You are not logged in.
Do you want a new forum account? Send us an e-mail with your desired nick and we'll get it done! We recommend using a secondary, yet still actively used e-mail address - we're an old web and forum after all, so to be on the safe side just in case :-)
(If the link doesn't work for you, right-click on it and save the e-mail address for use in your e-mail client)
ZwerG_Michi_de wrote:
If people realy stop renew the roster, i simply wont agree into a player play and the clans will lose. Who would be so lazy and take this risk. I know who: nobody.
You are arguing that it is too difficult to keep your own roster up to date. Then you say that you would know the other team's roster well enough to reject any players that weren't on it. I'd like to believe that, but I don't think it's very likely.
As Black Adder said, if we adopted your changes, then (almost) nobody would keep their rosters up to date and it would defeat the purpose of having the rule in the first place.
We all agree that the current rule has harsh consequences sometimes, which is unfortunate. I'm certainly not saying that the current rule gives the most "fair" result in every case (it doesn't). What we are saying is that changing the rule would result in even more arguments, would make it easier to avoid the intent of the rule, and would be less fair in general when we consider the league as a whole.
Offline
The only thing there is someone can decide is: "am i fair enough, to give my foe the opportunity to fight, when i could get a free win"
Isnt this a decision every clan should have?? And whats bad on having this decision? Tell me please... its just a opportunity in more fairness and fun. We are all here to play vs each other, if we have the opportunity to get admin win but decide to give the foe the oportunity to take the match, its OUR decision to make it more exciting.
...
So far i realy loose hope in ur sense of fun and fairness 
Offline
and omfg.. pedestrian, havent u read?
As Black Adder said, if we adopted your changes, then (almost) nobody would keep their rosters up to date and it would defeat the purpose of having the rule in the first place.
If people realy stop renew the roster, i simply wont agree into a player play and the clans will lose. Who would be so lazy and take this risk. I know who: nobody.
Tell me where is ANY problem ?? =/
There is no. I just will say "ur a lazy ass, i wont give u the oportunity to play, i will take the admin win, because ur just way to lazy"
SO please! P L E A S E tell me where is the problem?
And no, i did not meant that its to hard, to keep the roster up to date. I said there are just some cases where u can ask the other clan, if some other player of the clan can play, just to keep the matches going.
And this rule was in use for many years in a same kind of leage in aoe2, for years. Never any abuses of it. But in rtsl there will be so many abuses (and omg, nobody still told me how to abuse this rule in any way, and i lost the hope that someone is gona tell me), is that what u want to believe?
I realy start to think ur just fighting for ur own rules, hating me for not loving ur rules...
Last edited by ZwerG_Michi_de (2008-04-27 18:54:57)
Offline
I didn't want to bring this up, but it might help you understand:
Let's say Arsenal has a match against Chelsea in some football tournament. Before the game, both teams agree that, instead of playing 11 on 11 (like normal) they're going to play 14 on 14. Would you argue that the tournament or league should allow it?
I think you have to agree with me that no league in the world would allow them to play 14 on 14. The same rule applies here in RTSL - even if both teams agree before the match, using a non-roster player is still against the rules and is unfair to the rest of the league.
And to clarify what I said before: You said you could simply object to the other team using players not on their roster. My point was that, in order to do that, you would need to check the other team's roster in advance (to know whether or not that player was on it). I'm wondering how well that would work when you can't even remember to check your own roster before a match.
Offline
rofl, what a bad kind of exsample. We are not agreeing in playing warcraft instead of aoe3, its just "u agree in a match or u want admin win? " nothing more.
Ur example should be:
Arsenal has a match against Chelsea, before the game 3 of 12 players dont appear to the match, but the teams both agree that the 3 players can be exchanged by some random people. Even if they are way better soccer player then the 3 who didnt appeared: its the decission of just one clan: the opponent.
If a team want to they can play extra with weaker team vs one team and strong team vs others, they have the choice if they want to win or not... and in the case they agree into playing vs a stronger team then it would stand in the roster: who cares. Its their decision. They can even decide to give admin wins for the other by just not playing. U ever thought of that? oO
Offline
No league would allow Chelsea to play with 3 random players, even if Arsenal agreed.
(Unless, of course, Chelsea followed all the applicable rules, signed them to contracts, added them to its official roster, etc.)
Also, based on your logic, why wouldn't we allow teams to agree to play Warcraft instead of Age3? If both teams agree, what's the problem?
Offline
One more time: u can add this rule "Its allowed to play warcraft 3 instead of aoe3 if both clans agree". THAT is my logic, not just saying "u can do whatever u want to". Based on that: u think now everybody would start playing warcraft 3? And even if they do so: why not? (the only good reason is - warcraft 3 is a boring game and its a aoe3 league, so no sense in that - but u cant say that on the "use a player u like, if everybody is fine with that"-rule)
And u compare now rtsl with major soccer leagues? Do the clans and players get payed for playing? Are u doing a job here, or using ur free time? Come on! This is just a fun league...
Of course nobody would agree that 3 random people play in a game chalsea vs arsenal. But if this both would be some random teams in a tourney of some smaller towns, where they play for fun: who would say no then? Stupid admins i guess 
/e:
i think im done.
U just wont ever change ur rules, because u dont want to, now i know.
