Conquer Club

Posted: **Sun Sep 06, 2009 7:59 pm**

The games were posted on Friday at 11:05 AM. (PST). It is now Sunday 5:50 PM so I have another 18 hours or so. I just tried to join the games but they are password protected. I can't join them now and I won't have access to a computer again for another 24 hours. I timed this around my vacation carefully so that I would be able to play with no problems. the fact that the games are password protected is beyond my control. It seems that they were not created correctly so I should not be held responsible for not being able to join them. I'll try my best to log in before the time is up but I don't know if I will be able to.

Lindax, please re-post those games or let me know the password.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:32 am**

I am sorry, but u cannot delay another player for almost a week!

Lindax, clarifications are needed here, please. This wait is ridiculous!

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:51 am**

Arms Race
no spoils
unlimited forts
sunny

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:55 am**

AndrewB wrote:
Lindax wrote:
AndrewB wrote:I challenge Nanogram, please

Nano: Map and settings please.

Lx

More then 5 days have passed since I've challanged Nanogram and the games are still not started. As I understand, Nanogram forfeits and I challenge HLA, please.

"cowboy challenges HLA: Sep 4, 16:07 hrs."-Sorry Andrew, just sent my settings for the challenge that cowboyz did

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:14 am**

I would like to challenge Witt

finally an opening to move up

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:15 am**

AndrewB wrote:I am sorry, but u cannot delay another player for almost a week!

Lindax, clarifications are needed here, please. This wait is ridiculous!

Ok, clarification. This is the rule:

3.- If the player challenged does not respond within 3 days, he loses the challenge and he/she exchanges places on the ladder with the challenger. If the challenger does not join the game within 3 days, everything remains the same.

When somebody gets challenged, he/she has 3 days to respond with choice of map and settings. Once I have those, I create the games. Then both players have 3 days to join them. This means that in total we are talking about 6 days, plus the time between the announcement of maps and settings and I making the game.

In general you guys don't take that long, but I have seen several occasions where there were 4, 5 or 6 days between the initial challenge and the start of the games.

In this particular case, it seems that Nanogram is on holiday and is carefully planning his computer access to make sure he doesn't miss anything. He is correct in saying that he still had time to join (actually he still has almost 3 hours: "Andrew challenges Nano: Game 5538001 - Game 5538002 - Game 5538004 - Sep 4, 18:55 hrs." The date and time is when I made the games and posted them, he has 3 days from then).

The games are all password protected, as are all tournament games normally. In the beginning I would send players the games and the password, but since CC introduced the "invite" option, I use that. The problem is that the invites expire after 24 hrs. and I have to invite again if that happens. By sending an invite, the players do not get to know the password and that caused the problem for Nano yesterday, when he couldn't join the games. I sent him an invite again.

In short: There can indeed be almost a week between challenge and start playing. In this case none of the players did anything wrong. Sending invites instead of pm's seems to be part of this problem (from now on I'll do both).

Solution: Since Nano was online yesterday to join the games but he couldn't, I would suggest that we give him today to join them. Any other solution would have a negative effect on at least one of the players, although they did not do anything wrong. And we cannot turn back the clock.

For my part I can only apologize for being lazy and using the "invite" option.

What say you Andrew?

Lx

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:42 am**

HighlanderAttack wrote:Arms Race
no spoils
unlimited forts
sunny

Games are up, invites and pm sent.

Lx

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:43 am**

DBandit70 wrote:I would like to challenge Witt

finally an opening to move up

Witt: Map and settings please.

Lx

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:44 am**

Scores for Sunday, September 6, are posted on page 1.

Lx

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:00 am**

Luckily the hotel at which I am staying has a computer available for guests to use. I joined the games so we are back on track.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:21 pm**

Nanogram wrote:Luckily the hotel at which I am staying has a computer available for guests to use. I joined the games so we are back on track.

Ok, thanks. That solves the situation then, since you were still within the time limit.

