This is slasher. Thanks everyone for reading my translations! This is my first original post, discussing the history of chat ban in StarCraft leagues in South Korea and giving my opinion.
On May 13, at the round of 36 for OSL, GoRush was disqualified in his second game against BackHo and did not proceed further (the player to win two games proceeds, and BackHo won the first game). The reason was that he accidentally typed "a" on the chatting line - a violation of StarCraft leagues rules in South Korea (the ban on chatting during game), as you can see at 2:06 of this video:
At Fomos and other StarCraft forums, a huge debate ensued. Some argue that the rules are too tight, while others maintain that rules are rules and every gamer should follow it.
The origin of the chat ban goes back to 2005. At the Daum Direct OnGameNet Dual Tournament, the emperor Boxer (OSL record of 84 wins and 52 losses then) played against a new player Junitoss (OSL record of 1 win and 2 losses then). The map was Forte which has a small main base. In the middle of the game, Boxer went for a hidden Factory and typed what is translated into English as "no space :[" on the chatting line in an attempt to trick Junitoss into thinking that he had no space to build additional Factories due to the small main base, as you can see at 8:34 of this video:
Junitoss lost the match. Whether he was tricked or not, Boxer's message was likely to disturb the new player who is not used to the psychological aspects of StarCraft. After this match, a debate ensued, some arguing Boxer's action was a valid strategy while some arguing that it was not fair. Later, the chat ban was implemented.
In discussing the issue of the chat ban, it is important to recognize if any aspect of StarCraft gives an extra advantage to a player, in addition to what has been essentially incorporated into the game (like in general Protoss is strong against Terran; Terran against Zerg; Zerg against Protoss; Valkyrie is strong against Mutal; and so forth). Allied Mine - where a player allies an opponent while the opponent's units are on a field of Mines (thus the Mines are not exploded) and unallies at the most opportune time - is not allowed, presumably because it gives an extra advantage to a Terran player (can you think of equivalent examples to Protoss or Zerg? Maybe Stop Lurker, but you can do that without allying).
How about chatting? Does that give an extra advantage to a player? Can only some groups of players use chatting while others cannot, as is the case with Allied Mines (only Terrans can use this strategy)?
Either player can use chatting to his advantage. What if Junitoss was a more experienced player and typed "haha I saw the factory!" when he did not?
Chatting is something that does not give an extra advantage to any players. All the players can use it, and therefore it should be allowed.
Junghan Yi, a Fomos reporter, concluded his article on this debate with the following: "Fans don't want the interruptions of games due to tight rules, and players don't want to be adversely affected by the rules. It's time to listen to the cry of fans - 'don't interrupt our passion!'"
Junghan Yi, a Fomos reporter, concluded his article on this debate with the following: "Fans don't want the interruptions of games due to tight rules, and players don't want to be adversely affected by the rules. It's time to listen to the cry of fans - 'don't interrupt our passion!'"
Finally. From what I've read up to this point, pretty much every official fomos interview/whatever has pretty much sided with kespa and tried to downplay the controversies
chating is ok spam is not i guess. the psychology play a big aspect in the world of sc i think chatting is effective but not all the time it can be backfire?
- mis-type like gorush did shouldnt be banned - typing somthg with the purpose of disturbing ur opponents concentration should be banned. any chat during the game should be banned. - "gg"/"ww" or w/e as accepting the game as a loss is fine.
Essentially, I feel that the referees should be given more leeway on what the decision should be. I see the main problems as twofold:
1) The rules themselves are not open to interpretation. The refs are basically forced to execute them every time, whether it's something that's actually the player's fault [Backho's premature ziziyo] or something that is absolutely ridiculous [Ruby and GoRush surrendering in Korean]
2) The punishment for virtually everything is disqualification. I see no reason why minor infractions such as GoRush's "a" should not simply receive a warning. And even then, there is the untried option of simply regaming. Though it might be more controversial than allowing the players to game on, it's certainly better than denying the fans any enjoyment whatsoever.
The on-site referees seem to be talking heads that have no independent functional ability. I'd like to see this changed.
ok i can understand that chatting can mess up someone, but typing "a"? when they clearly know typing is AGAINST the rules? obviously it was a mistake..why else would he type it, knowing that he would be dqed?
