|
Post by MMV on Jan 9, 2007 0:51:26 GMT -5
its not complicated to just add these rules in you always seem to pander for more and more rules when you think there's none that qualify for the envelope you try to stretch. Consequently, here's a few additional rules for you that aren't listed on the ladder: 1. don't urinate directly into an electrical outlet 2. don't stick a metal knife in the toaster while it's on 3. don't put the electric heater in the bath-tub with you to see what happens the list of rules that aren't listed is ENDLESS so perhaps one of "Murphy's Lesser Known Laws" should be applied just for you: Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool (and it shouldn't be anyone's "job" to align things JUST to your specific level of understanding)
|
|
|
Post by holocanthe on Jan 9, 2007 2:37:31 GMT -5
are you stupid?i wasnt even in game when they razed my 2 cities.wanggon was there how can you fool calll me chater,you got a brain? Sorry, i didn't know that (i knewn only "Register team" ). Sorry again.
|
|
|
Post by dreddcool on Jan 9, 2007 3:56:16 GMT -5
..A.. team dont deserve this, MDR had time and were able to check the settings ( city elim limit) before they attacked... they should know wanggon wouldnt die even MDR get 2 cities of him, and they should ask TD what to do about that city elim limit setting... its the fault of MDR team to not set the right settings, and now admins are punishing ..A.. clan coz of MDR's mistake...
its not unsportsmanship that ..A.. didnt concede after wanggon lost 2 cities...u cant expect this from them, they played on within the rules which was set by MDR , if that rules were wrong, you have to punish the host...real sportsmanship is dealing with the results of ur serial mistakes and it has to be expected from MDR clan... but they chose the other way and shouted for a disqualify of .A.. from the event, even they were the side making the mistakes and played on wth wrong settings, then opening this thread after they lost with their own settings...if you have to insult a side with lack of sportsmanship its mustn't be .A.., it must be MDR coz they opened this thread...
now admins have to turn back from their mistake and give ..A.. the points that they deserved...
|
|
|
Post by cankaban on Jan 9, 2007 7:29:10 GMT -5
heh yes we played and won in their settings what else they asking for i couldnt understand..
if they want rematch ..A.. is ready to win again..
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Jan 9, 2007 7:29:55 GMT -5
If the ..A.. player that died on this occasion after loosing 2 of his cities in what was a 2 city ELIM game did the right thing and deleted his other cities and quit the game then perhaps the Result of said game would have been very different no? I guess thats why this games Result as become nul and void Jesus even this noob knows to check settings of the game before X-Ing in
|
|
Juni
Worker
Posts: 137
|
Post by Juni on Jan 9, 2007 10:05:41 GMT -5
its not complicated to just add these rules in you always seem to pander for more and more rules when you think there's none that qualify for the envelope you try to stretch. Consequently, here's a few additional rules for you that aren't listed on the ladder: 1. don't urinate directly into an electrical outlet 2. don't stick a metal knife in the toaster while it's on 3. don't put the electric heater in the bath-tub with you to see what happens the list of rules that aren't listed is ENDLESS so perhaps one of "Murphy's Lesser Known Laws" should be applied just for you: Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool (and it shouldn't be anyone's "job" to align things JUST to your specific level of understanding) ;D ;D ;D I love the way you deal with this stuff MMV. What you say is perfectly right, and you say that with a nice touch of humour. In a perfect world with perfect gentlemen (and women), no rules would be needed at all. Of course this does not exist, but is it hopeless to think that CCC players could be able to understand what can be done and what can't without writing a 500 pages book of rules ?
|
|
|
Post by everybodysdarling on Jan 9, 2007 10:31:32 GMT -5
I fully support SPM'S decision. 2 City Elimination is one of the major rules we use to play in ladder teamers and cannot be manipulated. CK's/Wanggons civ seems to have lost even 3 cities. It's hilarious.
And MGT, you eternal victim of circumstances, it is impossible to reschedule every incorrectly set CCC game, once it is over and the whole event is closed. The new outcome of the replayed game would affect every next round pairing. The in the misery uninvolved teams would eventually lose up to 8 points. Do you think that is fair?
Sometimes a clear and undoubtfully clear understandable decision has to be made by a responsible. SPM spoke. ..A.. disqualified. Good luck in next CCC. Case closed.
|
|
|
Post by rupman on Jan 13, 2007 18:21:32 GMT -5
UM half of what Alex said is true half of what he said is complete BS.