Lx

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:52 pm**

Rules does not state that there are 2 periods of 3 days available for wait. What it says is this:

If the player challenged does not respond within 3 days, he loses the challenge and he/she exchanges places on the ladder with the challenger. If the challenger does not join the game within 3 days, everything remains the same.

Since I have joined the games on timely basis then the second sentence does not apply here at all.

So what we are left with is this:

If the player challenged does not respond within 3 days, he loses the challenge and he/she exchanges places on the ladder with the challenger.

I dont understand how do u make from that 2 periods of 3 days.

I have waited more almost 6 days for the games to start since my challenge.

Furthermore, Lindax, you are incorrect in saying that your proposed solution has no negative effect. I have lost 6 days worth of challenges; that 7% of all avaialble time for challenges. If I would know, that I have to wait 6 days, then I certainly would not challenge Nano.

Waiting 6 days for the challenge to start is ridiculous!

If I would have need to travel, I would arrange for my babysitters to join and play the games on timely basis.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:01 pm**

AndrewB wrote:Rules does not state that there are 2 periods of 3 days available for wait. What it says is this:

If the player challenged does not respond within 3 days, he loses the challenge and he/she exchanges places on the ladder with the challenger. If the challenger does not join the game within 3 days, everything remains the same.

Since I have joined the games on timely basis then the second sentence does not apply here at all.

So what we are left with is this:

If the player challenged does not respond within 3 days, he loses the challenge and he/she exchanges places on the ladder with the challenger.

I dont understand how do u make from that 2 periods of 3 days.

I have waited more almost 6 days for the games to start since my challenge.

Furthermore, Lindax, you are incorrect in saying that your proposed solution has no negative effect. I have lost 6 days worth of challenges; that 7% of all avaialble time for challenges. If I would know, that I have to wait 6 days, then I certainly would not challenge Nano.

Waiting 6 days for the challenge to start is ridiculous!

If I would have need to travel, I would arrange for my babysitters to join and play the games on timely basis.

Well, what can I say? I explained the rules above and it has been the intention from the very start to have two 3 day periods. Anything else would be unfair. How can I give the person challenged 3 days to post his map and settings and the challenger the rest of the 3 days to join the games? Then all you need to do is wait 71 hours and 59 minutes to give your map and settings and the challenger has 1 minute to join the games.

To me Nanogram was within the rules, so there was no "solution" needed. He did the best he could to get online and join his games on a timely basis. Whether you would use a sitter or not is up to you.

I apologize if the rules were unclear to you.

Lx

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:19 pm**

Andrew, I questioned the rules myself on my last challenge and the way Lindax explained it was exactly how he explained it here. I think this tourney has been a lot of work for Lindax and I am pretty sure we all appreciate his efforts. Maybe a few tweaks to the actual rules if another one is run (and I hope he does run another one). I think Lindax has done everything to make this a great tourney and keep it as fair as possible. Just adding my two cents.

Posted: **Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:33 pm**

For me, it looks like creating new rules while the tournament is in progress. And applying them retrospectively.

Even though it might have been an intention of the organizer from the beginning, but if it was not written, it cannot be really applied.

I certainly appreciate all the effort Lindax has put in this. This is the MOST demanding format from the organizer perspective I have ever seen. Big kudos to him for that!

That being said, with all due respect, I refuse to be part of the tournament with fluid rules. The current 3 games vs Nano will be last ones for me in this tournament.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:16 am**

AndrewB wrote:For me, it looks like creating new rules while the tournament is in progress. And applying them retrospectively.

Even though it might have been an intention of the organizer from the beginning, but if it was not written, it cannot be really applied.

I certainly appreciate all the effort Lindax has put in this. This is the MOST demanding format from the organizer perspective I have ever seen. Big kudos to him for that!

That being said, with all due respect, I refuse to be part of the tournament with fluid rules. The current 3 games vs Nano will be last ones for me in this tournament.

Sorry to see you make that last statement Andrew.

