving a re from the meeting? To my question why I should do so since it's not in the rules—I heard no motivated answer.

Attaching a screenshot of my last move and my vision (SKD gave it to me) because I don't have Mizrael's password, just as he doesn't have mine.

Save is attached; passwords will be sent to AK members by either SKD or others.

I ask you to review our game and since we haven't opened the map, allow this game to continue with any minor corrections.

Attachments 2

2 files attached • Total size: 418.6 KB

лето 2012.

In reply to Dark

Wicc

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Regarding the meeting through a staggered turn order, this is a very original interpretation of the rules :) It seems Mizrael must have exerted some "hairy paw" influence :

Recognizing territory as neutral also doesn't fit within the rules or common sense. Here, with the help of a judge, it is necessary to determine where each player's territory is, and if any player has encroached, the turn should be rolled back and repeated without the encroachment.

In reply to Wicc

LuckyF

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

Considering the meeting point through a shifted line of sight, that's a very original interpretation of the rules :)

It seems Mizrael must have exerted some "hairy paw" influence :)

Declaring the territory neutral also doesn't fit within the rules or common sense.

Here, a judge needs to determine where each player's territory lies, and if any player has encroached, the turn should be rolled back and repeated without the encroachment.

Wicc, did you look at the save files?
There isn't a clear line of sight between them; the Dark Knights on the road don't create a line of sight to Mizrael... it's a line of sight to a dead-end secondary location. There's a direct path through another road with 6k value between them. Relying on a "line of sight" in such a buggy generation, where it's unclear to which zone it even applies, is absolute nonsense, and the request for a rematch is quite justified here. But if you're going to start demanding rollbacks, banning passage on the off-road path for some reason, and continuing the game... then I would advise the judges to simply declare a technical loss for the player who violated the rules. And in this situation, the Dark Knight, who opposed the rematch request, violated the rules.

discord: LuckyF#3482
icq: 681350680

In reply to LuckyF

Wicc

9 years ago

Auto-translated

LuckyF

Vik, did you look at the saves?
There isn't really a "line of sight" (LOS) between them; the Dark Knights on the road don't have LOS to Mizrael... but they do have LOS to a dead-end secondary location. There's a direct path to it via another road, costing 6k value. Relying on "LOS" in such an over-bugged generation, when it's unclear to which zone it even applies, is absolute nonsense, and the "re-position" was quite justified in this case. But if you're going to whine about rollbacks, banning passage on the off-road path for some reason, and continuing the game... then I would simply give a technical loss to the rule-breaker. And in this situation, the Dark Knight, who was against the "re-position," broke the rules.

I'm even struggling to comment on this post... it reminds me of Roger's posts about politics.

If there are misunderstandings about the ownership of the territory, we save the game and contact the judge. The judge opens the save and explains where you can go and where you can't. This is a common practice.

Since I am not the judge of that tournament, I don't need to look at the saves.

In reply to Wicc

LuckyF

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

I'm actually finding it difficult to comment on this post... it reminds me of Roger's posts about politics.

If there are any misunderstandings about the ownership of a territory, save the game and contact a judge. The judge will open the save and explain where you can and cannot go. This is a common practice.

Since I wasn't a judge in that tournament, I don't need to look at the saves.

Don't your posts remind you of Roger's posts about politics? They contacted the judges (and not just one), but the judges' response didn't satisfy them. You're taking someone's side and talking about "hairy paws" without even bothering to look at the saves. How can you comment on your behavior without it being difficult for you to answer...?

discord: LuckyF#3482
icq: 681350680

skd

9 years ago

Auto-translated

I'll explain, as I saw the map: the Black Knights are positioned on the road, and their strength lies in guarding it – this is their advantage. Dark is moving across the rough terrain in his turn, looking for an easy opportunity. In this situation, he doesn't seem to understand that moving across the rough terrain already puts him in the opponent's territory (if you look at the screenshot, there's a path between the bushes, meaning 4 game squares for passage).
At the same time, he's collected "resources that don't belong to him."
When I was looking at the save file, I believe the correct course of action is to skip the turn, while Adel (the weak hero who ventured into the opponent's territory) should stop near the Dread Knights and not spend any more movement points.
Since I have the save file, I also told Dark that it would be good to replay the turn on the stream, and he didn't object.

Here, I agree with Vik that re-engaging in combat by shifting the advantage is not the right decision.
However, I believe that the judge should only consider the disputed situation.
I shouldn't be comparing the number of heroes each player has, their mana, income, or whether the resource generation is bugged or not. Because that's not the subject of the dispute.

P.S. This is not a complete overview of the necessary decision in this situation, as my full opinion may contain spoilers. If anyone from the administration is interested, I can explain further in ICQ or via a private message on the forum.

