Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (95 users) | |
|
| Zarahtra Iceland. April 10 2012 02:06. Posts 3248 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 01:56 Noobity wrote:The way I see it, if a player wants to say "Hey, that game was too close, lets regame" or "Hey dude, you have your workers rallied to a drone, wanna start over? I know this stuff can be stressful  " then there's nothing at all wrong with allowing it. However, these are occasions where the player has to take that initiative before the admins make a decision. Otherwise, absolutely every call should be the decision of the admins.
Then how about, "Hey I spawned at the wrong spot, lets regame" or "Hey you scouted me first, lets regame"? Then you can add in less honorable goals like I said above your post such as "Hey you scouted me first, lets regame, else I cannot cheese you and make it look like it wasn't an agreement beforehand". Paranoid, maybe, but you are opening a big can of worms when you allow the players to have this kind of control over their series.
If a player makes a mistake in his game, he needs to accept that mistake and try to come out of that mistake the best he can. I mean players make a mistake all the time, get supply blocked, forget crucial upgrades etc, surely everyone can see how stupid it'd be if Demu or another GM player would offer a regame every time that would happen. |
|
|
| Azzur Australia. April 10 2012 02:08. Posts 5839 | Profile Blog # |
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.Last edit: 2012-04-10 02:09:05 |
| |
|
| LittleAtari Jordan. April 10 2012 02:19. Posts 1071 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 01:56 Noobity wrote:
I'd like to point out that Scarlett ended up winning the series against Demuslim. He offered, as a show of good sportsmanship and faith, the option for an opponent who was clearly on his level to take back a derp move. If anything, I'd say him not offering the regame would hamper the integrity of the match, as the "better player" won (I'd also like to stress that I don't necessarily believe that Scarlett is better than Demuslim, but it kind of helps my point). Obviously the argument can be made that Demuslim would have never made that mistake in the first place, but I'm dealing in hypotheticals anyway.
A win is a win. How you press the keys, which ones you press and for whatever reason all ties into your skill. So I would argue that we actually didnt get to see who actually played better because of DeMuslim offering the regame. |
| |
|
| THM Bulgaria. April 10 2012 02:30. Posts 968 | Profile # |
| I completely agree with the OP. |
| |
|
| Zaqwe April 10 2012 02:30. Posts 304 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 01:56 Noobity wrote:I'd like to point out that Scarlett ended up winning the series against Demuslim. He offered, as a show of good sportsmanship and faith, the option for an opponent who was clearly on his level to take back a derp move. If anything, I'd say him not offering the regame would hamper the integrity of the match, as the "better player" won (I'd also like to stress that I don't necessarily believe that Scarlett is better than Demuslim, but it kind of helps my point). Obviously the argument can be made that Demuslim would have never made that mistake in the first place, but I'm dealing in hypotheticals anyway. The way I see it, if a player wants to say "Hey, that game was too close, lets regame" after a disconnect or "Hey dude, you have your workers rallied to a drone, wanna start over? I know this stuff can be stressful " then there's nothing at all wrong with allowing it. However, these are occasions where the player has to take that initiative before the admins make a decision. Otherwise, absolutely every call should be the decision of the admins. While I agree that we should be professional about the games, I think that the players are the ones that make it what it is 9 times out of 10. And if someone wants to go out of their way to do something extremely good mannered, we should allow them. In defense of Demuslim's example, I'd argue that he essentially gave scarlett the opportunity to get any offers she has. Sure, beating Terious is huge, beating Ddoro is big too, but beating Demuslim and then taking Oz to 3 very good games shows she's on a level above the average player that goes to these tournaments. This kind of thing wouldn't happen if we were ironclad against all sorts of manner in game. EDITed: part about disconnect
Demuslim obviously made some mistakes in the following games which he lost (if he played perfectly he would have won, right?) so why doesn't he get to take back whatever mistakes he made which cost him the games? Shouldn't each player get an equal number of retries?
And I dispute that it is good manner to treat your opponent like a toddler who needs special second privileges that any other player would not get. It seems very BM to me. BM to the opponent who is being treated as an inferior, BM to the tournament organizers whose head you went over to create your own rules, and BM to other participants in the tournament who could be impacted by the fudged results.
