Before I even get into anything I would like to say I am very disappointed in how orb reacted to the decision made by tournament admins. Disconnects unfortunately are one of the most difficult things one will run into when coordinating, running and officiating a tournament. Today Torenhire and GenoZstriker of TL were our two main rules officials for the cyber ground tournament. Ultimately any and all decisions will be made in total agreement of multiple people, tournament officials and players opinion was considered. Isai felt he still had a chance in the game of course and Orb obviously felt he was too far ahead. After analyzing the replay and hearing both players opinions the consensus was although orb had a very large economic advantage, at the point of disconnect the game was not decided. Army composition/cost were fairly even, there was a terran army moving on the map while protoss was in a defensive position. While orb hypothetically would have continued to macro into an overwhelming advantage it was felt the presence and unit compositions AT THE POINT of disconnect was not a game decisive call. When a game disconnects you can only look at what exists on the map, what sort of situation might happen in the next minute or two.
In the next minute or two isai might have attacked with a fairly substantial force of mmm. Orb most likely would not have died but this can not be said with 100% certanty considering there were more marauders than stalkers and 16 marines+2medivacs + stim vs 10 zealots that would not have had charge researched (if isai attacked right away) any further analysis past this point becomes very hypothetical and even though orb had more than twice the economy at the point of disconnect the game was clearly not decided in the eyes of those who were consulted to watch the replay after hearing orb and isai's explanation.
The final ruling was the two play a regame with no one awarded a win, discarding the game.
Orb was clearly not happy with the decision, flaming excessively both isai, the tournament, all tournament admins and myself. This is totally unacceptable and unprofessional behavior on his part. I have no problems and totally encourage the intensity and competition in a tournament setting and know orb is a very outspoken player. I've known orb for over a year from previous broodwar lans and TL meetups, his passion for the game and intensity are unparalleled, anyone who has watched his stream or knows him as a person would agree. On the flip side anyone who knows me knows I strive to always provide as fair a solution as possible in any situation, define rules beforehand, appoint rules officials to handle things like this and overall try as best as I possibly can to provide a solid and fun event for all players involved. I constalty strive to stay professional in how I address issues and problems and this situation is no different. I am always interested in working WITH the people in improving anything and everything about live events and tournaments.
Orb was warned by TL in a post initially after the ruling (before he lost the re game) (source) and basically lost it in the thread after that. Also acting very unprofessional in person for the remainder of the night. I've run many, many tournaments and events in the DC area in the past 1-2 years now and I always pride on making the events as smooth as possible for players and everyone involved.
Anyway that is all I needed to say really, this post is primarily intended as a statement of what kind of thinking went into the decision that was made. Agree or disagree I feel it fair to fully share the situation publicly. I know the game was not livestreamed I believe the stream was covering the gretorp vs avilo series (which was absolutely amazing by the way) but this was an issue that needed to be addressed.
edit: the stream did analyze the replay afterwords and people generally agreed orb was in a decisive position. But was it decisive enough to award him the win at point of disconnect? Not as easy a question to answer until the terran army actually is eliminated.
edit* pre edit in spoiler. I am not good enough with the game to be as sure as I felt I was to make such a post. + Show Spoiler +
On September 26 2010 16:39 LuckyFool wrote: ...vs 10 zealots that would not have had charge researched (if isai attacked right away) any further analysis past this point becomes very hypothetical
Just want to put in my 2 cents. I am not questioning the decisions made by the admin. I felt though, when watching this, that is pretty clear that the terran wasn't going to attack until at least he had finished doing what he was going to do with that factory on the highground next to orb's nat. (Responding to the if statement in the part of your post I quoted.) Of course this but another IF. If he was indeed going to make use of that factory instead of not making it and devoting more resources into the mmm all in(doesn't even have a 2nd cc started), I think charge would be done.
I am in no way questioning the decisions made by the admin. It really is unfortunate connections were so bad.
On September 26 2010 17:05 mOnion wrote: its things like this that add to the list of reasons why orb should be removed from featured streams.
shameful really
I don't think this is the straw that broke the camel's back. What orb had to go through with that darn disconnect was pretty brutal and I think most people here would be pretty pissed. When you are pretty sure you are about to advance in the tournament and then a stupid bnet disconnect favors your opponent, you can easily lose your temper. Obviously it's wrong but if orb were to apologize I really do feel that everyone should give him the benefit of the doubt and some forgiveness in this case.
Tough decision admins but I think you got it right.
On September 26 2010 17:05 mOnion wrote: its things like this that add to the list of reasons why orb should be removed from featured streams.
shameful really
I don't think this is the straw that broke the camel's back. What orb had to go through with that darn disconnect was pretty brutal and I think most people here would be pretty pissed. When you are pretty sure you are about to advance in the tournament and then a stupid bnet disconnect favors your opponent, you can easily lose your temper. Obviously it's wrong but if orb were to apologize I really do feel that everyone should give him the benefit of the doubt and some forgiveness in this case.
Tough decision admins but I think you got it right.
oh i dont think so either, its just that he's acted like this time and time again, and to still react this way at a LAN of all things is like incomprehensible to me.
i've seen players like machine, silver, lz, etc go through more disconnects for BIGGER tournaments that were only online with no personal guilt to feel for taking a win and they STILL regame while retaining good manners.
i'm tired of giving orb the benefit of the doubt when he doesn't deserve it.
Isn't like the first rule of tournaments: Don't argue with admins and their decisions ?
Anyway, I would say that Orb was definitely in the lead, however his force was pure zealot/stalker with 0 FFs, which really help against MM and he was only on 4 gates, so they had pretty much equal production capacity, if orb was adding gates at that point, i would say that he would definitely come out ahead, as it is, it's not really clear.
On September 26 2010 17:05 mOnion wrote: its things like this that add to the list of reasons why orb should be removed from featured streams.
shameful really
I don't think this is the straw that broke the camel's back. What orb had to go through with that darn disconnect was pretty brutal and I think most people here would be pretty pissed. When you are pretty sure you are about to advance in the tournament and then a stupid bnet disconnect favors your opponent, you can easily lose your temper. Obviously it's wrong but if orb were to apologize I really do feel that everyone should give him the benefit of the doubt and some forgiveness in this case.
Tough decision admins but I think you got it right.
oh i dont think so either, its just that he's acted like this time and time again, and to still react this way at a LAN of all things is like incomprehensible to me.
i've seen players like machine, silver, lz, etc go through more disconnects for BIGGER tournaments that were only online with no personal guilt to feel for taking a win and they STILL regame while retaining good manners.
i'm tired of giving orb the benefit of the doubt when he doesn't deserve it.
I thought it was common knowledge he's jsut some dickhead still on his high horse from when he was good early in beta, and now he just thinks he's god material all over the place
Orb's behavior is absolutely unacceptable. It's not fair to the people who invested so much time and effort into organizing this event, only to have it tarnished by someone throwing a temper tantrum you'd expect from a 5 year old.
Orb has been given an ultimatum; expect to see something, one way or another, soon.
Just watch the kid's stream for two minutes and you can tell what sort Orb is. His commentray is fine but what's with the camera on himself moments. Day[9] can do that but the plebeian streams should avoid that sort of egoism at all costs.
On September 26 2010 18:12 chrisSquire wrote: So was there a rematch? Lemme guess Orb lost?
Just watch the kid's stream for two minutes and you can tell what sort Orb is. His commentray is fine but what's with the camera on himself moments. Day[9] can do that but the plebeian streams should avoid that sort of egoism at all costs.
Orb was one of the most popular and "famous" streamers of SC2 back in the Beta, so he isn't really a "plebeian".
Lucky is probably the most fair and objective person I know in the Starcraft community. I've never even seen the guy get mad before, so its always a safe bet to trust his decision. If they had to make that decision, then it was probably the right one.
Ok, orb is just ridiculous. I'm sorry if I'm being blunt or BM but this is just frustrating.
I first looked at the armies and actually thought to myself that the terran army seems a bit stronger. I'm a protoss player, so I know how weak gateway units are versus stim MMM (ESPECIALLY without sentry force field / guardian shield).
I really thought that the terran army had an advantage, so I tested it out. I did the exact same army composition in the unit tester (exact same number of units). I set up a PERFECT concave for the protoss army...even better than what is in the video. I then 1a the entire terran army into the protoss army after using stim. I also attacked with the protoss army as soon as the terran army was close so as to keep the perfect concave. I DID NOT MICRO A SINGLE THING FROM THE TERRAN ARMY -- this is very important. With ZERO micro (which never happens) from the terran army, the terran still came out on top. It was pretty decisive to be honest. Once again, this is without the shoot, run back, shoot, run back that is so common for terran bioballs. I just let it sit there. I also did not take into account pulling probes.
So, I gave orb the benefit of the doubt. I tried it again with charge. Terran still won (WITHOUT micro). I really think it is quite ridiculous that orb is making a big fuss. It's very disrespectful...
Just to stress this, I know that the unit tester is not perfect and in no way shows what could have actually happened. However, I think this clearly shows that the game is NOT the 100% orb cannot lose type of situation that he seems to think it is.
edit: sorry this is long. I'm NOT saying terran was ahead. I'm just saying it wasn't completely orb's game. Also, I'm pretty sure orb is supply blocked as well (hard to see though, I could be wrong).
As a Zerg player who doesn't play PvT, orb sure as hell looked like he was gonna win that game. He had defender advantage, and could pull all his Probes at his nat and still be ahead, but whatever.
The point I want to make is about tournament decision in general, and how prevalent a regame decision is. A lot of the times, regames are given out just because they feel like the "safer" decision, the "fairer" decision, the one where the tournament admins aren't directly involved in the elimination of the player. As such, I think regames are awarded much more often than they should be, simply because it lessens the responsibility of doing something substantial, even when a regame is not the best decision. To put it bluntly, regames are basically cop outs from the admins in many cases when there is a clear winner but the admins don't want to eliminate someone. For notable events, the TL tournament involving Artosis comes to mind (where afterwards, everyone agreed that regame was the incorrect decision at the time), along with this tournament imo.
Whether one army would beat the other, there's two things:
a) The simple fact that its even up for debate, by proxy, suggests that a regame was absolutely necessary. You can't award a win to someone unless you know that, without a shadow of a doubt, it was simply impossible for them to lose.
b) You cant judge a game based off assumptions. A couple things orb had said about the game was that he could pull each and every probe off his expansion, lose it, and still be ahead. By worker count, sure (although terran mules would change that number a bit), but surely I'm not the only one who has gotten absolutely thrashed by a bio-ball and immediately pushed in to my main. Secondly, proper kiting (even if he kited so long that zealot legs finished) would change things drastically.
