Latest topics
» Global Discordby zer0 Wed Dec 05, 2018 4:09 pm
» Leaving Iron - vT Gaming
by vT Gaming Fri May 11, 2018 12:10 am
» RTW World Championship
by zer0 Sat Mar 31, 2018 7:20 pm
» Leaving Iron
by zer0 Tue Mar 27, 2018 7:40 pm
» Iron tournament signatures
by zer0 Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:39 am
» The Cup of Nations season XVI
by zer0 Wed Jul 26, 2017 9:42 am
» RTW Ranks: by Zyzz and Luke
by zer0 Sun Jul 16, 2017 7:52 am
» Joining Iron
by Aristocrat Wed Jul 12, 2017 3:18 pm
» Members list
by Aristocrat Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:50 am
Music NEW
Luke losing game and then not admitting and asking to replay.
3 posters
Iron Clan :: Welcome :: Free Discussion
Page 1 of 1
Luke losing game and then not admitting and asking to replay.
I am going to add chat with dacder later.
Last edited by Cezar on Tue Mar 08, 2016 12:18 am; edited 1 time in total
Cezar- Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-08-23
Re: Luke losing game and then not admitting and asking to replay.
lol, interesting that luke admitted me that hos hates me w/o reason and that if i leave the community everything will be fine. ok i dont participate in any hos business on that tourney, but this is proof they just want to be exactly what they are. assholes.
Guest- Guest
Re: Luke losing game and then not admitting and asking to replay.
Anethum you are at wrong side of the bridge.
Re: Luke losing game and then not admitting and asking to replay.
http://harvestersofsorrow.org/forums/index.php?/topic/335-group-b-round-2-matchups/?p=2573
"Anethum and Luke played 1 game with a totally incorrect ruleset. I discussed the situation with both of them and will repeat my final decision here regarding the situation.
Timeline of events:
Anethum told Luke the wrong rules
Luke disagreed but after Anethum assured him that those rules were correct Luke agreed to play them.
Because of the incorrect rules Luke was left at a major disadvantage (forced to play Rome vs Pontus)
Luke then looked up the rules again and saw he was right all along and asked me to give him a rematch.
Anethum argued that he had won fairly (he hadn't) and so the game should count, he also argued with me (the admin) about the rules.
The confusion was whether or not bans are two-sided. That is to say, if someone bans Pontus, can that person still pick Pontus?
Well the answer is, obviously, no. That would make no sense anyways and was a stupid interpretation of the rules. It's obvious that the bans are double-sided.
With that being said, Anethum DID beat Luke game 1 when Luke agreed to play to those rules.
So the dilemma is that Anethum beat Luke, so it's unfair to take that victory away. Then again, it's more unfair to basically fuck over Luke because of Anethum quite literally breaking the rules.
So my decision is as follows:
From now on all bans are two-sided in all cases.
Anethum will be given a win in game 1 and is up 1-0 vs Luke.
In game 2, there will be no pick/ban stage.
In a reverse of game 1, Luke will be allowed to pick Pontus (just as Anethum was "allowed" to pick Pontus by breaking the rules)
In a reverse of game 1, Anethum will have the option to pick ANY faction other than Seleucids or Pontus (and obviously Egypt and Brits), which is the exact situation Luke was in game 1.
Game 3 will have a pick/ban stage as usual with double-sided bans.
This decision rests as final. If you have questions or concerns feel free to contact me with them."
"Anethum and Luke played 1 game with a totally incorrect ruleset. I discussed the situation with both of them and will repeat my final decision here regarding the situation.
Timeline of events:
Anethum told Luke the wrong rules
Luke disagreed but after Anethum assured him that those rules were correct Luke agreed to play them.
Because of the incorrect rules Luke was left at a major disadvantage (forced to play Rome vs Pontus)
Luke then looked up the rules again and saw he was right all along and asked me to give him a rematch.
Anethum argued that he had won fairly (he hadn't) and so the game should count, he also argued with me (the admin) about the rules.
The confusion was whether or not bans are two-sided. That is to say, if someone bans Pontus, can that person still pick Pontus?
Well the answer is, obviously, no. That would make no sense anyways and was a stupid interpretation of the rules. It's obvious that the bans are double-sided.
With that being said, Anethum DID beat Luke game 1 when Luke agreed to play to those rules.
So the dilemma is that Anethum beat Luke, so it's unfair to take that victory away. Then again, it's more unfair to basically fuck over Luke because of Anethum quite literally breaking the rules.
So my decision is as follows:
From now on all bans are two-sided in all cases.
Anethum will be given a win in game 1 and is up 1-0 vs Luke.
In game 2, there will be no pick/ban stage.
In a reverse of game 1, Luke will be allowed to pick Pontus (just as Anethum was "allowed" to pick Pontus by breaking the rules)
In a reverse of game 1, Anethum will have the option to pick ANY faction other than Seleucids or Pontus (and obviously Egypt and Brits), which is the exact situation Luke was in game 1.
Game 3 will have a pick/ban stage as usual with double-sided bans.
This decision rests as final. If you have questions or concerns feel free to contact me with them."
Dacder- Reputation : -11
Join date : 2015-03-28
Re: Luke losing game and then not admitting and asking to replay.
no we dont, remove yourself from this forum. this is anyway some 16 men hos tournament, where hos must win one way or another. we are well aware how hos tournaments look. now, be gonne.
Guest- Guest
Iron Clan :: Welcome :: Free Discussion
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|