I can understand the need for rules and regulations in an e-sport as competitive as starcraft in Korea. These rules in some ways legitimize the competition. The enforcement of these rules follow naturally, since that legitimizes the rules. The chat ban, the rule on pausing games, and allied mines are all rules created with intention of making the competition better, of this we have no doubt. I actually didn't know the background history behind the chat ban, but after having read it I believe it's the correct decision. It's obvious that you can gain unfair advantages from chatting, especially in a series where the psychological state of the player plays a huge part in the result. Pausing creates a similar effect. There's a reason why in basketball coaches call time outs right after the first freethrow of two a player has, especially if this is an important freethrow. It makes the player have to ponder over it for the duration of the time out. With starcraft, random unexpected pauses in the game will throw an opponent off. It's hard to get back into the pace of the game coming back from a pause. Allied mines, well that was just abusing an aspect of the game that wasn't part of the game mechanics.
Anyways, having said all that, the incidences that the rules end up having effect on are mostly accidents. Nal_Ra's accidental f10 p instead of f10 o, Gorush typing out an a, etc. The decision to DQ Nal_Ra I can understand, it was necessary. There was no way of affirming that it was an accident. In the case of Gorush, however, I think it's fairly obvious that it wasn't intentional. There needs to be some form of case to case judgment by the judges in such cases. I would like to see Kespa make some minor changes to their rules allowing for a greater degree of flexibility. You can soothe the fans while still upholding an image of sound structure and legitimacy.
On May 17 2009 07:45 mmdmmd wrote: ok, I understand he accidentally pressed a.
But press enter after that? His mind is obviously somewhere else during that moment. IMO the ban is justified.
In game, when you type something, the only way to get rid of is enter. So yes, you could delete and then enter, but just enter is quicker and Gorush probably thought nothing was going to happen.
Hm...so my final point of the post was...typing to disturb should be allowed...you can do it, so can your opponent...it's a legitimate strategy that BOTH players can use...if typing to disturb shouldn't be allowed, should microing back and forth with Mutals to disturb not allowed too?
Is there somekind different system korean keyboard? I mean I can press ESC key everytime i want to cancel whatever I type. Who wants to erase text and then press enter again?
On May 17 2009 07:59 sky_slasher wrote: Hm...so my final point of the post was...typing to disturb should be allowed...you can do it, so can your opponent...it's a legitimate strategy that BOTH players can use...if typing to disturb shouldn't be allowed, should microing back and forth with Mutals to disturb not allowed too?
this i disagree with. its gonna turn into a constant form of spamming, and not very appealing to audience members.
In every sport the rules are open to a referee's interpretation based on his discernment of the intent of a player. I don't see why this should be so different and set in stone. It should be immediately obvious that a single mistyped letter is not some attempt at psychological warfare and is just that: a typo. That GoRush was disqualified for it is ludicrous.
I agree. The referee should interpret the rules, using common sense. In this case it was just a mistake, and should have had no effect on the match.
As far as allowing chat to mess with the opponent, I don't think it is a good idea, and if you want to play mind games you can do it before the match starts.
I can see why the chat ban was implemented, since it could potentially affect players negatively. Though I have yet to see where it came from; in the Boxer vs Junitoss game, where the ban is said to originate from, there is little to imply that Junitoss was in anyway affected by what Boxer said. He didn't start acting foolishly, doing weird things or anything like that - rather, he was just a bad player that had a huge negative score even before the match with Boxer. Off course, this particular game might have created a debate as to whether or not chatting could create disturbances to players, which is valid, but the stricter the ban is enforced, the less enjoyable it becomes to watch the game. The atmosphere back then was much more relaxed, and it was fun seeing the progamers having fun as well. They really should be more lax with issues like these. And when they're at it, allow ceremonies again, so there's some more fun involved.
On May 17 2009 07:45 mmdmmd wrote: ok, I understand he accidentally pressed a.
But press enter after that? His mind is obviously somewhere else during that moment. IMO the ban is justified.
In game, when you type something, the only way to get rid of is enter. So yes, you could delete and then enter, but just enter is quicker and Gorush probably thought nothing was going to happen.
totally not against gorush, but u can press ESC instead of enter lol
On May 17 2009 08:37 konadora wrote: Maybe they should set the chat for 'To Allies'? If the players aren't allied to the referee, then it wouldn't be any more of a problem, will it?
