The Elite Championship - Season 1 [winner: Pharmafan!]

[L3R4T]

I understand the rules too, but if I was in your position Pharmaphan I would have wait for the Trumpet moves above all for teh sport, it's a such pleasure to play agains you guys, we are never matchmake with the league system !

[Mag!cGuy]

(10-19-2013 08:18 PM)Pharmafan Wrote:  

(10-19-2013 06:18 PM)Mag!cGuy Wrote:  

(10-19-2013 08:20 AM)Pharmafan Wrote:  

(10-19-2013 08:19 AM)His_Daddy Wrote:  Ok so let's welcome the champion of s1: pharmafan!

not yet.....

outwitters://viewgame?id=ahRzfm91dHdpdHRlcnNnYW1lLWhyZHIVCxIIR2FtZVJvb20YgICAgMHKqgsM

GG His_Daddy!

---

Trumpet or LER4T can still end tied with me....

Damnit, well done! I won't let you have so many wins in season 2, trust me

Doodat: thanks for the suggestion, I will put this sentence in the rules instead.

Thanks, Mag!c! Looking forward to play you in S2!

---

Alan, I can follow your explanations regarding possible interpretations of time data. Absolutely! I get your point but I remain with the question why you took the risk of passing this timeline in such an important game cause everybody knows that the in-game-system can kick the game after passing the line. You said that you even spend a bit of time with outwitters preparing for the game against LER4T and inviting him. Why haven`t you just made a turn against me?

Regarding sportsmanship I was talking about another meaning than you do: I talked about blaming the referee after self-misinterpretation of a rule.

You talk about sportsmanship between players regarding my own action taking the win now. I clearly stated that I absolutely don`t like winning that way. All my other wins were much more fun of course. Sportsmanship is very important for me and I see myself as a very fair player. So I would like to explain my point of view here:

Time is a part of the rules and games like this one. It`s also a part of chess for example. I never liked winning a chess game when my opponent timed out. But if he did I went with the rules and of course took the win. It`s the same for me in this case. I don`t feel like acting unfair or stealing a win. I also never felt uncomfortable within our duel. I`m good positioned, took your sniper and there would be huge efforts for you when I start attacking on the left. Your post sounded as I would have lost otherwise and thats absolutely not the case. If I had been with the back at the wall and crashed anyways and then win through timeout I would feel different. But here we had a game where I was good positioned, or do you see that different?

I went quite lucky through this tournament so far and had some really good moves and games and I don`t feel that it should all end with a discussion about interpretations of tournament rules and that you link my success to those....

All what I wrote is not meant offensive, Alan, and I really absolutely respect you as a very, very powerful player. Shake hands or do you disagree?

Agreed with everything said here.

[Alan Klaus]

Since you asked questions, pharma, here is my reply:
1) I started with Ler4t because I felt I owed it to you all to get that game started since Magic (very) recently threw out a goal of starting the next round today. The notice wasn't enough to finish but I thought I should at least have them all in-progress.
2) I could've just as easily made the move in your game but I thought I had almost 24 hours before timing out. I played about 25 elite tourny moves in those 24 hours and knew that time freedom was coming after a crazy Mon-Thurs. I play very fast when I have a plan and free time and tried to budget myself within what I thought were the rules.
3) I believe we were both well positioned and never said you would lose, just implied that you could. Do you not agree with that? I was ok with the chance you could've prepared to take the sniper because it'd cost you 3 wits and kill a unit over there instead of moving it to reinforce your other side. It's not ideal but better than me wasting wits protecting a potential threat in the fog at that point when I wanted to be on the offensive.
4) I knew my next move was really important in your game because you could spawn a mobi and start attacking soon. However, I only had time before yesterday for you or Ler4t's game. I choose to figure out what to do against scallywags on skullduggery because that race creamed me the two times I tried adorables in the past and I figured Ler4t would play them. Kind of funny he chose veggies after all that... Ler4t!!!! Haha
5) YOU brought up sportsmanship, not me. I never mentioned you until you took that personal shot.