UTC+03:00, icq 593626431

In reply to LuckyF

Wicc

9 years ago

Auto-translated

LuckyF

Doesn't your post remind you of Roger's stance on politics? They appealed to the judges (and not just one), and the judges' response didn't satisfy Darka. You're taking sides and talking about "hairy paws" without even bothering to look at the saves. How can you comment on your behavior like this? Perhaps you could answer...?

My post isn't about "taking sides," but rather an objective legal interpretation of the episode. In my opinion, it's so obvious that I'm surprised that two members of the Arbitration Committee came to a different conclusion. The phrase about "hairy paws" is a joke, emphasizing my bewilderment.

In reply to skd

LuckyF

9 years ago

Auto-translated

skd

I will explain, as I have seen the map, the Black Knights are standing on the road with guard strength - that's ГО. Dark in his turn moves off-road for the freebie. In this situation, he cannot understand that moving off-road is already the opponent's respawn (if you look at the screenshot - there is a passage between the bushes, i.e. 4 game tiles for passage).
At the same time, he collected "foreign resources".
When I watched the save - in my opinion the correct move is to end the turn, while Adèle (the pony who entered someone else's respawn) should stop next to the dread knights and not spend the remaining moves).
Since I have the save, when I watched the save I also told Dark that it was preferable to replay the turn on stream, which he did not object to.

Here I agree with Vic that replaying due to a shifted ГО is the wrong decision.
At the same time, I believe that the judge should only consider the disputed situation.
I should not compare the number of heroes players have, mashun, income, whether the generation is bugged or not. Because that is not the subject of the dispute.

Doesn't it bother you that in this generation, for Mizrael to reach his rampo-secondary or even just his respawn's stone mine, he has to go around the dark knights through Dark's respawn? Is this still not a replay due to meeting? Should they just ignore each other here? What kind of circus is this? And this with a direct path between them through one zone with 6k passages.

discord: LuckyF#3482
icq: 681350680

In reply to LuckyF

Wicc

9 years ago

Auto-translated

LuckyF

Doesn't it bother you that in this generation, for Mizrael to reach his rampart and even just the stone mine of his starting area, he has to go around the Dark Knights and through the Dark faction's respawn point? Isn't this still a disadvantage? Should they just ignore each other? What kind of circus is this? And this is with a direct path between them through a zone with 6k passages.

Mizrael can request a truce for a specific block if there is a valid reason.

Or he can request a truce through a zone with 6k passages.

In reply to Wicc

Dirty_Player

9 years ago

Auto-translated

I suggest we don't discuss the scenario that players might have to finish playing. Since there was already an appeal to the Arbitration Committee, let the Arbitration Committee decide whether it's nonsense or not.

In reply to Wicc

Dark

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

Considering the meeting point after a staggered turn, that's a very original interpretation of the rules :)

It seems Mizrael must have exerted some "hairy paw" influence :)

Declaring territory as neutral also doesn't fit within the rules or common sense.

Here, with the help of a judge, it's necessary to determine where each player's territory is, and if any player committed an encroachment, the turn should be rolled back and repeated without the encroachment.

I described this option in my post, and I generally agree with it if it's proposed.

лето 2012.

In reply to Wicc

LuckyF

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

Mizrael may request a respawn on block if there are grounds for it.

Or do a respawn on meeting through an area with 6K passages.

But there is no block here, he's getting by just fine. However, he's getting by while encroaching on the dark respawn. There's a clear oversight in the rules, one that doesn't address the factually bugged generation on SMK, where no GO is generated along the road between respawns — a situation that can nevertheless be ruled on differently at the judges' discretion. And if we're going to nitpick the rules, then in this case dark took the risk of picking up a pile of gold. It could well have been assumed that dark knights should block not only the road but also the pathless area below. So a technical loss could very well be called here — what does rolling back the turn have to do with it? This is roughly akin to a situation on Jebus Cross where it is unclear whether a GO to a side respawn has been broken and whether the opponent has gone there; one can take a risk and bypass a shifted one — if the opponent has already broken through, everything will be fine; if not, then a technical loss...

discord: LuckyF#3482
icq: 681350680

In reply to LuckyF

Wicc

9 years ago

Auto-translated

LuckyF

There is an outright flaw in the rules

This is a reason to submit a proposal to the AC for improving the rules.

This is roughly like a situation on Jebus Cross when it's unclear whether ГО has been broken through to a third-party respawn and the opponent has gone there or not. You could take a risk and walk past a shifted one. If the opponent already broke through, then everything will be fine. If not, then tech loss...

Intentional/unintentional nature of a violation is determined by the judge/AC. If it is decided that the violation was committed intentionally, then a tech loss will be entirely appropriate.

I will repeat — in this episode, different judge rulings are permissible, but a replay of the match through a shifted ГО is not among the acceptable options. If someone wants to order a restart, then some other justification is needed. Even if it is: "As the tournament judge, I have decided to change the tournament rules as applied to this particular game and order a restart, because I felt like it."

Reading content in

Interface language

Posts from Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

Statistics

Library

Users Online 13 users 1308 guests

Today's Visitors 17