On April 20 2014 00:23 xuanzue wrote: really awful admins.
blizzard must ban them for organizing any future tournament.
it's always awful when you change the rules in between games.
They didn't change the rules in between games. They always stayed the same, Miniraser was just mad and spouted misinformation on twitter, which we here at TeamLiquid took as fact.
Players can either A) Blinding cloud + baneling bomb vs the 1base spore swarmhost save, or if leading player cant afford this go for: B) Agree to a re-game as soon as possible, you know even better than admins when stuff are gonna get bonkers so dont make it more difficult than it has to be
On blizzard's end it would probably make sense to implement: - Brood Lords immune to abducts (ultralisk was already hotfixed, muta was "kind of hotfixed", so why not. - Spores nerfed vs non-light Zerg units. change spore bonus from +30 dmg vs biological into +30 dmg vs biological light. Corruptors, overlords and brood lords take too much damage as it is now. - A more extreme change: Allow for abduction(incl. uproot) of spore and spine crawlers by vipers?
As stupid as it may sound the current ZvZ endgame would benefit from returning to the WoL situation. It had way more depth than the current SH/spore/viper.
The player who was ahead in this situation had no gas remaining.
They did re-game and in the re-game Miniraser did the same, made Swarm Hosts and pulled into his main to force another stalemate. Don't know what you do then.
I fail to see how it's different from what terrans do in TvP. If your opponent has no resources to kill your floating buildings, will he be awarded a win at i51 regardless?
When Terrans lift their buildings, it's usually because they're trying to win a base-race and that's their only option to prolong it. The only way a base-race can occur is if both players attack each other's bases at the same time. Therefore, if the game is in a situation where a base-race is happening, then it's clear that both players were playing to win since they must've been attacking each other in order to get into that situation. This means that this situation would fall into the category of "natural stalemate", which the rules mention results in a re-game.
I didn't see Ourk's game so I shouldn't really comment on it, but it does sound like Miniraser has put himself in a situation where he has absolutely no intention of trying to win the game twice in a row. That isn't a "natural stalemate".
I don't know, I feel like a lot of the time terrans do go for a draw when they have no chance of winning. It then falls on the admins to try and decipher the player's intent, and that's a slippery slope if I've ever seen one.
How often do we see draws in SC2? I feel like if a draw happens twice in a row as a result of the same player doing nothing at all to attempt a win, it becomes very clear that someone is playing to draw rather than playing to win.
Fair point, but I feel like with how swarmhost plays, we're going to see this a lot more often if swarmhost vs swarmhost becomes common. If a tournament has a rule like this, you basicly have to arbitrarily decide the player's intent in not attacking or tech switching in games.
I think there's a difference between sitting in the middle of the map in SH vs SH and not being able to take an advantage to when you lose your advantage retreating to the main base because there is nothing else you can do.
Players can either A) Blinding cloud + baneling bomb vs the 1base spore swarmhost save, or if leading player cant afford this go for: B) Agree to a re-game as soon as possible, you know even better than admins when stuff are gonna get bonkers so dont make it more difficult than it has to be
On blizzard's end it would probably make sense to implement: - Brood Lords immune to abducts (ultralisk was already hotfixed, muta was "kind of hotfixed", so why not. - Spores nerfed vs non-light Zerg units. change spore bonus from +30 dmg vs biological into +30 dmg vs biological light. Corruptors, overlords and brood lords take too much damage as it is now. - A more extreme change: Allow for abduction(incl. uproot) of spore and spine crawlers by vipers?
As stupid as it may sound the current ZvZ endgame would benefit from returning to the WoL situation. It had way more depth than the current SH/spore/viper.
The player who was ahead in this situation had no gas remaining.
They did re-game and in the re-game Miniraser did the same, made Swarm Hosts and pulled into his main to force another stalemate. Don't know what you do then.
I fail to see how it's different from what terrans do in TvP. If your opponent has no resources to kill your floating buildings, will he be awarded a win at i51 regardless?