On May 17 2009 08:37 konadora wrote: Maybe they should set the chat for 'To Allies'? If the players aren't allied to the referee, then it wouldn't be any more of a problem, will it?
On May 17 2009 08:37 konadora wrote: Maybe they should set the chat for 'To Allies'? If the players aren't allied to the referee, then it wouldn't be any more of a problem, will it?
To Allies by default would be actually quite a neat safety buffer. Well, it could be a bit harder to change settings if your monitor broke like Leta's, but... Edit: Oh right shift enter solves the deal xD
As for chatting in-game, I personally think it's not such a stupid idea. Taunting the opponent has always been one of the elements of warfare. Player's personalities could shine better perhaps, mindgames would be even more important.
Of course, this mental game could be solved otherwise. Perhaps more aggressive pre-game interviews would spice things up. But the way the Korean progamers answer questions wouldn't hint too much towards this.
Kespa chose the other way, they want to concentrate on the game itself, and I see their logic. Strict rules in this approach are essential, but they should be guided by common sense. Dogspa referees clearly lack common sense, hence the resultant situation. And I think most of us agree that this is going a bit too far...
On May 17 2009 07:45 mmdmmd wrote: ok, I understand he accidentally pressed a.
But press enter after that? His mind is obviously somewhere else during that moment. IMO the ban is justified.
Use your brain mate. Which button is close to enter?
On topic: I pretty much agree with the people saying that these rules should be in place but the referees should enforce them only when it's clear it's done to disturb the other player.
Chat ban is pretty stupid... especially when they type 1 or 2 letters like 'a' which could happen just out of apm spam or 'ppp' which is pretty much the same case. funny or wacky ceremonies are pretty much encouraged by the winners, yet you get banned for typing?! Does the other player have a say in the matter? Like could BackHo have allowed the game to continue? anyways chatting makes the game more social, fun, and i would imagine gets the players and audience more excited/pumped. Its not like you can't talk shit to the guy at bat when you're a catcher in baseball. Adds more physiology to the game. Especially w/ GoRush wtf hes old school gotta show respect...
i believe you should be allowed to chat as much as you want as long as it is not offensive to the other player. chatting = worse play so its not affecting the game. and losses should be based on the player gg-ing leaving the game. not the ACTUAL "gg" (i believe progamers have enough integrity to not sit around the game until their dead)
Allowing chat would create true rivalry between players which would increase the amount of spectators and effectively make the parent company more money. It's pretty dumb that they would be so restricted to the point you would DQ someone over a damn typo. Pretty dumb.
On May 17 2009 09:19 Mykill wrote: i believe you should be allowed to chat as much as you want as long as it is not offensive to the other player. chatting = worse play so its not affecting the game. and losses should be based on the player gg-ing leaving the game. not the ACTUAL "gg" (i believe progamers have enough integrity to not sit around the game until their dead)
In a proleague finals not that long ago a toss hid pylons in PvP on Colloseum... I think it was Kahn vs someone...
Anyway, I think at this level of play even a little typing is very distracting and players who read the other players text will analyse it to think what it could mean... That's against the spirit of what KeSPA wants the game to be. I don't like that GoRush was disqualified, but a less severe penalty may still have been justified. It's hard to get creative, but maybe 10 second penalty box like they're not allowed to touch keyboard or mouse? That sounds retarded but with 1v1 what else can you do to make sure players don't pretend to be doing it be accident?
EDIT: I just watched the first GoRush game on HolyWorld... If GoRush was playing as badly as he was in the first game, I don't really feel much sympathy. His play was so gross.
I think chat in-game should be allowed. The psychological aspect of the game would be even more important, and would give more depth to players--some players (probably people like FBH >.>) would probably like to use it a lot, and cheesy players can take advantage of it by implying they're up to something. Other players (I'm imagining Flash here ahaha) would probably just be silent and ignore anything the opponent says, playing their own game regardless of the chat. The only downside is the possibility for bad manner/offensive comments. It's really hard to think of a ruleset that would both allow for chatting and preventing offensive remarks, other than leaving it entirely up to refs, so it's understandable why the chat ban is in place. They really need to rethink their everything=DQ policy though. I don't agree that gg should be the only allowable surrender (korean gg and other things IMO are all ok as long as they're understood as equivalents) but if the punishment was simply a warning I wouldn't really mind their stringent limits.
