|
On April 20 2014 05:58 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. What you are saying is actually a contradiction in terms. "If you play for a draw and are in a position in which you cannot possibly lose... you effectively lost the game". It's actual gibberish, I'm sorry. Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. No, by definition you don't deserve to lose. If you put yourself into a situation in which neither your opponent nor you can win/lose the game respectively, then you and your opponent are both in the exact same tie situation. In no way does it follow from that, that one of the two deserves to lose...
Okay, lemme put this scenario in front of you
let's say you're playing a zvz, and for 30 minutes it's very close action packed yadda yadda yadda, but you win a big fight and get a huge advantage. Instead of trying to come back from that, your opponent holes up in his main with mass swarmhost/spore crawler/viper Due to the design of the units, the spore buff, and the way ramps work, you can't kill him. It's a draw, regame.
After 30 minutes of action, you win a big fight and get an advantage that will snowball into a win. Unfortunately, your opponent decides to turtle in his main with SH/spore/viper. Regame again
how long do you want that bullshit to go on?
|
On April 20 2014 05:45 Storm-Giant wrote:A dumb (though understandable) rule, a dumber unit. Swarm Hosts need to be tweaked (not saying nerfed!) so they have some vulnerability while sitting on the same spot for literally hours. As long as they aren't changed, this situation may occur in future tournaments. (And Blizzard will keep ignoring this matter, sigh  )
hosts is a good unit... it should here to stay
the problem lies on fundamental flaws of 'freebies'
put like a 1, 2 or 5 mineral cost per casting
|
if you have problems with the rules in a tournament convince admins to change/delete that rule. If admins do not do anything about it and you should keep that in consideration and play it out or just dont participate at all. Rules are rules and as admins perspective they cant let 1 series go for over 3 hours specially at a lan.
|
On April 20 2014 06:14 GTPGlitch wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 05:58 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. What you are saying is actually a contradiction in terms. "If you play for a draw and are in a position in which you cannot possibly lose... you effectively lost the game". It's actual gibberish, I'm sorry. On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. No, by definition you don't deserve to lose. If you put yourself into a situation in which neither your opponent nor you can win/lose the game respectively, then you and your opponent are both in the exact same tie situation. In no way does it follow from that, that one of the two deserves to lose... Okay, lemme put this scenario in front of you let's say you're playing a zvz, and for 30 minutes it's very close action packed yadda yadda yadda, but you win a big fight and get a huge advantage. Instead of trying to come back from that, your opponent holes up in his main with mass swarmhost/spore crawler/viper Due to the design of the units, the spore buff, and the way ramps work, you can't kill him. It's a draw, regame. After 30 minutes of action, you win a big fight and get an advantage that will snowball into a win. Unfortunately, your opponent decides to turtle in his main with SH/spore/viper. Regame again how long do you want that bullshit to go on?
Forever until the end of time, something gets patched, or you figure out a resource.
|
On April 20 2014 06:14 GTPGlitch wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 05:58 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. What you are saying is actually a contradiction in terms. "If you play for a draw and are in a position in which you cannot possibly lose... you effectively lost the game". It's actual gibberish, I'm sorry. On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. No, by definition you don't deserve to lose. If you put yourself into a situation in which neither your opponent nor you can win/lose the game respectively, then you and your opponent are both in the exact same tie situation. In no way does it follow from that, that one of the two deserves to lose... After 30 minutes of action, you win a big fight and get an advantage that will snowball into a win. Unfortunately, your opponent decides to turtle in his main with SH/spore/viper.
Eh, what? If your opponent is in a position to stop you from killing him and make it impossible for you to win, how is you winning the fight snowballing into anything, nevermind a win?
|
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran?
|
Swarmhost are clearly bad for Sc2. They need to be removed.
|
On April 20 2014 05:58 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. What you are saying is actually a contradiction in terms. "If you play for a draw and are in a position in which you cannot possibly lose... you effectively lost the game". It's actual gibberish, I'm sorry. Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. No, by definition you don't deserve to lose. If you put yourself into a situation in which neither your opponent nor you can win/lose the game respectively, then you and your opponent are both in the exact same tie situation. In no way does it follow from that, that one of the two deserves to lose...
