(Water Strat) Spielkind 3 - (Darkness SB) Absol (sub by bogtro) 2

[inthisroom]

Curious decision indeed, lucky I wasn't on the losing end of that one because I wouldn't have taken it very well.

You could have been if i asked a WM ruling instead of calling it a replay

Seriously, didn't you understand that I was actually supporting you with that post?

[majofa]

Go to the first screenshot and then click right, there are actually 12 of them.

[Spielkind]

thx majofa!
its actualy a bad habbit you will complain by charging on my screens, bogtro... i have SS´s of all rounds, showing YOU playing the first 2 rounds and leaving in the 3rd. AI took control and played 1 pend and 1 RT on my toad. this is what i call a bad draw... cause obviously ai drew a pend and spend the 2 time quanta you gained the first 2 rounds. i see no point not to verify this by my screens. helston asked for SS´s, he got them all! and saying helston seems not to asked me for what happened.... seriously, how should he know what happened? i asked for a ruling and have to explain, so you can think we talked about.

and for the record, no! i never said you werent in the game, so obviously you were, or who could make the first to rounds without taking control by the AI? i never would ask for a ruling if i thought at any point you never entered the game. what your PC error or something like that makes, i have no idea, but definetly your were in the game, so i asked for ruling.

[Avenger]

People usually send a short message in game chat (or outside) before rushing through an ai game.

[hainkarga]

Game 3 [DIDN'T GET IN, RULED LOSS]: Started to search, didn't get in, then disconnected from everything. Apparently Spiel started playing against AI which either drew no quanta for several turns or the game continued on in the background of my computer, where I drew quanta but couldn't play it because obviously I wasn't clicking on anything. Spiel evidently beat AI (I don't know if he has proof of this, WMs ruled without receiving proof), so he was given win.

What is this madness now ? Majofa well remembers i replayed a match where he didn't get in and i had a very good draw (he may or may not believe this part). So it is not cool to replay when you aren't you i guess. I call BS on this ruling.

[Absol]

Well, i hate this round. In more ways than one.

[hainkarga]

thx majofa!
its actualy a bad habbit you will complain by charging on my screens, bogtro... i have SS´s of all rounds, showing YOU playing the first 2 rounds and leaving in the 3rd. AI took control and played 1 pend and 1 RT on my toad. this is what i call a bad draw...

So you say he played first few rounds and he says he doesn't. This situation is sad. If spiel has ss with timers and some cards played, he is right and i take back what i said up there.

(Ps. for me, it has become hard to trust to the soldiers of a pure machiavellist general.)

[Acsabi44]

wow.... This is my 5th war, and I thought I saw everything.... apparently not.
Anyways, lemme give my 2 cents on this matter.

First thing first, if a desync happens, there is no clear resolution of the game, neither from the player's perspective, for from the WM's. From the point of the desynch, everything is murky. AI plays badly, players forget to take screenshots etc. I even heard that the AI draws completely different cards than the players, so even if both players play it out, they won't be seeing the same cards in the same order. So the correct thing would be to from the point of desynch, compare the two decks and decide who is te winner, but in that case, what is the point of playing the game through? Unless the desynch happens in the very las few turns, who is to say what could have happened?
The other thing is, and I really don't wanna talk about this, because I hate the thought, but if a series of desynchs happens for no apparent reason at all, one cannot help but have some nasty thoghts about the other player's intention, especially if the desynch always comes in a particular player's favour. I was in this situation this war with bogtro, where we had lots of desynchs and they mostly seemed to help me. I know that I did nothing intentional to cause or exploit those desynchs, but even so, if I won that duel, bogtro may have had some nasty thoguths, and with every right so. I would have certainly felt ashamed as well.

I think the keywords in a situation like this are honor and fair play. If a player starts his match with the best intentions, then I think he cannot do anything but to expect the same from the opponent. I think in a case of a desynch, the nice thing to do is to offer a rematch, regardless of the state of the game. After all, as the current situation indicates, there is no strict rulng regarding desynch. WMs are just as in the dark about the ordeal as the players involved.

To warp up, I think there is no correct WM ruling in a situation like this (it is no coincidence that the most debated WM rulings I saw were always involving desynch). I feel that it is the players who sholuld come to a honorable arrangement, and I think the honorable arrangement is these situations is a rematch.

[Zso_Zso]

I have no new insight in terms of ruling decision here, a lot of good points have been raised already about that.