The barbs didn't come out till about 20 turns in. We had already bombed both are fronts and Caesar had just taken a city from Alex. This is when Cankaban starts messaging to everyone about Barbs in his broken English. I had no idea what was going on. Caesar didn't what a re-host and said so because he just took an Alex city. Cankaban I could barely understand but I'm pretty sure he wanted a re-host. I said I didn't particularly want one given that we just took a city but whatever. So we played on. 5 turns later, we were dealing with another barb ever turn, from Horse Archers to Swordsman and Archers. Can lost a worker and almost lost a city to them. I sent 2 knights back from the front to scout and kill these pests till he had filled in all his land. I dunno how many units Caesar sent back but I know he sent some.
At this point I asked for a re-host because the barbs were unbearable. They slowed down our growth and likely kept us from finishing off Alex at that time. MDR of course denied my request and I can't entirely blame them, but as far as I'm concerned, with that they locked themselves into the settings, irregardless of what happened. We consulted DTA on this and he said to play on. So we did.
Many turns later they boated Wanggon(who had subbed for Cankaban) and took two of his cities much to my dismay. Especially considering I told him like 5 times to stop building science in his cities and get units out to protect his cities. I also told him I would laugh if he died, at which point he started bitching at me in his broken English, because Wang knows best apparently.
So as Alex and I said they boated Wang and took two of his cities. We thought he was dead and were stunned when he wasn't. I laughed because I now realized how bad they messed up the settings. They of course thought Wang should be dead and he wasn't. They complained and my entire team told them too bad. They wouldn't give us a re-host earlier so now it's catching up to them. We again consulted DTA on this new event and he told us again to play on.
Not 5 turns later we took the second of Alex's cities, mostly with Caesar's units about 25-30 but with maybe 6-10 of Wang's units and a few of mine were up there as well, some I had gift but maybe 2-3 I was still in control of. Of course Alex didn't die either and we again played on.
Now given the entire series of events here and the consequences that have been put in place I don't not think ..A.. was in anyway unsportsmanlike anymore than MDR was to us. We asked for a re-host because of the messed up settings and they denied us. They wanted wanggon to delete his units and quit. We denied them. We then took the second of Alex's cities which would have killed Alex, so Alex should be dead. They never took any other cities from us nor we from them. In the end we won on points.
We consulted the TD when all this stuff happened and he told us to play on. Another TD chimed in on this thread and he said we were stuck with settings. Now from what I can discern, the head admin has declared our play unsportsmanlike and disqualified us. I think this is completely unfair given we consulted the TD and he made a ruling. Both teams suffered from these crappy settings and to say ..A.. would have lost if 2 city elim was on is subjective at best. We also may have finished off Alex early without the barbs on, and still may have taken a 2nd city from him late with out the additional help of Wang's units. To simply call this unsportsmanlike and disqualify us far after the fact and to my knowledge without contacting ..A..'s clan rep Kazache, it's Captain MGT or any of the other people in the game for that matter to get their side of the story is complete and utter BS! This could not have been handled in a worse manner by whatever admin made this decision. If I recall correctly this is one of things(Admins making unilateral decisions that affect many others, without so much as a consult) that caused the Civ 3 ladder to split a little over a year and a half ago. It would seem to me that one would learn from such an experience but apparently not.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Jan 14, 2007 2:52:34 GMT -5
SPM were you aware that Alex lost a second city? If you can go back and take points away from ..A.. you sure as hell can go back and give them to ..A.. . I had no idea that alex lost a second city and I hope you didnt either because disqualification with this new information i just found out is compltly unacceptable, especially when you consider that MDRs captain agreed that we deserve the points fair and square and it was MDR who set these settings in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by balmung on Jan 14, 2007 7:33:54 GMT -5
some people will never understand Dead is dead, and when a ghost army is still fighting its not fair. And when they took a SECOND CITY its still a ghost army involved in that
|
|
|
Post by rupman on Jan 14, 2007 13:15:47 GMT -5
^ They also never saw any barbs because they had the shorter side of the map and were able to fill in their land faster. So we had to deal with barbs and they didn't. That's not fair.
Who are you or anyone else to say that we would not have taken Alex's city without Wangs extra units. It's not as if we didn't have several units left over. I as recall Caesar healed up and went for a 3rd city, but failed. You'd have to ask him though. I was busy with my own stuff in the south and wasn't really paying close attention to the North. The point is the entire discussion of who would have died etc... etc... is hypothetical. The settings were messed up, we consulted the tourney director twice about this and both times he told us to play on. How is this ..A..'s fault? At any point DTA could have told us to rehost or that Wang should be declared dead etc... We went by the TD's ruling. Now we are being punished for it. I don't see how this can be seen as a fair resolution by anyone.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jan 14, 2007 13:24:53 GMT -5
What does it matter? There is 1 team that wins the CCC and 10 that lose it.