The fact is that this disconnect happened BEFORE the major game-deciding engagement, and anything could have happened. Someone here says that they tested it in a build-order-tester and made these two armies fight one another with 0 micro and the terran came out on top- sure, maybe, but who is to say what would have been in the mind of either player in regards to a follow-up? The inside-the-game mindset works a lot differently than the post-analysis with fog of war off. Frankly, Isai could have completely botched it and gotten stomped in 3 seconds somehow. If one army stomped the other and 'then' it disconnected, then sure.. but you can't decide it mere moments before the engagement even occurred.
I'm fine with orb being an internet-tough-guy, as that's what he's e-famous for and is, I have to say, expected of him. To do what he did in a LAN, though, is quite unacceptable to me. The few times I've met him at TL dinners and whatnot, he's seemed pretty chill. How one man can single-handedly tarnish what was otherwise a completely perfect LAN, though, is beyond me. Be upset at Battle.net and Blizzard- don't take it out on all your friends.
I believe it was a fair call. If terran came out ahead in that battle it would be bye bye nexus/expo and any advantage that orb had. A BIG IF though, but it is completely plausible.
good decision based upon if the rules state re-game unless the game is clearly over.
Orb was wayyyyyyy ahead, but if the terran actually attacked immediately and charge wasn't finished in time it is very possible (depending on micro) that the terran could stream roll the protoss army and actually win the game.
That being said orb was wayyyy ahead. and had charge finished terran had no chance in my eyes.
The tourney admins have really represented themselves well, making this video/thread was unnecessary but very professional. Orb's response to the regame decision was outrageous.
Edit: to be clear, I'm not at all saying that this thread shouldn't have been made By "unnecessary" I merely meant that the admins didn't have an obligation to explain themselves so well! LuckyFool has gone above and beyond in the interest of being fair and transparent. That's cool to see.
with the amount of money that was on the line (over $500+gear) and the discussion/debate after the ruling was made I felt it was very necessary to address this issue in a separate thread. Both for the players to see where the admins were coming from and in response to orbs accusations in the tournament thread.
1: The admins didn't talk to me at all regarding the decision. They didn't come over to where I was showing the replay and ask for my opinion on the game. Instead, they spent 10+ minutes standing with IsAi while he showed through the replay
This is terrible professionalism and isn't fair in the slightest. Obviously IsAi was telling them all about how he was about to push and how I wouldn't be able to defend and shit.
Thus you miss the details I saw on my end, such as: A: If you pay attention to his pathing at the end of the game, IsAi was running after my probe mid and was getting delayed. He was going to chase down the probe until he killed it as you can see with his move actions at the very end of the game. Thus this would have delayed his push, I would have had more units, and charge would have been finished. B: Due to the fact that I had 51 probes and my opponent had 18, I could have pulled literally every probe at my expansion to help defend and would still have been ahead economically. If you think I would not have been able to defend against that with charge, more units, and ~24+ probes, you don't understand this game at all. C: Even if by some ridiculous miracle IsAi would have killed my whole army and all my nat's probes, I would have been able to be rebuilding my army the entire time the fight was going on due to my high income and GUARANTEED would have been able to follow up with a larger army due to my income being higher than IsAi's.
2: Look at the simple facts. I was at an advantage (this is thoroughly agreed upon by literally everyone who has seen this replay). Otherwise the series was even (1-1). Thus overall in the series due to this being the last game, I was at an advantage. What you did by calling a regame was completely removed that advantage (more so than you know). You evened the playing field and gave IsAi back even ground with which to play me on. Do you not see how ridiculously unfair that is? At the very least you should have given me map choice. Making me play a regame where my opponent gets to completely rethink he strategy on the most Terran favored map in the map pool is downright absurd.
3: What 99% of you don't realize is that Games 1-3 IsAi literally did the exact same build every single game. He went for an all in infantry push with SCVs every single game. The first game I was caught off guard and won. The second game I adapted and beat it. The third game I had already learned how to beat it and beat it quite easily. Then, you went and gave him a regame after having me play him 3 games in a row with the same build. What he went and did was abuse this opportunity and fast expand the next game after having all-in'd all three of the legitimate games. This kind of opportunity to change his strategy was already gone and lost by the time it failed in the actual 3rd game. To allow him to do this in an unexpected and unallowed-by-the-rules 4th game is ridiculously unfair and goes against the bo3 rules the tournament laid out. You effectively broke the rules of the tournament (you didn't even write anything in the rules about disconnects despite disconnects and problems with B.net happening in literally every single LAN we've ever done...) and by breaking those rules prevented me illegally from getting potentially up to $300 though more realistically getting at the very least $75. Quite honestly, I don't even care about the money as much as the fact that you think this is just when by hearing you in the video you clearly don't see half the stuff going on in this series or game.
players opinion was considered
Wow, you're going to blatantly lie to people on teamliquid too? You didn't even talk to me after the disconnect happened. I was told by Zlasher that the decision was a regame. You knew what you were doing was unfair and not right so you didn't even have the guts to come tell me your decision? This is let alone actually coming and "considering my opinion" on the game.
although orb had a very large economic advantage, at the point of disconnect the game was not decided. Army composition/cost were fairly even
Right, so what you're saying is that: 1: Our armies were even 2: My economy was at a "very large ... advantage"
So overall I was at a "very large advantage." So with a very large advantage I couldn't be awarded the game? Instead, you have to neutralize that advantage and even the playing field?
With that logic, any time anyone is starting to get a disadvantage in a tournament (or has a very large disadvantage), they should apparently pull the plug and get a regame called since apparently advantages don't mean anything in this game.
In this situation a 15 probe advantage would have been enough to call it, let alone a 33 probe advantage.
I also found it amusing how literally every single player that watched the game at the tournament said I had it won guaranteed, yet the tournament admins decided to disagree with everyone else there, most likely since they were over hanging out with IsAi instead of getting the full picture.
On the flip side anyone who knows me knows I strive to always provide as fair a solution as possible in any situation, define rules beforehand,
Well then you either failed miserably or weren't trying. Let's break this down:
strive to ... provide as fair a solution as possible
But oh wait, you took a huge advantage and leveled it into an even playing field (worse than even for me due to the strategy or playing 3 games getting turned into playing 4)
define rules beforehand
Except that in the rules document you wrote literally nothing about disconnects. I checked it multiple times.
Orb was warned by TL in a post initially after the ruling (before he lost the re game) (source) and basically lost it in the thread after that
Now you're literally just trying to make me look bad so that people will not believe my word. I was warned well after my last post that day was made, I didn't "lose it" after getting warned.
On September 26 2010 17:05 mOnion wrote: its things like this that add to the list of reasons why orb should be removed from featured streams.
shameful really
I don't think this is the straw that broke the camel's back. What orb had to go through with that darn disconnect was pretty brutal and I think most people here would be pretty pissed. When you are pretty sure you are about to advance in the tournament and then a stupid bnet disconnect favors your opponent, you can easily lose your temper. Obviously it's wrong but if orb were to apologize I really do feel that everyone should give him the benefit of the doubt and some forgiveness in this case.
Tough decision admins but I think you got it right.
oh i dont think so either, its just that he's acted like this time and time again, and to still react this way at a LAN of all things is like incomprehensible to me.
i've seen players like machine, silver, lz, etc go through more disconnects for BIGGER tournaments that were only online with no personal guilt to feel for taking a win and they STILL regame while retaining good manners.
i'm tired of giving orb the benefit of the doubt when he doesn't deserve it.
Lay off the personal attacks. I have never done this before in my entire SC2 career as this kind of ridiculous "you have a huge advantage, now let's turn that into an advantage for your opponent instead" situation has never occurred for me before.
I don't know why you have some kind of personal grudge against me, but you weren't even there at the tournament, so don't judge me when you don't even understand what happened
Everybody huddling around your computer agreed with you winning because they heard your emotionally-driven assumptions of what would have happened throughout the rest of the game.
Everyone huddling around Isai and Luckyfools' computer watching the replay decided that it wasn't over. Maybe the admins didn't come over and talk to you, but you also didn't come over and talk to them, so you have very little idea of what was considered on the other side of the room.
You cant base games on what you think would have happened. For example, you suggest that because he's chasing a probe for half a second, that 40 seconds of zealot charge (minus some if you chrono'd) would finish before he got there. As little respect as you obviously have for Isai, there's no evidence to suggest that he might not re-think chasing that probe and just attack. Concurrently, there is no evidence to suggest that he'd just attack and wouldn't just chase the probe for 3 years, but the fact of the matter is, we don't know. You also claim that you would have floated your observer over the factory and nullified it, but it's easier to say that when you're watching a replay without fog of war than it is to magically do it with no information of a factory at all (granted, i don't think the factory really mattered in that game by any means.)
In the end, your entire argument for that game is based off assumptions of how the entire game would play out. You had "an" advantage (economy, not army) and thus you feel entitled to the win. "Advantage" is far from "having won the game already and just needing to go through the motions"- the word advantage suggests that someone is ahead, not that someone is going to win. At that stage in the game, if he'd attacked, you'd lost ever probe in your expo, he'd have closed the gap by a decent amount. Even if you had 37-38 workers (after theoretically losing your natural), only 30 of them are giving you max 1base income. Yes, he had shit on workers, but mules would cover that gap even more, and he may eventually build some more.
That being said, everything I just said is as much theorycrafting as what you've given. As I said in an earlier post, the simple fact that its up for debate means that it absolutely has to be a re-game. "Advantage" or no, if the game wasn't essentially already over, its unfair to give a loss to someone without even giving them the chance.
I don't think you can really justify feeling entitled to an advantage in the regame, either. It's bad luck that you had to regame on Lost Temple vs Terran, but no self respecting league or tournament has every changed maps for a disconnect/power outage/whatever regame.
I'm honestly disgusted with your actions.
It's also hard to hear something like that when you start game 3 (not the re-game even) by bitching out your opponent for picking "the most imba race on the most imba map" yada yada yada "heres a medal", followed by how you single handedly managed to tarnish an otherwise perfect LAN with all of your poor manners and disrespect.
It's fine to be upset, but you're upset at the wrong people. Blame Battle.net.
What have we learned? Rules are for enemies and worst type of situations, make a clear rule about disconnects and have people follow it or not join the tournament.
On September 26 2010 17:05 mOnion wrote: its things like this that add to the list of reasons why orb should be removed from featured streams.
shameful really
I don't think this is the straw that broke the camel's back. What orb had to go through with that darn disconnect was pretty brutal and I think most people here would be pretty pissed. When you are pretty sure you are about to advance in the tournament and then a stupid bnet disconnect favors your opponent, you can easily lose your temper. Obviously it's wrong but if orb were to apologize I really do feel that everyone should give him the benefit of the doubt and some forgiveness in this case.
Tough decision admins but I think you got it right.
oh i dont think so either, its just that he's acted like this time and time again, and to still react this way at a LAN of all things is like incomprehensible to me.
i've seen players like machine, silver, lz, etc go through more disconnects for BIGGER tournaments that were only online with no personal guilt to feel for taking a win and they STILL regame while retaining good manners.
i'm tired of giving orb the benefit of the doubt when he doesn't deserve it.
