Tournament of Champions (Season 4) for AA 50 Anniversary '41 version
-
@deltium Would it be a good idea to share the save game in this case? Or do you have concerns since it ended with adjudication?
-
@redrum - good point, and agree that it is OK to share the game file (attached)
-
@redrum No concerns regarding the decision, it was a well deserved victory for the General.
-
@blackskull Glad to hear. I just always like to see improved visibility in the community and sharing the final save games which @Deltium has ton a pretty good job of so far
-
We need a ruling on the following scenario.
So I stole a certain victory from the jaws of defeat, and @Raville is being a sore sport and contesting the LL battle. On a silly game engine shortcoming after the battle was over.
Here is the scenario. The game is Low Luck. It was played very aggressively by his axis and he eventually took Moscow on R11. I made a tactical retreat into eastern Europe rather than face certain death in Moscow. I decided that I am not surrendering and I would make him earn the victory since I still had significant TUV and a viable option.
I adjusted tactics to fight without mother Russia. I made a feint move into Eastern Europe inorder to occupy the axis with mopping up duties. This gave me 2 rounds to adjust for a Pacific strategy. Plus I already had significant assets positioned in that theatre. After a stunning string of allied naval victories in the pacific. My allies all of a sudden, have a chance to knock the yellow menace out of the war on R13.
Before any moves were made I clearly announced my intentions, and told him the game comes down to one aashot. I have a 33% chance of surviving with enough air units. If he hits 2 air units, Tokyo will have high odds to survive the invasion. If he hits only one fighter, USA has 100% victory by LL calculation. I even revealed to him, that if I hit one Jap unit with the sole British infantry during previous British turn, it wouldn't even matter about the aashots outcome, at all. So my intentions were very clearly established.
He only killed one fighter with his aashot. I proceeded with combat and killed all his units in Tokyo as LL bc had also predicted with 100% certainty (after the aashot casualty was removed).
After 3 combat rounds, I had 1 tank and 2 bombers left and his units were all killed, for all intensive purposes the battle was over. I was astonished that I had pulled it off. Since luck was not with me for most of the game.
So with the current position, the axis has no chance of recapturing Tokyo. For all intensive purposes the war is already over, unless he wants to fight on (which is his up to him). I clicked to proceed. To my astonishment the auto select was still on the tank instead of my bomber, even though I thought I selected the bomber. (there was one allied casualty to be selected of those 3 mentioned) Anyways, @raville is contesting my capture of Tokyo because of that game engine shortcoming (casualty auto select).
We agreed no edits, however I argue this is just bad sportsmanship by @raville. It simply goes against proper spirit of triplea gaming. I did pay special attention to the reselection of casualties, for each combat round since it kept picking my land units (2 combat rounds previous).
I tried to select bomber instead of tank and obviously, he knows it. If the shoe were on other foot. I would definitely not contest this scenario. Honestly I would be pissed. But at myself for getting outplayed. However, I would still go out with some class and congratulate him on his decisive game play, regardless of my will to continue.
I could understand if the battle was still ongoing with more combat rolls ensuing. But this is just silly. Honestly I'm disappointed that he even feels this is an honorable way to even win. TOC or not!
One last point, no edits only applies to forgotten moves and what not. That never applies to game engine quirks. Especially one like this, that was immediately caught and without any further battle rolling to muck it up further. This would not even be an issue on table top. Did he honestly think I did not want Tokyo, haha, common bro.
Here is the game save. I will be happy to give you more information if required.
On a side note, at least I'm keeping you busy, hehe.
0_1520409539457_ww2.v3.toc.match.2_GZ.allies_v_Raville.axis__r13_usa_cm._03.02.2018.tsvg
-
Hello GZ and Raville - I understand how sensitive this is for each of you, and I will consult with 2 additional expert-level players and we shall make a group decision, with the majority to decide the outcome. Please allow us a day or two to discuss this among ourselves and we shall make a ruling very shortly.
-
@deltium added chat log to the admin as requested
-
@Raville I am not a judge on this match but can you post your opinion as well please?
-
@prastle I post my view
I was in our ToC game with General_Zod and since beginning we set: not edition at all, I tried some edit and he didn't allowed me, so the rule was set to NO edition.
