|
Post by alexcherbourg on Jan 6, 2007 20:44:59 GMT -5
I request here victory for the CCC even renaissance in name of team MDR vs ..A..
We took two cities - the same turn - to wanggon but he didn t die because there was no two cities elimination activated.
In this case, good sportsmanship would make anyone conceed, but they don't care about fair victories and asked to continue and to play it for score. It s obviously uneasy to come back in score 19 turns before the end when u built only a small number of cities and slaved them to hell to maximize the number of units.
But in the end, after 6 hours of play, we finish 75 points behind them, even though they kept ironizing about us the last turns to keep us disturbed. I have to say if I didn't have their spam in the screen I'd probably have managed to gather my thoughts to make more points.
By spirit I feel the winner of this game of course but all in all they got lead to next round which is really unfair. I play this competition to be confronted to the best teams and got deprived of this just because of a mistake in the settings.
It was not the only mistake in the settings - there were also barbarians activated.
At creation, noone paid attention to settings because opponent team, ..A.., picked two isabella in their team and they didn't seem to want to fix it.
Then, the game started and I lost a city. A few turns later, Cankaban (..A..) noticed that barbarians were activated and lost a worker to them and paused the game to complain.
I asked if they wanted a rehost but Cankaban answered "No it would be unfair because you are one city down". So we continued.
45 minutes laters, Cankaban pauses the game again and asks a rehost. Obviously we weren't in mood for it since it had been decided to continue the game earlier. TD said to continue and we did, but Cankaban said he couldn't keep playing the game and asked for a sub.
Later on, we take two cities to Wanggon the same turn. We re really not on the same register as barbarians - which can annoy both teams. Taking two cities usually mean victory. But he didn t die (see above), and we continue with 300 points late. (it s turn 19 before the end).
We took three more cities later on, one of which couldn t be deleted on time because it wasn t auto destruction (we managed to kill on time the other cities though), including one more city to the "ghost" wanggon.
All in all, it s why I m asking for victory in this game.
|
|
|
Post by Levi on Jan 6, 2007 21:42:17 GMT -5
When you clicked ready, you accepted the settings. That is your fault. Perhaps if you had checked the settings, and corrected them before you clicked ready, you would have won. Who knows. You made a mistake which contributed to your loss. Consider this a learning experience.
As far as I am concerned, the outcome of this stands as is.
|
|
|
Post by eiffel on Jan 6, 2007 21:48:55 GMT -5
Mmm, a player loses 2 cities in a 2 cities elim event, still plays and you say go on, play it "ironman-like" ? weird... I wonder why MDR has accepted to go on
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Jan 6, 2007 21:52:21 GMT -5
When you clicked ready, you accepted the settings. That is your fault. Perhaps if you had checked the settings, and corrected them before you clicked ready, you would have won. Who knows. You made a mistake which contributed to your loss. Consider this a learning experience. As far as I am concerned, the outcome of this stands as is. 1) who was host? 2) who was TD? 3) that has to be the weakest statement I have ever seen from a TD (of this event or otherwise). So, lets say someone flips settings and produces some comotion and the game starts... then that is how it goes? WTF? Why do we go to the lengths to set up rules/settings for EACH event? Levi, your sorry ass reply is almost as weak as the team not accepting their loss as to the POSTED, let me repeat 4) Weak. Nice cheap victory, enjoy. ( events like this are what turn people off to tournies and the 'attitude' of the ladder in general, what a shame.)
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Jan 6, 2007 22:58:12 GMT -5
Yeah I think ..A.. should have conceded the game after losing 2 cities. That's called good sportsmanship. I feel bad for you MDR. But on the other hand... I think you should check settings very closely. It seems these sort of rules problems happen for you every CCC. PS would someone mind moving this thread to ccc area?
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jan 7, 2007 0:32:18 GMT -5
When i first read this i thought to myself, man this is bad sportsmanship but when i checked which 3 players were in question, i laughed.