A boX series is a boX series, not a boX+d where d is the number of times a player manages to force a draw. Tournaments have time schedules they'd like to stick to. Very few organisers would like it if the one hour they scheduled for a bo3 turns out to be three hours or more because one of the players has to much pride to admit he was bested (yes, being forced to hole up in your main with no chance or intention to get out counts as being bested).
I'm talking about intention here. If you have the intention to still get out, good. If you don't and you just want to wait for your opponent's army, then no. You've been bested. In SC2 the score is either 1 or 0, not 0,5. The system does not work like that.
|
On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran?
It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again.
I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again? The tournament can't just stop on account of one game, the venue is rented for a certain, reasonable period of time, and both the players and organizers have other things going on in their lives. If this one game suddenly takes 3 days to play out because Miniraser is desperate and his opponent simply doesn't know how to deal with this strategy, the tournament will actually be unsalvageably fucked.
If you guys have another solution to dealing with this kind of situation, I'd love to hear it.
|
On April 20 2014 06:30 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 05:58 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. What you are saying is actually a contradiction in terms. "If you play for a draw and are in a position in which you cannot possibly lose... you effectively lost the game". It's actual gibberish, I'm sorry. On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. No, by definition you don't deserve to lose. If you put yourself into a situation in which neither your opponent nor you can win/lose the game respectively, then you and your opponent are both in the exact same tie situation. In no way does it follow from that, that one of the two deserves to lose... because one of the players has to much pride to admit he was bested (yes, being forced to hole up in your main with no chance or intention to get out counts as being bested).
No, it doesn't. Go ahead, load up SC2 right now, do exactly that and see if the game actually ends in a draw or a loss for you and then get back at me.
On April 20 2014 06:34 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran? It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again. I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again?
In the same sense I could easily ask "why didn't ourk just 6 pool or rush miniraser?", your argument is denying Ourk any sense of agency in the early game, as if he (Ourk) was somehow magically obligated to play for lategame aswell and there was no way he could have cheesed or done an early all-in. Great logic.
|
On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:30 maartendq wrote:On April 20 2014 05:58 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. What you are saying is actually a contradiction in terms. "If you play for a draw and are in a position in which you cannot possibly lose... you effectively lost the game". It's actual gibberish, I'm sorry. On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. No, by definition you don't deserve to lose. If you put yourself into a situation in which neither your opponent nor you can win/lose the game respectively, then you and your opponent are both in the exact same tie situation. In no way does it follow from that, that one of the two deserves to lose... because one of the players has to much pride to admit he was bested (yes, being forced to hole up in your main with no chance or intention to get out counts as being bested). No, it doesn't. Go ahead, load up SC2 right now, do exactly that and see if the game actually ends in a draw or a loss for you and then get back at me.
Load up a game and start swearing in chat. Tell me if you get a DQ. What's that, tournaments have rules?! Marvelous concept.
|
On April 20 2014 06:38 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 06:30 maartendq wrote:On April 20 2014 05:58 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. What you are saying is actually a contradiction in terms. "If you play for a draw and are in a position in which you cannot possibly lose... you effectively lost the game". It's actual gibberish, I'm sorry. On April 20 2014 05:56 maartendq wrote:
If you purposely withdraw your whole army to your main with only the intent of forcing a draw, you deserve to lose. No, by definition you don't deserve to lose. If you put yourself into a situation in which neither your opponent nor you can win/lose the game respectively, then you and your opponent are both in the exact same tie situation. In no way does it follow from that, that one of the two deserves to lose... because one of the players has to much pride to admit he was bested (yes, being forced to hole up in your main with no chance or intention to get out counts as being bested). No, it doesn't. Go ahead, load up SC2 right now, do exactly that and see if the game actually ends in a draw or a loss for you and then get back at me. Load up a game and start swearing in chat. Tell me if you get a DQ. What's that, tournaments have rules?! Marvelous concept.
But now you are discussing the rule itself and not the philosophical implications of it. We are discussing wether or not X logically counts as losing and not if a rule states it does. Two completely seperate arguments, which makes me think that this debate goes way over your head.
|
On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:34 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran? It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again. I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again? In the same sense I could easily ask "why didn't ourk just 6 pool or rush miniraser?", your argument is denying Ourk any sense of agency in the early game, as if he (Ourk) was somehow magically obligated to play for lategame aswell and there was no way he could have cheesed or done an early all-in. Great logic.