In Round 13 General_Zod attacked Japan with 3 BMRs+7 fighters+3 inf+1tank, I defended with 6 fighters+4 inf+2 art+AA, in AA shot I got a six of four, so only got one fighter off, then battle continue and remain 2 Japanese fighters vs 2 BMRs+1 tank, he got the planes and I got 1 shot, he lost the tank and battle was over, as I didn't allowed edition he left the game. It was clear the rule of NO edition, so he won the battle but didnāt take Japan. It is clear that a rule set should be obeyed, as he didnāt let me edit all the way... Certainly there are mistakes when one is gaming, that's the game! If we have a rule we have to respect that, even if it is a mistake!
I think that in other game organizations (Axis & Allies.org, atwar-game, GTO, etc.,) there isnāt any chance to edit as default and as we set it in our game before beginning, Iād asked some editing and clearly General_Zod said āNo editing at all during the gameā¦ā so we continue as that and therefore donāt recognize any editing as it had been set, just to continue the game. If he had announced his intentions he should get them in the battlefield and its result could be a GG, but then a mistake and Iām in my right to continue the game. Saved by the edge! Mistakes are what make lose or win a game. There is the map, the game and the results, not cheating, if we committed mistakes or errors, as I did through the game, we had to pay for! Iām not going to support a mistake that could cost me the game and the game job I did as itās shown. But Not Edition! Thatās the game!
About dice, it was terrible for me all the game (as seen in the map), in the opening Japan lost three planes as unusual; my first and only BMRs from Germany and Japan were lost at the first intent to bombing and in the same turn; got a lot of sixes when 5 or 4s were needed and in Japan battle I had a terrible dice and he had a lucky one (even as calculator shown opposite), but then his mistake and please donāt blame me for that, we establish Not Edition! Thatās the game! And also I donāt complain for luck as the random system is as it is and had shown from the beginning who as the luck.
Anyhow, I recognize General_Zod is a great experienced gamer and a friend, but should be most careful in those details that make to win or lose a game.
-
-
Editing game quirks is essential, since they are many. Many games would not be playable with TripleA if we didn't edit those game quirks. So point is, I was referring to forgotten moves and the like with respect to no edits. This clearly is not a forgotten move, it was caused by a quirk in game interface. I could see if it happen on combat round 1 or 2 or whatever, while you still had living units in Tokyo. However I killed you already, the battle was a decisive victory, with zero ambiguity to muck it up in that regard. And especially, since I clearly stated my intentions to take Tokyo only minutes before (as per chat log). The auto select is a silly game interface quirk in my opinion when taken in the full context of this particular situation.
With regards to playing on. I encourage you to continue, if you desire. Your also an excellent and experienced gamer, which is why I wish you upheld yourself to the appropriate standards. This is not as black and white, of a simple edit issue, as you are insinuating. I do understand your desire to defend your silver title on this particular TOC, however this is not the way to do it my friend.
Furthermore I would challenge anyone who says this is not a game interface quirk. A very good argument can be made that the ideal game engine should not keep selecting undesired units for you.
In fact, it is deserving of a feature request to disable auto casualty select per game engine preferences.
-
@general_zod Did it happen because
- you inadvertently pressed space bar (chatting?), confirming the autoselection, or
- just missclicked, or
- are you saying it is a bug, in that the engine would have taken differently than you selected?
-
@general_zod said in Tournament of Champions (Season 4) for AA 50 Anniversary '41 version:
In fact, it is deserving of a feature request to disable auto casualty select per game engine preferences.
Actually, years ago, when that was reworked, also on account that there are games with AA shots (not supported), in which the autoselect is just a bad feature, I suggested to have an option for not having the autoselect at all, but Veqryn was strongly against it, and I guess @redrum was too.
Another possible feature request might be having a box you can tick at the start of the particular battle, to tell the engine to take 1 land unit last as casualty.
I'll let you open any of them. -
@cernel
I am not really implying 3.Honestly not sure. It was very late (nearly 3am local time). I had adrenaline coursing through my body (excitement and jitteriness) due to this amazing comeback kid decisiveness.
Especially, once the all important aashot was missed by @raville. And since I already knew this assured by LL, a 100% victory of this battle. In which btw, I even rolled slightly better, because I survived with 2 units versus 1.69 units, haha I was chatting a bit during the battle so maybe I did hit the spacebar and inadvertently may have caused the ok button to accept prematurely. But now that you bring it up it may have been 1 or 2, or a combination of 1 and 2 due some lag and me pressing, clicking and chatting and being excited, jittery and fatigued. I thought that I clicked to take a bomber out. But memory is unreliable in such physiological conditions due to fatigue and adrenaline and rapid timeline.
