lol victory by technicality, the sweetest victory there is.
yo im pretty sure you can unpause after 5 in esea but ive waited like 20 during a regular season match
freakinyo im pretty sure you can unpause after 5 in esea but ive waited like 20 during a regular season match
thats because most teams in esea want their matches to be competitive/even and if they have to wait half an hour for it to not be an unfair 5v6, most are polite enough to do so.
thats because most teams in esea want their matches to be competitive/even and if they have to wait half an hour for it to not be an unfair 5v6, most are polite enough to do so.
Air_freakinyo im pretty sure you can unpause after 5 in esea but ive waited like 20 during a regular season matchthats because most teams in esea want their matches to be competitive/even and if they have to wait half an hour for it to not be an unfair 5v6, most are polite enough to do so.
Let's fight like gentlemen
thats because most teams in esea want their matches to be competitive/even and if they have to wait half an hour for it to not be an unfair 5v6, most are polite enough to do so.[/quote]
[IMG]http://puu.sh/84sUd.jpg[/IMG]
Let's fight like gentlemen
MaxieXtineHm... I have to sound off about this...i pretty much completely disagree here and for more reasons than just the fact that my team is the one that got fucked here.
too many people put too much time into this game for an admin to not intervene when a team in playoffs has as bad luck as we did with simply getting players to the match, especially considering it was the final round and we had put up a good defense.
they are not being punished, if they deserve the win they will earn it during the rematch, but simply saying "too bad" when a team has unforeseeable issues that stop them from playing mid-match is a terrible terrible way to run a league and I commend the ugc admin responsible for making what is apparently an unpopular decision to help uphold the integrity of the league and the effort required to compete at the top of it.
this is a very different situation from not rescheduling a match to a more convenient time for them and less convenient time for us, or allowing a ringer for a class that could be filled by a rostered player who mained the class at an invite level but got benched because they didnt feel he was good enough. They had days to prepare and find a suitable substitute for one player, we were given just over 5 minutes for 3.
the clause about admin interpretation superseding all written rules is in there specifically to deal with things like forfeit-win hunting because it undermines the point of even competing in a league to begin with.
tl;dr for you extine, the ugc admin decided that he wants the winners of the league to reflect the best teams, not the teams who can abuse the rules the best
there's a huge difference in allowing us to use ringers, and allowing us to practice with said ringers, and then changing your minds the day before the match just to screw us over (which also happened during playoffs)
i find it absolutely ridiculous that you guys can't see the double standards that is going on here, or the absurdity of asking us to reschedule the match when we're already on the third round, and calling us out for bad sportsmanship after what your team did to us at the beginning of playoffs (after calling us faggots after the game was over)
i didn't know saying that what happened to you guys was karma was bad sportsmanship when you guys did the exact same thing to us on viaduct, i figured that it was pure irony that it was happening to you guys during the match and called it out
karma can mean the principle of causality, which means essentially you reap what you sow, or what goes around, comes around
i really wish we dealt with you guys through match communications on the viaduct matches to see how sleazy your team is willing to go to secure a win, rather than trust you guys over steamchat, but we'll see what happens when we do play on sunday for the rematch
people are calling us out on being little kids for returning the favor when we had to deal with the consequences of that viaduct game by being placed in the losers bracket from the start of playoffs, which is a huge deal if you're participating in any sort of tournament
i highly doubt that many people placed in the exact same situation as us would allow them to get a ringer midmatch either
i'm extremely salty about the entire ordeal, and it's not the fact that vhalin was the cause behind all of this, it's the fact that they claim that they're actually good/nice guys in this scenario when their entire team denied us any leniency when it came to rescheduling/playing the game with a team that could actually compete with them
i feel like if we actually played with the roster we were practicing with for on viaduct, the entirety of playoffs would have been changed by this point
all of that is for moot though, and i'm looking forward to trying my best on sunday to knocking you guys out of this tournament BY THE BOOK
i pretty much completely disagree here and for more reasons than just the fact that my team is the one that got fucked here.
too many people put too much time into this game for an admin to not intervene when a team in playoffs has as bad luck as we did with simply getting players to the match, especially considering it was the final round and we had put up a good defense.
