Jump to content


Photo

MT Announcement - Update on obvious draws


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Marshal

  • WC Online Team
  • 3,743 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 31 March 2020 - 09:14 PM

Dear community,

 

The most frustrating cases that people seem to bring is when an opponent is declining an obvious draw. A no-progress draw is somewhat subjectve, but in the case of an obvious draw, a player really has no valid excuse for not accepting and not trying anything within 5 minutes.

 

Currently those draw refusals are handled the same. From now on, players found guilty of declining an obvious draw, will be deducted 300 ELO points for their first offense, this will be on top of the restoration of the game result to be a draw.

 

1st degree draw refusal: -100 or -300 (+ draw correction)

2nd degree: reset

3rd degree: permanent ban (optional reminder)

 

Note that both offenses, no-progress or obvious draw refusal, are considered "draw refusal" and thus count towards the penalty scheme.

 

Definition of the obvious/clear draw from an earlier announcement

 

Spoiler

 

The MT

(Bobby Dylan, don mitsos, Eagle06, Fairway, Nortrom, Verti_GO)


Edited by Nortrom, 02 April 2020 - 01:03 PM.
Added definition

  • tobermoryx, Fairway, texaspete09 and 2 others like this
"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates
See this thread my blog post

#2 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,038 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 02 April 2020 - 04:22 AM

I would hope the benefit of the doubt would go to the defendant should there be any question of the nature of the obvious ["clear"?] draw. It is a severe, severe penalty if the nature of the draw is open to any question.

Edited by GaryLShelton, 02 April 2020 - 04:23 AM.

Posted Image
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

#3 KissMyCookie

KissMyCookie

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 02 April 2020 - 06:58 AM

I would hope the benefit of the doubt would go to the defendant should there be any question of the nature of the obvious ["clear"?] draw. It is a severe, severe penalty if the nature of the draw is open to any question.

 

 

MINOSSOF disconnect when loses

https://imgur.com/a/xRlNVwF

 

MT verdict: While there are reasons to believe the DC was intentionally, MT decided to vote BOTD ( Benefit of the doubt)

 

Case closed.

 

 

 

Reporting player:

 

rogier jacobs

 

This player I accuse of willful Disconnect, and I would like to add a potential ATW charge, although it may appear weak.

 

He had a known major at F8. My known marshal was on F6. He had a colonel next to an unmoved piece of mine, with his second colonel on H8. His marshal was on G7. I moved to F7; his colonel next to the unmoved piece attacked it and it was a bomb; I attacked his major at F8. He let his 15 seconds run out, then he proceeded to let his buffer run out. I was in the process of taking a screenshot of his name when he disconnected. He let the disconnect buffer run tom zero. Hence, this is why I ask for consideration of ATW...he had no intention of coming back to the match...it was lost for him...he did not know where my colonel or majors were located. On the left, he had a sergeant and no other information of mine.

 

https://imgur.com/a/l16FHLf

 

Thank you for your time and consideration.

 

KMC

 

MT Verdict: While there is reason to believe this DC was done on purpose,

MT decided to give the BOTD (benefit of the doubt) because the game is still playable.



#4 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,038 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 02 April 2020 - 07:09 AM

That's fine, and I agree it's good, KMC, but these are DC cases not DR ones. It is hardly uncommon for there to be differences of opinion on whether a draw is clear or not. So if the same botd is applied for any hazy cases of which type of draw refusal might be in play--since there is now a dramatic difference in penalty--that will be good.

300 points is, I might add, a huge penalty. A question: how low will the penalty take those who are convicted? Below 100? Below 0?

Edited by GaryLShelton, 02 April 2020 - 07:11 AM.

Posted Image
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

#5 KissMyCookie

KissMyCookie

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 02 April 2020 - 07:29 AM

That's fine, and I agree it's good, KMC, but these are DC cases not DR ones. It is hardly uncommon for there to be differences of opinion on whether a draw is clear or not. 

 

Whether they are DC or DR cases, I believe these indicate the current MT's modus operandi in that they prefer to afford the BOTD to players accused of any offense should there be questions among the MT members.

 

I suppose we can wait until such a blow-out case is submitted, voted upon by the MT, and then read about their decision. In the meantime, I see no reason to doubt their integrity, or question with "what ifs" until an item of controversy actually appears.



#6 Bobby Dylan

Bobby Dylan

    Lieutenant

  • Moderators
  • 645 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 02 April 2020 - 10:42 AM

I would hope the benefit of the doubt would go to the defendant should there be any question of the nature of the obvious ["clear"?] draw. It is a severe, severe penalty if the nature of the draw is open to any question.

Hi Gary,

 

we realize this is a severe penalty, but it will only apply to players who declined a obvious draw.

MT wll be inclined to go for the benefit of the doubt to the defendant  if a case is not clear or not obvious in any way.