Last edited by ZwerG_Michi_de (2008-04-27 20:57:35)
Offline
ZwerG_Michi_de wrote:
The only thing there is someone can decide is: "am i fair enough, to give my foe the opportunity to fight, when i could get a free win"
Isnt this a decision every clan should have?? And whats bad on having this decision? Tell me please... its just a opportunity in more fairness and fun. We are all here to play vs each other, if we have the opportunity to get admin win but decide to give the foe the oportunity to take the match, its OUR decision to make it more exciting.
...
So far i realy loose hope in ur sense of fun and fairness
All right, so what if your 'fairness' screws a chance for other team to get into the play-offs? What then? You think the screwed team will like your attitude? Your action does not affect just your match, it affects everyone else. And I'm not even mentioning the possible and very probable argument about whether you screwed the clan intentionally or not (however misplaced the dispute might be)...
Now imagine everyone is nice and all, like you suggest. Because you would allow a team who 'broke the standard rules' get away with it, you would practically nullify all the effort to maintain the roster all other, careful operators, made. I, for one, would tell myself 'why the hell do I even bother with this nonsense when he does not and gets away with it anyways...' Still sounds cool to you? Not to me, let me tell you. And herein would begin the downfall of updating the rosters.
Fairness is nice and such but it can have consequences that other might see not fair (and rightfully so).
Last edited by Black Adder (2008-04-27 22:43:22)
Offline
Yeah right... everybody will just agree in playing vs a way stronger team just like that. The whole league is gona screw up, because we are all here to play unfair.
If a clan realy has the intention to play unfair: they can make 2 line ups: a strong team and a weak team. The strong plays only vs clan A and the weak vs all the other teams. Well, is that fair? And why there is no rule on rtsl to prevent this?
Oh i fuckin know: nobody has ever done that!
And to come back to the rule change, there need to be TWO clans to agree into cheating. How often will this happen? Oh i fuckin know... This whole discussion is so sad
And to start the evil mind: i even can play with players not in the roster vs all clans but one - they will all get admin wins but the one i played with players in my roster. So every clan but one gets admin wins. OMMMMMMGGGGGGGGGGGGGG THE LEAGUE IS SCREWED UP!!!!
(and btw. what is the exact difference to now? U think 2 clans cant just say "u gona take the wins, then clan x wont come into finals" and just do fake matches. So where is the difference actually? And tell me why nobody have done this actually? (i hope nobody did this..) Because we are here to play for fun. The rule change wont make any problems.)
Last edited by ZwerG_Michi_de (2008-04-28 08:31:48)
Offline
tbh Michi your posts are making less sense as this thread goes on, I don't even understand the point of your last post or even any reasoning behind it. I don't get all this discussion about strong/weak teams, as far as I know every clan in RTSL that is fighting to make playoffs put their strongest team forward.
Offline
Yeah and thats exactly the point:
Why i should agree in playing vs a team which is stronger, then the roster on rtsl tells? I simply wont agree into that.
And to repeat the last both posts:
Black Adder:
"everybody will start to cheat, because they will simply let people play who are just way stronger then the original teams. Or they will agree into playing a way stronger team then its in the roster and loose by fault, so some other team dont get into playoffs."
Michi:
"-_- .... i can do such cheating now too, the rule change wont change anything at this point."
So just one more argument of yours kicked. Are there any standing?
I mean... i know this rule cant do any harm to the league, and in the end i think u know this too. But the longer this discussion gets, i think more and more that ur just fixed with ur own rules.
Offline
First,excuse my horrible english ^^
I hope you understand what i want to say 
I havnt read trough whole the text here but in my opinion the rule should be changed.
Im not saying this for fun, but cause i have some years of experience in league admin work.
Imo the rules concerning players allowed to play should be changed.
It is right that with the beginning of a match, both clans agree to the lineup playing.
So both take responsibility.
According to the rule, only players in the roster are allowed to play.
So if they agree to a player not in the roster, both clans should get admins loss.
Sounds hard.
But it has the advantage that both clans check if the opponent players are allowed to play BEFORE the match.
Because its often the case, that players in the opponent team not in the roster are only reported if the games are lost for the own clan.
So if the other team plays with players not in the roster and i win, its ok, if i loose i ll report and get adminwin.
It should not work like that.
It is only few more work for admins to check once a week for their group in the results if alle players entered in the results are correct.
I ve seen results with no players entered => thats not ok.
Its a hard rule but it verifies that only valid players will participate.
And cases like this will likely not happen again.
In this case for example, ZwerG would have been informed by the opposing clan that player xyz is not in the roster ( things like that happen, and ZwerG is really a reliable Clan !) They could have changed the player or reschedule. The matches could have been played according to the rules. Without stress for admins.
Offline
GWC_Coyote wrote:
Because its often the case, that players in the opponent team not in the roster are only reported if the games are lost for the own clan.
So if the other team plays with players not in the roster and i win, its ok, if i loose i ll report and get adminwin.
It should not work like that.
that's exactly my point!
Offline
Thanks for that helpfull comment Labo ....
Offline
i dont see why it is so difficult to just abide by the rules that are put in place. theyre not always fair but for the majority theyre fine not that difficult to keep roster up to date and have commitment for the players to be there at that time. dont see why this is being made into such a huge arguement over something that simple.. and pedest adder etc i would have given up trying to explain this a long time ago
Offline