On May 17 2009 09:36 DoX.) wrote: The ref was fucking dumb during that game imo
That is politically incorrect! You have no reason to call the [sic] ref fucking dumb with no evidence beyond a truly valid and debatable decision he made that game. Ignorance and baseless attacks such as this inhibits the development of organized discussion and progress in e-sports.
On May 17 2009 09:36 DoX.) wrote: The ref was fucking dumb during that game imo
That is politically incorrect! You have no reason to call the [sic] ref fucking dumb with no evidence beyond a truly valid and debatable decision he made that game. Ignorance and baseless attacks such as this inhibits the development of organized discussion and progress in e-sports.
You're dumb and I have evidence! It's not the refs, it's the people who make the rules. The refs just enforce them.
^It was the ref's job to interpret what Gorush said and decide there and then if it warranted a DQ or regame or w/e. Kespa's rules already stated that it would be up to the ref to decide what would happen next.
On May 17 2009 07:45 mmdmmd wrote: ok, I understand he accidentally pressed a.
But press enter after that? His mind is obviously somewhere else during that moment. IMO the ban is justified.
In game, when you type something, the only way to get rid of is enter. So yes, you could delete and then enter, but just enter is quicker and Gorush probably thought nothing was going to happen.
I personally use esc to close chat without saying it but whatever.
On May 17 2009 09:36 DoX.) wrote: The ref was fucking dumb during that game imo
That is politically incorrect! You have no reason to call the [sic] ref fucking dumb with no evidence beyond a truly valid and debatable decision he made that game. Ignorance and baseless attacks such as this inhibits the development of organized discussion and progress in e-sports.
You're dumb and I have evidence! It's not the refs, it's the people who make the rules. The refs just enforce them.
I don't think chatting should be allowed in official matches, but I don't think chatting should be an automatic DQ either...what happened to GoRush was stupid.
On May 17 2009 08:37 konadora wrote: Maybe they should set the chat for 'To Allies'? If the players aren't allied to the referee, then it wouldn't be any more of a problem, will it?
Well then they cant see the gg
shift+enter? ~~
Shift enter is all-chat I believe. I think the allies shortcut is alt enter?
On May 17 2009 07:55 Too_MuchZerg wrote: Booths should have button near by keyboard which gamers can press if need to pause game (giving electric shock to kespa referee).
This, and a button on the other side of the keyboard that signals concession. The first button would be bright blue and would say PAUSE and the other would be red and say GG. Chatting ingame could then be disallowed and would result in a warning
imo the chat ban should just be completely revoked... The whole point of e-sports is fore the entertainment of the spectators and in game chat would only add to the entertainment and excitement value, not detract from it.
Also, if a player wishes they can squelch their opponent and not respond so they can make that choice if they wish.
At the very least KeSPA shouldn't penalize people for obvious mistakes like Nal_rA's accidental pause in the first minute of the game or GoRush typing "a" by accident... That's just silly and is going to hurt their fanbase's interest in starcraft e-sports.
Pretty sure you aren't allowed to chat publicly in other pro games like CS.
I think it's stupid as hell for players to be chatting it up in a professional game. There's really no reason to allow it, and letting people chat just welcomes problems of trying to enforce what they say when it comes to offensiveness and spamming. It's a lot easier to just say no chatting. Let them do it in the events like allstars and the lighthearted stuff.
On May 17 2009 08:37 konadora wrote: Maybe they should set the chat for 'To Allies'? If the players aren't allied to the referee, then it wouldn't be any more of a problem, will it?
Well then they cant see the gg
shift+enter? ~~
Shift enter is all-chat I believe. I think the allies shortcut is alt enter?
On May 17 2009 10:35 floor exercise wrote: Pretty sure you aren't allowed to chat publicly in other pro games like CS.
I think it's stupid as hell for players to be chatting it up in a professional game. There's really no reason to allow it, and letting people chat just welcomes problems of trying to enforce what they say when it comes to offensiveness and spamming. It's a lot easier to just say no chatting. Let them do it in the events like allstars and the lighthearted stuff.
Every CPL I went to and every LAN event I have been to chatting is allowed, mm2 is preferred, but a little comment or friendly remark is not penalized and they are rare. Although bare in mind the last LAN I attended or played in was back in early 2006.
ex: element dying to a two person stack during CPL winter 2003, his reaction - "towers are just so the 80s", a priceless quote in the cs community which took nothing away from anything and deserved no penalty.
