Jump to content


Photo

MT Announcement - Double/Multiple Chasing Enforcement


  • Please log in to reply
114 replies to this topic

#61 Losermaker

Losermaker

    Major

  • Moderators
  • 1,015 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 14 August 2018 - 12:17 PM

Personally the way I see it, if someone dm/mc someone and their opponent still wins, one should be able to report that, as the next person that gets dm/mc by that player may not be lucky enough to win and will have to go through the pain of the game and reporting it. As far as I can see, if a player plays on and loses, it shouldn't affect the end result of MT punishing the offender, because that player is just having a shot at saving MT/admins and himself the time of the report, the opponent has still done the wrong thing and should be punished. However, I think if you play on and lose you should not get win points, only refunded points, or the MT could judge cases based on wether the piece lost by the chase affected the game outcome as Napo said, but I can't see that happening.



#62 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,494 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 15 August 2018 - 02:07 AM

Gary, have you thought about maybe were on to something? Seriously, have you tried to be open minded about this or are you refusing to see this except from your original perspective?
I'm very curious if there is any people in the community who understands what we are trying to show MT? Does anyone else see what TheO, The Prof and myself see?


Ryan, as I said before, the policy we've made toward games one finds himself in with PB'd players is that you will have 5 moves in which to quit for a no-questions MT reversal of the points lost. Beyond that, though, and then we feel you are agreeing to play and accept the consequences.

Here the policy is consistent with that. We will allow you to quit after being d/m chased for a short while.
But then no. After a brief bit you must accept the risk of playing, as in any game.

The opponent will get punished regardless, however.

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#63 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 15 August 2018 - 02:12 AM

I understand, thank you Gary.

#64 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 15 August 2018 - 01:17 PM

If MT agrees that double chasing should result in a forfeit of the match, then what is the logic for saying that the victim loses their rights if they play on?

There are reasons why it is preferable for the victim to play on and attempt to win (without needing an MT judgement) following the sacrifice of a piece to break the chasing.

1. They don't want a loss on their record.
2. They may want the practice
3. There may be a chance that their case is not successful
4. Admin changes to points can take a long time

Gary mentioned earlier that you can't have your cake and eat it. This to me is inexplicable if you concede that the multiple chasing offence is a forfeited match.

There is no having your cake and eating it. You either win or you win. So what if the victim plays on? Why should that mean the victim loses their rights? It isn't like they are trying to convert a draw into a win - they already have the win.
  • Wogomite likes this

#65 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,801 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 15 August 2018 - 01:21 PM

In chess (just an example) you can't go back 20 minutes in time and say " we had a 3-fold repetition " earlier.

 

The game is not automatically drawn if a position occurs for the third time – one of the players, on their move turn, must claim the draw with the arbiter.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts

 

eOMDNAj.png


#66 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 15 August 2018 - 02:35 PM

Were not talking about a draw here Nortrom. We are also not talking about a situation that is legal in the game of Stratego. You are referring to a legal move in chess where as the d/m chase is referring to something illegal in Stratego. For whatever, you all are stubbornly refusing to see the logic behind our proposal. It's very frustrating that people in charge of the decisions we have to endure can't see the most obvious logical understanding of the situation. The Prof, TheO and myself have explained it in the most detailed and logical way and you still can't see it. It's pretty sad actually. 



#67 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,801 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 15 August 2018 - 02:55 PM

No, we're talking about going back in time after a decision made by a player who is not happy with how it turned out.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts

 

eOMDNAj.png


#68 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 15 August 2018 - 03:15 PM

That's where we disagree and you are showing you don't know at all what were actually talking about.

#69 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 15 August 2018 - 03:23 PM

I don't think striving for something whether it happens or not should disregard mts ruling on a situation that involves cheating. TheO outlined wonderfully the reason a player may attempt to want to get the win themself rather than simply resort to surrendering without trying to win first. The Prof also gave good reasons why a player would benefit from trying to get a win on their own before being forced to accept mt offer of the win. Regardless of whether a player succeeds or fails on their own attempt to win, the chaser still CHEATED and has thwarted the match indefinately. Why does it matter if a player continues on to try and win on their own, they have done nothing wrong in doing so but MT disregards any of the reasons a player would benefit from continuing on to attempt to get the win on their own.

How does continuing on change the fact that the cheater ruined the match? Who dag on cares what the victim does?