If it makes you sleep easier tonight, just pretend you finished 3rd anyway.
EDIT:: For what its worth i have to say, now that i know both sides ..A.. were unfairly deducted however many pionts. (But as i said above, 3rd is the same as 10th)
|
|
|
Post by rupman on Jan 14, 2007 14:46:29 GMT -5
We were deducted 5 points and we were tied with Mud for second prior to that. This may be nothing to you Tony but this is the highest place ..A.. has ever gotten in the CCC. We placed 4th with 27 points several CCC's ago. So I am or was quite proud of our second place finish this time around. It also shows that with a little more work maybe ..A.. can win this thing in the future.
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Jan 14, 2007 16:11:16 GMT -5
We were deducted 5 points and we were tied with Mud for second prior to that. This may be nothing to you Tony but this is the highest place ..A.. has ever gotten in the CCC. We placed 4th with 27 points several CCC's ago. So I am or was quite proud of our second place finish this time around. It also shows that with a little more work maybe ..A.. can win this thing in the future. Good. If you devote even a very small fraction of the time and effort towards futures CCC events that you have here(forum and topic) I have no doubt you would double anyones points total. FFS, stop the endless complaints and move on...to dwell in the past will keep your focus there... move on!
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Jan 14, 2007 16:22:02 GMT -5
Please follow this linear line of events, tell me how it seems: (team x and team y will be used) Team x has an issue with settings, specifically; barbs on. This is a big deal,obviously. Teams x and y decide to continue(forgive the incident). Time passes. Team y losses two cities; another problem with settings, seemingly much more critical. The local authorities decide to continue, based on the game was decided so when team x had an issue. Ok. There is a Fire. A building burns to the ground. Mr. X is found guilty (responsible) of said fire. Mr. X is put on probation and released. Later it is found out that Mr Y had Died in the fire, seemingly more critical. Should Mr.X be let free on the same premises even though the later/newer events(findings that had actually happened simultaneously as the setting of fire)are much more crucial; murder!(or death of a civ ) Ok, Mr.x gets probation for the first crime, but he must now be held for a crime too severe to overlook or let go unactioned. It does not matter if the actioning is done immediately or shortly thereafter. Weather it is reviewed or appealed, it must be dealt with in a manor set forth by the laws(rules). This seems pretty cut n dry to me folks.
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Jan 14, 2007 16:30:21 GMT -5
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D LoL DrShot i shure hope you are here all week that was so funny
|
|
|
Post by rupman on Jan 14, 2007 17:03:45 GMT -5
The problem is Doc, that prior to Mr. Y being born God noobed up his settings so that he cannot simply burn to death. He has to be poisened, stabbed, shot, hung, decapitated and then burned before he dies.
|
|
|
Post by cankaban on Jan 15, 2007 12:38:35 GMT -5
Cankaban I could barely understand but I'm pretty sure he wanted a re-host. I said I didn't particularly want one given that we just took a city but whatever. So we played on. 5 turns later, we were dealing with another barb ever turn, from Horse Archers to Swordsman and Archers. To simply call this unsportsmanlike and disqualify us far after the fact and to my knowledge without contacting ..A..'s clan rep Kazache, it's Captain MGT or any of the other people in the game for that matter to get their side of the story is complete and utter BS! This could not have been handled in a worse manner by whatever admin made this decision. If I recall correctly this is one of things(Admins making unilateral decisions that affect many others, without so much as a consult) that caused the Civ 3 ladder to split a little over a year and a half ago. It would seem to me that one would learn from such an experience but apparently not. i was the only one trying to explain what had happened but all knows my englih sucks.noone understood what i said,they took 5 points from us because of mdr's fault and 0 from them i cant understand this...
|
|
|
Post by cankaban on Jan 15, 2007 12:40:36 GMT -5
We were deducted 5 points and we were tied with Mud for second prior to that. This may be nothing to you Tony but this is the highest place ..A.. has ever gotten in the CCC. We placed 4th with 27 points several CCC's ago. So I am or was quite proud of our second place finish this time around. It also shows that with a little more work maybe ..A.. can win this thing in the future. i m sure we can win ccc if admins decide a bit more fairer,they didnt ask anything formally b4 they took our 5 points from us...
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Jan 15, 2007 13:45:39 GMT -5
And the Dumbass award of the month goes to ;D ;D ;D
|
|