It's also not fair to anyone who makes the same mistake in a different match against a different opponent and doesn't get the same treatment.
This sort of thing undermines the whole tournament. I get that he was just trying to be nice, but it's supposed to be a serious competition not a casual hand holding playdate. |
|
|
| Zaqwe April 10 2012 02:33. Posts 304 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
Where should the line be drawn? If both players agree to talk in game, any rules against talking should be thrown out? If both agree to play a BO5 instead of a BO3 should that be allowed? If they make their own schedule, that's okay as long as both agree?
What if they decide to play brood war instead of SC2? It's okay, because they both agree? |
|
|
| Bedrock United States. April 10 2012 02:50. Posts 376 | Profile # |
You bring in new conditionals on ruling of games, this is what happens.. a disastrous discussion about what people think is right or wrong. This is why there needs to be a "council", where they can set penalties on players if they don't act accordingly. Without a ruling council, you will always have different sets of people saying this is right or this is wrong.
Now, the game is still fairly new, and we have obviously not seen everything there is to see, but if these critical situations continue to arise and a governing body was in place they could keep records of it all to either penalize/ban/kick from tourney/whatever depending on the severity of the player's action(s).
My two cents. :/
|
| | eSports or die tryin' |  |
|
|
| Dazz3 Sweden. April 10 2012 03:05. Posts 24 | Profile # |
I agree 100% with the original post. I've been in the position several times as a player and you always feel like a jerk when you get asked if you want to take the free win so you almost never do it.
On April 09 2012 07:14 Doso wrote:
And that is a problem because... ?
If I can reslove 50%+ of those problems by simply asking the players, a little "pressure" is the least of my problems. They are getting paid for being professionals - handling pressure is part of the job.
Honestly, not to offend you but if you cant handle the pressure of being an admin and take the heat you shouldn't be an admin. Last edit: 2012-04-10 03:06:07 |
|
|
| Kuskinator United Kingdom. April 10 2012 03:19. Posts 43 | Profile # |
I fully agree with the OP, and will add my opinions even though chances are they will just be buried in what will become a very large thread.
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it.
I disagree. Now that it's happened once and you leave in the possibility of it happening again, at any point in the future that a player doesn't offer the regame then he/she will be looked down upon because "demuslim did it, why didn't you?". I think what Demuslim did was very good sportsmanship, but he should have just thrown the next game rather than get a regame. This is type of sportsmanship does happen in other sports albeit rather rare.
Where would you draw the line if you did allow "mistakes" like this? Should there be a regame if a Zerg accidentally makes 2 Hydra/Roach dens? Someone Pylon blocks their own Nexus? Just take the decision away from the players. If they feel that strongly they can play poorly and/or throw the next game - there should never ever be any pressure for someone to do this no matter how big the mistake.
With the MKP/Parting situation - I didn't see it but from what I've read and the screen shots I've seen it does sound like GOM had people analysing the replay and could not come to a 100% conclusion that MKP was going to lose. There are many situations where at a certain point in a game it looks 100% like player "x" will lose, but later on through sheer skill or mistake by the opponent player "x" actually wins (MKP has been on both sides of this situation before). MKP didn't think the game was over otherwise he would have GG'd already.
Let's say in this example the players were asked. Parting was obviously in a good position so would want the win. If MKP agrees he's a "mannered" guy, but could potentially cost his team the trophy and prestige of winning. If MKP demands a regame, he is seen as "BM" but has now won the trophy for his entire team - but it is tarnished because there was a regame.
It's a difficult decision to put the team coach and/or player in - so the admins rightly took charge, looked over replays and came to a conclusion.
Clearly defined and enforced rules before the tournament starts is a must. "15 minutes late, forfeit game 1. Forfeit another game every additional 5 minutes late" is the sort of rule that should be 100% enforced. If the player on time wants to forfeit G2 to even things up then he should do that within the game (worker rush/sloppy play) - but it should not be expected.
There are 3 states of "mannered":
Well mannered (gifting opponent a game to level things up).
Bad mannered (showing up late).
Neutral (playing within the rules).