Whether it be "nice shot rambo" or "gg" or "gg guys" or whatever in any kind of fashion. The only DQs that I know of in any LAN event whatsoever in CS had to do with talking shit, which is the only reason that is justifiable in my opinion.
Just drawing to draw the parallel because competitive 1.3/1.5/1.6/CS:S was getting pretty damn big, I don't follow it much anymore so I can't comment on its current status.
in western cultures we don't have a strong tradition of professional game playing like they have in asian cultures. most americans can only name two professional chess players (kasparov and fisher), if any. in asia (i am speaking from my experience living in japan, but i understand korea to be similar, correct me if i am wrong), there have long been televised go and chess games and lessons. the results are reported in newspapers and on news programs. people that are generally well informed about current events are aware of a lot of players and the various titles that are at stake. traditionally playing these games have been around as legit professions for 100s maybe 1000s of years.
this tradition is what pro gaming in korea springs from, not athletic sports. when you come at it from this perspective, things like the chat ban and the ear muffs as essential rules. it is all about the game. all the action takes place in the game and all the mind games are in the game. a go player that yelled or made annoying sounds or openly talked about strategy or specific moves in order to throw their opponent off would not be tolerated. that isn't mind games, it is trying to make up for a weakness in the game with something external. professionals are totally focused on the game and they let their play do all the talking.
starcraft is of course a little different. it is fast paced and young people like it, so they have flashing lights and rock music and cheering crowds and win ceremonies to make it more fun. but all of that is still kept external to the game itself to maintain credibility within the tradition of professional gaming. if they allowed chatting and text spamming, the game could easily get to a point where players just spammed nonstop. maybe pros could get used to it, but it would most likely decrease the value of the spectator experience. and then there is the worry of a major title being decided by chat or spam, which would kill the credibility of the game from the tradition of professional gaming.
all that considered, the rules are clearly too strict. in japan i once saw a professional go game in which one player sneezed while the other player was placing a stone. the second player was surprised and dropped his stone on the board, messing up a bunch of other stones. of course deliberately making an noise to distract another player would result in a forfeit, as would deliberately messing up the stones on the board. but since it was clearly an accident they fixed the clocks, fixed the board and proceeded with the game. no big deal. kespa needs to adopt the same stance when it comes to accidents. they have their video feed and cameras on their hands, right? the first time, pause and give a warning. if it becomes a pattern, then punish. really not hard. the current zero tolerance rule is clearly detrimental to the sport.
another thing that is a shame, imo, is that blizzard has not stepped up to patch starcraft to make a "competition mode". they have made so much money thanks to professional starcraft they really should have taken the time to make some improvements. a way to disable chat, with built in gg and pause request functions. a built in observer mode with additional stats displayed. a better, more interesting start screen than the lame ums story-mode-press-start thing that comes up. hopefully they are paying attention and at least put things like this in starcraft2.
The chat ban is up for debate. Is that psychological element a part of Starcraft? Hard to say, but it is up for debate. The real issue is KeSPA's implementation of rules.
I think LR said it well, but I shall state it again: 1) The rules have no lee way. You have live, thinking refs there, why don't you give them a function that live, thinking refs can do. The refs are trying to make KESPA and Esports work together, they're not going to make bad calls. 2) Warnings for major infractions would at least make the rules more fair. Making a DQ the one and only punishment for ceremonies, give FBH a hearing and a warning. If FBH is reckless again, perhaps then the game should be revoked.
On May 17 2009 07:45 mmdmmd wrote: ok, I understand he accidentally pressed a.
But press enter after that? His mind is obviously somewhere else during that moment. IMO the ban is justified.
Wow, you just DON'T understand do you? We've all been in a situation where we've made a mistake. No matter how stupid or ridiculous the mistake was, WE'VE ALL BEEN THERE BEFORE.
Why can't people like you just understand? I'd like to see you carry out a seemingly easy task and NEVER screw up.
On May 17 2009 07:45 mmdmmd wrote: ok, I understand he accidentally pressed a.
But press enter after that? His mind is obviously somewhere else during that moment. IMO the ban is justified.
Wow, you just DON'T understand do you? We've all been in a situation where we've made a mistake. No matter how stupid or ridiculous the mistake was, WE'VE ALL BEEN THERE BEFORE.