When Terrans lift their buildings, it's usually because they're trying to win a base-race and that's their only option to prolong it. The only way a base-race can occur is if both players attack each other's bases at the same time. Therefore, if the game is in a situation where a base-race is happening, then it's clear that both players were playing to win since they must've been attacking each other in order to get into that situation. This means that this situation would fall into the category of "natural stalemate", which the rules mention results in a re-game.
I didn't see Ourk's game so I shouldn't really comment on it, but it does sound like Miniraser has put himself in a situation where he has absolutely no intention of trying to win the game twice in a row. That isn't a "natural stalemate".
I don't know, I feel like a lot of the time terrans do go for a draw when they have no chance of winning. It then falls on the admins to try and decipher the player's intent, and that's a slippery slope if I've ever seen one.
How often do we see draws in SC2? I feel like if a draw happens twice in a row as a result of the same player doing nothing at all to attempt a win, it becomes very clear that someone is playing to draw rather than playing to win.
Fair point, but I feel like with how swarmhost plays, we're going to see this a lot more often if swarmhost vs swarmhost becomes common. If a tournament has a rule like this, you basicly have to arbitrarily decide the player's intent in not attacking or tech switching in games.
I think there's a difference between sitting in the middle of the map in SH vs SH and not being able to take an advantage to when you lose your advantage retreating to the main base because there is nothing else you can do.
The leading player still has a responsibility to prove that he/she can break that one base with 50 swarmhosts and 30 spores, if the player can't, he/she's not deserving of the win and the almighty game goddess rules it as a draw
Players can either A) Blinding cloud + baneling bomb vs the 1base spore swarmhost save, or if leading player cant afford this go for: B) Agree to a re-game as soon as possible, you know even better than admins when stuff are gonna get bonkers so dont make it more difficult than it has to be
On blizzard's end it would probably make sense to implement: - Brood Lords immune to abducts (ultralisk was already hotfixed, muta was "kind of hotfixed", so why not. - Spores nerfed vs non-light Zerg units. change spore bonus from +30 dmg vs biological into +30 dmg vs biological light. Corruptors, overlords and brood lords take too much damage as it is now. - A more extreme change: Allow for abduction(incl. uproot) of spore and spine crawlers by vipers?
As stupid as it may sound the current ZvZ endgame would benefit from returning to the WoL situation. It had way more depth than the current SH/spore/viper.
The player who was ahead in this situation had no gas remaining.
They did re-game and in the re-game Miniraser did the same, made Swarm Hosts and pulled into his main to force another stalemate. Don't know what you do then.
I fail to see how it's different from what terrans do in TvP. If your opponent has no resources to kill your floating buildings, will he be awarded a win at i51 regardless?
When Terrans lift their buildings, it's usually because they're trying to win a base-race and that's their only option to prolong it. The only way a base-race can occur is if both players attack each other's bases at the same time. Therefore, if the game is in a situation where a base-race is happening, then it's clear that both players were playing to win since they must've been attacking each other in order to get into that situation. This means that this situation would fall into the category of "natural stalemate", which the rules mention results in a re-game.
I didn't see Ourk's game so I shouldn't really comment on it, but it does sound like Miniraser has put himself in a situation where he has absolutely no intention of trying to win the game twice in a row. That isn't a "natural stalemate".
I don't know, I feel like a lot of the time terrans do go for a draw when they have no chance of winning. It then falls on the admins to try and decipher the player's intent, and that's a slippery slope if I've ever seen one.
How often do we see draws in SC2? I feel like if a draw happens twice in a row as a result of the same player doing nothing at all to attempt a win, it becomes very clear that someone is playing to draw rather than playing to win.
Fair point, but I feel like with how swarmhost plays, we're going to see this a lot more often if swarmhost vs swarmhost becomes common. If a tournament has a rule like this, you basicly have to arbitrarily decide the player's intent in not attacking or tech switching in games.