Please do not mistake neutral with bad-mannered. |
|
|
| Too_MuchZerg Finland. April 10 2012 03:21. Posts 2727 | Profile Blog # |
When referee makes decision he/she must keep that and not change it (unless clearly wrong rule used)
Firefist vs Backho (OSL RO36 BW) is classic thing that player has to choose manner route even though Backho "zizi yo" anticipating firefist typing "GG" because game was over. KeSPA referee asked opinions from players and firefist had no option than to accept loss. KeSPA changed rules few month later whoever types "gg" first loses that map they are plaing.Last edit: 2012-04-10 03:29:04 |
| |
|
| felisconcolori United States. April 10 2012 03:24. Posts 2525 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
Common sense, despite what you think, is often neither common, nor makes any sense. Logic on the other hand...
The Demuslim - Scarlett situation isn't really an issue. No matter how manner you want to say Demu was, it does nothing to wipe away the actual effect of the first game. You could amend the series to be 1-2 in results; being told "oh, you made a mistake? Let's just regame" doesn't do much for the state of mind, of a competitor knowing that they just got stomped because they made a mistake. It will shake their confidence, and make them focus more in the following games. If anything, Demu may have shot himself in the foot - not played his best in the next game because hey, his opponent "lost that game because of mistake no progamer should ever make. Maybe this Scarlett person is all hype, I should take this ezpz".
Demu shouldn't have offered the regame, they should've in any case coordinated with a ref, but it doesn't change the end result if you take all three games into consideration. Demu maybe a nice guy... or he could be condescending towards a female rookie gamer depending on what's inside his mind when he does it. (I'm thinking "nice guy", although Demuslim has proven he can troll just fine.) Players should not be consulted by Refs unless the Ref is looking for specifically information. Players should not be making agreements outside of tournament rules and referee oversight that could conceivably effect tournament match outcomes. There's a word for that... what is it... hmmm... |
| | Opteron- "fyeah prime." Yes, I email sponsors... to thank them. Don't post drunk, kids. |  |
|
|
| Assirra Belgium. April 10 2012 04:04. Posts 3198 | Profile # |
On April 09 2012 07:14 Doso wrote:
And that is a problem because... ?
If I can reslove 50%+ of those problems by simply asking the players, a little "pressure" is the least of my problems. They are getting paid for being professionals - handling pressure is part of the job.
And if you are admin/ref you are paid to do your job which is making decisions. That is YOUR job not the players. |
| |
|
| Assirra Belgium. April 10 2012 04:06. Posts 3198 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
If the players come to an agreement eh?
"Hey man, i will just 6pool you 3times in a row and at the end we just split the money"
admin "since you both came to an agreement this is ok" |
| |
|
| KawaiiRice United States. April 10 2012 05:50. Posts 2807 | Profile Blog # |
They should have a panel of unbiased pros to help make a decision... Dunno if people admining have any idea about the game
Although its a bit hard to find if those people are friends with people in question |
| | っ( ≧▽≦)/ Playing T and Z~ \(≧ω≦ ) || @MYiKawaiiRice |  |
|
|
 Myles United States. April 10 2012 05:58. Posts 4072 | Profile Blog # |
On April 10 2012 04:06 Assirra wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
If the players come to an agreement eh? "Hey man, i will just 6pool you 3times in a row and at the end we just split the money" admin "since you both came to an agreement this is ok"
Easy there buddy. You made a hard left turn when you brought up players rigging games to get certain outcomes as compared with one player trying to be 'fair' and 'manner' when something outside the game changes the outcome. |
| |
|
| Assirra Belgium. April 10 2012 06:18. Posts 3198 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 04:06 Assirra wrote:
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
If the players come to an agreement eh? "Hey man, i will just 6pool you 3times in a row and at the end we just split the money" admin "since you both came to an agreement this is ok"
Easy there buddy. You made a hard left turn when you brought up players rigging games to get certain outcomes as compared with one player trying to be 'fair' and 'manner' when something outside the game changes the outcome.
I just took his logic and put it on a different lvl showing that it doesn't work.
the referees are there for a reason, it is their job to decide, not the players. |
| |
|
| Chemist391 United States. April 10 2012 06:25. Posts 231 | Profile # |
I feel like there have been a few implicit references to the eP.Gimix vs WhiteRa match at MLG Anaheim last year.
Some facts about that incident:
WhiteRa was (for whatever reason) late for the match. MLG refs DQ'd him. Gimix protested the decision. The refs ignored Gimix and DQ'd WhiteRa. ie, player input was not considered.