[Mag!cGuy]

Okay guys, we need to end this

I am very sorry for the inconvenience alan, but you should also understand rules have to be respected, and if you are not sure about one of them, don't hesitate to ask. There was two possible meaning with the former sentence about the 4 days timeout, you were part of the 1% that understood it the wrong way, and you can't blame me nor pharmafan for this. Pharmafan wasn't happy to make the game ends with a timeout, you can see it at the previous page.
As for sportmanship, I think pharmafan is friendly enough so that we can be sure he didn't mean to offense you, simply saying that blaming other for something you have done was maybe not the coolest thing to do, and I do agree with him. ^^ Anyway I personnaly never felt attacked by you here, no harm done!
At least your experience makes sure it won't happen again since I changed the sentence of this rule thanks to doodat. Outwitters is only a game, and that match was only one match, so perhaps so much debate is not worth it.

By the way, I need your confirmation: will you participate at season 2?

As jesus says, peace

[Alan Klaus]

6) my initial statement was based on my memory, not looking things up: "Well this sucks... I had a statement in my head about going 'past' 4 days and I guess incorrectly thought that meant showing 5 days on the game." It turns out that is 100% accurate and includes a level of self responsibility rather than blame. How's that being unsportsmanlike? Then I offered a suggestion for clarity after losing a game on a misunderstanding. Magic replied "It is as clear as possible, pharmafan understood it and when I at first set the timeout to 3 days, some players told me it was too short, because they did understand I meant "3 days"". That is not correct, it could DEFINITELY be more clear. A simple rule should not need further reading to be understood. As I said "passed the 4 day timeout" to me meant showing "5 days ago". As you said, I could literally timeout at that point *but I knew I had almost 24 hours left before that happened!*

7) Magic: "There is nothing wrong in playing one turn per day, whereas there is something wrong when it comes to 4 days." Saying something is "wrong" is an opinion... slow periods followed by spurts like 25 moves in 24 hours evens out to much faster than one turn per day. I just didn't have many games going at once because there was no stated timeframe at first, it seemed rather flexible, and I wasn't crazy far behind some other players. It also adds a moral twist to the rule debate, which is silly.

8) You are within your rights to claim a win on a timeout and I never said otherwise. Exercising that right is not sporting of you based on my set of values, but I didn't bring that up until you attacked me. It'd be one thing if I was a full 24 or 48 hours over... but it was less than a night's sleep as I went to bed in good standing planning to play in the morning (and I thought I'd still have the entire day based on my reading of the rule). I also wanted to finish that game just for the fun of it. As Ler4t said, this tourny is great fun to play all of you strategists!

9) Of course I agree you're awesome at this game... everyone in the top-20 (or more) has hugely dangerous moves.

[Mag!cGuy]

Lol...

[Alan Klaus]

Look, I never meant for this to be a big debate. Logically, or in court for example, that rule would not hold up. However, I also could've read the whole thread again to see context/intent. I just didn't think there WAS any uncertainty and that's the problem with ambiguous written statements that rely on outside context. Saying that is not an attack on Magic. In fact, there never would've been a debate if he replied something like "The intent of the rule as shown in the thread is quite clear but I can see the wording of the rule is unclear standing alone. I'll fix it for the next tourny and am sorry it affected your game this time around." I was simply defending myself when you guys started saying it was absolutely clear when it wasn't.

[Mag!cGuy]

(10-20-2013 12:37 AM)Mag!cGuy Wrote:  Okay guys, we need to end this
[...]
At least your experience makes sure it won't happen again since I changed the sentence of this rule thanks to doodat.
[...]
By the way, I need your confirmation: will you participate at season 2?

[Alan Klaus]

Lol Magic... fine, you're 100% right and I never should've mentioned anything that could, even as a secondary effect to the point, possibly imply otherwise.

I don't know about season two... is there a proposed format somewhere? How many players are you aiming for and how quickly do you want the round to finish?

---

Oh I see the other thread now. If it's still around the same size then I'm in. I was worried it'd be 20 players of something.

[Mag!cGuy]

Well, there will maybe be more players than the first time, but it surely won't be 20 Only one rule has been added: you can't play a race more than 4 times.

Do you have an hesitation as for this rule, like, can we play the race 4 times or can we play the races 3 times? Let's make it sure now already.