they are not being punished, if they deserve the win they will earn it during the rematch, but simply saying "too bad" when a team has [b]unforeseeable[/b] issues that stop them from playing [i]mid-match[/i] is a terrible terrible way to run a league and I commend the ugc admin responsible for making what is apparently an unpopular decision to help uphold the integrity of the league and the effort required to compete at the top of it.
this is a very different situation from not rescheduling a match to a more convenient time for them and less convenient time for us, or allowing a ringer for a class that could be filled by a rostered player who mained the class at an invite level but got benched because they didnt feel he was good enough. They had days to prepare and find a suitable substitute for one player, we were given just over 5 minutes for 3.
the clause about admin interpretation superseding all written rules is in there specifically to deal with things like forfeit-win hunting because it undermines the point of even competing in a league to begin with.
tl;dr for you extine, the ugc admin decided that he wants the winners of the league to reflect the best teams, not the teams who can abuse the rules the best[/quote]
there's a huge difference in allowing us to use ringers, and allowing us to practice with said ringers, and then changing your minds the day before the match just to screw us over (which also happened during playoffs)
i find it absolutely ridiculous that you guys can't see the double standards that is going on here, or the absurdity of asking us to reschedule the match when we're already on the third round, and calling us out for bad sportsmanship after what your team did to us at the beginning of playoffs (after calling us faggots after the game was over)
i didn't know saying that what happened to you guys was karma was bad sportsmanship when you guys did the exact same thing to us on viaduct, i figured that it was pure irony that it was happening to you guys during the match and called it out
karma can mean the principle of causality, which means essentially you reap what you sow, or what goes around, comes around
i really wish we dealt with you guys through match communications on the viaduct matches to see how sleazy your team is willing to go to secure a win, rather than trust you guys over steamchat, but we'll see what happens when we do play on sunday for the rematch
people are calling us out on being little kids for returning the favor when we had to deal with the consequences of that viaduct game by being placed in the losers bracket from the start of playoffs, which is a huge deal if you're participating in any sort of tournament
i highly doubt that many people placed in the exact same situation as us would allow them to get a ringer midmatch either
i'm extremely salty about the entire ordeal, and it's not the fact that vhalin was the cause behind all of this, it's the fact that they claim that they're actually good/nice guys in this scenario when their entire team denied us any leniency when it came to rescheduling/playing the game with a team that could actually compete with them
i feel like if we actually played with the roster we were practicing with for on viaduct, the entirety of playoffs would have been changed by this point
all of that is for moot though, and i'm looking forward to trying my best on sunday to knocking you guys out of this tournament BY THE BOOK
talk like that is gonna have vhalin putting on some weight fox
can u handle another 40 lbs?
can u handle another 40 lbs?
thats what i dont get though, if they screwed me over i wouldnt want to beat them 9v8 and be like ha i showed you
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better
freakinthats what i dont get though, if they screwed me over i wouldnt want to beat them 9v8 and be like ha i showed you
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better[/quote]
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun
We expect Platinum teams to set an example of fairness and good sportsmanship and not to force an outcome through being a rules lawyer. MF9K was in the wrong for unpausing the match (after 7 minutes) when they did not initiate the pause in the first place. Is there a specifically written rule for this? No, and there shouldn't have to be. Engaging in a dialogue with the other team, ascertaining how much longer they needed to recover their players and being flexible with them to ensure a fair match is played is a show of good sportsmanship and I shouldn't have to tell that to anyone..let alone Platinum players. The 5 minute pause rule is a guideline and not one that we have ever enforced (to the minute) in any division...let alone in a Plat match with a direct monetary outcome. All rules (including this one) are subject to Head Admin interpretation and each match dispute is reviewed on a case by case basis.
What should have happened is that both teams got an admin innovated as this issue was occurring live. Had I been engaged I would have spoke with GC to find out how long they needed to get 9 back and would have allowed them to pause for up to 15 minutes. I don't believe that is remotely unreasonable to allow in the interest of fair play. Had they not been able to recover their 9 players then I would have allowed them to postpone the round that this occurred in to make it up the next night. Would I have done this in a regular season match in Iron? Probably not. But this is the playoffs. Do you think ESEA would allow a win at LAN over a technicality like pausing for a few too many minutes?
