Topic: 2022 Tournament Replays

Mars wrote:

tothxa wrote:

The first one ends with the-x losing his fortification [..] So the second part starts a few minutes earlier.

It seems somehow unfair to load a savegame where he has not lost the fortification yet.

Well, yes, when we stepped back, I expected that he would dismantle that fortification after some fighting. I haven't analysed the replays yet, but it felt that he used the few minutes he gained to prepare much better for the attack on that side, which was most unfair of him, because initially that attack caught him entirely by surprise. He commended me for fair play for allowing the step back, but he did not play fair himself. But I should have told him so right then. And even then, he would have had plenty of time to build up a strong defensive wall there too, and by that time his military had been much stronger. This would have been so even if I didn't allow the step back. But indeed, he would have been under much more pressure, and I may have built up a second military industry right next to his base.

edit:

I have reviewed it a little. I won't comment on what he did at the step-back. However I was in a much better position than I thought after I had captured his fortification initially. He wouldn't have been able to build up defense at the ford, only very close to his HQ, and even there he would have had to sacrifice even more of his economy to make room for it. Though it still would have taken me time to be able to attack his HQ, so it's hard to tell whether I even had a chance given his military strength – but then again, he was running out of rocks and unwilling to mine. So yes, would have been much much more interesting.

edit 2:

Thinking of it some more, probably a more reasonable request from the-x would have been that I destroy the captured fortification and not use the gained land until I build military sites to cover it. Especially because his decision to rely on a single fortification was not due to mouse problems. But as I said, I don't want to change my decision. Veteran tournament players probably wouldn't have agreed to any such request, but I guess this situation wasn't entirely unlike how young Polgár Judit felt seeing Каспаров's hand tremble. (not claiming any similar talent¹ or future for myself)

Well, at least now I feel no more guilt for my 2 wins against stronger players because of my better use of the quirks of the maps and win conditions.

Top

Quote

This is fairplay and so it should be. For the future, to solve this problem with dismantling sites, it is important to have a rule which doesnt destroy the game. The easiest and in my opinion best way would be that sites get automatically dismantled, this will prevent from a lot of possibilities of disputes. In every similar situation before, of course, i also agreed to load the last savegame, it feels like fairplay not to take advantage of it. Other way around, of course i did not take advantage of it since i was not building any site but building farms not to proceed.

Top

Quote

If a milsite gets burned or captured, this is a mistake of the player. If you would have said, oh I overlooked this and tothxa would have accepted it would have been his decision. But according to him you claimed mouse problems to cover your mistake. This I would call a lie and unfair behaviour.

So I will decide tonight, how to solve this. In any case such behaviour is far from what would tell good sportsmanship.

Changing the game, because one player is not able to manage such situations will not happen hopefully.

Top

Quote

hessenfarmer wrote:

I will review the replay tonight very closely. Such accusations are not made the first time. So I take them seriously.

Well, of course I accept the defeat. I basically did so when I agreed to the step back.

Top

Quote

According to tothxa you claimed mouse problems to make him accept a reload. This was obviously not true, and he made his decision based on fake information.

So tricking someone into a decision by lying is a foul.

Top

Quote