Lay off the personal attacks. I have never done this before in my entire SC2 career as this kind of ridiculous "you have a huge advantage, now let's turn that into an advantage for your opponent instead" situation has never occurred for me before.
I don't know why you have some kind of personal grudge against me, but you weren't even there at the tournament, so don't judge me when you don't even understand what happened
you seem to think that the more ahead you are gives you the right to rage more which isnt the case.
it doesn't matter what happened. it couldve been a 150k tourney on the line, doesn't matter. your reaction is completely disgraceful, add to the fact that there are/were a lot of nooby nerds who look up to you since beta and from watching your stream, you'd think you'd have the presence of mind to carry yourself in a way that doesn't make you look like a child.
Every respectable league/tournament has clearly defined rules that govern what do to in the event of a disconnect. That this LAN did not is as much a problem as you claim orb's reaction was. That they spent 10 minutes at one of the competitors computers discussing how to move forward tells me that they were not prepared for this situation. That they were not prepared for a disconnect tells me that they were not prepared to host a tournament. So when you argue it was orb, and solely orb, who tarnished this event you are wrong. Prior planning and preparation prevents poor performance.
On September 26 2010 17:05 mOnion wrote: its things like this that add to the list of reasons why orb should be removed from featured streams.
shameful really
I don't think this is the straw that broke the camel's back. What orb had to go through with that darn disconnect was pretty brutal and I think most people here would be pretty pissed. When you are pretty sure you are about to advance in the tournament and then a stupid bnet disconnect favors your opponent, you can easily lose your temper. Obviously it's wrong but if orb were to apologize I really do feel that everyone should give him the benefit of the doubt and some forgiveness in this case.
Tough decision admins but I think you got it right.
oh i dont think so either, its just that he's acted like this time and time again, and to still react this way at a LAN of all things is like incomprehensible to me.
i've seen players like machine, silver, lz, etc go through more disconnects for BIGGER tournaments that were only online with no personal guilt to feel for taking a win and they STILL regame while retaining good manners.
i'm tired of giving orb the benefit of the doubt when he doesn't deserve it.
Lay off the personal attacks. I have never done this before in my entire SC2 career as this kind of ridiculous "you have a huge advantage, now let's turn that into an advantage for your opponent instead" situation has never occurred for me before.
I don't know why you have some kind of personal grudge against me, but you weren't even there at the tournament, so don't judge me when you don't even understand what happened
you seem to think that the more ahead you are gives you the right to rage more which isnt the case.
it doesn't matter what happened. it couldve been a 150k tourney on the line, doesn't matter. your reaction is completely disgraceful, add to the fact that there are/were a lot of nooby nerds who look up to you since beta and from watching your stream, you'd think you'd have the presence of mind to carry yourself in a way that doesn't make you look like a child.
Here you go again assuming you know everything about the situation when you really, REALLY don't.
I'll bet you didn't know IsAi started offensively GGing and trash talking me, did you? Doesn't that change the situation a little bit? Makes it a little easier to get mad at someone when they start trash talking you and offensively GGing. Please stop assuming you know everything that happened that day and that you therefore have every right to judge me from your high horse where you only have 1 small biased perspective of the events that unfolded that day.
On September 27 2010 04:04 jennicide wrote: Every respectable league/tournament has clearly defined rules that govern what do to in the event of a disconnect. That this LAN did not is as much a problem as you claim orb's reaction was. That they spent 10 minutes at one of the competitors computers discussing how to move forward tells me that they were not prepared for this situation. That they were not prepared for a disconnect tells me that they were not prepared to host a tournament. So when you argue it was orb, and solely orb, who tarnished this event you are wrong. Prior planning and preparation prevents poor performance.
Perhaps I can see your point in that. I wouldn't go as far to say as that not having a disconnect rule means they weren't fit to run a tournament, however. Most everyone who was there seemed outstandingly pleased with the way things were running.
While such rules are certainly the responsibility of the organizers to prepare in advance, an on-the-fly ruling for a regame after 20 minutes of analysis seemed, to me anyway, to be a worthy substitute. Maybe I'm flawed in thinking that, but the organizers/admins showed (in my opinion) professionalism in handling the issue given the fact that there were no pre-determined rules. Not having such rules is inexcusable, but I feel they made the best of the situation given them not having a rule for it.
In a situation where no rule is defined, an on-the-fly judgment call was necessary. That judgment leaded to a regame, and while everyone wished such a hard call wasn't necessary, it was the best they could accomplish at that very moment.
The truth is the whole Orb vs. Isai thing is not as big as it seems. The only reason this seems big is because one of the players was Orb, who happens to be known within the community, and started raging in the thread.
On September 27 2010 04:04 jennicide wrote: Every respectable league/tournament has clearly defined rules that govern what do to in the event of a disconnect. That this LAN did not is as much a problem as you claim orb's reaction was. That they spent 10 minutes at one of the competitors computers discussing how to move forward tells me that they were not prepared for this situation. That they were not prepared for a disconnect tells me that they were not prepared to host a tournament. So when you argue it was orb, and solely orb, who tarnished this event you are wrong. Prior planning and preparation prevents poor performance.
Hmmmmm and when you don't have rules for something particular and that something happens what do you do then? You come up with a possible solution to fix. What would major tournaments do? ESL + MLG = Instant regame. Other online cup = disconnect 2-3 minutes in-game = instant regame. Disconnect after 2-3 minutes in-game = player who disconnects get default win unless other player regame. Online service goes down = instant regame while other analyze replays.
Fairly certain, Orb would lose 75% of the time in that engagement. Marauder Marine Medivac wrecks that zealot stalker army with any unit control at all...
Looking at the VoD I would guess Isai is a platinum or low diamond player (loading scvs at start, blind pulling scvs to push, very poor control during push).
So the 25% being him not stimming or misclicking and running his army into Orbs without attacking or chasing the probe across the map and letting orb get in 2 gateway cycles of 8 more units.
Had they had clearly defined rules in regard to disconnects and orb rages it is a completely different situation. Did orb act unprofessionally? I don't know as I wasn't there. For the sake of this discussion let's assume that he did. The tournament organizers also acted unprofessionally. They were not prepared for a situation where one or both players disconnected. That is a fairly premise that they muffed up.
On September 27 2010 03:52 Nokarot wrote: Everybody huddling around your computer agreed with you winning because they heard your emotionally-driven assumptions of what would have happened throughout the rest of the game.
Everyone huddling around Isai and Luckyfools' computer watching the replay decided that it wasn't over. Maybe the admins didn't come over and talk to you, but you also didn't come over and talk to them, so you have very little idea of what was considered on the other side of the room.
You cant base games on what you think would have happened. For example, you suggest that because he's chasing a probe for half a second, that 40 seconds of zealot charge (minus some if you chrono'd) would finish before he got there. As little respect as you obviously have for Isai, there's no evidence to suggest that he might not re-think chasing that probe and just attack. Concurrently, there is no evidence to suggest that he'd just attack and wouldn't just chase the probe for 3 years, but the fact of the matter is, we don't know. You also claim that you would have floated your observer over the factory and nullified it, but it's easier to say that when you're watching a replay without fog of war than it is to magically do it with no information of a factory at all (granted, i don't think the factory really mattered in that game by any means.)
In the end, your entire argument for that game is based off assumptions of how the entire game would play out. You had "an" advantage (economy, not army) and thus you feel entitled to the win. "Advantage" is far from "having won the game already and just needing to go through the motions"- the word advantage suggests that someone is ahead, not that someone is going to win. At that stage in the game, if he'd attacked, you'd lost ever probe in your expo, he'd have closed the gap by a decent amount. Even if you had 37-38 workers (after theoretically losing your natural), only 30 of them are giving you max 1base income. Yes, he had shit on workers, but mules would cover that gap even more, and he may eventually build some more.
That being said, everything I just said is as much theorycrafting as what you've given. As I said in an earlier post, the simple fact that its up for debate means that it absolutely has to be a re-game. "Advantage" or no, if the game wasn't essentially already over, its unfair to give a loss to someone without even giving them the chance.
I don't think you can really justify feeling entitled to an advantage in the regame, either. It's bad luck that you had to regame on Lost Temple vs Terran, but no self respecting league or tournament has every changed maps for a disconnect/power outage/whatever regame.
It's also hard to hear something like that when you start game 3 (not the re-game even) by bitching out your opponent for picking "the most fucking imba race on the most imba map" yada yada yada "heres a medal", followed by how you single handedly managed to tarnish an otherwise perfect LAN with all of your poor manners and disrespect.
It's fine to be upset, but you're upset at the wrong people. Blame Battle.net.
First off, I think I am justified to hypothesize what would have happened in this game both because having played this game myself and the series itself and seeing all my opponents decisions I understand what was going on better than the admins do, and also because my opponent literally played the same way from game 1 through game 3 and thus you can look at his actions and compare them.
Secondly, just because no other tournament has changed maps for a disconnect doesn't mean that in this isolated and unique situation we have to follow exactly what happened in some other tournament in a completely different situation.
The basic facts are that 1: I was in a huge advantage 2: The admin decision turned my huge advantage (which didn't need necessarily to become a win but at least stay an advantage) into an advantage for my opponent. This isn't remotely fair.
Thirdly, I don't think you're thinking as clearly as you are pretending to:
bitching out your opponent for picking "the most fucking imba race on the most imba map"
Good job rephrasing what I said and adding curse words in there to make me seem like more of an asshole.
Oh, let's not forget that my opponent trash talked me before and after that. No one wants to talk about that! Let's just keep bashing orb and pretending like he was unreasonably BM in an otherwise perfectly GM tournament where everyone was prancing around like unicorns in their perfectly happy world.
Are you serious?
Blame Battle.net
While battle.net is obviously also to blame, IsAi and the tournament admins personally decided to play out the tournament in this fashion, and therefore their actions are as much to blame as battle.net is.
lol if the admins didn't even talk to orb then thats just fucking low, saying both players opinions were taken in to consideration when you really didn't even speak to him. Pathetic
giving orb the map choice would have been a good descision
Its so hard to regame like that, its gives the opponent a clear advantage and his opponent knew that and abused it. Jesus thats suck
On September 27 2010 04:21 PokePill wrote: Fairly certain, Orb would lose 75% of the time in that engagement. Marauder Marine Medivac wrecks that zealot stalker army with any unit control at all...
Looking at the VoD I would guess Isai is a platinum or low diamond player (loading scvs at start, blind pulling scvs to push, very poor control during push).
So the 25% being him not stimming or misclicking and running his army into Orbs without attacking or chasing the probe across the map and letting orb get in 2 gateway cycles of 8 more units.