#70 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,494 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 15 August 2018 - 08:54 PM

I can appreciate that a player might want to not have a loss on his record. So if he wants to play on in the face of a double chasing event, he certainly may. But we are not going to be judging whether a piece he may have lost during a double chase, if any, prevented him from winning the game after the offense occurred. This would introduce tenuous subjectivities into the judging process that we need to avoid.

So if the victim plays on in a game wherein he was double chased and wins that game, all is well. If he fails to win the game he plays on in, however, no restoration of points will take place, though the d/m chaser will, of course, still be punished.

Why should it be this way instead of the other? Why should we not hold that when bad players do wrong this should give carte blanche to the victims? It's because we feel this thinking leads to players potentially whining when they don't succeed. We are agreeing that the d/m chaser should be punished regardless what the victim does but we believe that you as a player should take responsibility for your playing. Don't ask us to restore points in games you proceed to play against PB'd players or d/m chasers in, and then fail. That's not right in our opinion.

Having said all this, the matter could be adjusted after the trial.

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#71 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 16 August 2018 - 08:44 AM

>>>But we are not going to be judging whether a piece he may have lost during a double chase, if any, prevented him from win

You've lost me - Why would you need to judge that? Multiple chase = forfeit. What happens after is irrelevant.

(To clarify this is only against multiple chasers)

>>>>a player should take responsibility for your playing

No, the site should take responsibility for the rules. If this was a programmed rule, the game would end, the victim wouldn't receive a loss, nor would they have to make a case and take screenshots, nor would they have to wait for their points back.

Only allowing the case to be presented in a small window is a punishment to the victim.

If they try and fail to win (having suffered the loss of a piece after they have already technically won the game) then they make a case - this can definitely not be considered whining.

Imagine a football match that finishes with Player A winning the game 1-0. Player B says 'I've still got 20 mins shall we play on for fun?. Player A agrees. They mess around for fun afterwards and Player B scores two goals. Later that day Player A looks at the results and sees it has been put down as a loss for Player A. The referee tells him to stop whining.

#72 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,801 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 16 August 2018 - 09:18 AM

Refusing a valid draw is also considered illegal, yet, should you risk your pieces and lose due to it, the game result will not be modified. Why should a different approach be taken for D/M chasing?


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts

 

eOMDNAj.png


#73 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 16 August 2018 - 09:43 AM

Because if someone plays on after a case of draw refusal, they are choosing to go after the win.

In the context of a draw refusal this makes perfect sense that a victim should give up their right to a draw should they go on and try to win a game.

The situations are not comparable.

#74 Losermaker

Losermaker

    Major

  • Moderators
  • 1,015 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 16 August 2018 - 10:30 AM

It's an interesting subject, and great to see 2 sides showing their views in constructive and interesting ways, keep it up I'm enjoying the arguments put forward by both sides :)



#75 Wogomite

Wogomite

    Captain

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 882 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 16 August 2018 - 11:50 AM

Think about this example:
Consider a chaser is putting a "forced" fail on his opponent, this is why mt will recognize a surrender by the victim and restore his points. MT is rightfully recognizing that the chaser has put the victim in a situation that is detrimental to the game and result of a match, again, the reason mt is willing to reward points to the victim. Now this forced fail that mt recognizes due to the chase will cause the same forced fail effect at the moment of the chase, 10 mins later or 20 mins later. This is why mt does NOT say "get over it, break the chase and try to win", the forced fail (chase) is recognized as something that will affect the end of the match if the chase is broken by the victim. This forced fail should then not be overlooked if the player chooses to go on and fail in the end. MT recognizes that the chase would cause a forced fail in a hypothetical end game situation which is why they are awarding points in the first place but what gets me is that when the hypothetical turns into reality, mt says "no case, you should have surrendered earlier". If a victim breaks the chase and tries to win on their own, it would be a fluke or considerable difference in skill level that allowed the victim to win but what if they don't win? Instead of seeing it as the victims fault for not surrendering, MT should recognize that this is the very outcome that was predicted to happen due to the chase (forced fail) in the first place.

#76 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 16 August 2018 - 12:06 PM

@MT
so in summary you are saying that if a victim of a d/m chase wants a sure victory he has to surrender and bring all necessary evidence to MT. If he does not surrender then the outcome of the game will remain what it will be. So what is then the incentive to continue a game after a d/m chase? Better surrender and report like for draw refusals, right? The rule in such case is to surrender not to continue the game, do i get it right?