However, I would like to make a suggestion which may seem like a side-issue here, but there were rightful complaints raised about it. Spielkind has provided a lot of screenshots, that's true, but all of them show the whole desktop and have been resized to be much smaller making important information barely visible. I understand the resize may have happened to reduce bandwidth for uploading and storage size. However, that is the wrong way to go about it.
First you take 10x as much information as important, including 90% garbage like other windows, ads, menu bars etc., then you throw away 90% of all information, including 90% of useful information and keep lots of garbage...

Unfortunately, I've seen this bad habit in other threads too -- taking full desktop shots and then shrinking.

My suggestions:

• Do not take the whole screen, use the "select rectangular region" option of the screenshot tool -- most of them offer such
• Select only the actual game screen area, no menus, no ads, no other windows, no address bars in other tabs showing your secret team chat etc.
• If your software can only take full desktop shots, then use another simple image editing tool to crop the image to the important rectangle
• Only upload the small size Elements The Game screen without ads and other info -- it is small enough and the important information will be well visible

Spoiler for example of properly cut down snapshot:

[deuce22]

With all those SS, I approve of this ruling.

[kev]

Every time I needed something, pulled a Blonde, yelled at computer, got it.

This made me smile.

[bogtro]

Your definition of "playing the first two rounds" is a highly disturbing one. Timing out and playing nothing is determined to be playing and in the game? I think not. Regardless of how many or what quality the SSes are, it is quite clear that I was never in the game to anyone who has bothered to think about it (Note that every single third party agrees with this, as well as Helston specifically saying "[16:01] <Helston> I do believe you didn't make it into the match." The only dissenters are apparently you and possibly majofa, both of whom happen to be direct beneficiaries). Therefore, all your SSes show are you playing a game against a very poor AI with a poor draw. It is worth noting that even if I had actually been in the game (and so the chat interface was lying, or perhaps the forum glitched 3 times, or maybe my mind control ray tricked everyone in chat as well as the computer program), desyncs cause different cards to be drawn for both sides, and so it is quite possible that I would have had more quanta than the AI got. It's also important that you didn't even send these screenshots until after the ruling was made, making them even more irrelevant.

I will note that you made absolutely no effort to contact me in any way before playing out the game to a win and requesting a ruling. This is basic etiquette that everyone should follow to reduce confusion. Otherwise people will follow the same conclusion that I made, which is that you had also disappeared and to wait for you to eventually return. A simple "playing against AI" would have sufficed, to which I could have responded "wasn't in", and the entire problem would have been resolved right there.

Despite this, I have no issue with you in particular. With the exception of some non-optimal etiquette and not sending evidence in a timely fashion, you did nothing that I wouldn't do in your position. The issue I have is with the WMs who are responsible for enforcing the rules. I would expect at the very least that I was consulted before a ruling was given.

Regardless of everything else, the fact quite simply remains: The most optimal resolution of a game is a duel between 2 players. Should this duel be interrupted, a ruling in favor of one side should be made only when it is clear that the resolution of the duel would be equivalent to the ruling. Rulings should never be made in favor of a player when the result is unclear. Any unclear situation is clear grounds for a replay. This is how it has been since the infancy of organized PvP. We're taking a giant step back here and it won't be trivial to reverse. There are only two possible situations here. The first is that I was not actually in, which basically everyone agrees on except for interested parties, in which case a replay is the no-brainer ruling. The second is that I was in and either decided to kill my internet or my internet happened to collapse, either of which (based on League rules, which for some reason we're interpreting as War rules) result in a loss. The ruling, as it stands, represents the correct ruling had the second situation happened - a situation that everyone agrees is BS. Are you serious? Of course you can't 100% determine which situation actually occurred, but the ruling is based on the grounds that something might have happened? Which WMs agree didn't happen? This really is totally insane.

EDIT: Before people start saying I'm taking this too seriously, the entire point of playing this is to have fun. The rules are supposed to ensure that when a sub-optimal situation occurs, there is a defined response in order to avoid exactly what's happening here. Instead, we have a ruling that goes against not only the rules that are apparently being used, but is also against every relevant precedent set since organized PvP began. The ruling is equivalent to an accusation of cheating. I take accusations of cheating extremely seriously, and I'm not going to just stand by and be told "well we know you're right, but somebody in the future might do something differently and so we'll just have to screw you over".