Why can't people like you just understand? I'd like to see you carry out a seemingly easy task and NEVER screw up.
some people are just idiots, dont try to reason with them.
I think they want to make sure starcraft looks professional and fair. If I had a voice in the matter I'd certainly be against banning chatting in game, but they must of made their minds that it is a game breaking function. It could potentially change the outcome of a game for the less deserving player who played mind games or spammed it breaking the other guy's concentration or whatever.
In my opinion that's bullshit, players got so many more issues to handle in their heads than whether there's a ton of text messages popping up at the bottom of the screen or the guy is trying to mess with your head. I doubt they even have time to notice it in the midst of their 400 APM routines. It would only be game breaking if it were visually impairing to have a few messages on the screen (as many as one can type while still playing, which can't cover that much area), and if that was the case they could set better rules preventing spamming and not chatting entirely.
They're afraid players can mess each other up through text, which is so gay and over protective. They type at the game lobby too, why not ban that. In fact, put a paper bag on their heads as they enter the booth, and not let them use their screen names, now that would be fair. They have to use "Generic_player_from_team#1" and "Generic_player_from_team#2" as aliases. No human expression allowed at all, because human expression is imbalanced, unjust, and perhaps dangerous.
But maybe it is game breaking and I'm wrong, you never know...
Pffft, it's like Kespa only thing you either DQ the player or not. I wonder if they've considered other options, like penalizing a player by like 10 seconds or something (can't touch mouse/keyboard for 10 seconds). That's a penalty without throwing the entire goddamn game.
On May 17 2009 08:37 konadora wrote: Maybe they should set the chat for 'To Allies'? If the players aren't allied to the referee, then it wouldn't be any more of a problem, will it?
Well then they cant see the gg
shift+enter? ~~
Shift enter is all-chat I believe. I think the allies shortcut is alt enter?
he's saying that both players should set to allied chat first chance they get, and then gg with shift+enter. that way, no one would know if they typed something or not, but when they gg, everybody sees it.
On May 17 2009 07:59 sky_slasher wrote: Hm...so my final point of the post was...typing to disturb should be allowed...you can do it, so can your opponent...it's a legitimate strategy that BOTH players can use...if typing to disturb shouldn't be allowed, should microing back and forth with Mutals to disturb not allowed too?
this i disagree with. its gonna turn into a constant form of spamming, and not very appealing to audience members.
I hate arguments like this.
Do progamers do something that portrays them as 12 year olds without a brain? Look, you remove the chat ban and i doubt you'd see much of a change. A bit of banter back and forth but spamming? Get real man, most of these gamers are grown adults, they know their limits.
IIRC Boxer didn't type "no space" to trick Juni... he typed that because it was true and he's a showman. Juni was just a nervous wreck and panicked.
I don't see how typing ban is even legitimate. It's up to the person reading it to believe it or not... I don't see the issue.
I believe some games would be much more entertaining if chatting were allowed. Imagine some of the rivalries that could flourish under such a system
But everyone needs to pay attention to the first page. These rules leave nothing to interpretation. An accident or an intentional BM is treated the same way which is WRONG... especially in a game where split seconds can lose you the game.
On May 19 2009 20:25 kNife wrote: sad for him.. but i reli cant think the way he typed ''a'' > Someone explained that in another thread on this issue. After getting disqualified the game before for typing gg in Korean, he wanted to test his keyboard settings, which language they were at, and accidently submitted the "a" he wrote to test.
On May 19 2009 20:25 kNife wrote: sad for him.. but i reli cant think the way he typed ''a'' ><ll
Someone explained that in another thread on this issue. After getting disqualified the game before for typing gg in Korean, he wanted to test his keyboard settings, which language they were at, and accidently submitted the "a" he wrote to test.
On May 19 2009 20:25 kNife wrote: sad for him.. but i reli cant think the way he typed ''a'' > Someone explained that in another thread on this issue. After getting disqualified the game before for typing gg in Korean, he wanted to test his keyboard settings, which language they were at, and accidently submitted the "a" he wrote to test.
Wouldn't he see that in the pre-game chat though?