There is more chance of levi not spamming the lobby then these guys giving you the win!
|
|
|
Post by venceslas on Jan 7, 2007 2:41:02 GMT -5
How it is strange, because in the indus, A has thinked that I have made an error with an option(no city razing should be checked according to them, my setting was exactly like specified in the SPM planning) and spoke to illegal game during a bit of time. It seems sometime A think game must be replayed and other time it shouldn't chris.
|
|
|
Post by cankaban on Jan 7, 2007 5:53:23 GMT -5
I WAS IN THE HELL!!! first of all caesar took a city of alexcherbourg at turn 20 then barbarians raised(i didnt lose worker first) then i started to lose turns cause of barbarians: 1-my 2 settler delayed to settle for 5 turns 2-couldnt work inside borders for 15 turns we said continue for good sportmanship 3-a horseman treated my second city,i just noticed a unit hasnt moved yet,called it back,then killed horsearcher 1 tile outside of my empty second city.if this unit moved that turn(which was automated)i would lost that city 4-i lost a worker and it died.. then we said we are not so sportmanship;) asked td dta for rehost but he answered: YOU CLICKED READY,NOW YOU HAVE TO PLAY,NO REHOST! then of course(my friends knows me)i m pissed of and didnt want to continue.. asked to wanggon to sub me.. then after that,i saw this time mdr team crying for rehost reason:WE TOOK 2 CITY BUT IT WASNT 2 CITY ELIMINATION SORYY!I AM A NOOB HOST I FORGET TO PUT 2 CITY ELIM!! who was host? me?caesar?rupman? NO! ROMAZI 'NOW' WE SAID,'U CLICKED READY' 'DEAL WITH IT' i dont mind which city they took,if we started with that settings by pressing ready now we have it play as dta said.. ALSO,IF ITS COMES TO SPORTMENSHIP,YOU NEED TO REHOST THAT GAME WHEN I ASK(WHEN 56 TURNS LEFT),NOT WHEN YOU LOST ON POINT,AFTER LOSING ITS EASY TO CALL FOR A REHOST..WHEN WE WANTED REHOST,YOU SAID 'YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE ,THATS WHY YOU WANT IT NOW..'NOW YOU SEE WHO LOST?I KNOW HOW MANY PM YOU SENT TO DTA WHEN WE CALLED FOR REHOST.. ARE YOU SPORTMENSHIP?NO %0!SO HAD BETTER FORGET REHOST AND NEVER CALL IT FOR A GAME THAT YOU PLAYED AND LOST.. ONLY ..A.. TEAM CAN ASK FOR A REHOST BECAUSE YOU WERE THE HOST,AND ITS REJECTED WHEN YOU SAID TO DTA,WE HAVE ALREADY WON! NOW..WE HAVE ALREADY WON..NO NEED TO ARGUE ABOUT IT
|
|
|
Post by cankaban on Jan 7, 2007 6:00:12 GMT -5
Then, the game started and I lost a city. A few turns later, Cankaban (..A..) noticed that barbarians were activated and lost a worker to them and paused the game to complain. I asked if they wanted a rehost but Cankaban answered "No it would be unfair because you are one city down". So we continued. 45 minutes laters, Cankaban pauses the game again and asks a rehost. Obviously we weren't in mood for it since it had been decided to continue the game earlier. TD said to continue and we did, but Cankaban said he couldn't keep playing the game and asked for a sub. not Cankaban its CanKaban,use capital plz ;D
|
|
|
Post by cankaban on Jan 7, 2007 6:06:55 GMT -5
also venceslas,i am very sorry about that thing,my teammates thought its settings was different,and wanted to make sure by asking you,it wasnt a kind of nuts plan,sorry about that,and congz you played well,gg
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Jan 7, 2007 6:37:08 GMT -5
When i first read this i thought to myself, man this is bad sportsmanship but when i checked which 3 players were in question, i laughed. There is more chance of levi not spamming the lobby then these guys giving you the win! 1. Yes Shame but true 2. IF all 6 players failled to check the game setting before clicking ready then maybe BOTH teams should be disqualified From the RENNY event and BOTH teams NIL points in thats event Well thats my suggestion anyways
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Jan 7, 2007 9:11:19 GMT -5
a game condition according to the specific tournament/match rules was 2 city elimination
doesn't matter if anyone checked settings or not (although host would be ulitmately responsible)
the 2 city elimination setting was agreed upon long before the launch/staging area
it was a game setting included in the rules posted by SPM and agreed to by all clans when they posted their roster, registered for the event, checked in, and began the game.