Fairly certain you don't fully understand what's going on in this game. Not only was my opponent not about to attack, but charge was going to be finished soon, my opponent's control was awful, I had a large enough economy to rebuild my army instantly as I lost units.
Even if by some miracle he killed my army in that situation my superior economy would allow me to rebuild my army extremely quickly while his awful economy would not allow him to rebuild quickly at all.
Thus even if by some ridiculous miracle he won that engagement I'd still win the game with extreme ease
On September 27 2010 03:19 -orb- wrote: I'd like to point out a number of things:
1: The admins didn't talk to me at all regarding the decision. They didn't come over to where I was showing the replay and ask for my opinion on the game. Instead, they spent 10+ minutes standing with IsAi while he showed through the replay
This is terrible professionalism and isn't fair in the slightest. Obviously IsAi was telling them all about how he was about to push and how I wouldn't be able to defend and shit.
Me and toren and Geno were all behind your shoulder, Luckyfool didn't even talk to Isai, he was sitting at his computer until Toren, Geno, and me went to him. Nobody talked to isai.
I was told by Zlasher that the decision was a regame. You knew what you were doing was unfair and not right so you didn't even have the guts to come tell me your decision? This is let alone actually coming and "considering my opinion" on the game.
I don't remember the exact situation now, but me, geno, and toren walked over to discuss the decision, and toren was the one who told you that the admins decided that we can't auto give you a win in that situation. Luckyfool was doing his match and was at his computer, it wasn't only his decision it was also toren and geno's and my own. Don't just blame luckyfool for not saying it to your face because 3 of us were there. We were all around your computer until rob's game was over then we watched the replay you uploaded on luckyfools computer, isai was nowhere to be seen or heard.
although orb had a very large economic advantage, at the point of disconnect the game was not decided. Army composition/cost were fairly even
Right, so what you're saying is that: 1: Our armies were even 2: My economy was at a "very large ... advantage"
So overall I was at a "very large advantage." So with a very large advantage I couldn't be awarded the game? Instead, you have to neutralize that advantage and even the playing field?
With that logic, any time anyone is starting to get a disadvantage in a tournament (or has a very large disadvantage), they should apparently pull the plug and get a regame called since apparently advantages don't mean anything in this game.
In this situation a 15 probe advantage would have been enough to call it, let alone a 33 probe advantage.
I also found it amusing how literally every single player that watched the game at the tournament said I had it won guaranteed, yet the tournament admins decided to disagree with everyone else there, most likely since they were over hanging out with IsAi instead of getting the full picture.
Your armies weren't even, I can amove 10 maruaders and 14 marines and 3 medivacs with stim against 9 stalkers 10 zealots and bisu could try to micro and he would never beat that. If you pull probes, you will lose a ton of probes because, as you know, marines and marauders destroy probes especially when therse 3 medivacs, the probes would kill 0 units and just soak a few shots. This is assuming the terran doesn't micro, and Isai isn't a silver level player.
The admins chose the right decision to regame, which is after all the community standard. Having experienced that awful moment when T attacks right before your charge is done, if T attacked immediately, P's army would likely lose, and I doubt he could get a decent probe surround since T had stim. If you have roughly equivalent army cost of zeal/stalker vs stimmed MMM and P doesn't have charge or forcefields, T almost always wins. And after that it's all hypothetical since P would be able to hang on to his main with probes at the ramp / 4gate+robo reinforcements, but T could also kill the natural nexus and leave, equalizing their position. Good analysis in your video.
I watched the replay at your computer, then went over to IsAi. I heard your arguments and I heard his. The only reason I stayed by IsAi was because Rob was sitting right behind him. which is where we gathered to decide on the regame/awarding win to you or him.
I had already decided it was going to be a regame when I saw it at your computer first. While I don't remember 100%, I remember you telling me about your warpgate cycles, how the observer would stop his factory on the highground, your superior army position, pulling your probes, etc. etc. So yes, I DID get your side of the issue. I didn't pick favorites, or anything. Did it favor him by giving a regame? Yes. Was that the ONLY reason I did it? No.
I also did come back there (Zlasher and Alex were there, I am pretty sure) when I came back and told you it was a regame. Like I said in the other thread, I apologized like 50 times about having to issue a regame. If nobody wants to back me up on this, so be it. But don't go trashing people for getting the story wrong when yours isn't perfect either.
Edit: Thanks for the above post, Zlasher. I'm glad someone remembered that.
Orb was obviously ahead at the point of the disc, and the terran seemed pretty bad but terran armies/stim being what they are I don't count out the terran at all if he planned on attacking very soon. And to say he wasn't going to when he's outside your nat is pretty stupid, so is thinking you'd reinforce with 4/5 gateways if he broke your natural. And even if you do the game is even at that point anyway if he defends the obviously all-in response. So with the very real possibility of the terran at least equalizing the game I don't think a regame is out of the question, regardless of how bad you think he is or how much of a child a player can be.
On September 27 2010 04:21 PokePill wrote: Fairly certain, Orb would lose 75% of the time in that engagement. Marauder Marine Medivac wrecks that zealot stalker army with any unit control at all...
Looking at the VoD I would guess Isai is a platinum or low diamond player (loading scvs at start, blind pulling scvs to push, very poor control during push).
So the 25% being him not stimming or misclicking and running his army into Orbs without attacking or chasing the probe across the map and letting orb get in 2 gateway cycles of 8 more units.
30 worker advantage doesn't really mean anything.
the terran army wins that 99% of the time
Isai is a former B- BW player, he was doing stupid as shit strategies that were all-in as hell, but that has absolutely no play on the decision so i don't see the point in bringing it up.
On September 27 2010 04:28 EleanorRIgby wrote: lol if the admins didn't even talk to orb then thats just fucking low, saying both players opinions were taken in to consideration when you really didn't even speak to him. Pathetic
giving orb the map choice would have been a good descision
Its so hard to regame like that, its gives the opponent a clear advantage and his opponent knew that and abused it. Jesus thats suck
Were you at the tournament? no
Did we talk to orb? No, but he talked to us, and we knew what his opinions and points were since we were 2 feet over his fucking shoulder while he went over the replay 2-3 times.
Did we talk to Isai? NO, he didn't say shit, he didn't do shit afterwards, the guy sat there and waited for the decision without berating anyone afterwards without doing anything, he just waited for a result.
On September 27 2010 04:21 PokePill wrote: Fairly certain, Orb would lose 75% of the time in that engagement. Marauder Marine Medivac wrecks that zealot stalker army with any unit control at all...
Looking at the VoD I would guess Isai is a platinum or low diamond player (loading scvs at start, blind pulling scvs to push, very poor control during push).
So the 25% being him not stimming or misclicking and running his army into Orbs without attacking or chasing the probe across the map and letting orb get in 2 gateway cycles of 8 more units.
Fairly certain you don't fully understand what's going on in this game. Not only was my opponent not about to attack, but charge was going to be finished soon, my opponent's control was awful, I had a large enough economy to rebuild my army instantly as I lost units.
Even if by some miracle he killed my army in that situation my superior economy would allow me to rebuild my army extremely quickly while his awful economy would not allow him to rebuild quickly at all.
Thus even if by some ridiculous miracle he won that engagement I'd still win the game with extreme ease
Yes, HuK, the admins, and everyone else doesn't understand that your income advantage means nothing in this scenario because the margin of victory the T army rolls you with is too big for your 4 unit cycles of reinforcements and pulling 50 probes.
Pokepill, Terran would have won the engagement but not necessarily the game, since orb will forever have a higher income, and better reproduction. Even if orb lost everything in his naturla at that point he still was at an advantage.
Anyways, I think another thing people need to take into consideration is that Toren, myself, and Rob are all friends with orb, we've known him for much longer and have had no ill-will towards him. Why would that play a role in the decision that we made? In online tournaments with disconnects, if one individual disconnects he can either forfeit the game or regame, and is in no position to demand a win, ie: artosis v slush. Isai didn't disconnect, its not his fault. But to say that, with a losing army, that orb had to be given the move on to the RO4? I'm not so sure how someone is arguing that someone must get kicked out of the tournament that thhey are playing in due to a disconnect by blizzard.
First off, I think I am justified to hypothesize what would have happened in this game both because having played this game myself and the series itself and seeing all my opponents decisions I understand what was going on better than the admins do, and also because my opponent literally played the same way from game 1 through game 3 and thus you can look at his actions and compare them.
The problem is that your hypothesis is based on assuming he wouldn't attempt micromanaging his troops, that you would have the instant gamesense to pull probes before the battle even starts (as opposed to after losing half your army, like most players do), and the assumption that he would chase your probe for 40 seconds and allow you to finish charge when he was 5-10 seconds away from your base.
If he did some stutter-step micro (which maybe I'm giving him too much credit for, but the mere existence of it gives him a chance), surely you're aware how much stronger m&m becomes in that situation when he has stim, especially without zealot charge.
Yes, you'd know better than the admins on whether or not your opponent is capable of such things, but that's no arguement to award you an instant win before the battle has even happened.
Secondly, just because no other tournament has changed maps for a disconnect doesn't mean that in this isolated and unique situation we have to follow exactly what happened in some other tournament in a completely different situation.
You can't expect new rules to be made in an isolated, unique situation that plays in your hand. No tournaments, map imbalance or not, regame on a new map. While he certainly took full advantage of changing up his strategy in the re-game, game 3 was his map choice because he lost game 2. You can't take that away from somebody.
Good job rephrasing what I said and adding curse words in there to make me seem like more of an asshole.
I just watched again. I apologize for adding in the curse word there- it was a lapse of memory on my part. Perhaps you don't care and/or think I'm full of shit and am trying to save face, but I'll edit that out anyway.
While I didn't see any of Isai's BM, theres still no excuse for it. I know this isn't GSL, nor do we have a governing body like KESPA for a local 60-player LAN, but bad manners in general are inexcusable and unprofessional. If you were able to be the better man and walk away, maybe Isai's BM would be under harsher scrutiny.
I don't have any exact quotes to pull from the community-forum thread, but a little in-game BM is a lot different than calling him a "fat fuck" and calling all of the tournament admins "fucking morons/idiots", something which was all on you, not Isai.
1: The admins didn't talk to me at all regarding the decision. They didn't come over to where I was showing the replay and ask for my opinion on the game. Instead, they spent 10+ minutes standing with IsAi while he showed through the replay
This is terrible professionalism and isn't fair in the slightest. Obviously IsAi was telling them all about how he was about to push and how I wouldn't be able to defend and shit.