For my part I can only say that I did not create a new rule and that to me the rules are written the way I explained it above. Nothing fluid about them.

Just look at how I registered the challenges right from the beginning, on page 1. I register the challenge with the date and time a person challenged another player. That player then had 3 days to give map and settings. Once I had the map and settings and set up the games, I posted the date and time I posted the games, so both players would have 3 days to join the games. In other words: I have been applying this right from the start of the tourney and there have been many challenges that took 5 or 6 days before the players actually started playing.

This seems to come down to interpreting how I wrote down the rules, not how I apply them.

Lx

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:51 pm**

Lindax wrote:
Just look at how I registered the challenges right from the beginning, on page 1. I register the challenge with the date and time a person challenged another player. That player then had 3 days to give map and settings. Once I had the map and settings and set up the games, I posted the date and time I posted the games,

All correct up to this point and indeed is defined in rules like this.

Lindax wrote:so both players would have 3 days to join the games.

You are incorrect here. The rules clearly state: challenger, not challengee has 3 days to join. And for me it makes the perfect sense. Challengee gets 3 days to post his games, in return challenger gets 3 days to join. But not Challengee gets 6 days and challenger gets 3 days.

Lindax wrote:In other words: I have been applying this right from the start of the tourney and there have been many challenges that took 5 or 6 days before the players actually started playing.

This seems to come down to interpreting how I wrote down the rules, not how I apply them.

Lx

As I was saying before, because you applied a certain rule in the past games/tournaments etc, does not make it a rightful rule, which you can apply in this tournament. The other players should have complaint about that new rule too.

And I dont see, how it is open for interpretation. To me, it is a new rule, created in the middle of tournament; giving extra 3 days of wait to the challengee.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:46 pm**

AndrewB wrote:As I was saying before, because you applied a certain rule in the past games/tournaments etc, does not make it a rightful rule, which you can apply in this tournament. The other players should have complaint about that new rule too.

And I dont see, how it is open for interpretation. To me, it is a new rule, created in the middle of tournament; giving extra 3 days of wait to the challengee.

Ok, we obviously disagree here: it is simply not true that I made a new rule during the tournament.

I'm really sorry that you see it that way and that this has to end this way.

Lx

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:07 pm**

Look Lindax, I am not going to be one busting your balls. We are getting along very well, and my complaint is nothing personal. i hope it will stay this way

But I still disagree with your ruling and explanation for that ruling, and as result still would like to withdraw from the tournament, respectfully.

Thanks.

Posted: **Tue Sep 08, 2009 4:28 pm**

AndrewB wrote:Look Lindax, I am not going to be one busting your balls. We are getting along very well, and my complaint is nothing personal. i hope it will stay this way

But I still disagree with your ruling and explanation for that ruling, and as result still would like to withdraw from the tournament, respectfully.

Thanks.

I know it's not personal

I respect your wish to withdraw from the tourney, once you finished the games against Nano.

Lx

Posted: **Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:02 pm**

Updated.

Lx

Posted: **Fri Sep 11, 2009 4:32 pm**

Rémi wins against Lindax

Posted: **Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:06 pm**

Rémi wrote:Rémi wins against Lindax

gg's Remi.

I challenge danryan.

Lx

Posted: **Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:09 pm**

Lindax wrote:
Rémi wrote:Rémi wins against Lindax

gg's Remi.

I challenge danryan.

Lx

ryan: Map and settings please.

Lx

Posted: **Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:47 pm**

Lindax wrote:
Lindax wrote:
Rémi wrote:Rémi wins against Lindax

gg's Remi.

I challenge danryan.

Lx

ryan: Map and settings please.

Lx

I don't know if 24 hours were up, but who cares, it's all good.

Let's do:

random, foggy, esc, chained

Conquer Club

Lx Ladder 2000+ [Winner: Nanogram]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [1 Month left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]

Re: Lx Ladder 2000+ [3 Weeks left]