|
On September 28 2010 00:59 ZlaSHeR wrote:
How can a game ever be 100% won? If the person in the advantage gets a heart attack and the other person has a command center adn 50 minerals, doesn't that mean he wins?
This is why the rule either has to be always 100% regame (meh) or have a group of admins come to an agreement on the result of the game (usually this happens) but then THAT gets arbitrary when a line is drawn and the admins are split, or it is a close decision
I'm sorry, but how is that even an argument? If a game is at a point where without a doubt, forgoing some MAJOR disaster, won by some person then they should be aptly rewarded for the win. 100% right decision by everyone involved imo.
Just in case you aren't convinced let's analyze your analogy a bit further, assume we round to the nearest one here. Think of how many games have been played on B.net, and how many of them end in heart attacks, house fires, spontaneous combustion, ect. - then follow this formula:
(# of games ended in catastrophic failure/ # of games played) *100%
ex. (15/10000000)*100%= 0%
That should give you the picture of how often this needs to be worried about. I mean, seriously... :p
|
Hear, hear!
Well said, Rob.
|
I just woke up. reading this T_T lol
For the record I was completely GM towards Orb (well I never BM'd him) during our first 3 games.. although I may have cheesed/all-in 3 games I never once said anything wrong towards him in or out of the game in fact I saw it as something awesome(not a fan just heard of him) that I got to play vs him -_- .. it wasn't until game 3 - his start of the game comments where I realized his choice of words .. it was USEast all over again -.- -- then theres the fact that he "raged" and kept trying to push that disconnect win somewhat angered me and I may have gotten somewhat out of hand during game 4 but it was never direct BM at all. more just a
IsAi: gg gl 
orb: F*ck ur smiley
and me gging for him.. and then him thowing mass bm words at me.. all i said was "cry about it" because he kept going on and on -.- eventually i just agreed to everything he said to me -.- and let him have his fun bming me on and on while i took it. game was over and he brought the situation in person out loud..
Its fine that he doesnt feel he owes me an apology. If anything I apologize to him for the awesome smiley face I gave him before game 4. He apologys to the right people anyway ------
although bringing out words and everything out loud in person... Speak like that to the wrong guy and you might regret it one day. practice self control - I have ACTUAL anger issues -.- did i go and say/attempt anything dumb? no i didnt.
what did i do? i walked outside and calmed down simple -_-
lalala.
whats done is done.
gg gl 
o.o
|
On September 28 2010 04:15 emperorchampion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2010 00:59 ZlaSHeR wrote:
How can a game ever be 100% won? If the person in the advantage gets a heart attack and the other person has a command center adn 50 minerals, doesn't that mean he wins?
This is why the rule either has to be always 100% regame (meh) or have a group of admins come to an agreement on the result of the game (usually this happens) but then THAT gets arbitrary when a line is drawn and the admins are split, or it is a close decision I'm sorry, but how is that even an argument? If a game is at a point where without a doubt, forgoing some MAJOR disaster, won by some person then they should be aptly rewarded for the win. 100% right decision by everyone involved imo. Just in case you aren't convinced let's analyze your analogy a bit further, assume we round to the nearest one here. Think of how many games have been played on B.net, and how many of them end in heart attacks, house fires, spontaneous combustion, ect. - then follow this formula: (# of games ended in catastrophic failure/ # of games played) *100% ex. (15/10000000)*100%= 0% That should give you the picture of how often this needs to be worried about. I mean, seriously... :p
It is an argument in that, don't use the word 100% in a rulebook. No matter what that % is though there will always be arguments when one person can argue they were 99% won or 95% won or 90% winning the game.
ps: 15/10000000 is not 0%.
|
I know what's 100% right now, this thread. Everyone who wanted to respond to orbs apology did. Debate over the issue or anything related could go on forever and get nobody anywhere.
Please close this thread and if a mod (ETT) can keep us posted in here if TL reevaluates the 30 day temp ban that would be awesome.
Thank you.
|
I actually was like "no way terran can recover unless he gets a good drop off"
*reactored starport has 2 medivacs pop out*
I agree orb was ahead. I agree he shouldn't have acted the way he acted, and that is was both childish and unprofessional. Would I have done the same thing, and raged? Possibly. I'm not wearing his shoes.
After watching the vod, though, I am in agreement with the officials, though sort of displeased. Orb has reason to be mad, as he was up a base and near to the point where he had a cemented win, but it's his own fault for throwing away 3-4 stalkers while even expanding at all. If your opponent throws away 7 scvs, why atk? You lost 1 zealot, he lost 7 scvs, numerous marauders and marines. Why do you even feel the need to attack? If you're going to expand, do so with your superior army. If you're going to attack, use those 400 minerals for more units I know attacking while expanding is common, but this is one scenario I disagree with it. Pick one here, imo.
I'll get back on point: Orb's main was pretty much undefended, and the terran had a big ball ready to be dropped (though I doubt he was going to do this). He could have dropped the main, killed probes, and attacked the natural with stimmed marauders when orb went to his main to fend off the drop. It's all speculation, but the terran COULD HAVE WON, which should end the discussion as to whether or not the tournament officials made the right decision - they did.
It is in stark contrast how well LuckyFool has handled this situation to how Orb did. I feel bad for the guy, have always liked him if he's the orb I knew from sc1, and am glad he drafted a formal apology, but if there's one thing I've learned from all of this, it is that LuckyFool is one cool cucumber.
|
|
|
apparently i didn't deserve an apology though o.o
and orb said he would've won 300$, he wouldn't have beaten ls or gretorp lol xd
|
I think right now is a time to reflect on a similar circumsatance: How about artosis vs slush? That was an even bigger tournament( I think, right?) and Artosis lost because of a disconnect. But he let Slush have the win and they even played a second game later. While he may have flamed there, that was at the heat of the moment, while Orb has been flaming for a while.
|
On September 28 2010 07:10 Pandain wrote:
I think right now is a time to reflect on a similar circumsatance: How about artosis vs slush? That was an even bigger tournament( I think, right?) and Artosis lost because of a disconnect. But he let Slush have the win and they even played a second game later. While he may have flamed there, that was at the heat of the moment, while Orb has been flaming for a while.
Basically its just a shitty situation that can only be fixed by implementing LAN capability. Of course if someone has an advantage and the game drops they aren't going to be happy with a re-game, but that's just what has to be done. I really hope Blizzard can work something out to allow LAN owners and the hosts of major tournaments to have access to LAN, while still keeping everyone else on b.net to combat piracy.
|
On September 28 2010 07:10 Pandain wrote:
I think right now is a time to reflect on a similar circumsatance: How about artosis vs slush? That was an even bigger tournament( I think, right?) and Artosis lost because of a disconnect. But he let Slush have the win and they even played a second game later. While he may have flamed there, that was at the heat of the moment, while Orb has been flaming for a while.
Can't award Artosis the win when it was HIM who disconnected though. This one wasn't Isai's fault it was battle.nets
how many times have we pointed that out...
|
Baltimore, USA22247 Posts
On September 28 2010 05:15 LuckyFool wrote:
Please close this thread and if a mod (ETT) can keep us posted in here if TL reevaluates the 30 day temp ban that would be awesome.
We've discussed it in the mod forum; we're going to have orb serve out his 30 days in full. Despite the apology after the fact, orb still needs to be held accountable for his behavior in this and prior incidents. We do not want to set the standard that being BM so long as you apologize afterwards is "ok", but we want to completely discourage him from being BM in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