Then another question. We have had a case reported by gwynplaine maybe a year or more ago where gwynplaine was double chasing his opponent, only way for him to not get his flag captured, asked him for tie request which was refused and finally reported him for draw refusal. MT received all necessary evidence for the draw refusal but no complain from the victim of the double chase, no complain means no evidence ofcdouble chase was available as per the terms required above: chat requiring to stop the double chase, 20-25 moves or 5 minutes video evidence and finally surrender screenshot from the victim. So in this case according to above rules you confirm that in the absence of d/m chasing evidence no case will be filed for the d/m chasing while the draw refusal will be recognized for gwynplaine. Do i understand correctly?
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#77 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,801 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 16 August 2018 - 12:37 PM

Paragraph 1: Yes.

 

Paragraph 2: D/M takes priority over draw refusal for this reason. I suppose we could word this better. If proven (be it via evidence provided by the plaintiff even), I think we'd not uphold the draw refusal claim. It is something we'd have to look into, but my personal opinion would be a lost game for the chaser.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts

 

eOMDNAj.png


#78 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,494 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 16 August 2018 - 01:04 PM

Dan, yes in paragraph 1, as Nortrom says.

In paragraph 2, the only problem with the Gwynplaine affair from that time is that there was no announced enforcement of double chasing at all then. So we were forced to ignore the double chase aspect of that case. Today there is. Still, by the book today, if we don't have the complaint and evidence by the victim of the d/m chase, then we're not going to go looking for cases. But since we are definitely now policing this offense we aren't going to allow it to slide by in a case similar to what you mentioned. If we see double chasing by a Gwynplaine seeking a draw refusal, we're not going to ignore it.

If Gwynplaine is breaking the rules by double chasing his opponent, today he will not be able to complain his opponent is refusing a draw. Any ruling for such a flagrant rule breaker makes a travesty of the rules.

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#79 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,494 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 16 August 2018 - 02:20 PM

>>>But we are not going to be judging whether a piece he may have lost during a double chase, if any, prevented him from win
You've lost me - Why would you need to judge that? Multiple chase = forfeit. What happens after is irrelevant.
(To clarify this is only against multiple chasers)
>>>>a player should take responsibility for your playing
No, the site should take responsibility for the rules. If this was a programmed rule, the game would end, the victim wouldn't receive a loss, nor would they have to make a case and take screenshots, nor would they have to wait for their points back.
Only allowing the case to be presented in a small window is a punishment to the victim.
If they try and fail to win (having suffered the loss of a piece after they have already technically won the game) then they make a case - this can definitely not be considered whining.
Imagine a football match that finishes with Player A winning the game 1-0. Player B says 'I've still got 20 mins shall we play on for fun?. Player A agrees. They mess around for fun afterwards and Player B scores two goals. Later that day Player A looks at the results and sees it has been put down as a loss for Player A. The referee tells him to stop whining.


TheO, why I state that we won't judge whether a lost piece in a double chase event affected the outcome of a continued match is that that is what some have mentioned in this discussion. Under that idea the victim would be able to play on, but if he lost then the MT would judge whether the double chase caused the loss. We're not going to do any such judging. I hope that clears that up.

You, on the other hand, apparently want no restrictions on the victim and feel that he should be able to play on "for the fun of it" after a d/m chase event if he chooses, and never have any consequences should he then lose. Correct me if that's wrong. So, yes, in that case the MT would do no judging either; we would merely award win points if the victim lost the game in any failed attempts.

Our position is that we hold that all players should take responsibility for their playing. Your response to that about the site taking responsibility for its programming notwithstanding, you surely agree with that general premise.

Look, it seems to me the important question of how long has not been asked, or answered, yet. If a double chasing event occurs, how long does a victim have to quit before the MT says, "You're on your own."?

How long should that be? We don't want it to be the whole game but we don't intend on quibbling over a few moves either. We currently have a five move limit with regards to playing PB'd players and quitting those games. Should we allow the victim to do the same five moves for this also?

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#80 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 16 August 2018 - 04:47 PM

>how long does a victim have to quit before the MT says, "You're on your own."?

I think you're making this unnecessarily hard for yourselves, and this is only because you currently think that a victim of multiple chasing should lose his/her rights to an automatic victory should he/she play on after the infringement. The victim has absolutely nothing to gain by playing on (bar a reduced inconvenience and unblemished record should he/she manage to win the game a second time)

I have yet to hear a good reason why the victim should lose this right. So why not just scrap that strange clause and keep it simple?

Multiple chasing = forfeit of game. Whatever happens afterwards.
  • Fks likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users