Initially I stated that MF9K's attack time of 8:59 was still in place and GC would get the chance to redo. But after talking wth Stabby, I agreed to his request to allow a full round redo. The clock time should be set by the players who are there at the time the round is played. So I agreed to allow MF9K to replay their attack round with the chance to set a better time.
I think we have been more than reasonable in our handling of this situation.
What should have happened is that both teams got an admin innovated as this issue was occurring live. Had I been engaged I would have spoke with GC to find out how long they needed to get 9 back and would have allowed them to pause for up to 15 minutes. I don't believe that is remotely unreasonable to allow in the interest of fair play. Had they not been able to recover their 9 players then I would have allowed them to postpone the round that this occurred in to make it up the next night. Would I have done this in a regular season match in Iron? Probably not. But this is the playoffs. Do you think ESEA would allow a win at LAN over a technicality like pausing for a few too many minutes?
Initially I stated that MF9K's attack time of 8:59 was still in place and GC would get the chance to redo. But after talking wth Stabby, I agreed to his request to allow a full round redo. The clock time should be set by the players who are there at the time the round is played. So I agreed to allow MF9K to replay their attack round with the chance to set a better time.
I think we have been more than reasonable in our handling of this situation.
GOLDEN_NINJA_WARRIORfreakinthats what i dont get though, if they screwed me over i wouldnt want to beat them 9v8 and be like ha i showed you
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun
well of course it is
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better[/quote]
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun[/quote]
well of course it is
Gentlemans club is pussyies and cant handle to lose so they go cry to their dad the ugc admins
MF9K gonna crush
MF9K gonna crush
GOLDEN_NINJA_WARRIORfreakinthats what i dont get though, if they screwed me over i wouldnt want to beat them 9v8 and be like ha i showed you
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun
How can you call anyone a big gay retard when you've unironically named yourself GOLDEN_NINJA_WARRIOR?
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better[/quote]
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun[/quote]
How can you call anyone a big gay retard when you've unironically named yourself GOLDEN_NINJA_WARRIOR?
Dear UGC, why have rules if you're not going to enforce them?
MunchGOLDEN_NINJA_WARRIORHow can you call anyone a big gay retard when you've unironically named yourself GOLDEN_NINJA_WARRIOR?freakinthats what i dont get though, if they screwed me over i wouldnt want to beat them 9v8 and be like ha i showed you
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun
wanna go?
munch more like cockmunch 8)
i would want to beat them 9v9 proving that im actually better[/quote]
the mind of a big gay retard is hard to grasp
just remember guys winning is more important than fun[/quote]
How can you call anyone a big gay retard when you've unironically named yourself GOLDEN_NINJA_WARRIOR?[/quote]
wanna go?
munch more like cockmunch 8)
snowblindfrogWe expect Platinum teams to set an example of fairness and good sportsmanship and not to force an outcome through being a rules lawyer. MF9K was in the wrong for unpausing the match (after 7 minutes) when they did not initiate the pause in the first place. Is there a specifically written rule for this? No, and there shouldn't have to be. Engaging in a dialogue with the other team, ascertaining how much longer they needed to recover their players and being flexible with them to ensure a fair match is played is a show of good sportsmanship and I shouldn't have to tell that to anyone..let alone Platinum players. The 5 minute pause rule is a guideline and not one that we have ever enforced (to the minute) in any division...let alone in a Plat match with a direct monetary outcome. All rules (including this one) are subject to Head Admin interpretation and each match dispute is reviewed on a case by case basis.
What should have happened is that both teams got an admin innovated as this issue was occurring live. Had I been engaged I would have spoke with GC to find out how long they needed to get 9 back and would have allowed them to pause for up to 15 minutes. I don't believe that is remotely unreasonable to allow in the interest of fair play. Had they not been able to recover their 9 players then I would have allowed them to postpone the round that this occurred in to make it up the next night. Would I have done this in a regular season match in Iron? Probably not. But this is the playoffs. Do you think ESEA would allow a win at LAN over a technicality like pausing for a few too many minutes?
