Revised Tournament of Champions (ToC 14) -- St. Nazaire Raiders !!
-
For the record, I have no issue with any of my emails being posted. Post the entire email chains if you wish so the truth can be out there.
Also for the record, Louis, you never agreed to continue playing at J17 with the fair ruling applied. Prastle confirmed this. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it and prove prastle a liar (might as well accuse him of lying, as you've continuously accused me).
In your email which I posted, you made it clear that your only acceptable solution was getting a G17 do-over because the ruling went against you.
-
@bayder He has already been paid for second place and you as first This war is DONE! WE SHALL MOVE ON !
-
@prastle side note who was third guys ?
-
-
@LaFayette said in Revised Tournament of Champions (ToC 14) -- St. Nazaire Raiders !!:
If you'd like to continue discussing the game rules, please open a new thread to discuss it - it is quite interesting, but should not be continued here.
I concur, but, just to add what is merely my opinion, I actually believe it would be quite pointless discussing any of this anywhere in this forum, since the rulebook is arguably unclear on any of the points at hand, and could be interpreted and argued upon in a number of ways.
-
@epinikion said in Revised Tournament of Champions (ToC 14) -- St. Nazaire Raiders !!:
Correct, as far as I know, based on the bracket (though it should be really up to @Deltium to confirm, since he is managing the bracket).
1st: Bayder
2nd: LouisXIVXIV
3rd: Polarole
4th: epinikion -
@epinikion ty and @Cernel
-
@polarole I can send your winning prize money through paypal. I am not sure how often you read the forum. Sending you an email as well. Congrats!
-
I only now understand Prastle's position on this. It isn't just a book rule matter in terms of what actually took place in our game because Bayder never elected to let his fighters be cargo, and he never mentioned that idea in his argument. What the judges ruled was that the move Bayder actually made was illegal -- they said we were both wrong.
Prastle's point is that the engine should have prompted Bayder with a question about being cargo and that lets him off the hook for making an illegal move. But if there was a cargo prompt I certainly would not have made my move, which should let me off the hook for the carrier buy. In any case, the laissez faire /play-on/ do what the judges say outcome here, Bayder, is that you simply do not land your fighters in the space because the move you ACTUALLY MADE is not allowed.
Speaking to your specific point, though, Prastle made me numerous formal offers in the context of my reversing my "this is bs" position. He's the person with that authority - he's the representative of the judges. I had not accepted your proposal of playing it your way at the moment you decided you would not play because of the insult; he and I were "negotiating". I was strongly considering playing your way if only to humiliate you with a simple win regardless, but... it also seemed to mess up the integrity of the game and was unfair and disadvantageous. That was where the discussion was. He is not lying. I am not lying.
I can also assure you, Bayder, you do not want me to litigate my attitude and motives in public. I have no desire to do that, so... put the matches down...
-
In terms of all the mods trying to tamp this discussion down --- that's fine. I did say I would dissect the game with Epi though. Presumably that's not a problem?
-
@LouisXIVXIV, I agree, the discussion should be tamped down. You've confirmed in your emails and forum posts exactly what I stated, that you refused to play on with the fair ruling applied. I was always willing to play on with the fair ruling applied. The game ended with your refusal to play on. You can dodge it all you want if it makes you feel better, but that's the simple truth. Call it quitting, forfeiting, or whatever you want. Bottom line, you lost. You tried to negotiate a G17 do-over for your mistake move (highly ironic that someone with 95% confidence would be reduced to grovelling for a do-over). Your disqualification for your highly inappropriate behavior was in addition to all of this.
Hopefully you'll realize you're on an island here. Nobody agrees with your assessment that your side had a dominant position. Nobody else is disagreeing with the fair ruling. Nobody else condones or tolerates the type of behavior you have displayed, and continue to display.
From my side, this is ended...unless you continue to misrepresent the truth and what actually transpired.
-
This post is deleted! -
This post is deleted! -
I'm going to let the reader decide as to your mischaracterization of what happened. I think it's pretty plain and I don't need to force-feed it to them in narrative form as you're trying to do.
I was disqualified! I got the e-mail telling me I was not allowed in ToC 15. Presumably one of the main people responsible for that disqualification (LaFayette) posted here stating that was the reason for it. What are you even talking about?
The game itself is another matter. If you think you aren't losing this game you're even worse that I thought.
-
Since @prastle is not currently online, I'm taking the initiative to LOCK this topic. Please, everyone abstain from retaking any of these arguments until @prastle or @Deltium are available to decide what to do (and if to delete or edit anything).
EDIT: For information, some topics have been deleted as off topic (as pertaining to ToC 13, instead of 14). All the deleted topics are still available and the tournament directors can decide if to undelete and move them in the (still open) proper topic, eventually.
-
@Cernel After the 4 days of emails and chats I think we can leave it locked and all move on...