To answer your question,  I think an Elo rating below 100 is not possible, so if someone has an Elo of 250 and declined a obvious draw, then his/her Elo will become 100.

But I will ask my colleagues about that.


Edited by Bobby Dylan, 02 April 2020 - 10:57 AM.

  • GaryLShelton likes this

When you've got nothing, you've got nothing to lose - Bob Dylan


#7 Fairway

Fairway

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,215 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 02 April 2020 - 12:42 PM

That's fine, and I agree it's good, KMC, but these are DC cases not DR ones. It is hardly uncommon for there to be differences of opinion on whether a draw is clear or not. So if the same botd is applied for any hazy cases of which type of draw refusal might be in play--since there is now a dramatic difference in penalty--that will be good.

300 points is, I might add, a huge penalty. A question: how low will the penalty take those who are convicted? Below 100? Below 0?

If there is any remote question as to how clear the draw is, then a -300 ELO penalty will not be applied. The main point of this -300 penalty is to penalize the jerks who talk about having hours to shuffle marshals around the lakes after all miners are gone and flags are bombed in.

 

To define a 'clear' draw, the MT will be using the following definition:

 

clear draw is defined as a draw where neither player can capture his opponent's flag or all of his pieces in the absence of a gross mistake. A player refusing a clear draw will be expected to lotto/take a chance and try to advance the game or accept the tie within 5 minutes.

 
 
If there is any remote question as to whether this situation is a clear draw, then only a -100 penalty will be applied.
 
And, similarly with players who are less than 200 ELO and convicted over draw refusal, players less than 400 ELO who are deducted -300 ELO will simply be reset to 100 (but keep their stats).

  • GaryLShelton, tobermoryx and Bobby Dylan like this

I'm gonna be the 2020 NASF Champion  :) 


#8 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Marshal

  • WC Online Team
  • 3,743 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 02 April 2020 - 01:04 PM

Updated to include the definition of clear (aka obvious) draw.


  • Bobby Dylan likes this
"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates
See this thread my blog post

#9 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,038 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 02 April 2020 - 08:18 PM

Whether they are DC or DR cases, I believe these indicate the current MT's modus operandi in that they prefer to afford the BOTD to players accused of any offense should there be questions among the MT members.
 
I suppose we can wait until such a blow-out case is submitted, voted upon by the MT, and then read about their decision. In the meantime, I see no reason to doubt their integrity, or question with "what ifs" until an item of controversy actually appears.

.
There's no slight to the intention or integrity of the MT, KMC. Just a comment from years of experience being in the chambers where these things are discussed. The press with this new rule is to intensify punishment. Knowing there can, and often is, doubt about the nature of the draw in question I merely pose my comment as a reminder to increase the BOTD factor by at least as much as the punishment has been increased. And as they've said as much in response, I'm sure they will. 🙂
Posted Image
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

#10 Wnehme

Wnehme

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 03 April 2020 - 02:12 PM

Dear MTs
When i logged in to the game, i didnt know about the existence of this forum nor about penalties and certain rules
I recall i was playing once vs someone and i had 2 majors vs him 1 scout i thought i was winning and then he started his moving around and i couldnt get him
I was so new to the game and i was frustrated being up 2 majors we chatted and he didnt mention about reporting nor did he report me
We stayed like this for 45 minutes and then he surrendered
My point is not everybody knows what is going on here and the DR rules and others
What i would suggest is a small pop up window
( when u start a game)with a link to one simple page to all these rules
Very simple straightforward page

#11 Fairway

Fairway

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,215 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 03 April 2020 - 02:16 PM

It is a common courtesy (and common sense) to simply accept the draw when you have two majors and your opponent a scout. Even a beginning player with little to no knowledge of the game should be able to decipher, in 100% of cases, that if you can't do something in 45 minutes, then you're not going to be able to do it. Since you were chasing him for 45 minutes, you definitely realized that it was impossible to catch his scout. The only move here is to offer a draw or accept his draw. I don't see how even a true beginner would logically think any different.

 

 

Side note - If beginners just starting the game are the only ones who have trouble with this rule (for whatever bizarre reason) then they are likely to have a very low rating... in that case, -300 and -100 makes no difference.

 

A link to the forums in the actual game-side (more prevalent than just the word 'forums' at the top of the page) would, indeed, be excellent.


I'm gonna be the 2020 NASF Champion  :) 


#12 garlick

garlick

    Miner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 03 April 2020 - 02:57 PM

Here is what happens when you care about points and do not know about the forum nor draw refusal rule, while playing a complete idiot refusing the draw 

 

b7hkiIi.jpg


  • Fairway likes this

#13 Verti_GO

Verti_GO

    Sergeant

  • Moderators
  • 258 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 03 April 2020 - 03:06 PM

When I'm playing against an opponent who is not respecting the rules, I warn him through battle chat about any abusive or illegal behaviour, pasting the forum url where he can find information about rules and reports, just in case he don't know that what he's doing is allowed by the game platform but it is not allowed according to the rules.

