The Colosseum - Rules

[Ryli]

I dont know if it was said somewhere but,

How is betting score calculated?

It's in the rules. Basically, it's number of correct match outcome predictions.

Assuming we have

A
B
C
D

You bet A and D to win, then D to win.
B and D win, then D wins.

Do you still get the point for D winning round 2, or does D have to beat A?

[The_Mormegil]

You get the points on the winner, not on the whole matchup. So you get 2 points if you bet A and D, the D and the matches go B and D, then D.

[kev]

Obvious betting tiebreaker is obvious... but it was added to the faq in the opening post anyway.

[MyNameIsJoey]

[17:35:50] vagman13: ‹@ji412jo› not going to give you the win because of their fuck up.I wont even agree to a replay because there is no way I would have played this deck with the current situation So I ll stop playing unless kev or morm give fair judgement and accept their fuckup.And you can quote me on that

Now, as to what was the problem,

in skinny. says you ''may'' use 2 less upgraded cards.

[Jaymanfu]

Rules in the opening post have been clarified again.

Basic changes: Some people interpreted "may not" differently than "must not" and they were meant to mean the same.  Also, brave/coward are not impacted by any arena advantages/disadvantages, which is now explicitly stated.  Some arena advantages/disadvantages were also clarified.

This was posted awhile back but at the same time, it was after people had already picked there str/weakness

[MyNameIsJoey]

Rules in the opening post have been clarified again.

Basic changes: Some people interpreted "may not" differently than "must not" and they were meant to mean the same.  Also, brave/coward are not impacted by any arena advantages/disadvantages, which is now explicitly stated.  Some arena advantages/disadvantages were also clarified.

This was posted awhile back but at the same time, it was after people had already picked there str/weakness

I have linked this to vag in chat already, it didnt change his mind.

[vagman13]

This was posted awhile back but at the same time, it was after people had already picked there str/weakness

Precisely.This little differencce means that more than half of my matches so far are void,my character is ruined since not only I had already picked str/weaknesses when the changes were made but I kept building on it and now I find out its all worthless and for nothing.

So long story short,It's either that kev and morm accept their mistakes and find a divine sollution or I will simply leave this event.I joined to play and have fun and not doing mental fishing what someone that writes rules has in his mind.

[Antagon]

whats the problem here, i really tried and cannot understand the whole thing. what happened?

[Jaymanfu]

Basically the weakness: Skinny used to read, Skinny: All decks must be exactly 30 cards. You also may use two less upgrades than normal. Morm and Kev said it was supposed to read as MUST (may also works but can be interpreted differently), and changed it to MUST after people had already picked there str/weakness. So vagman13 didn't see and thought may read as he didn't have to.

[Antagon]

tbh, why it should be your choice, cause NOTHING forces you to use upgraded cards, why it should be an ability there, that you can use less, if you want.

and chosing a weakness without asking before, if something isnt clear (for example i did a lot), is not the best idea.

if you just hooked on the text, vagman is right, but thats like bug exploiting, in my eyes, knowing exactly what it means but "exploit" the "bug" of unclear text. making organisers - who made a very good job so far and spend a lot of time on this event - to scaregoats, is a bit childish and poor, at least in my eyes.

[YoungSot]

Basically the weakness: Skinny used to read, Skinny: All decks must be exactly 30 cards. You also may use two less upgrades than normal. Morm and Kev said it was supposed to read as MUST (may also works but can be interpreted differently), and changed it to MUST after people had already picked there str/weakness. So vagman13 didn't see and thought may read as he didn't have to.

While it's true that the wording isn't rules-lawyer perfect, it should have been fairly obvious which of the two possible interpretations was the right one. One interpretation makes it meaningless and the other makes it a weakness. We know the intent of the rule is to provide a weakness. I don't mean to offend you vagman, but i think in a casual event like this one, it's on us players to take the spirit of the rules into account when interpreting them.

[kev]

I'm not really sure what to say here.  I still feel the meaning of the original rules was pretty clear cut.  If you're interpreting it as your option, what was the point of even adding that clause.  As it's a weakness, there's really only one interpretation.  Although it was the goal, the rules weren't perfect because they're complex, one of the organizers doesn't speak English as a first language, and the other is a moron.  It has to be partly up to the players to ask questions and point out rule deficiencies, and obviously exploiting loopholes would have been against the spirit of the event.

Someone, and I share the blame, should've caught the error after the vag v kirch match.  I can't turn back time but I edited the rules 11 days ago and noted it here.  Using extra ups after that point was just plain wrong.

I will simply leave this event.

Okay.

I apologize to vag, kirch, 927, and everyone who bet (all 63 of you ) for not catching the problem earlier.