this one is NOT a "sportmanship ruling" as others have been in the past - this one is very clear
the event/condition of 2 city elimination was met - that's it - done - the person is dead and out of the game regardless of which settings were checked.
|
|
|
Post by Levi on Jan 7, 2007 13:28:38 GMT -5
Perhaps we should add a rule to the CCC general rules that says something like. "Players are expected to play their matches according to the rules specified. Matches played not according to the listed rules subject both teams to forfeiture.
|
|
|
Post by holocanthe on Jan 7, 2007 13:43:52 GMT -5
2 city = elim So ..A..CanKaba ..A..Caesar Rupman = cheaters What makes the administrators?? Nothing as usual let us imagine that the roles are reversed.......
|
|
|
Post by charliebrownparker on Jan 7, 2007 14:13:12 GMT -5
Perhaps we should add a rule to the CCC general rules that says something like. "Players are expected to play their matches according to the rules specified. Matches played not according to the listed rules subject both teams to forfeiture. Before ruling about everything please try to use your brain . How can you disqualify a team who doesn't host the game? Do you know levi that some parameters cannot be seen by all players? Regarding MDR vs A ren matter i will not ask to replay game or to disqualify ..A.. team. We have made a "noob" mistake with settings so that's our fault. Death to All decided to let the game run. We did. No problem we accept it . Now we just know that players as Wanggon does'nt have any idea about sportmanship and fair play. There's still one thing a cannot explain . How can a guy who hasn't played any CCC game with Civ4 (I don't even know if he played civ4 once ) be HeadTD? Please before being "head something" try to learn first what is a CCC game!!!!! May be should we have a pool about that? Clan community cannot allows someone inexperienced ruling about the way to run events.
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Jan 7, 2007 14:29:03 GMT -5
Perhaps we should add a rule to the CCC general rules that says something like. "Players are expected to play their matches according to the rules specified. Matches played not according to the listed rules subject both teams to forfeiture. I actually agree with Levi this should be put into CCC and Ladder rules even perhaps
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Jan 7, 2007 14:34:38 GMT -5
2 city = elim So ..A..CanKaba ..A..Caesar Rupman = cheaters What makes the administrators?? Nothing as usual let us imagine that the roles are reversed....... Didnt MDR HOST the game? whoever hosted the game was at fault in the first place Dont you guys Check the settings whilst in Staging? Dont you Have a F8 Key?
|
|
|
Post by holocanthe on Jan 7, 2007 14:41:42 GMT -5
Dont you guys Check the settings whilst in Staging? Dont you Have a F8 Key? And you ?
|
|
|
Post by venceslas on Jan 7, 2007 15:37:47 GMT -5
Keep cool Holo chris.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Jan 7, 2007 19:36:17 GMT -5
The settings were indeed "accepted" when players checked in. (and of course as per CCC rules and the event rules/settings demanded, the 2 city elimination option was not enabled)
This doesn't change the fact that the rule of the event was 2 city elimination and it was accomplished - as per the specific event rules.
Consequently, as Levi posted:
I think the match was indeed lost by the team that lost 2 cities - as indicated in the rules.
As posted above, when DTA was asked, he stated something like (as used in text) "YOU CLICKED READY,NOW YOU HAVE TO PLAY,NO REHOST!"
So they "played - no rehost" and the events still led to someone losing 2 cities
Two city elimination is pretty cut and dried, it happened, all in the game saw it - period.
Although the final results of the game would now be uncertain as losing one team-mate from the 2 city elimination wouldn't necessarily mean losing the event, Levi's and DTA's ruling of play it as is and let this be a lesson about tournaments - applies both ways.
I would think that the entire ladder community would support that the "terms of the game rules were met" and the victor is clear.
ESPECIALLY since it would change the overall final outcome of the top five clans of this CCC VERY much.
|
|