#14 Wnehme

Wnehme

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 03 April 2020 - 03:25 PM

This is not the point
@ fairway, not it is not that common back then to realize this i thought he will do a misstep and i might corner him
And no it is not that common to tell someone who have been playing for 2 weeks listen i will take 100 or 300 pts because there is rule and penalties that you never heard about but IT IS COMMON SENSE

@ Vertigo you point is valid however coming from an opponent you might say he is bluffing

I am maybe the person who report the most , so you made it look like i am defending all the players who are violating the rules

All what i am saying is pop up window with a link or anything that stays for 10 seconds and you click ok, if not doable fine
You can say it is not doable without writing all this
And i am sure informing all these players about DR and DC and ATW beforehand will reduce cases

#15 Wnehme

Wnehme

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 03 April 2020 - 03:31 PM

Fyi we spent 45 minutes chatting about his visits to lebanon and stuff like that so it was mainly the chat
But again not the point
The point is back then i didnt know there was rules and points deduction and penalties and a forum and moderators

#16 KissMyCookie

KissMyCookie

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 03 April 2020 - 06:10 PM

@Wnehme–Dear friend,

 

Although I think in spirit anyone of us here reading your posts understand your concern(s), as they are valid, there is still a principal at play throughout this world as a truth of "civilized" societies–if someone is caught breaking the law, and they honestly did not know about said law, the court will state, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

 

If anyone is going to play a game, it is up to that person to read the rules, learn about the fundamental aspects which directly concern the game, and then proceed after having an understanding of those same rules/principals. Just because it is possible to go to Stratego dot com, open an account, setup a board, and then engage in a match does not change the fact that the rules exist. If such a player is not interested in learning about HOW this game is supposed to be played, why should all other players who understand the rules be subjected to a bad and frustrating situation just because of one person's ignorance? I must tell you as my friend that in such a scenario, it is unacceptable behavior from the one not knowing the rules OR more importantly, how the game is played and NOT played.

 

Spoiler


#17 Bobby Dylan

Bobby Dylan

    Lieutenant

  • Moderators
  • 645 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 03 April 2020 - 06:45 PM

I think people who can understand the Stratego rules, can also understand that two bombed in flags, no miners or other movable pieces except 2 marshals, is a clear draw.
And for real beginners who don't understand that, it doesn't matter if 300 or 100 points were deducted.

And if MT has really the idea that the accused is very new to Stratego or does not understand this, especially f.e. if there were no warnings by the plaintiff in the battle chat, MT always have an option to go for a benefit of the doubt.

But I agree with Wnehme that a more clear link to the forum, especially in the App which not even has a link to the forum, should be better.

When you've got nothing, you've got nothing to lose - Bob Dylan


#18 Wnehme

Wnehme

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 03 April 2020 - 07:00 PM

Your point is valid no doubt
But still people needs to see signs
When u go walk ur dog everbody knows that cleaning after him is a must yet they put a sign please clean after your dog. So if they want to penalize the person they tell him we put a sign
Like the DC and ATW , how many will stop doing it if you tell them before the game you will loose 75 pts if you DC
Maybe 50% wouldnt care and 50% will say you know what i will surrender
Like also the mutliple chasing i never heard of it until 1 month and saw it twice happening with me after 2000 games and if i wasnt following the forum would never heard of it

#19 Wnehme

Wnehme

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 399 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 03 April 2020 - 07:03 PM

And regarding your example, i know you are a geniune person, but a big majority is not
Once i was playing a guy who said i violated something and he will report me
I did nothing i won after and kept the video and reviewed and was waiting for his report
He never did- it was a scam and i was sure 90% it was

I wanted to send an email once to a player and i couldnt so i asked fairway and he said not everyone is on forum
So it occurs to me many are playing without knowing the rules

Edited by Wnehme, 03 April 2020 - 07:06 PM.


#20 Bobby Dylan

Bobby Dylan

    Lieutenant

  • Moderators
  • 645 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 03 April 2020 - 07:11 PM

@ Wnehme:

DC is something different. Everybody can understand that it's real bad sportmanship to DC when lost, and let you wait for 2,5 minutes.
On Lichess, a chess site, DC will be punished too if it happens too many times.

ATW the same, it doesn't matter what the punishment is, it is just bad behaviour which should be punished.
And we increased the punishment for ATW and DC to minus 75 to prevent people will do this again when punished before.

Obvious draw is a little bit the same. Even beginners will understand after running around the lakes with two marshals for 15 minutes will not lead to a win.

On double chasing you have a point. When I was new I did not know about this rule, but a very nice player ( player garlick) explained that to me in the battle chat, so from then I know.
And we did not increase the punishments for double chasing though.

When you've got nothing, you've got nothing to lose - Bob Dylan





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users