Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments. — Tournament Committee

Dark

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Mizrael

If, at the time the controversial situation arose, we had simply saved the game and submitted the save file to the judges, everyone would have calmly accepted their decision.

What what???
In my appeal, I provided screenshots; this is my last turn, and I didn't make any more moves. Then, during your turn (after what's shown in the screenshot), you moved to Adel and killed her. Immediately after killing her, you left the game without discussing anything. I don't know if you saved the game... but I suspect you didn't. Then, you immediately stated that it was a rematch or that you were ready for one, which I didn't understand. Now, you're saying that if we had sorted it out right away, how? in what way?... At that moment, I offered you a rematch and suggested we agree on a line that neither of us would cross. You sharply refused and again insisted that it was a rematch. I also suggested discussing it further and finding a consensus, but I received the same answer about a rematch. Moreover, before appealing to the judges, I was sure that you were the one who had violated the rules, but even if that were the case, you wouldn't have been penalized for it.

Regarding my appeal that I am a tournament judge, that was a joke that I didn't hide. Did you take it seriously?! Did you think I could rule in my own favor, even if I wanted to? On the contrary, I was saying that I want to resolve this situation and won't be a nuisance because I am a tournament judge.

Now, let me explain the diagram:

Blue marks the GO (Guard of Order), and orange marks the zone through which I entered, which is the source of the dispute. Then, I saw the bears, and I stopped moving at the end of my turn... The bears are marked in yellow, and the zone from which I thought they had moved is marked with a black line. That's why I didn't tell Mizrael anything about the possible issue. The fact that Mikhail decided to submit the save file to the judges isn't entirely accurate... At first, he insisted that the only consensus was a REMATCH, and any other consensus was unacceptable, which I disagree with. And I submitted the save file to the judges, and not just one judge, by the way, after various responses (decisions) from the judges, I appealed to the AC (Arbitration Committee) to decide what to do next.
From my side, I don't see anything critical in this situation. I can offer a rematch or remove Adel, I can skip my turn without encroaching, or, as I suggested, we can mentally draw a line that neither of us can cross... etc

Attachments 1

1 file attached • Total size: 172.2 KB

Mizrael

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Distorting facts by twisting words. You definitely knew that I saved and gave the evidence to the judge; it's clearly written in the chat log, don't lie. You mentioned your judging in the correspondence during the game at least 3 times, and only the first mention about "forcing a trade" could be considered not trolling; in the other cases, it's not even close, again, a lie. In short, all the materials are with the judges, and it's up to them to decide.

In reply to Mizrael

Dark

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Mizrael

Distorting facts. You definitely knew that I saved the game and sent it to the judge; it's clearly written in our chat log, don't lie. You mentioned your judging in the chat log at least 3 times during the game, and only the first mention about "forcing a trade" doesn't seem like trolling; in all other cases, it's not even close, again, a lie. In short, all the materials are with the judges, and it's up to them to decide.

I won't argue online anymore. Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see in the chat log that you clearly saved the game. Regarding the judges, your previous post implies that I didn't want to negotiate, and you had no choice but to send the save to the judge, which is not the case. You insisted that we turn to the judges for a decision, not wanting to discuss anything other than one possible solution. I, in turn, contacted several judges and sent them all the information, and only after their differing opinions did I, not you, turn to the Arbitration Committee (AK). I think it would be wise for us to end the argument here; it won't affect the AK's decision anyway. I didn't intend to insult you, and I don't intend to now; if it seemed that way, then you misunderstood me. And I have no complaints about you as a person or as a player at the moment.

Chingis

9 years ago

Auto-translated

1. I'm currently playing the h3dm1 template. What are the rules for it? The rules don't say anything about this template. My opponent says that it's allowed to upgrade vampires and build a stronghold. Is this correct? Please advise.
2. And in general, is it possible to agree with the opponent that we won't use certain rules?

In reply to Chingis

ДаУ

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Chingis

1. I'm currently playing the h3dm1 template. What are the rules? The rules don't say anything about this template. My opponent says that it's allowed to upgrade vampires and build a stronghold. Can I confirm if this is allowed? Please.
2. And in general, can we agree with the opponent that we won't use certain rules?

+1 Here, I'm not the only one.

Diabler

9 years ago

Auto-translated

You can agree on whatever you want and however you want. On h3dm1, if it's HotA, then you can definitely upgrade vampires and place one-time boosters; if it's SoD, it's better to follow the rules of the tournament that was played on Mirror. As far as I know, there are no mandatory rules for Mirror other than the standard ХВ rules, and even then there are probably exceptions (for example, a red-rush might be allowed on L+U on Mirror if agreed upon)

Dark30

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dear AK! I submitted the following request to the judges of the "1 vs. All" tournament: "The following situation arose in the "1 vs. All" tournament with my opponent, Derbent: I attack, the battle takes place under his Castle. He retreats. After the battle, I equip a +1 speed item; I am wearing the Amulet of Sacrifice. I pass the turn. He doubles his mana and attacks without using his Castle. He sees the Amulet of Sacrifice and the +speed item, and then exits the battle and also leaves the chat. At the same time, his hero's health remains green. Half an hour later, he writes to me that his internet connection lagged. Today, during the Odd game, the opponent is demanding that I allow him to redo the entire turn. I agree to load his save from before the battle, but the opponent claims that he did not have the "save before each battle" option enabled, and he, of course, does not save before the final battles. I don't want to let him redo the turn because both I and the witness saw that his hero's health was green when he left. In the previous game, things weren't entirely smooth either, but we managed without general intervention. Specifically, the opponent saved at the end of his turn instead of simply passing the turn to start with the autosave, but we adjusted this in this game. The question is: how should we proceed in this situation with our unfinished game?" The tournament judges suggested letting him replay the entire turn. However, I am inclined to doubt that, given the importance of the game, the opponent will perform the same actions. Despite this, and despite the suspicion that he intentionally left the battle, I am willing to let him replay it one more time, but only under one condition: we load the save from before the battle, and he immediately attacks. If there is no such save because the "save before each battle" option is not enabled, and his internet connection is so unreliable that it disconnects during the final battles, then this raises additional suspicions. In light of the above, I believe that allowing him to replay the entire turn, the identity of which cannot be verified, would be wrong. Therefore, I am turning to you. If the situation cannot be resolved, I am prepared to accept the decision.