I didn't ask for a counter-argument, I asked for a solution. I understand that the solution the organizers implemented is not ideal in every conceivable sense. It is, as far as I can tell, the best of many shitty solutions. If you have a better one on offer, ie. give Miniraser the win and disqualify Ourk, then present an argument for it and maybe I'll be compelled.
|
On April 20 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 06:34 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran? It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again. I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again? In the same sense I could easily ask "why didn't ourk just 6 pool or rush miniraser?", your argument is denying Ourk any sense of agency in the early game, as if he (Ourk) was somehow magically obligated to play for lategame aswell and there was no way he could have cheesed or done an early all-in. Great logic. I didn't ask for a counter-argument, I asked for a solution. I understand that the solution the organizers implemented is not ideal in every conceivable sense. It is, as far as I can tell, the best of many shitty solutions. If you have a better one on offer, ie. give Miniraser the win and disqualify Ourk, then present an argument for it and maybe I'll be compelled.
play with the standard rules of Sc2? Draws are apart of the game, much like chess... If you have the opportunity to not lose. then you best take it. thats how competition works. To me having a rule where forcing a standard outcome such as a draw, to loss to one player is bad for competition. The problem i have with the rules, is that what miniraiser did is a natural stalemate in SC2. and the problem with the other side of this coin, EVERY stalemate is intentional =/ So it just comes down to referee opinion and opinions should not exist in esport rules.
|
On April 20 2014 06:44 KiF1rE wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 06:34 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran? It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again. I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again? In the same sense I could easily ask "why didn't ourk just 6 pool or rush miniraser?", your argument is denying Ourk any sense of agency in the early game, as if he (Ourk) was somehow magically obligated to play for lategame aswell and there was no way he could have cheesed or done an early all-in. Great logic. I didn't ask for a counter-argument, I asked for a solution. I understand that the solution the organizers implemented is not ideal in every conceivable sense. It is, as far as I can tell, the best of many shitty solutions. If you have a better one on offer, ie. give Miniraser the win and disqualify Ourk, then present an argument for it and maybe I'll be compelled. play with the standard rules of Sc2? Draws are apart of the game, much like chess... If you have the opportunity to not lose. then you best take it. thats how competition works. To me having a rule where forcing a standard outcome such as a draw, to loss to one player is bad for competition.
Is it good for the competition that the entire tournament may have to be canceled as a result? Seriously, we're not talking about rules in some theoretical academic vacuum, we're talking about a rented venue where there is only so much time actually allotted for games. Once that time is up, there can physically be no more games.
|
On April 20 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 06:34 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran? It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again. I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again? In the same sense I could easily ask "why didn't ourk just 6 pool or rush miniraser?", your argument is denying Ourk any sense of agency in the early game, as if he (Ourk) was somehow magically obligated to play for lategame aswell and there was no way he could have cheesed or done an early all-in. Great logic. I didn't ask for a counter-argument, I asked for a solution. I understand that the solution the organizers implemented is not ideal in every conceivable sense. It is, as far as I can tell, the best of many shitty solutions. If you have a better one on offer, ie. give Miniraser the win and disqualify Ourk, then present an argument for it and maybe I'll be compelled.
No, the best solution (given the circumstances) would probably have been to flip a coin. Ourks actions resulted in the same outcome twice just as much as Miniraser's actions did.
The way most people in this thread phrase their posts seems to imply that Ourk really had no agency in these games at all and was just Miniraser's toy, which is simply wrong.
IF ourk had done everything in his power to stop Miniraser from turtling again (in the) endgame he could have easily forced a decision earlier, by either 6 pooling or rushing Miniraser in some other way.
The fact that he didn't do that, means that he is just as guilty that the games resulted in draws as Miniraser is. It's just easier to blame Miniraser because he was the defensive player in both games, which for some reason is frowned upon in this community, even though it technically is perfectly within the rules of the game itself.
Really confusing.