I think there's a difference between sitting in the middle of the map in SH vs SH and not being able to take an advantage to when you lose your advantage retreating to the main base because there is nothing else you can do.
When you lose your advantage and take a better position, aren't you then trying to stay alive and force a mistake out of your opponent and keeping a chance of winning the game instead of staying in a situation you'll most certainly die in?
Players can either A) Blinding cloud + baneling bomb vs the 1base spore swarmhost save, or if leading player cant afford this go for: B) Agree to a re-game as soon as possible, you know even better than admins when stuff are gonna get bonkers so dont make it more difficult than it has to be
On blizzard's end it would probably make sense to implement: - Brood Lords immune to abducts (ultralisk was already hotfixed, muta was "kind of hotfixed", so why not. - Spores nerfed vs non-light Zerg units. change spore bonus from +30 dmg vs biological into +30 dmg vs biological light. Corruptors, overlords and brood lords take too much damage as it is now. - A more extreme change: Allow for abduction(incl. uproot) of spore and spine crawlers by vipers?
As stupid as it may sound the current ZvZ endgame would benefit from returning to the WoL situation. It had way more depth than the current SH/spore/viper.
The player who was ahead in this situation had no gas remaining.
They did re-game and in the re-game Miniraser did the same, made Swarm Hosts and pulled into his main to force another stalemate. Don't know what you do then.
I fail to see how it's different from what terrans do in TvP. If your opponent has no resources to kill your floating buildings, will he be awarded a win at i51 regardless?
When Terrans lift their buildings, it's usually because they're trying to win a base-race and that's their only option to prolong it. The only way a base-race can occur is if both players attack each other's bases at the same time. Therefore, if the game is in a situation where a base-race is happening, then it's clear that both players were playing to win since they must've been attacking each other in order to get into that situation. This means that this situation would fall into the category of "natural stalemate", which the rules mention results in a re-game.
I didn't see Ourk's game so I shouldn't really comment on it, but it does sound like Miniraser has put himself in a situation where he has absolutely no intention of trying to win the game twice in a row. That isn't a "natural stalemate".
I don't know, I feel like a lot of the time terrans do go for a draw when they have no chance of winning. It then falls on the admins to try and decipher the player's intent, and that's a slippery slope if I've ever seen one.
How often do we see draws in SC2? I feel like if a draw happens twice in a row as a result of the same player doing nothing at all to attempt a win, it becomes very clear that someone is playing to draw rather than playing to win.
Fair point, but I feel like with how swarmhost plays, we're going to see this a lot more often if swarmhost vs swarmhost becomes common. If a tournament has a rule like this, you basicly have to arbitrarily decide the player's intent in not attacking or tech switching in games.
I think there's a difference between sitting in the middle of the map in SH vs SH and not being able to take an advantage to when you lose your advantage retreating to the main base because there is nothing else you can do.
When you lose your advantage and take a better position, aren't you then trying to stay alive and force a mistake out of your opponent and keeping a chance of winning the game instead of staying in a situation you'll most certainly die in?
That's called playing the game in my eyes :/
But where do you draw the line? You can't let this go on time and time again if you have to stick to a schedule. You have to make a decision to keep the tournament going on right? Giving the win to the player who had the advantage before the draw is basically the only way to decide this, if you do not have time for another regame.
To put it into perspective, 3 hours after the start of the series the 2nd Map started, which is when 2 rounds later in the tournament should have been starting.
this is ridiculous, the game can be played this way, and if its a draw so be it. But it is their tournament and they can have what ever rules they want, they are the ones giving out the prize money.
this, however, is more pertinent - what do you think they'll do if you had your way and games just descended into 2 hour snooze fests?
After 3 hours of ZvZ a player should be able to build a seige swarm host for 15k/15k with 15 range that can't be abducted. Then if one player is just turtling on one base, the other one can break him. If the map is mined out and it's just swarm host battling, regame it.