Thus you miss the details I saw on my end, such as: A: If you pay attention to his pathing at the end of the game, IsAi was running after my probe mid and was getting delayed. He was going to chase down the probe until he killed it as you can see with his move actions at the very end of the game. Thus this would have delayed his push, I would have had more units, and charge would have been finished. B: Due to the fact that I had 51 probes and my opponent had 18, I could have pulled literally every probe at my expansion to help defend and would still have been ahead economically. If you think I would not have been able to defend against that with charge, more units, and ~24+ probes, you don't understand this game at all. C: Even if by some ridiculous miracle IsAi would have killed my whole army and all my nat's probes, I would have been able to be rebuilding my army the entire time the fight was going on due to my high income and GUARANTEED would have been able to follow up with a larger army due to my income being higher than IsAi's.
2: Look at the simple facts. I was at an advantage (this is thoroughly agreed upon by literally everyone who has seen this replay). Otherwise the series was even (1-1). Thus overall in the series due to this being the last game, I was at an advantage. What you did by calling a regame was completely removed that advantage (more so than you know). You evened the playing field and gave IsAi back even ground with which to play me on. Do you not see how ridiculously unfair that is? At the very least you should have given me map choice. Making me play a regame where my opponent gets to completely rethink he strategy on the most Terran favored map in the map pool is downright absurd.
3: What 99% of you don't realize is that Games 1-3 IsAi literally did the exact same build every single game. He went for an all in infantry push with SCVs every single game. The first game I was caught off guard and won. The second game I adapted and beat it. The third game I had already learned how to beat it and beat it quite easily. Then, you went and gave him a regame after having me play him 3 games in a row with the same build. What he went and did was abuse this opportunity and fast expand the next game after having all-in'd all three of the legitimate games. This kind of opportunity to change his strategy was already gone and lost by the time it failed in the actual 3rd game. To allow him to do this in an unexpected and unallowed-by-the-rules 4th game is ridiculously unfair and goes against the bo3 rules the tournament laid out. You effectively broke the rules of the tournament (you didn't even write anything in the rules about disconnects despite disconnects and problems with B.net happening in literally every single LAN we've ever done...) and by breaking those rules prevented me illegally from getting potentially up to $300 though more realistically getting at the very least $75. Quite honestly, I don't even care about the money as much as the fact that you think this is just when by hearing you in the video you clearly don't see half the stuff going on in this series or game.
players opinion was considered
Wow, you're going to blatantly lie to people on teamliquid too? You didn't even talk to me after the disconnect happened. I was told by Zlasher that the decision was a regame. You knew what you were doing was unfair and not right so you didn't even have the guts to come tell me your decision? This is let alone actually coming and "considering my opinion" on the game.
although orb had a very large economic advantage, at the point of disconnect the game was not decided. Army composition/cost were fairly even
Right, so what you're saying is that: 1: Our armies were even 2: My economy was at a "very large ... advantage"
So overall I was at a "very large advantage." So with a very large advantage I couldn't be awarded the game? Instead, you have to neutralize that advantage and even the playing field?
With that logic, any time anyone is starting to get a disadvantage in a tournament (or has a very large disadvantage), they should apparently pull the plug and get a regame called since apparently advantages don't mean anything in this game.
In this situation a 15 probe advantage would have been enough to call it, let alone a 33 probe advantage.
I also found it amusing how literally every single player that watched the game at the tournament said I had it won guaranteed, yet the tournament admins decided to disagree with everyone else there, most likely since they were over hanging out with IsAi instead of getting the full picture.
On the flip side anyone who knows me knows I strive to always provide as fair a solution as possible in any situation, define rules beforehand,
Well then you either failed miserably or weren't trying. Let's break this down:
strive to ... provide as fair a solution as possible
But oh wait, you took a huge advantage and leveled it into an even playing field (worse than even for me due to the strategy or playing 3 games getting turned into playing 4)
define rules beforehand
Except that in the rules document you wrote literally nothing about disconnects. I checked it multiple times.
Orb was warned by TL in a post initially after the ruling (before he lost the re game) (source) and basically lost it in the thread after that
Now you're literally just trying to make me look bad so that people will not believe my word. I was warned well after my last post that day was made, I didn't "lose it" after getting warned.
I'm honestly disgusted with your actions.
I'm not trying to make you look bad and I'm not trying to lie. At the time I wished to resolve the issue as best as possible, hence why I even created this thread and recorded a video attempting to explain the decision. And also why we spent over 10 minutes, hearing from both isai and you (you were at isai's pc already fairly irate when torenhire called me over) consulted with EVERY staff member on what sort of decision to come to. You made yourself look bad with how you responded to the decision. You started blatantly attacking both Isai and the admins RIGHT away on TL. (before you even started the re game) and were promptly warned. I am simply bringing attention to this fact. Regardless of the admins decision, calling Isai a "Fat ass" saying the admins are "Fucking morons" minutes after the decision was made is completely unacceptable behavior and I'm sure TL administration would agree with me.
Also I can't speak on Torenhire or Geno's behalf but I know you never once approached me to voice your displeasure with the decision. All I'm seeing is you calling everyone a fucking moron on TL. Do you think I'm going to even try to approach you at this point? What good would it have done other than create a possible ridiculous confrontation? If you handle a situation like a professional you will be treated professionally. You were quite unprofessional in how you conducted yourself and were unnecessarily straining the integrity of the tournament administration.
Even if we did completely fuck up (which I honestly believe we didn't) you shouldn't have responded that way. It would have been impossible to approach you after the decision was made because you had already called the entire administration "fucking morons."
the rules packet did not clearly define a disconnect procedure. This is an unfortunate circumstance that was overlooked when composing the rules. Because you did not rise the issue beforehand though anything in any gray area obviously is ultimately decided upon by the administration/staff. We had an appointed rules official beforehand (torenhire) to deal with issues that arise. By playing in the tournament you in essence agree to the rules and the administration/staff decisions. There was an issue in the morning groups with a disconnect when somebodies PC crashed and the players decided to regame after discussion with admins.
We were interested in making as best a possible decision with the material we have available. In this case Torenhire called me over to review a replay which happened to be open on isai's pc. You had also come over so I absolutely remember it was Torenhire, Geno, Myself, Isai, you and Zlasher reviewing the replay at once. Zlasher was fairly certain the ruling should have been an orb win. Isai was fairly calm and said he thought the game wasn't over, orb was fairly irate saying there was absolutely no way he could have lost, Geno has already voiced his opinion in the thread saying what I agree with, at the time of disconnect you can't be 100% sure of a winner. There is a difference between having an advantage and the game being 100% over.
Test it in the unit tester, 10 marauders, 16 marines+stim, 2 medivacs vs 9 stalkers 10 zeealots (with charge and without charge) and "x" amount of probes. The fight can go any number of ways. At the time of the disconnect isai is chasing a probe. Would he have chased this probe to the other side of the map? Was he planning to delay until a tank builds from the factory? These are questions that are impossible to answer and can only be theorized. The admin team made a decision that it thought was as fair and unbiased as possible at the time with what we saw in the replay. Regardless of how big of an advantage one has one of the great aspects of starcraft is the game is unpredictable and a single mistake, mismicro, better concave or better fight a games tides can be turned.
I'd also like to say I am very disappointed this situation even had to happen and I am extremely annoyed there is no LAN capability on starcraft 2 for the public.
whether orb would win or lose is irrelevant. It is about a billion % common practice that when a disconnect occurs unless 1 guy is literally finishing off the other guys final pylon/depot or w/e they regame it. ESPECIALLY in a LAN this is the case. The reason being nobody wants to travel to a place and play games only to get robbed of that experience by something completely out of their control.
Orb: It isn't like they gave the other guy the win. If you feel like you were WAY ahead in that game that is fine... based upon what I have heard you were not 100% going to win, or even 85% going to win... you had an advantage and probably could have won (which is still debatable since not everyone sees it that way).
If every lan / tourney had the practice "when a disconnect occurs the guy that was probably ahead wins" we would have a terrible policy for tourneys/lans. Why would anyone continue to play after they get ahead? Why not just yank the internet?
It is preposterous to see the scale of anger here. Had they done what you wanted against you I would completely expect/be ok with your reaction. But they made you regame (which 99% of tourneys/lans would) and you lose fair and square so now you flip huge amounts of shit for pages and pages? Isn't this like, one of your first lans? This really the impression you want to leave?
"Fat fucking piece of shit, taking advantage of you fucking losing a game" was but one of many orb-isms that he SHOUTED ACROSS the room (even though there was only 2 rows of computers and 12 feet separating him and Isai) towards him. Nobody recorded what orb said after game 4 but its pretty much a miracle for orb that ETT, intrigue, hot_bid or any other of the TL admins that have been to the DC area meet ups before didn't hear what you said, I think thats overlooked by many people trying to make an argument on this thread who weren't there.
On September 27 2010 04:04 jennicide wrote: Every respectable league/tournament has clearly defined rules that govern what do to in the event of a disconnect. That this LAN did not is as much a problem as you claim orb's reaction was. That they spent 10 minutes at one of the competitors computers discussing how to move forward tells me that they were not prepared for this situation. That they were not prepared for a disconnect tells me that they were not prepared to host a tournament. So when you argue it was orb, and solely orb, who tarnished this event you are wrong. Prior planning and preparation prevents poor performance.
It wasn't ten minutes of OH SHIT WHAT DO WE DO?!
It was 10 minutes of the tournament admins, and others, trying to decide if it was a large enough margin between the two players to award a win, or a regame.
While we may have made a mistake in not adding disconnect rules to the rulesheet (next time it will so we don't get criticized for being an unrespectable and unprepared tournament), there's no reason to be acting like he did. Gretorp was very unhappy he had to regame, too, but he didn't take it out on us like it was our fault. Before the argument comes up that the disconnect didn't effect him, he lost the regame, but it was game two. He was pissed about it for a while and then got it together and won the third game in a rather convincing fashion. He shook hands with his opponent afterwards and everything was fine. So while the situation was fucked up, there's no reason to be unprofessional about it. We had multiple disconnect issues during the night, and after the very first one (Lastshadow DC'd somewhere in his group rounds), Rob and I set up a disconnect rule with Geno. Review the replay if the game was in a point where it mattered (after opening builds and whatnot) and make a decision as a group.
Is that unreasonable? The tournament admins make a vote, and we have a 100% vote for regame based on Orb + IsAi's position in the game. Like it's been said time and time again, I know Zlasher was there with me, possibly Geno but I am unsure so I'll exclude him for the moment, and I had made up my mind before I even thought about going to IsAi to find out what he thought. I handled this the same way as I did with Gretorp / Avilo. Went to Gretorp, talked to him for a bit, went to Avilo, got both player's opinions, Gretorp even came over to talk with the group of us watching the replay with Avilo, and (although frustrated to hell, like anyone else would be) agreed to a regame.
This is really our first major tournament, so there's obviously going to be learning to be done. We did well in most things, and I guess if you want one of us to admit it, we didn't do well with making sure we had all our bases covered in terms of rules. So, sorry to everyone who was involved in our screw-ups.
