Posts from WT Nostalgy

The formalism of the law should never negate common sense – laws are created not to trample on common sense, but to support it. But here, that's not the case.

HellLighT (Blue, Swamp, Brokhild) def Tofsla (Red, Necropolis, Galtran). Mini-nostalgia 124

We defended all the respawn points; on the computer's respawn point and my own, it yielded 2 hives and a consulate. Starting from 121, I began gathering resources, and by 124, I was in Flaks' treasure zone, preparing to take the library. I had 2 hives + boots, as well as Dragon Utopia. I would have taken it on turn 125, but my opponent rushed and unsuccessfully tried to kill ГО with 10 lords using Thunderbirds. He surrendered. Thanks for the game.

P.S. The decision was ultimately made by Mee, because I am an interested party, but this kind of thing – "oh, can I use autosave or did I slightly break the rules?" (I’m generally saying that I’ve seen/heard this more than once on the Wargaming Tournament platform, not about this specific situation) – is complete nonsense. This is a money tournament; you shouldn't make actions if you are unsure. If you didn't read the regulations carefully, reread them (when I doubt something, that's what I do). For any controversial issue, contact the hosts and judges. Why did you assume that violating the rules should be ignored? In ongoing tournaments, defeats were awarded immediately and for less serious offenses.
On my part, I already wrote that I was wrong to present my opinion as the only correct one, and also got carried away while discussing the opponent's actions, although now you are doing no better with your own comments.
P.P.S. Regarding reviewing all games in a row, it is clear that addressing save reviews requires concrete, substantial arguments confirmed by some action during the game. I believe that I raised the question not without reason; there were questions, I sent them to the judge for review regarding possible unfair play. If you think that assessing it requires only saving from one day, you are mistaken; a full analysis of the game is being conducted, and no one intends to turn a blind eye to violations (unless the opponent himself objects).

The whole point is that if you don't create a clear distinction between "significant" and "insignificant" violations with unconditional criteria for both, there will always be endless arguments, as there are as many opinions as there are people. And it's impossible to make such a distinction, and therefore, any violation is simply a violation, and that's it. Yes, sometimes it seems absurd and inhumane, but at least it's clear and unambiguous, without subjective opinions, so to speak.

Since so many suggestions have been made, I can definitely play another decisive game with Tofsl if he wishes.

Since so many suggestions have been made, I can definitely play another decisive game with Tofsl if he wishes.

Andres blu (Conflux Moner Moner) def Javdet red (Fortress Broh Broh) 123 8mm6a

Sold everything for 3K, hoping to play through birds and I succeeded, the only thing was that the respawn was huge and I never found the ore mine there, as a result I missed 1 building and the birds were stuck in the fort. Additionally, water and earth dwellings were found and taken. Long roads to nowhere and into blocks. I didn't get out of the adjacent zones on the first one, but even there I found 2 Griffin Conservatories, 3 Hives, and 2 Dragon Utopias. In general, the plan for the game was simple and obvious, but on 123 news of a capitulation arrives. The opponent forgot to set up a citadel, a fully leveled computer came and justified it.