Slightly tongue-in-cheek but idk what else to say. Reworking the swarmhost would mess up all the Zerg matchups I think but I really don't agree with giving a win to one player over the other arbitrarily.
this, however, is more pertinent - what do you think they'll do if you had your way and games just descended into 2 hour snooze fests?
I don't think this game- or Mana vs. Firecake, or any other 2+ hour game- represents the standard game of SC2. Those are outliers, and there are always going to be situations that could force a stalemate, even without swarm hosts.
On more than one occasion in BW, there were TvT stalemates because both players had taken half the map, set up their siege tank/ goliath/ turret/ etc. lines as close as possible, and neither player was willing to move forwards (because they'd lose). So they'd draw and re-game.
Imagine if BW banned siege tanks because of the .0000000001 chance that they'd force a stalemate. lol.
Players can either A) Blinding cloud + baneling bomb vs the 1base spore swarmhost save, or if leading player cant afford this go for: B) Agree to a re-game as soon as possible, you know even better than admins when stuff are gonna get bonkers so dont make it more difficult than it has to be
On blizzard's end it would probably make sense to implement: - Brood Lords immune to abducts (ultralisk was already hotfixed, muta was "kind of hotfixed", so why not. - Spores nerfed vs non-light Zerg units. change spore bonus from +30 dmg vs biological into +30 dmg vs biological light. Corruptors, overlords and brood lords take too much damage as it is now. - A more extreme change: Allow for abduction(incl. uproot) of spore and spine crawlers by vipers?
As stupid as it may sound the current ZvZ endgame would benefit from returning to the WoL situation. It had way more depth than the current SH/spore/viper.
The player who was ahead in this situation had no gas remaining.
They did re-game and in the re-game Miniraser did the same, made Swarm Hosts and pulled into his main to force another stalemate. Don't know what you do then.
I fail to see how it's different from what terrans do in TvP. If your opponent has no resources to kill your floating buildings, will he be awarded a win at i51 regardless?
When Terrans lift their buildings, it's usually because they're trying to win a base-race and that's their only option to prolong it. The only way a base-race can occur is if both players attack each other's bases at the same time. Therefore, if the game is in a situation where a base-race is happening, then it's clear that both players were playing to win since they must've been attacking each other in order to get into that situation. This means that this situation would fall into the category of "natural stalemate", which the rules mention results in a re-game.
I didn't see Ourk's game so I shouldn't really comment on it, but it does sound like Miniraser has put himself in a situation where he has absolutely no intention of trying to win the game twice in a row. That isn't a "natural stalemate".
I don't know, I feel like a lot of the time terrans do go for a draw when they have no chance of winning. It then falls on the admins to try and decipher the player's intent, and that's a slippery slope if I've ever seen one.
How often do we see draws in SC2? I feel like if a draw happens twice in a row as a result of the same player doing nothing at all to attempt a win, it becomes very clear that someone is playing to draw rather than playing to win.
Fair point, but I feel like with how swarmhost plays, we're going to see this a lot more often if swarmhost vs swarmhost becomes common. If a tournament has a rule like this, you basicly have to arbitrarily decide the player's intent in not attacking or tech switching in games.
I think there's a difference between sitting in the middle of the map in SH vs SH and not being able to take an advantage to when you lose your advantage retreating to the main base because there is nothing else you can do.
When you lose your advantage and take a better position, aren't you then trying to stay alive and force a mistake out of your opponent and keeping a chance of winning the game instead of staying in a situation you'll most certainly die in?
That's called playing the game in my eyes :/
But where do you draw the line? You can't let this go on time and time again if you have to stick to a schedule. You have to make a decision to keep the tournament going on right? Giving the win to the player who had the advantage before the draw is basically the only way to decide this, if you do not have time for another regame.
To put it into perspective, 3 hours after the start of the series the 2nd Map started, which is when 2 rounds later in the tournament should have been starting.
I'm sure the admins used the rule in a way they see correct, but I still feel the rule touches fundamentals of the game that should not be touched. I hope they can revise this rule and find something better for the next event.
EPT
