Quote from: MonkeyIsland on October 24, 2016, 05:57 AM
Then counter argument was "player A's position in standings is fake because of free wins fake points".

I don't think this is a problem. When you hand out a free win, you would have probably lost the game anyway. Usually people don't pick a scheme they are worse at, and people don't give a free win when they have a decent chance to win.

harpy might have accepted Roper against a worse player (which seemed to be the case cos he said he can't win Sbaffo in Roper) so it's kinda stupid he can openly look for tus and start banning schemes only when he finds out who is his opponent. Of course avoiders can always send "tus?" PMs to noobs and "tus defaults?" PMs to top players instead of open "tus anyone" but at least we could get rid of these clear avoiding situations like Sbaffo's and harpy's.

Quote from: MonkeyIsland on October 24, 2016, 05:57 AM
But at the end of every league season, comes the playoffs. No matter how someone avoid certain schemes/players, in playoffs there will be no avoiding of any kind.

The problem is that you can get the advantage of picking 3 of 5 schemes in the playoffs by avoiding certain schemes/players during the season.

FB had these schemes earlier: Battle Race, BnG, Pro / Elite, Fort, Roper, Rope Race, Shopper, Team17

http://web.archive.org/web/20041019160811/http://www.laene.nl/fb/index.php?p=rules

Sbaffo, the current practice is that you don't get a free win (see the quote of MI). I wrote how the rule could be changed for future cases. Got it?

Quote from: Sbaffo on October 22, 2016, 09:25 AM
Has anyone got this motherf@#!ing point? I won't repeat it again.

Didn't I just propose that you could report a free win in further cases like harpy's? If you look for tus and then say "no ttrr ok?", you have accepted tus and you must play ttrr or whatever. No IFs after you find an opponent.

Quote from: Sbaffo on October 22, 2016, 08:23 AM

Quote from: Senator on October 22, 2016, 08:19 AM
There's already this

Quote from: franz on July 04, 2012, 09:38 PM
Openly asking for clanners but then refusing to play a clan is not okay.  If you only want to play a specific scheme/type, you must make this clear when asking for clanners or risk getting an avoid complaint.

Aight, he accepted tus and then told me that he didn't play tus roper just right when i picked it. This should mean that i'm allowed to report it, right?

Don't think so.

Quote from: MonkeyIsland on May 04, 2013, 02:46 PM
People are free to play the schemes they want. If you play their pick and then they refuse your pick, it will be avoiding. In this case, nothing happened. They asked your pick and refused to play clanner. Many people already do that if they know their opponent pick is BnG.

Forcing a rule otherwise, will make people hand out free wins.

Quote from: MonkeyIsland on May 04, 2013, 05:22 PM

Quote from: sm0k on May 04, 2013, 03:33 PM
well so gonna be ok if i ask for clanner, some clan agree and i ask for their pick.. and if i dont have the right partner for this sheme i can just avoid it? you wanna make me clear this is ok?

You can play the scheme you want. You can ask "clanner Team17 anyone?" and only play Team17. It is based on agreement. You CAN'T refuse your opponent's pick when they have played yours. But before the start of the games, yes you can talk to them to reach an agreement.

Quote from: Sbaffo on October 22, 2016, 08:23 AM
This one can be easily abused:

Random son of a bitch: tus anyone?
Sbaffo: me tus
Random son of a bitch: no ttrr ok?

And then some hours later the same son of a bitch will pick ttrr against someone that's less experienced. Why should that be allowed? Lots of people do it.

What do you mean? I said you could report a free win in a case like this.

I don't think point reduction will help. Free wins do the same thing. harpy doesn't care if his Roper points are reduced to -1000. He will be just happy if he can avoid Roper without gifting free wins. People who game the system won't uncheck Roper. They will get their Roper points from noobs as before and avoid top players as much as they can. Not much changes.

Free wins could be given at least in cases like harpy's so we wouldn't have these frustrating situations where people first look for tus and then start banning schemes depending on the opponent. If you want to ban a scheme, you should do it before you know your opponent.

Player A: tus anyone?
Player B: me tus
Player A: no roper ok? -> tus confirmed. If you leave, the opponent can report a free win and you have one week to play the game.

Player A: tus anyone?
Player B: me tus, join
*Player A joins the game lobby* -> tus confirmed. If you leave, free win.

There's already this

Quote from: franz on July 04, 2012, 09:38 PM
Openly asking for clanners but then refusing to play a clan is not okay.  If you only want to play a specific scheme/type, you must make this clear when asking for clanners or risk getting an avoid complaint.

Quote from: WTF-8 on October 20, 2016, 07:14 AM
http://steamcommunity.com/app/327030/discussions/0/341537671995395338/ "This game is dead - THANKS TEAM 17"
according to a view of a number of WMD players, WMD is RIP after just a few months after release
do anyone want to make a pun out of that?

I haven't had problems finding ranked games though. Maybe less funners are hosted than in WA.

Yeah harpy was in a position to say "no roper or no game" cos he had lower season rating. But as I said, harpy could have searched "tus no Roper anyone?" in AG and the outcome would be the same = no game.

Rules like "you can't fall back from a TUS match after joining the game lobby" or "agreements regarding scheme picks are not valid" would have loopholes and lead to awkward situations.

1. What if you "drop" after you see your opponent's pick? Or just suddenly find out that you can't play? Or in 2vs2 games your partner goes afk and never arrives at the game lobby? If such a rule was in place, no one would ever say "no Roper or no game" but simply leave the lobby. A free win could be given no matter what was the reason for leaving, though, and the player would have one week to play the pick.

2. Someone who doesn't want to play Roper writes "tus no roper anyone?" in AG. You would need to lie to him "ok let's tus no roper" to get him in the lobby and then pick Roper. Or at least get logs where he looks for "tus no roper" and then refuses to play regular tus with you.

Also, some players play just occasionally and they want to play certain schemes or with their buddies. Avoiding rules and such are meant for situations where a player tries to abuse the system in order to get in playoffs. If these rules applied stricly to every player, there would be just less players and less games. If harpy can't have a tus game without rope schemes, he won't simply look for tus. Is that what you want?

Quote from: AduN on October 19, 2016, 09:47 PM
cancelling?
"tus no ropes"

are you kidding me?

Never saw Chel..people looking for "tus defaults only"? It's not a new thing.

What are you suggesting exactly?

Whenever someone looks for "tus no ropes", you can report a free win if he joins the lobby and refuses to play your rope pick?

What harpy did is rare. Usually people either write "tus no ropes" or give a free win and play just their own pick. harpy didn't want to give a free win so he canceled the match.

Well harpy should have written "tus no roper/wxw/ttrr" when he looked for tus. But he could as well have said "sry I need to go" after seeing your pick so I don't think he should be punished for saying no to Roper in the lobby.

I think "tus defaults only" or such should be allowed only occasionally. When it looks like a player will reach 80 games and be fighting for a playoff spot, he can't avoid certain schemes all the time.

You could report him for avoiding but even then a free win may not be given because he is not someone who aims for playoffs...

Now it's like he decided to look for "tus no ropes" after he saw your pick.

QuoteIf a player agrees to play TUS with you and then disappears before playing it, you CANNOT report free win. That match never started and cannot be reported.

If a player plays his pick but then disappears at your pick, you CAN report free win. But even that free win must be played when that player comes back.

You mean this week's Sunday 19 GMT?

Semifinals

blitz (4) vs lalo (8)
Instantly (2) vs Almog (3)

Deadline: Monday 2016-10-24 (14 days)

beautiful ss by Lukz in the first replay at 10:55