What I can say with conviction is, that if this auto selection quirk didn't exist. This would all be a moot point. Also that the context is key element here, there is a chat log of my intentions and his acknowledgement. As if that's even needed with experienced players in this very particular event.
So be careful not to over parse this matter into individual components. Overall context is the key and cannot be ignored.
The battle was over at the point of the incident.The defense rests.
-
-
@cernel yes we both brought that up in the past as well. We both were ignored
-
@general_zod sorry friend, as I mentioned and also you presume by yourself as an expert and frequent player, how is it that this gadget was unknown to you or was an engine trick set? You should know well as its everyday gaming matter and you should be aware of that, particularly that the game was NO edit game as we set it. I'm so sorry for this miss but results talk by them, there is the map and battle result and we are in a ToC game with no concessions. I keep and maintain our position of NO edition. We can continue with our game results whenever you want wishing will not affect our friendship and comradery.
-
Hello Raville and General_Zod,
OK, your particular case has been reviewed deeply by 3 expert players, and discussed quite a bit. We have read your various comments, chat logs, and reviewed the map.
This is a VERY DIFFICULT one to assess, as the decision impacts the entire outcome of the game, and not just one particular battle. As such, we will outline the facts and discuss key information that we considered:
-
On one hand, it is clear that both players agreed that "no edits" would be allowed during the game. This is an established fact, and edits are indeed a sensitive matter throughout the game, as we have all likely forgotten to move an AA, or to place a naval unit to block an attacking fleet, etc., etc. It's a common problem, but in tournaments, players need to be as detailed oriented as possible with the combat, and non-combat moves.
-
However, for avoidance of doubt, this does not meet the pure definition of an edit, but rather, it is a very unique and specific problem which arose because of the OOL selection in an incredibly important battle in Japan. In fact, this one OOL decision is, in itself, the key determinant in who wins the game. It is incredibly important to highlight that this exact contingency has already been fully anticipated in the rules for the tournaments, and the rules are posted at the following link:
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/394/triplea-rules-for-anniversary-edition-tournaments
For convenience, I quote the relevant section, with emphasis on the key portion:
Order Of Loss in battles (OOL)
In general first the inexpensive (IPC value) and weaker defending units are removed, and only after that the more expensive units. The software automatically removes both attacking and defending units according to the standard-OOL. The attacker has the possibility to manually correct the OOL for his units. He may do this by manually correcting the appropriate fields. However, if he deviates from the standard-OOL he has to notify his opponent before moving on with rolling the dice. The most efficient way to do so is by sending an email to your opponent BEFORE continuing.Example: Attack on GER, 4th battle round: 1arm 4ftr 1bmb (attacking) vs 1inf 2ftr (defending). Say the defense scores two hits, then the software will automatically remove the tank and one of the fighters as losses. If the attacker prefers to conquer the territory instead of just clearing it, he will rather want to keep the tank and sacrifice a second fighter. He changes this manually,and then he continues rolling. Of course, the attacker is not allowed to change the order of loss for the defender, except the defender specifically told him to do so before. Under certain circumstances a "OOL-stop" is mandatory. In this case the attacker rolls the dice for his attacking units and then must ask his opponent for the OOL. Only after the OOL has been communicated the battle continues. This principle holds for every round of combat unless the defender states an OOL for the entire fight.- We next reviewed the communication between players, as this was a live game. Fortunately, we could review the exact chat BEFORE the battle, which included the following communication, for reference:
(6:13:17 AM) General_Zod: do u know if that 1 british inf hit in japann, it was gg
(6:13:38 AM) General_Zod: even now it comes down to 1 aashot
(6:14:01 AM) General_Zod: if u miss it tokyo falls
(6:14:04 AM) Raville: Not really, dont forget AA
(6:14:14 AM) General_Zod: im not forgetting
(6:14:28 AM) General_Zod: it comes down to 1 aashot
(6:14:41 AM) General_Zod: if u kill 2 i have 33%
(6:14:50 AM) General_Zod: if u kill one i have 100%
(6:15:02 AM) General_Zod: or like 995
(6:15:06 AM) General_Zod: 99%
(6:16:14 AM) General_Zod: any ways the whole game sits on one aashot
(6:16:18 AM) General_Zod: phew
(6:16:20 AM) General_Zod: lol
(6:16:40 AM) General_Zod: i hope my luck was building for this on eshot
(6:20:17 AM) Raville: no much to think just act
(6:20:31 AM) General_Zod: im planning for failure
(6:20:38 AM) General_Zod: i need back up plan
(6:21:22 AM) General_Zod: im gonna try, just its all on if u hit 4
(6:21:39 AM) General_Zod: 10air
(6:22:13 AM) General_Zod: so its 33%
(6:22:16 AM) General_Zod: for me
(6:22:28 AM) General_Zod: worth it though
(6:22:43 AM) General_Zod: i will never get the shot this good again
(6:25:00 AM) Raville: go then pls
(6:26:13 AM) General_Zod: almost ready
(6:35:06 AM) General_Zod: 100%
(6:35:09 AM) General_Zod: gg
(6:37:00 AM) Raville: no
(6:37:03 AM) General_Zod: i click too fastWe highlight a few parts of the discussion to establish a fact pattern of what the players were thinking and mutually understanding before the battle began, with the parts in bold illuminating the understanding between the players.