Initially I stated that MF9K's attack time of 8:59 was still in place and GC would get the chance to redo. But after talking wth Stabby, I agreed to his request to allow a full round redo. The clock time should be set by the players who are there at the time the round is played. So I agreed to allow MF9K to replay their attack round with the chance to set a better time.
I think we have been more than reasonable in our handling of this situation.
So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know? That's why rules are in place and until you get a lan where you can have on site control and enforcement, the documented rules should be followed. If they aren't good enough to just enforce to the letter, revise them. Law gets amended all the time. I dont really care who wins this but what's the point of having rules if they don't matter?
What should have happened is that both teams got an admin innovated as this issue was occurring live. Had I been engaged I would have spoke with GC to find out how long they needed to get 9 back and would have allowed them to pause for up to 15 minutes. I don't believe that is remotely unreasonable to allow in the interest of fair play. Had they not been able to recover their 9 players then I would have allowed them to postpone the round that this occurred in to make it up the next night. Would I have done this in a regular season match in Iron? Probably not. But this is the playoffs. Do you think ESEA would allow a win at LAN over a technicality like pausing for a few too many minutes?
Initially I stated that MF9K's attack time of 8:59 was still in place and GC would get the chance to redo. But after talking wth Stabby, I agreed to his request to allow a full round redo. The clock time should be set by the players who are there at the time the round is played. So I agreed to allow MF9K to replay their attack round with the chance to set a better time.
I think we have been more than reasonable in our handling of this situation.[/quote]
So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know? That's why rules are in place and until you get a lan where you can have on site control and enforcement, the documented rules should be followed. If they aren't good enough to just enforce to the letter, revise them. Law gets amended all the time. I dont really care who wins this but what's the point of having rules if they don't matter?
They wanted a win after a season of hard work and having a bad history with the team. I don't blame them for denying ringers.
Platinum...
So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know? That's why rules are in place and until you get a lan where you can have on site control and enforcement, the documented rules should be followed. If they aren't good enough to just enforce to the letter, revise them. Law gets amended all the time. I dont really care who wins this but what's the point of having rules if they don't matter?
So outside of LAN there should be No Exceptions?
So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know? That's why rules are in place and until you get a lan where you can have on site control and enforcement, the documented rules should be followed. If they aren't good enough to just enforce to the letter, revise them. Law gets amended all the time. I dont really care who wins this but what's the point of having rules if they don't matter?[/quote]
So outside of LAN there should be No Exceptions?
SetsulPlatinum...
So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know? That's why rules are in place and until you get a lan where you can have on site control and enforcement, the documented rules should be followed. If they aren't good enough to just enforce to the letter, revise them. Law gets amended all the time. I dont really care who wins this but what's the point of having rules if they don't matter?
So outside of LAN there should be No Exceptions?
Revise the rules if they can't be applied on literally the first case asked to enforce them?
So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know? That's why rules are in place and until you get a lan where you can have on site control and enforcement, the documented rules should be followed. If they aren't good enough to just enforce to the letter, revise them. Law gets amended all the time. I dont really care who wins this but what's the point of having rules if they don't matter?[/quote]
So outside of LAN there should be No Exceptions?[/quote]
Revise the rules if they can't be applied on literally the first case asked to enforce them?
Foxi'm extremely salty about the entire ordeal, and it's not the fact that vhalin was the cause behind all of this, it's the fact that they claim that they're actually good/nice guys in this scenario when their entire team denied us any leniency when it came to rescheduling/playing the game with a team that could actually compete with them
I literally spoke to stabby at lan about the whole vhalin thing. I had no idea until stabby told me that vhalin ended up denying the ringer, to which I said that I was sorry about it and that it was fucked up because this is supposed to plat and we don't need to be afraid of ringers. More importantly we don't need to play dirty by denying a ringer after already giving the ok. But what did you expect any of us to do about it? Vhalin was the team leader and unfortunately held the final say. To go against his decision would've meant we would have had to appeal to an admin to get him removed from our roster and his leader login taken away.
So I'm sorry that stabby and vhalin have beef and that's why he pulled that shit, but to assume that anyone else on the team wanted to play that match like that is just plain wrong.