He's been to a few lan's in this area (and maybe others) before, he's never blown up like this, but I agree wiht you there incontrol that the win can only be given if someone is cleaning up. Especially since this wasn't Isai's disconnect, it as battlenets.
gretorps game vs avilo (whihc lets admit, is a higher level matchup) disconnected at the same point in time, and gretorp was ahead (not by as much) but gretorp decided to punch a chair and talk it over with avilo without raising his voice, he didn't shout, he didn't yell at anyone, he didn't call anyone fat fucks, he didn't berate the admins for saying that a regame should be given. He regamed, lost, and came back in game 3 with the win. He ended up winning his next two games going on to win the tournament.
Even in the heat of the moment and after only watching orb's POV, I thought he was insanely ahead, but that the win couldn't be warranted in that situation when he had a losing army.
I have to say that it sounds like Orb got dicked over.
I cannot honestly see any way he could have possibly lost that game, at all. Like the guy says-- his probes could have waged manly combat. He was very Stalker heavy, and with probes to tank for them they could have done a ton of damage. Keep in mind he would be reinforcing RIGHT THERE while the Terran only had what army was with him. Orbs army would have been much larger when the engagement began, and unless the Terran won overwhelmingly, the next round of warp-ins would have mopped up.
That being said, it happens. Admins did their best, it was a slightly bad judgment, but the admins are in charge. You have to remain respectful to them even afterward. A re-game is safer than giving someone an unfair loss, and had Orb won, no one would be complaining. I'm all for BMing your opponent because I'm American and a douchebag, so i can't really comment on that. Treat the refs properly, though.
Obviously this should be a learning experience for admins everywhere. And for Blizzard. Why can't Tournament-games just pause when a DC occurs and resume when Bnet comes back up? Why isn't there LAN? So many people who's fault this is way before the admins or the players.
Talking to both players and coming up with an alternative, like map pick for the person at an advantage, would have been a cutesy move.
On September 27 2010 06:53 Ndugu wrote: I have to say that it sounds like Orb got dicked over.
I cannot honestly see any way he could have possibly lost that game, at all. Like the guy says-- his probes could have waged manly combat. Keep in mind he would be reinforcing RIGHT THERE while the Terran only had what army was with him. Orbs army would have been much larger when the engagement began, and unless the Terran won overwhelmingly, the next round of warp-ins would have mopped up.
That being said, it happens. Admins did their best, it was a slightly bad judgment, but the admins are in charge. You have to remain respectful to them even afterward. A re-game is safer than giving someone an unfair loss, and had Orb won, no one would be complaining. I'm all for BMing your opponent because I'm American and a douchebag, so i can't really comment on that. Treat the refs properly, though.
Obviously this should be a learning experience for admins everywhere. And for Blizzard. Why can't Tournament-games just pause when a DC occurs and resume when Bnet comes back up? Why isn't there LAN? So many people who's fault this is way before the admins or the players.
Talking to both players and coming up with an alternative, like map pick for the person at an advantage, would have been a cutesy move.
orbs army was smaller and would not have gotten bigger due to being 92/92 food and not having a pylon incoming. The only way to reproduce was to lose his army first, not to mention the 3 medivacs and MM group with stim would defeat that protoss army any day o f the week.
You clearly didn't pay attention to that game if you think he had the game won right there. It's not about who will win, because everyones had comebacks, the only way to award a win is if orb is ready to win the game RIGHT THERE which he had not done, and would not have done.
All of us at that LAN are americans, don't group us with you if you wont even pay attention to the commentary, the game, or the situation.
On September 27 2010 06:53 Ndugu wrote: I have to say that it sounds like Orb got dicked over.
I cannot honestly see any way he could have possibly lost that game, at all. Like the guy says-- his probes could have waged manly combat. Keep in mind he would be reinforcing RIGHT THERE while the Terran only had what army was with him. Orbs army would have been much larger when the engagement began, and unless the Terran won overwhelmingly, the next round of warp-ins would have mopped up.
That being said, it happens. Admins did their best, it was a slightly bad judgment, but the admins are in charge. You have to remain respectful to them even afterward. A re-game is safer than giving someone an unfair loss, and had Orb won, no one would be complaining. I'm all for BMing your opponent because I'm American and a douchebag, so i can't really comment on that. Treat the refs properly, though.
Obviously this should be a learning experience for admins everywhere. And for Blizzard. Why can't Tournament-games just pause when a DC occurs and resume when Bnet comes back up? Why isn't there LAN? So many people who's fault this is way before the admins or the players.
Talking to both players and coming up with an alternative, like map pick for the person at an advantage, would have been a cutesy move.
orbs army was smaller and would not have gotten bigger due to being 92/92 food and not having a pylon incoming. The only way to reproduce was to lose his army first, not to mention the 3 medivacs and MM group with stim would defeat that protoss army any day o f the week.
You clearly didn't pay attention to that game if you think he had the game won right there. It's not about who will win, because everyones had comebacks, the only way to award a win is if orb is ready to win the game RIGHT THERE which he had not done, and would not have done.
All of us at that LAN are americans, don't group us with you if you wont even pay attention to the commentary, the game, or the situation.
What grounds do you have to say that I didn't pay attention to any of that?
Sure, Orb might not have instantly won the game right there, if you don't consider holding off a borderline all-in attack while having 2 expansions running and decent tech "winning".
Like I said, the admins made their decision and I agree with their right to make it and Orb's consent to go along with it-- that doesn't mean I can't disagree with their decision.
You can't honestly see ANY way he would lose, thats my grounds. I'll paint a scenario where he loses for you, he loses his whole army after getting kited and medivacs healing him back up, 10 marauders with stim will take down his Nexus in maybe 10 volleys along with the marines, he runs up the ramp because orb built more stalkers in the attempts to not get kited/killed by the marauders, but unfortunately a wave of 4/8 stalkers will still lose to 10 stimmed marauders and 3 medivacs.
If you did pay attention to the video you'd know there is always a chance orb loses, he his ahead economically and behind in army comp and size.
On September 27 2010 07:58 ZlaSHeR wrote: You can't honestly see ANY way he would lose, thats my grounds. I'll paint a scenario where he loses for you, he loses his whole army after getting kited and medivacs healing him back up, 10 marauders with stim will take down his Nexus in maybe 10 volleys along with the marines, he runs up the ramp because orb built more stalkers in the attempts to not get kited/killed by the marauders, but unfortunately a wave of 4/8 stalkers will still lose to 10 stimmed marauders and 3 medivacs.
If you did pay attention to the video you'd know there is always a chance orb loses, he his ahead economically and behind in army comp and size.
There's always a chance for everything. There's a chance that, based on Orb's observations, the other player was going to develop a heart problem and they were gonna have to put the match on hold. Or that he waited a bit to engage and Orb had charge done and an increasing army size advantage.
In my opinion, it is so overwhelmingly likely that Orb would have won that he should have been awarded the victory. Once again, I was not an Admin, and I respect the Admins decisions, just like I hope mine would have been respected had I been an admin.
There's always a chance for everything. There's a chance that, based on Orb's observations, the other player was going to develop a heart problem and they were gonna have to put the match on hold. Or that he waited a bit to engage and Orb had charge done and an increasing army size advantage.
In my opinion, it is so overwhelmingly likely that Orb would have won that he should have been awarded the victory. Once again, I was not an Admin, and I respect the Admins decisions, just like I hope mine would have been respected had I been an admin.
Don't really care to debate this ad infinitum.
There's a chance that Orb loses his army, loses his natural. There's a chance he mis-micros. There's a chance IsAi never attacks and Orb rides his huge econ to a victory. There's a chance for everything.
I quoted you, and underlined and bolded the important word.
If you could replace that word with "certain" then a free-win can be given. IMO.
It really seems that orb was in tremendous position to take this game. Also, Isai had pretty terrible unit control in the first few minutes of this game. He lost a big force to take down a zealot. From what this replay shows, he would have to dramatically step up his game in order to properly micro the attack, if he were attacking right then.
However, what's done is done. Perhaps what needs to happen is a change in how tournaments handle disconnects. I think it was said that this one had no prior rules? Certainly in the future, tournaments need to be prepared for the reasonably likely disconnect possibility (Blizz... help make this a better e-sport game, add some support). Perhaps if one player has a large advantage (orb's advantage was rather large), and a disconnect occurs, that player should be allowed to choose the next map (as was mentioned before), because a fresh game is not fair. The player should be allowed to maintain some of their earned advantage into the regame, and a map choice would be a reasonable way to allow that.
-Orb- has drafted an apology. I honestly feel it's sincere, and want to share it here (having his permission to do so). I will be reviewing the next course of action with the rest of the moderation team. In fairness, it may not have been made 100% clear by myself to Orb that we were seeking apologies for the way he acted.
Ignore the wacky formatting, it's a pastebin.com thing...
4. Hello, this is orb. Micronesia was kind enough to offer me the ability to contact you all through him. 5.
6. I want to personally apologize to you all. While I still firmly disagree with the decision made during the cyberground tournament, it wasn't my tournament. It was your (the admins) tournament. You had every right to make whatever decision you wanted, regardless of the fairness of the decision. While I still feel personally wronged by the decision, I understand it wasn't done with the intention of wronging me. In that moment without a contingency plan it would be difficult for anyone to come up with a fair solution. Also, I understand it must have been difficult dealing with the fact that if you awarded me with the win some people would probably have viewed you as showing favoritism. 7.
8. As all of you know, I'm not the best at dealing with my anger. I can't help but think I've become my father as he used to flip out at minor inconveniences, but at this point I don't know how to deal with it. Getting mad at you when you were clearly in a difficult situation wasn't the right thing to do, and truthfully this entire ordeal should not have been placed on your shoulders (if Blizzard would give us LAN mode). While I still do not feel I owe IsAi one bit of an apology due to the amount of BM he displayed towards me both after and before this even happened, clearly none of you deserved that rage that I apparently felt the need to express. 9.
10. So many factors built up into the reason why I blew up (not the least of which being that I scheduled off work on a Saturday where I would have made over $300 to end up getting shafted out of the prize-pool by Blizzard's relentless anti-piracy), but that doesn't excuse it. To be honest, if I were in your shoes I'd probably ban me from coming to future LANs, as that kind of behavior and drama is only detrimental to non-Korean ESPORTS development. 11.
12. I'll leave the decision on whether to grant me any forgiveness up to you guys. Either way, I'm sorry. 13.
I've said multiple times here, and it hasn't changed, that I'm orb's friend. It is awesome for him to post an apology, and at least upon my behalf I know that I forgive him for his actions and understand his frustration. I'll leave it to the others to speak for themselves. It seems that he has completely understood why our decision was made, which is all I was trying to get towards the whole time.
The decision was not made to "shaft you of the prize pool" as everyone saw that Isai didn't get in the prize pool anyways, losing to Gretorp then LastShadow, two of the most difficult opponents in the tournament.