For example, it is clear that General_Zod had run the calculations that the # of AA hits had a material impact on whether or not the battle would have succeeded, and that Raville had done so as well. It is clear that the AA gun hit ONE plane, which ensured that General_Zod would win the battle.
HOWEVER, it is VERY important to highlight that General_Zod was ASSUMING a non-standard OOL for the ENTIRE battle, as the the attack started with 3 bombers + 7 fighters + 3 infantry + 1 tank. Given the high number of attacking aircraft, the battle could not have succeeded with just air surviving and the ground units not surviving.
Both Raville and General_Zod's statements appear to vindicate the fact that this was mutually understood, by Raville's staement, "not really, don't forget AA" and General's Zods statement, "99%, any ways the whole game sits on one AA shot"
This chain of communication implies that BOTH players understood the specific serious of events that would, or would not, lead to a binary outcome in this most important battle.
In conclusion:
First and foremost, this is a very unfortunate incident for both of you, and probably NOT something that will ever happen again in your remaining A&A games in your entire life! As such, the judges have to determine what is the least unfair outcome to each respective person.
Therefore, the following has been determined:
-
this particular dispute is NOT an edit request, as technically is it is purely a OOL issue at the very last stage of a highly critical battle in the game.
-
The pre-established rule on OOL is crystal clear that, per the rules, "the attacker has the possibility to manually correct the OOL for his units. He may do this by manually correcting the appropriate fields. However, if he deviates from the standard-OOL he has to notify his opponent before moving on with rolling the dice." The judges have determined that the extensive and detailed discussion on OOL BEFORE the battle meets the "spirit" of the rule regarding an amended OOL, given that BOTH players mutually understood the sensitivity of 1 or 2 AA hits in Round 1 of the battle, and the expected result of the battle itself It is VERY important to highlight that, if this communication had NOT occurred, then the actual battle results would stay as-is. However, in THIS case, given that BOTH players mutually understood the outcome of the battle given the various AA contingencies, that the "understood OOL" will hold firm, and that Japan is successfully captured by Geneeral_Zod.
For clarity, and for future reference, the judges will NOT consider such excuses as "I was tired and clicked incorrectly" due to the software, and the ONLY reason that this is considered in General Zod's favor is specifically due to the mutual understanding of the OOL which would, or would not result in the capture of Tokyo As this was the agreed understanding of the OOL at the start of the battle the outcome of the OOL will remain, as previously understood, BEFORE the battle began.
As a final point, we want to emphasize again, that this is a difficult decision for the judges, and the ruling was 2 in favor, and 1 against, so it was indeed a split decision. We hope that both players will continue and move past this difficult decision, as this is a double-elimination tournament, and both players have a 2nd chance to carry-on and win future games.
-
-
@deltium said in Tournament of Champions (Season 4) for AA 50 Anniversary '41 version:
First and foremost, this is a very unfortunate incident for both of you, and probably NOT something that will ever happen again in your remaining A&A games in your entire life!
He he.
-
@deltium glad to see this resolved,both players played a great game,and i agree with Deltuim and other experts decision,overall and i agree with Prastles comments aswell,gg