Oh yeah and even though it was shitty at least you had 3 days to figure shit out. We had 7 minutes. And we were already using 2 backups to start with because vhalin disappeared and deadbolt didn't want to play.
If you just wanted to win and that's why you did it, I could live with that. But trying to maintain some moral high ground over us under the guise of "karma" is insultingly delusional.
But fuck it I've been a ranking asshole in UGC for a long time so if you wanna pin that shit on me go ahead, but if I or my team aren't "good/nice guys" then ya'll sure as fuck aren't either.
[/quote]
I literally spoke to stabby at lan about the whole vhalin thing. I had no idea until stabby told me that vhalin ended up denying the ringer, to which I said that I was sorry about it and that it was fucked up because this is supposed to plat and we don't need to be afraid of ringers. More importantly we don't need to play dirty by denying a ringer after already giving the ok. But what did you expect any of us to do about it? Vhalin was the team leader and unfortunately held the final say. To go against his decision would've meant we would have had to appeal to an admin to get him removed from our roster and his leader login taken away.
So I'm sorry that stabby and vhalin have beef and that's why he pulled that shit, but to assume that anyone else on the team wanted to play that match like that is just plain wrong.
Oh yeah and even though it was shitty at least you had 3 days to figure shit out. We had 7 minutes. And we were already using 2 backups to start with because vhalin disappeared and deadbolt didn't want to play.
If you just wanted to win and that's why you did it, I could live with that. But trying to maintain some moral high ground over us under the guise of "karma" is insultingly delusional.
But fuck it I've been a ranking asshole in UGC for a long time so if you wanna pin that shit on me go ahead, but if I or my team aren't "good/nice guys" then ya'll sure as fuck aren't either.
MF9K was in the wrong for unpausing the match (after 7 minutes) when they did not initiate the pause in the first place. Is there a specifically written rule for this? No, and there shouldn't have to be.
Why isn't there a specific rule for this? If a team unpausing another teams pause is considered the wrong approach, this should be outlined in the rules. There should be rules for anything that is obscure or could be abused.
The 5 minute pause rule is a guideline and not one that we have ever enforced (to the minute) in any division...
This is how its written on the UGC rule page: "A pause may last up to a maximum of 5 minutes." That sounds like a pretty straight forward rule to me. Are there any other rules we should know about that are guidelines?
What should have happened is that both teams got an admin innovated as this issue was occurring live.
Yes, that would have been ideal. You could understand why MF9k might not be the ones to initiate contact, and GC were certainly scrambling around in the heat of the moment. There was no admin input during the crisis, and MF9K proceeded in the fashion that the rules dictate.
Future adjustments to the rules and procedures are needed without a doubt to stop this from occurring again. Either make Platinum Playoff matches from a certain point on have a UGC admin sit in the game as spectator, or make it so the 5 minute pause rule has an eXception for playoffs and an admin must be consulted before unpausing.
Why isn't there a specific rule for this? If a team unpausing another teams pause is considered the wrong approach, this should be outlined in the rules. There should be rules for anything that is obscure or could be abused.
[quote]The 5 minute pause rule is a guideline and not one that we have ever enforced (to the minute) in any division...[/quote]
This is how its written on the UGC [b]rule[/b] page: "A pause may last up to a maximum of 5 minutes." That sounds like a pretty straight forward rule to me. Are there any other rules we should know about that are guidelines?
[quote]What should have happened is that both teams got an admin innovated as this issue was occurring live.[/quote]
Yes, that would have been ideal. You could understand why MF9k might not be the ones to initiate contact, and GC were certainly scrambling around in the heat of the moment. There was no admin input during the crisis, and MF9K proceeded in the fashion that the rules dictate.
Future adjustments to the rules and procedures are needed [b]without a doubt[/b] to stop this from occurring again. Either make Platinum Playoff matches from a certain point on have a UGC admin sit in the game as spectator, or make it so the 5 minute pause rule has an eXception for playoffs and an admin must be consulted before unpausing.
i dont think ive ever denied a team things because ive had beef with players on the other team
like are you guys all 12 or something lol
just fucking replay the map and win if you deserve the win holy SHIT
like are you guys all 12 or something lol
just fucking replay the map and win if you deserve the win holy [b]SHIT[/b]
Paintsellertalk like that is gonna have vhalin putting on some weight fox
can u handle another 40 lbs?
who are u
can u handle another 40 lbs?[/quote]
who are u
Platinum...