In reply to Dark30

Wyndoc

9 years ago

Auto-translated

I suggest making it mandatory to enable the "save before battle" option, because some players experience unexplained crashes, and excuses that this option wasn't enabled sound more like dubious justifications.

In reply to Dark30

Dirty_Player

9 years ago

Auto-translated

2Dark30, what do you suggest in this situation? Should we give the opponent a technical loss? On what grounds? If you had evidence that he played one way initially and then completely differently after disconnecting, that would be a different matter. But as it is, there is no evidence of a violation other than the disconnection. What should the Arbitration Committee consider? Therefore, continue playing.

Dark30

He wrote to me half an hour later that his internet connection had lagged.
Today, during an Odd turn, the opponent demands that he be allowed to complete his turn.
I agree to his save before the battle, but the opponent claims that he didn't have the "save before each battle" checkbox enabled, and he, of course, doesn't save before the final battles.

This is, of course, not good, but the rules require him to enable this checkbox, so he cannot be penalized for it.

Wyndoc

I suggest making it mandatory to enable the save before battle checkbox, because some people sometimes have inexplicable crashes, and excuses that this option is not enabled look more like dubious justifications.

I think it's long overdue.

P.S. We used to play without mods and password-protected saves, and it was fine. And now, it's just disconnections and appeals to the judge. :smile32:

In reply to Dirty_Player

Dark30

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

2Dark30, what do you suggest in this situation? To give the opponent a technical loss? On what grounds? If you had evidence that he played one way first, and then completely differently after disconnecting, that would be a different matter. But as it is, there is no fact of a violation other than the disconnection. What should the arbitration committee consider? Therefore, continue playing.

This is, of course, not good, but the rules require him to check that box, so you can't give him a loss for that either.

I think it's long overdue.

P.S. We used to play without a mod and password-protected saves, and it was fine. And now, it's just disconnects and appeals to the judge. :smile32:

I didn't say anything about a technical loss; I'm just asking to consider the possibility of continuing from a save before the battle. If there isn't one, the save should be submitted for a decision within 145 days, because the game loses its meaning if there is no way to confirm the opponent's repeated move. The precedent is that a hero was checked (during which valuable information was obtained), and I believe that continuing the turn with a "repeat" of a move that is not refuted and cannot be proven is fundamentally unacceptable.

In reply to Dark30

Diabler

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dark30

Dear AK!

In the previous match, things weren't entirely smooth either, but we managed without any major intervention. Specifically, the opponent saved at the end of their turn instead of simply passing the turn to start playing from the autosave, but we adjusted this in this match.

This is a perfectly reasonable action from the opponent because, after various updates or other changes, the save checkbox often gets reset. And if you play more than one match a day, the autosave gets overwritten.

Dark30

9 years ago

Auto-translated

autosave and daily saves are regulated by the tournament rules, as is the game password.

In reply to Dark30

Diabler

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Dark30

autosave during the day seems to be regulated by the tournament rules, as well as the game password.

Well, it doesn't matter; maybe the person just prefers to save manually – it gives them peace of mind.
p.s. I don't understand what the problem is with not letting the opponent pass their turn. They attacked you, which means you revealed your army/mana/stats/lack of a wish. Let them just attack with the same composition.

In reply to Diabler

Dark30

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Diabler

Well, it doesn't matter; maybe the player finds it more convenient to save manually – it gives them peace of mind.
P.S. I don't understand what the problem is with not letting the opponent take their turn. They attacked you, which means you revealed your army/mana/stats/lack of an artifact. Let them just attack with the same composition.

To clarify, the player has the right to save the game every second – it's their right, but the daily autosave (i.e., after passing the turn) eliminates any possibility of checking for guards or performing any other actions (let me explain further: I saved, and there were, for example, 300 moves left to clear a passage, check for guards, etc., and then I exited). We start with my save; I already know that it's not worth sending units or a hero there. The situation is that there are 300 moves left, I saved and exited. The computer might enter the battle based on the timer to complete those 300 moves. Again, it's a debatable situation as to whether the computer or the player did it, and there are already enough debatable situations.

P.S. Based on this game, the opponent might have forgotten to remove shackles or exchange resources for a ransom because they didn't know that I had a Cloak of Displacement and were counting on an explosion. All of this is undoubtedly speculation, but the disconnect on their part seems strange, especially since the hero was green and pinging, and their ICQ was offline.

In reply to Dark30

KobRa_RR

9 years ago

Auto-translated

Before important battles, you should save the game. If you can't do it yourself, there should be an option to enable automatic saving. Experienced players do this, and those who don't should be legally encouraged to do so.

Reading content in

Interface language

Posts from Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

Statistics

Library

Users Online 11 users 1289 guests

Today's Visitors 33