Along with that, the decision on the possibility of future LAN participation will probably be Rob's final decision, but knowing him, he will take input from everyone and see himself what the consensus may be.
We're sorry that it had to end that way orb, I know I would be frustrated as hell if that happened to me, but right now I'm pretty sure we have decided on the new course of action that will be implemented in the case of a battle.net drop, if it were to happen again, especially since a battle.net drop is nobodys fault but blizzards, which is different from an individual's disconnect at an "online" event.
I don't know how I feel about this whole Orb thing so I won't comment on that.
But he has a point in his apology that this very true. This should have never been placed on your shoulders. The no LAN functionality reared it's ugly head at the event we were casting the same day.
We had a dropped game that was razor close, but it may have cost someone that would have won a win. Aside for that we had to delay some games for 15 minutes during a massive lag storm on b.net and lost hundreds of viewers.
Piracy sucks, but at what point does the $ you would lose in sales outweigh the increased sales you would see in pushing SCII forward as an e-sport. MANY of our viewers for this event were new, and many were severely put off by the fact that this new game had problems that have an easy solution but it's not there.
It so seems like Blizz could implement a LAN feature through battle.net like they said they would like forever ago. You log on but once the game starts it's run p2p (or something like that) on the LAN. Why when my opponent is sitting 5 feet from me do I have to have all my data sent to the server (New York iirc)? Replay parsing is not a crazy thing when you are the developer of the game. When the game is over the replay gets parsed and all info added to b.net.
Without a LAN feature I cannot imagine SCII growing to it's full potential as an e-sport. Tons of major games will be forever marked with an asterisk due to game x being a drop game when player x probably would have won.
I'm glad to see Orb apologized however, it's not an easy thing to admit you were wrong.
I appreciate him taking responsibility for his misdeeds, but at the same time, wish he didn't try to further justify his actions in every sentence. The most heartfelt apologies I've heard in my life usually both start and end at "I'm sorry, I fucked up," not "but my dad used to explode, I skipped out on a $300 work day, I wouldn't have to act this way if there was LAN mode, and I still openly hate IsAi and am not able to be the better man and apologize despite receiving attitude."
While I sympathize with all but the last one I mentioned, an apology shouldn't be means to continuously argue your case or win the crowd over. Maybe I am wrong in interpreting it that way- it's hard to not read what he says without a predisposed bias, given his reputation.
At the very least, it's good to know that he's calmed himself down to a level where he's willing to admit guilt. I've met him on two occasions prior to the LAN, and he's been nothing but a nice guy, in person anyway. Obviously his reputation online is.. somewhat unique. In the automated banlist, it said that he was given many many many chances to correct his online persona, but this is the first time we've seen it in person. Therefore, I'm all for giving him a second chance in regards to LANs, now that he hopefully knows better. I still wish he would apologize to IsAi, but I, too, wish IsAi would apologize to him, if he did indeed start some shit.
On September 27 2010 14:06 ZlaSHeR wrote: I've said multiple times here, and it hasn't changed, that I'm orb's friend.
Aye. And I expressed this to ETT when he and I were chatting about it - I understand Orb's frustration and the only thing that was out of line was the lashing out at our person. I don't fault him for being pissed over it happening.
Orb is a great guy to hang with at the dinners, and this is really the first time anything went too far.
Along with that, the decision on the possibility of future LAN participation will probably be Rob's final decision, but knowing him, he will take input from everyone and see himself what the consensus may be.
I agree that it should really be Rob's decision, as he is the man-in-command for all these events. He sent me a PM asking my input on the whole deal, I imagine you got it as well...I am assuming he'll make a decision on it once he gets input from us.
Orb: I appreciate the apology. Like I said in a post back whenever, I've known you a long time, not going to let one bad spoil the good. I don't hold grudges 99.9% of the time, I don't intend to start now. As long as you don't continue to call us out on our decision, I don't have a problem with letting you continue to hang out or play in the tournaments. Nobody is perfect (ourselves included) and it was a less-than-great (aka shit) situation...we handled it as best as we could, and it seems like you understand that now.
The only thing I want to see that hasn't been stressed at all (Edit: Nokarot just said it above me), I want to make sure anything between you and IsAi (KamuL on TL) is gone and you're both good w/ each other. IsAi, if you got BM on him, own up to it now...I don't want you and Orb to have any grudges with each other in any future events. You're both great players and fun to hang with, I'd hate for this issue to keep re-surfacing every time you two meet.
Thanks again for coming back with an apology, Orb. A lot of us were somewhat worried that we lost a friendship over something as BS as a BNET DC.
Before any final decision will be made I would love to hear from both Geno and Isai if they wish to respond.
Isai I'm sure will continue to be a part of possible tournaments in the area in the future. For Orb to not apologize at all to Isai, and specifically state that, does matter in this case, especially considering the amount of lashing out Orb did against Isai publicly in the tournament thread. Orb and Isai's personal business should be kept between Orb and Isai but by the kind of posting Orb did during the tournament in the thread for anyone to see made it more than just Orb and Isai's business. Any possible underlying issues or problems that may exist between the two will absolutely factor into any decisions made regarding Orb's involvement moving forward.
If Geno and Isai haven't responded or don't wish to respond before noon or so tomorrow expect my statement then.
Isai didn't BM him, orb was starting off on game 3 about how imba LT is for terrans and that its BM to pick a map in the map pool, go figure. When the games were over and orb was going off on isai, he didn't say anything back he was just sitting there, eventually went outside for a smoke but he definitely wasn't the one being BM. orb also considered looking at replays of the other games BM, and changing to a fast expand in the game 4 as BM.
And to Toren, yes I got the PM, gave him what I think is the best option, he also has an opinion on the best option, and he'll put yours and Geno's together, but its not like he'll override something if he disagrees with the three of us, Rob will make his decision based on consensus.
And to Toren, yes I got the PM, gave him what I think is the best option, he also has an opinion on the best option, and he'll put yours and Geno's together, but its not like he'll override something if he disagrees with the three of us, Rob will make his decision based on consensus.
What I meant, I guess I just worded it stupidly. lol.
On September 27 2010 15:29 ZlaSHeR wrote: Isai didn't BM him, orb was starting off on game 3 about how imba LT is for terrans and that its BM to pick a map in the map pool, go figure. When the games were over and orb was going off on isai, he didn't say anything back he was just sitting there, eventually went outside for a smoke but he definitely wasn't the one being BM. orb also considered looking at replays of the other games BM, and changing to a fast expand in the game 4 as BM.
I think orb said that IsAi started the BM in games 1-2 and/or battle.net chat (the latter of which wouldn't appear in the replay obviously.)
I don't really see how orb would lose this game TBH. His rage was pretty understandable. Even if the admins would rather not give the win to the player with the massive advantage, he should've at least been given choice of map or something for the regame.
Eh. There's no reason anyone should let orb off of this as long as he doesn't apologize Isai for all the shit that he has spewed towards him. It's ludicrous that he even thinks that he's justified regardless of whether Isai was BM to him or not (which other witnesses seem not to agree with). He's so adamant to completely disregard the person who was subject to his antics. It's really a crapshoot apology because he's absolutely refusing to apologize to the person who he should be apologizing the most to.
On September 27 2010 16:25 FawkingGoomba wrote: I don't really see how orb would lose this game TBH. His rage was pretty understandable. Even if the admins would rather not give the win to the player with the massive advantage, he should've at least been given choice of map or something for the regame.
Did you read the thread? It was said by us, and a TON of other people that we fucked up in that aspect. We get it. Stop reiterating the same thing over and over again.
I got a great idea, guys. Let's start up the argument all over again. Everyone is going to have a different view on what should have happened/who was going to win. There's no point in bringing it back up as it's done and over with now.
On September 27 2010 16:25 FawkingGoomba wrote: I don't really see how orb would lose this game TBH. His rage was pretty understandable. Even if the admins would rather not give the win to the player with the massive advantage, he should've at least been given choice of map or something for the regame.
For the next LAN, I plan on unleashing a contingency plan so epic that it shall be copyrighted the "Zlasher method of battle.net disconnects". I'll release the idea when the time is right ;o
as for Isai, if you guys saw him there he handled it exactly how he should have. Wait for the admins to make a call, go along with the call, play it out, go outside and have a smoke. No yelling, no raising voices, no name calling or anything, just go about your business.
The 100% exists for situations that are 100% clear. Though orb had a big advantage this was in absolutely no way fully decided. When talking about a player who cannot lose the game you're talking about situations where one player could happily make a move-command mistake lose a bunch of units and still roll his opponent over no problem. In this game in particular I would even go as far as that if this was a good terran player vs a good protoss player that the terran army rolls him over every time. The game was in no way decided although orb had a large advantage (also due to skill).
I will never understand getting angry at frustrated at well-willing tournament organizers. Hosting tournaments is a very hard, but also unrewarding job. I see someone mention if you don't have rules in place against disconnects you are not fit to host tournaments.. I don't even think OGN/MSL have publicly stated rules about this. Either way to have disconnects happen at this rate at LAN tournaments is a pretty new situation and it's going to take a while before every tournament out there understands that Bnet is so fucked up that these rules absolutely need to be in place. But even if they weren't in place and they refer to what imo are the best rules out there (TL rules) then they still made the right decision.
On September 27 2010 16:25 FawkingGoomba wrote: I don't really see how orb would lose this game TBH. His rage was pretty understandable. Even if the admins would rather not give the win to the player with the massive advantage, he should've at least been given choice of map or something for the regame.
We can recreate the same situation on bnet if you'd like. After watching that replay multiple times, I changed my mind about the outcome of the game. I don't know how good Isai's micro is, but I do know at least some terrans could win that fight and actually kill the natural.
2 Nazgul: iirc the "default" disconnect rule is:
1. regame if both players agree to regame 2. if they do not agree, tournament admin makes the decision
I'm not sure if that's the same as TL rules. Everything happened exactly as it was supposed to. Players disagreed, officials made the decision, tourny went on.
Okay well that is a fine rule for a small tournament that doesn't want to invest hours upon hours to create a ruleset. Definitely not like the TL rules. Our rules say that you have to have the game 100% won in order to get a win for a disconnect.
On September 27 2010 17:32 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: Okay well that is a fine rule for a small tournament that doesn't want to invest hours upon hours to create a ruleset. Definitely not like the TL rules. Our rules say that you have to have the game 100% won in order to get a win for a disconnect.
How is that mutually exclusive with what I've written?
How can a game ever be 100% won? If the person in the advantage gets a heart attack and the other person has a command center adn 50 minerals, doesn't that mean he wins?