It's the best explanation I have read so far, I doubt he would have tried to be the sacrificial lamb to challenge the rule.
so shouldn't you pluck the enter key off the keyboard? i havent slept yet and its morning so sorry if i can't think right now.... is there any hotkey manuvers that require the enter key? if not im gonna pluck it right now
On May 19 2009 21:49 Crimson)S(hadow wrote: so shouldn't you pluck the enter key off the keyboard? i havent slept yet and its morning so sorry if i can't think right now.... is there any hotkey manuvers that require the enter key? if not im gonna pluck it right now
On May 19 2009 21:49 Crimson)S(hadow wrote: so shouldn't you pluck the enter key off the keyboard? i havent slept yet and its morning so sorry if i can't think right now.... is there any hotkey manuvers that require the enter key? if not im gonna pluck it right now
On May 17 2009 07:45 mmdmmd wrote: ok, I understand he accidentally pressed a.
But press enter after that? His mind is obviously somewhere else during that moment. IMO the ban is justified.
Seeing the multitude of tasks they perform and they're constant on-screen focus I'm not surprised that when you're getting 300-400apm average you might accidentally press a button too many in one out of 100 games...
Seriously, during battles in WC3 it happens sometimes that my hand is placed a bit wrong on the keyboard and I can't use any abilities as I'm constantly pressing wrong key and wonder what's going on (I won't look at the kb until the battle is over). I imagine that mistakes happen but are not common, they should cut him some slack.
On May 17 2009 07:32 sky_slasher wrote: This is slasher. Thanks everyone for reading my translations! This is my first original post, discussing the history of chat ban in StarCraft leagues in South Korea and giving my opinion.
On May 13, at the round of 36 for OSL, GoRush was disqualified in his second game against BackHo and did not proceed further (the player to win two games proceeds, and BackHo won the first game). The reason was that he accidentally typed "a" on the chatting line - a violation of StarCraft leagues rules in South Korea (the ban on chatting during game), as you can see at 2:06 of this video:
At Fomos and other StarCraft forums, a huge debate ensued. Some argue that the rules are too tight, while others maintain that rules are rules and every gamer should follow it.
The origin of the chat ban goes back to 2005. At the Daum Direct OnGameNet Dual Tournament, the emperor Boxer (OSL record of 84 wins and 52 losses then) played against a new player Junitoss (OSL record of 1 win and 2 losses then). The map was Forte which has a small main base. In the middle of the game, Boxer went for a hidden Factory and typed what is translated into English as "no space :[" on the chatting line in an attempt to trick Junitoss into thinking that he had no space to build additional Factories due to the small main base, as you can see at 8:34 of this video:
Junitoss lost the match. Whether he was tricked or not, Boxer's message was likely to disturb the new player who is not used to the psychological aspects of StarCraft. After this match, a debate ensued, some arguing Boxer's action was a valid strategy while some arguing that it was not fair. Later, the chat ban was implemented.
In discussing the issue of the chat ban, it is important to recognize if any aspect of StarCraft gives an extra advantage to a player, in addition to what has been essentially incorporated into the game (like in general Protoss is strong against Terran; Terran against Zerg; Zerg against Protoss; Valkyrie is strong against Mutal; and so forth). Allied Mine - where a player allies an opponent while the opponent's units are on a field of Mines (thus the Mines are not exploded) and unallies at the most opportune time - is not allowed, presumably because it gives an extra advantage to a Terran player (can you think of equivalent examples to Protoss or Zerg? Maybe Stop Lurker, but you can do that without allying).
How about chatting? Does that give an extra advantage to a player? Can only some groups of players use chatting while others cannot, as is the case with Allied Mines (only Terrans can use this strategy)?
Either player can use chatting to his advantage. What if Junitoss was a more experienced player and typed "haha I saw the factory!" when he did not?
Chatting is something that does not give an extra advantage to any players. All the players can use it, and therefore it should be allowed.
Junghan Yi, a Fomos reporter, concluded his article on this debate with the following: "Fans don't want the interruptions of games due to tight rules, and players don't want to be adversely affected by the rules. It's time to listen to the cry of fans - 'don't interrupt our passion!'"
I am happy to see what others think.
Thank you.
This is interesting. The Korean forums think that the 좁아ㅠㅠ(narrow T-T) means the narrow choke in the map, not the lack of space, and thus, BoxeR tried to stop Juni from scouting his ninja expand.
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.fomos.kr/board/issue/1242233085_1.jpg)
, or gg? when they're ahead in a game