On April 20 2014 06:47 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:44 KiF1rE wrote:On April 20 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 06:34 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran? It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again. I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again? In the same sense I could easily ask "why didn't ourk just 6 pool or rush miniraser?", your argument is denying Ourk any sense of agency in the early game, as if he (Ourk) was somehow magically obligated to play for lategame aswell and there was no way he could have cheesed or done an early all-in. Great logic. I didn't ask for a counter-argument, I asked for a solution. I understand that the solution the organizers implemented is not ideal in every conceivable sense. It is, as far as I can tell, the best of many shitty solutions. If you have a better one on offer, ie. give Miniraser the win and disqualify Ourk, then present an argument for it and maybe I'll be compelled. play with the standard rules of Sc2? Draws are apart of the game, much like chess... If you have the opportunity to not lose. then you best take it. thats how competition works. To me having a rule where forcing a standard outcome such as a draw, to loss to one player is bad for competition. Is it good for the competition that the entire tournament may have to be canceled as a result? Seriously, we're not talking about rules in some theoretical academic vacuum, we're talking about a rented venue where there is only so much time actually allotted for games. Once that time is up, there can physically be no more games.
Then don't get involved in the theoretical debate. If that is your stance, FINE, it makes sense. But it's not what we were discussing earlier. You don't have to play semantic games with people if your stance is as clear-cut as this and you have no interest in the more theoretical discussion behind that, which is focusing on "win-conditions" and so on.
|
I actually don't mind that. If you play to draw you can not win, therefore you lose. Simple solution to this is play to win
|
On April 20 2014 06:48 Orcasgt24 wrote:
I actually don't mind that. If you play to draw you can not win, therefore you lose. Simple solution to this is play to win
I've been pretty pissed that terran can force stalemates vs protoss in certain situations. Absolute bullcrap that the protoss killed the entire terran army, could have over a hundred supply in army, but because of something as dumb as "LOL I CAN FLOAT MY BUILDINGS, YOU CAN KILL ME" is apparently worth a regame. The only race that can do such a thing, too.
I'm glad anytime somebody gets awarded a loss for forcing a stalemate. I hope this happens more often, actually.
edit - they can do it vs zergs too, but it's much more commonly seen vs toss
|
On April 20 2014 06:48 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:37 SlixSC wrote:On April 20 2014 06:34 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 20 2014 06:23 Caihead wrote:
So when Polt or Marineking does it it's fine because they are terran? It was fine the first time Miniraser did it. Then he immediately, deliberately did it again. I asked on the last page, I'm asking again. What happens if the second time was called a draw just like the first, and in the third game Miniraser did it again, taking up another two hours? And then he did it again? And again? In the same sense I could easily ask "why didn't ourk just 6 pool or rush miniraser?", your argument is denying Ourk any sense of agency in the early game, as if he (Ourk) was somehow magically obligated to play for lategame aswell and there was no way he could have cheesed or done an early all-in. Great logic. I didn't ask for a counter-argument, I asked for a solution. I understand that the solution the organizers implemented is not ideal in every conceivable sense. It is, as far as I can tell, the best of many shitty solutions. If you have a better one on offer, ie. give Miniraser the win and disqualify Ourk, then present an argument for it and maybe I'll be compelled. No, the best solution (given the circumstances) would probably have been to flip a coin. Ourks actions resulted in the same outcome twice just as much Miniraser's action's did. The way most people in this thread phrase their posts seems to imply that Ourk really had no agency in these games at all and was just Miniraser's toy, which is simply wrong. IF ourk had done everything in his power to stop Miniraser from turtling again endgame he could have easily forced a decision earlier, by either 6 pooling or rushing Miniraser in some other way early on. The fact that he didn't do that, means that he is just as guilty that the games resulted in a draw as Miniraser is. It's just easier to blame Miniraser because he was the defensive player in both games, which for some reason is frowned upon in this community, even though it technically is perfectly within the rules of the game itself. Really confusing.
Without having seen the games, I can't judge whether the blame is really 50-50, ie. as far as I know, which isn't far at all, it's possible that Ourk tried something different in game 2, but it didn't kill Miniraser outright and led to a two hour stalemate. In the third game, he would have tried something different again, and there's no telling if it would have worked or led to another 2 hour stalemate. (if you watched the games and actually know the relevant info, please tell me!) If this is true, the blame is not 50-50, but maybe 70-30, in which case I'm OK with Miniraser getting DQed.
If the blame really is equally splittable, then a coin flip may have been preferable.
|
I'd love for them to remove swarmhosts, come up with an interesting unit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