This is why the rule either has to be always 100% regame (meh) or have a group of admins come to an agreement on the result of the game (usually this happens) but then THAT gets arbitrary when a line is drawn and the admins are split, or it is a close decision
On September 28 2010 00:59 ZlaSHeR wrote: How can a game ever be 100% won? If the person in the advantage gets a heart attack and the other person has a command center adn 50 minerals, doesn't that mean he wins?
This is why the rule either has to be always 100% regame (meh) or have a group of admins come to an agreement on the result of the game (usually this happens) but then THAT gets arbitrary when a line is drawn and the admins are split, or it is a close decision
Well, I like to believe in a thing called common sense.
Common sense mixed with good SC2 knowledge should be able to weed out the answers to most of these disputes.
Watched the replay, orb had the advantage, but did he have the game? No. Regame was the best possible solution, on the other hand if Isai really did act like orb said he did, then I do kinda understand his anger.
Ok first of all I'd like to give a big thanks for everyone who's responded and given input into the situation, especially Torenhire, Zlasher, GenoZStriker and Nokarot who were in attendance when it happened. This was not an easy situation. In fact in the nearly 2 years that I've been hosting lans and coordinating tournaments I can probably say this was the most difficult situation that has arisen and I've had to deal with.
As people may know, I didn't run the tournament alone, nor did I ever want to. Torenhire was appointed rules official before the day of the tournament and GenoZStriker came on a little later and ended up being our third officially appointed admin before any of the games started for the tournament. While I may be the final ultimate authority because I am the event coordinator, I will never be a dictator. I am always committed to making decisions that are fair and correct. So I will always ask others opinions in order to try and fully understand situations like this, because lan events, tournaments and anything else I run or coordinate are ultimately for TL and the Starcraft community. A fun enjoyable event for everyone is always my primary focus when coordinating anything for the community. This was a very difficult situation that was brought on ultimately by an error with Battle.net which is outside both the players and the administrations control. The fact that this even had to happen was not a result of anyone but Blizzards wrong doing. Neither Orb, Isai, the tournament lan center, or administration was at fault for the problem that caused this situation to happen.
I can fully accept Orbs apology.
While I am disappointed in how he reacted, specifically things he said to Isai and the administration in the tournament thread I do realize Orb is a very competitive and outspoken player. I've known this for about as long as I've known Orb which dates back to well before Starcraft 2 or his stream. That being said there are lines that cannot be crossed. Accusing and not respecting the administration during a tournament, flaming and throwing hostile statements to a fellow tournament player is totally unacceptable behavior that I won't tolerate during competitive events that I coordinate. Orb has apologized for all of this and I and the administration fully accepts it. The administration never wanted to wrong anyone, we simply did what we thought was best and most fair at the time regardless of any possible personal bias or player reputation. Our primary focus as an administration team was and will continue to be providing as fair a competition as possible, treating and respecting all players competing as equals.
TL has already issued a 30 day ban for his actions on Saturday. Regardless of if TL reviews his ban duration and lowers it because of this apology the only further disciplinary action I deem necessary on my part is to issue a stern warning. Because Orb has attended so many events in the past and handled himself professionally during those events I feel a stern warning is necessary in this situation. Actions like we saw on Saturday will not be tolerated. I expect players to treat each other with respect and dignity. I also expect players to respect the decisions made by the administration team. These are basic principles I would expect any player competing in my events to follow. If anything of this nature happens again Orb can expect a full ban from future events and tournaments that I coordinate.
Orb is fully invited to continue being a part of D.C area events and tournaments. One rough situation like this will not be allowed to sever what has been a positive relationship with Orb up to this point. I also would like to say at this time that I personally enjoyed having Orb attend events in the past. We both share a passion for the game and the community, I respect what he's done for the TL community, his stream has been immensely popular, he's done shows in the past, offered strategy advice, has contributed to Liquipedia, provided amazing and lengthy coverage during beta, and I'm sure he has done more that I don't know.
In conclusion I would like to say I run events for the players, if the players are not happy I am not happy. I am always open to any and all suggestions anyone has for improving events or tournaments and hope to have many positive experiences moving into the future with Orb and all of TL.
On September 28 2010 00:59 ZlaSHeR wrote: How can a game ever be 100% won? If the person in the advantage gets a heart attack and the other person has a command center adn 50 minerals, doesn't that mean he wins?
This is why the rule either has to be always 100% regame (meh) or have a group of admins come to an agreement on the result of the game (usually this happens) but then THAT gets arbitrary when a line is drawn and the admins are split, or it is a close decision
I'm sorry, but how is that even an argument? If a game is at a point where without a doubt, forgoing some MAJOR disaster, won by some person then they should be aptly rewarded for the win. 100% right decision by everyone involved imo.
Just in case you aren't convinced let's analyze your analogy a bit further, assume we round to the nearest one here. Think of how many games have been played on B.net, and how many of them end in heart attacks, house fires, spontaneous combustion, ect. - then follow this formula:
(# of games ended in catastrophic failure/ # of games played) *100%
ex. (15/10000000)*100%= 0%
That should give you the picture of how often this needs to be worried about. I mean, seriously... :p
For the record I was completely GM towards Orb (well I never BM'd him) during our first 3 games.. although I may have cheesed/all-in 3 games I never once said anything wrong towards him in or out of the game in fact I saw it as something awesome(not a fan just heard of him) that I got to play vs him -_- .. it wasn't until game 3 - his start of the game comments where I realized his choice of words .. it was USEast all over again -.- -- then theres the fact that he "raged" and kept trying to push that disconnect win somewhat angered me and I may have gotten somewhat out of hand during game 4 but it was never direct BM at all. more just a IsAi: gg gl orb: F*ck ur smiley and me gging for him.. and then him thowing mass bm words at me.. all i said was "cry about it" because he kept going on and on -.- eventually i just agreed to everything he said to me -.- and let him have his fun bming me on and on while i took it. game was over and he brought the situation in person out loud.. Its fine that he doesnt feel he owes me an apology. If anything I apologize to him for the awesome smiley face I gave him before game 4. He apologys to the right people anyway ------ although bringing out words and everything out loud in person... Speak like that to the wrong guy and you might regret it one day. practice self control - I have ACTUAL anger issues -.- did i go and say/attempt anything dumb? no i didnt.
what did i do? i walked outside and calmed down simple -_-
On September 28 2010 00:59 ZlaSHeR wrote: How can a game ever be 100% won? If the person in the advantage gets a heart attack and the other person has a command center adn 50 minerals, doesn't that mean he wins?
This is why the rule either has to be always 100% regame (meh) or have a group of admins come to an agreement on the result of the game (usually this happens) but then THAT gets arbitrary when a line is drawn and the admins are split, or it is a close decision
I'm sorry, but how is that even an argument? If a game is at a point where without a doubt, forgoing some MAJOR disaster, won by some person then they should be aptly rewarded for the win. 100% right decision by everyone involved imo.
Just in case you aren't convinced let's analyze your analogy a bit further, assume we round to the nearest one here. Think of how many games have been played on B.net, and how many of them end in heart attacks, house fires, spontaneous combustion, ect. - then follow this formula:
(# of games ended in catastrophic failure/ # of games played) *100%
ex. (15/10000000)*100%= 0%
That should give you the picture of how often this needs to be worried about. I mean, seriously... :p
It is an argument in that, don't use the word 100% in a rulebook. No matter what that % is though there will always be arguments when one person can argue they were 99% won or 95% won or 90% winning the game.
I know what's 100% right now, this thread. Everyone who wanted to respond to orbs apology did. Debate over the issue or anything related could go on forever and get nobody anywhere.
Please close this thread and if a mod (ETT) can keep us posted in here if TL reevaluates the 30 day temp ban that would be awesome.
I actually was like "no way terran can recover unless he gets a good drop off"
*reactored starport has 2 medivacs pop out*
I agree orb was ahead. I agree he shouldn't have acted the way he acted, and that is was both childish and unprofessional. Would I have done the same thing, and raged? Possibly. I'm not wearing his shoes.
After watching the vod, though, I am in agreement with the officials, though sort of displeased. Orb has reason to be mad, as he was up a base and near to the point where he had a cemented win, but it's his own fault for throwing away 3-4 stalkers while even expanding at all. If your opponent throws away 7 scvs, why atk? You lost 1 zealot, he lost 7 scvs, numerous marauders and marines. Why do you even feel the need to attack? If you're going to expand, do so with your superior army. If you're going to attack, use those 400 minerals for more units I know attacking while expanding is common, but this is one scenario I disagree with it. Pick one here, imo.
I'll get back on point: Orb's main was pretty much undefended, and the terran had a big ball ready to be dropped (though I doubt he was going to do this). He could have dropped the main, killed probes, and attacked the natural with stimmed marauders when orb went to his main to fend off the drop. It's all speculation, but the terran COULD HAVE WON, which should end the discussion as to whether or not the tournament officials made the right decision - they did.
It is in stark contrast how well LuckyFool has handled this situation to how Orb did. I feel bad for the guy, have always liked him if he's the orb I knew from sc1, and am glad he drafted a formal apology, but if there's one thing I've learned from all of this, it is that LuckyFool is one cool cucumber.
I think right now is a time to reflect on a similar circumsatance: How about artosis vs slush? That was an even bigger tournament( I think, right?) and Artosis lost because of a disconnect. But he let Slush have the win and they even played a second game later. While he may have flamed there, that was at the heat of the moment, while Orb has been flaming for a while.
On September 28 2010 07:10 Pandain wrote: I think right now is a time to reflect on a similar circumsatance: How about artosis vs slush? That was an even bigger tournament( I think, right?) and Artosis lost because of a disconnect. But he let Slush have the win and they even played a second game later. While he may have flamed there, that was at the heat of the moment, while Orb has been flaming for a while.
Basically its just a shitty situation that can only be fixed by implementing LAN capability. Of course if someone has an advantage and the game drops they aren't going to be happy with a re-game, but that's just what has to be done. I really hope Blizzard can work something out to allow LAN owners and the hosts of major tournaments to have access to LAN, while still keeping everyone else on b.net to combat piracy.
On September 28 2010 07:10 Pandain wrote: I think right now is a time to reflect on a similar circumsatance: How about artosis vs slush? That was an even bigger tournament( I think, right?) and Artosis lost because of a disconnect. But he let Slush have the win and they even played a second game later. While he may have flamed there, that was at the heat of the moment, while Orb has been flaming for a while.
Can't award Artosis the win when it was HIM who disconnected though. This one wasn't Isai's fault it was battle.nets
On September 28 2010 05:15 LuckyFool wrote: Please close this thread and if a mod (ETT) can keep us posted in here if TL reevaluates the 30 day temp ban that would be awesome.
We've discussed it in the mod forum; we're going to have orb serve out his 30 days in full. Despite the apology after the fact, orb still needs to be held accountable for his behavior in this and prior incidents. We do not want to set the standard that being BM so long as you apologize afterwards is "ok", but we want to completely discourage him from being BM in the first place.