Revise the rules if they can't be applied on literally the first case asked to enforce them?
Revise the rules when they prove to be inadequate? Yes.
Enforce the rules when they prove to be inadequate? No.
At first you suggested to enforce a rule at all times, now you're suggesting to revise it as soon as a problem with it arises? If you're not applying the revised rule in the incident that caused the revision, you're screwing someone over and if you do, you basically didn't enforce the (old) rule.
I might have missed the magical solution hidden beneath your list of problems
(reminder:
PlatinumSo what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know??
), but please tell us what rule covers all of these and everything else that could possibly happen so UGC can use that rule and enforce it no matter what might happen.
Revise the rules if they can't be applied on literally the first case asked to enforce them?[/quote]
Revise the rules when they prove to be inadequate? Yes.
Enforce the rules when they prove to be inadequate? No.
At first you suggested to enforce a rule at all times, now you're suggesting to revise it as soon as a problem with it arises? If you're not applying the revised rule in the incident that caused the revision, you're screwing someone over and if you do, you basically didn't enforce the (old) rule.
I might have missed the magical solution hidden beneath your list of problems
(reminder:
[quote=Platinum]So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know??[/quote]
), but please tell us what rule covers all of these and everything else that could possibly happen so UGC can use that rule and enforce it no matter what might happen.
The only thing worth talking about here is the precedence this incident sets for the UGC rules. I take full responsibility as my team's captain for not thinking to involve an admin during the pause, but we did have the rules page pulled up and simply followed them exactly as they were stated (we gave the pause extra time, but whatever).
Yes, our teams have some serious issues with each other. I'm not going into why we decided not to give GC anything more than the rules allowed, because that's between us. Squabbling over details of who's a shittier sport to protect my "rep" isn't my cup of tea. Gobble up what drama you can while you can.
Rematch is Sunday. Should be an exciting round.
Yes, our teams have some serious issues with each other. I'm not going into why we decided not to give GC anything more than the rules allowed, because that's between us. Squabbling over details of who's a shittier sport to protect my "rep" isn't my cup of tea. Gobble up what drama you can while you can.
Rematch is Sunday. Should be an exciting round.
SetsulPlatinum...Revise the rules when they prove to be inadequate? Yes.
Revise the rules if they can't be applied on literally the first case asked to enforce them?
Enforce the rules when they prove to be inadequate? No.
At first you suggested to enforce a rule at all times, now you're suggesting to revise it as soon as a problem with it arises? If you're not applying the revised rule in the incident that caused the revision, you're screwing someone over and if you do, you basically didn't enforce the (old) rule.
I might have missed the magical solution hidden beneath your list of problems
(reminder:PlatinumSo what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know??), but please tell us what rule covers all of these and everything else that could possibly happen so UGC can use that rule and enforce it no matter what might happen.
How about a longer pause duration? That's actually applicable to tf2. 5 minutes rolls fast as hell especially when it takes a few minutes to even figure out the problem.
Revise the rules if they can't be applied on literally the first case asked to enforce them?[/quote]
Revise the rules when they prove to be inadequate? Yes.
Enforce the rules when they prove to be inadequate? No.
At first you suggested to enforce a rule at all times, now you're suggesting to revise it as soon as a problem with it arises? If you're not applying the revised rule in the incident that caused the revision, you're screwing someone over and if you do, you basically didn't enforce the (old) rule.
I might have missed the magical solution hidden beneath your list of problems
(reminder:
[quote=Platinum]So what would you have done if a couple players were getting potentially temporarily ddosed? What if someone happened to lag? What if it wasn't as cut and dry as 3 people crashing outright? What if the team was losing and wanted a round overturned and decided to pull their modems? How would you know??[/quote]
), but please tell us what rule covers all of these and everything else that could possibly happen so UGC can use that rule and enforce it no matter what might happen.[/quote]
How about a longer pause duration? That's actually applicable to tf2. 5 minutes rolls fast as hell especially when it takes a few minutes to even figure out the problem.