12 Lives #4 - Sign Ups

[Gb4by]

sign me up if there is room

[shockcannon]

So what's the strategy for this event? I'm guessing you should save elements that you use in multiple decks for later? Are there certain elements that are universally accepted as more valuable than others? And why are quantum pillars not allowed?

[iancudorinmarian]

I can't give you tips on strategy. You will have to create your own.

Quantum pillars are banned because all "other" cards are banned.

[iancudorinmarian]

Final Standings

• rob77dp
• worldwideweb3
• asdw152
• TheonlyrealBeef
• Vindilos
• shockcannon
• Wyand
• Gb4by
• DANIEELA
• Manuel

[Wyand]

What was the decisive between me and shockcannon? I won our game...

[iancudorinmarian]

What was the decisive between me and shockcannon? I won our game...

Lives at the start of the round you two were eliminated.

[Wyand]

I wouldn't say a word if rules like this would be known (mentioned in the first post) before the tourney.
But now it matters (points awarded). Looking from a different perspective: he had more life, so he lost
more in the same round, worse performance. Another perspective: Wyand-shockcannon=3-2.
And I'm pretty sure he could bring up different perspectives. Again: what I don't like that this
wasn't made public in the first post, and I lose points by this ranking.

[iancudorinmarian]

And knowing it beforehand would affect you in what way? There's literally nothing you could've done except winning to improve your placement.

If you're looking for reasons to complain, find a better one.

[Wyand]

Rules are created before an event not after. It is not about how much is the influence on the results,
it is about principles. I find my complain well-founded.

[rob77dp]

I'll chime in here I suppose...

I think you both a point to make- knowing what tie-breaks will be used prior to start of event is typical protocol and gives competitors a sense of knowing what to expect... knowing this particular tie-break method in advance with how the event plays with rules would not affect how the tie-break would shake out. That is, knowing the tie-break method prior to event would maybe serve to detract from or attract to sign-ups but knowing it after the event is not a grounds for complaint about finishing/final-standing, in my view.

[TheonlyrealBeef]

The tiebreaker was irrelevant at the start of the event. Only the pvp event participation program that applied to this event after initial signups has made it relevant. If you truly wish to protest changes that affect this program, refuse all points for this program not being part of the rules during original signups.

Me? I'm just happy getting a piece of Mark for participating, against my expectations.

[Wyand]

You are right about two things, these are good arguments. True, the pvp event participation program was applied later, plus yes, I'm also happy that the program exists and I get points for it.
My problem that both shockcannon and I mentioned the problem at round 6, when it mattered, and all we got that "this is irrelevant etc." instead of explaining
the rule which applies to situations like this. And it doesn't matter that it probably won't affect our performance. The principle matters. I simply don't like that it
is not the first time when someone questions something and all he gets like "less qq", "I'm the authority so I'm automatically right" or some ad hominem
or something irrelevant is handed out instead of a true argument.

Yes, I have a huge sense of justice. Others may say that I'm touchy. Still, my opinion stays the same if it happens with someone else or if I would end up
losing points by using the correct logic.