The part everybody remembers where Gimix threw the first 2 games against WhiteRa occurred the next day when they *coincidentally* met again in the losers-bracket. Because they had already met, there was an extended series Bo7 where Gimix began with a 2-0 advantage. |
| |
|
| EnderSword Canada. April 10 2012 06:40. Posts 546 | Profile # |
On April 10 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 04:06 Assirra wrote:
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
If the players come to an agreement eh? "Hey man, i will just 6pool you 3times in a row and at the end we just split the money" admin "since you both came to an agreement this is ok"
Easy there buddy. You made a hard left turn when you brought up players rigging games to get certain outcomes as compared with one player trying to be 'fair' and 'manner' when something outside the game changes the outcome.
Nothing about the DeMus/Scarlett situation was 'out of the game'
The mistake was 100% in game, and 100% a valid fuck up.
Re-gaming it is probably the most literal 'rigging the game' situation we've had in a long time.
Also with the agreement stuff, someone initiates that conversation, allowing the possibility for 'agreement' lets there be pressure.
Conceding or GGing out of a game is fine because it's unilateral. You're not asking your opponent 'May I gg?' you just 'GG'
Anything that requires player input on the other guy shouldn't be allowed
|
| | Bronze/Silver/Gold level Guides - www.youtube.com/user/EnderSword |
|
|
| Myles United States. April 10 2012 06:44. Posts 4072 | Profile Blog # |
On April 10 2012 06:18 Assirra wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:
On April 10 2012 04:06 Assirra wrote:
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
If the players come to an agreement eh? "Hey man, i will just 6pool you 3times in a row and at the end we just split the money" admin "since you both came to an agreement this is ok"
Easy there buddy. You made a hard left turn when you brought up players rigging games to get certain outcomes as compared with one player trying to be 'fair' and 'manner' when something outside the game changes the outcome.
I just took his logic and put it on a different lvl showing that it doesn't work. the referees are there for a reason, it is their job to decide, not the players.
Except you took 'players coming to an agreement' out of context and applied it to a situation it was never meant for. Your level and his level are in two different universes and not comparable at all.
A player agreeing to regame instead of taking the win in a situation you had no control over is like fighting up a weight class. Yea, you aren't playing exactly by the rules, but it's allowed because you're not gaining an advantage nor compromising the competitive integrity. And I find it hard to think of ways you could exploit it. |
| |
|
| Myles United States. April 10 2012 06:48. Posts 4072 | Profile Blog # |
On April 10 2012 06:40 EnderSword wrote:
Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 05:58 Myles wrote:
On April 10 2012 04:06 Assirra wrote:
On April 10 2012 02:08 Azzur wrote:
So much discussion here... But really, I think we should apply the best rule - common sense.
If the players come to an agreement, then organisers should let the players decide - e.g. in the DeMuslim situation, if he offered a re-game, then let the players do it. I think it's ridiculous to force a player to accept a win if they offer something. The player can be congratulated for being manner, but people must realise that such an action is out of the ordinary and shouldn't be expected.
There should be ZERO obligations on a player to offer anything. If the opponent makes a bad mistake, then if they want to play on, then it should be the normal. Anything else, it should be the referees decision. Player decision only comes into play when they agree to it.
If the players come to an agreement eh? "Hey man, i will just 6pool you 3times in a row and at the end we just split the money" admin "since you both came to an agreement this is ok"
Easy there buddy. You made a hard left turn when you brought up players rigging games to get certain outcomes as compared with one player trying to be 'fair' and 'manner' when something outside the game changes the outcome.
Nothing about the DeMus/Scarlett situation was 'out of the game' The mistake was 100% in game, and 100% a valid fuck up. Re-gaming it is probably the most literal 'rigging the game' situation we've had in a long time. Also with the agreement stuff, someone initiates that conversation, allowing the possibility for 'agreement' lets there be pressure. Conceding or GGing out of a game is fine because it's unilateral. You're not asking your opponent 'May I gg?' you just 'GG' Anything that requires player input on the other guy shouldn't be allowed
I'll admit I'm not familiar with the Demulism incident, I was just speaking in general. But either way, I still don't see how this makes it any more possible to rig games than it already is. |
| |
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
