HUH??????? https://x.com/alexrr_official/status/1926367495583101254?s=46
Brother are the admins fucking retarded? They screwed KOI over and their solution is to screw EP over instead?
That's nonsense, it's way too fucking late now to fix the mistake, apologize, take the responsibility and move on
Basically what happened was that Pika disconnected at the start of the first half bonus round. It was within the first minute and no damage was dealt as the rulebook specifies, round should have been remade. However the admin said he did not "hear" KOI calling for Tech pause. KOI offered proof that they did call for it in time but the admin said nah, no replay for no reason at all. After that they were 4-0 down and fuming.
Honestly I believe they were gonna lose anyway but the admin did fuck them over pretty bad. If I had to guess, I'd say EP would have won like 13-7 or something.
However man, there's mistakes that just can't be fixed, this is NOT the solution
Im looking forward to how they justify that one
cause we read those rules in quite a bit of detail last time around (now even have precedent after JL) and it doesnt say "once a player dc's you shall only take a short tech pause and then continue the game like normal... but all the results are void of course"
I really think we might need a major ascension rule rewrite if they are apparently this hard to read and constantly cause major issuees
This is rulebook, it's very clear https://x.com/SergioFFerra/status/1926342371723079786
And proof that the condition was met https://clips.twitch.tv/AliveDependableCarabeefMVGame-s4VjR0O6ugD3mQN9
KOI did get screwed, but that does NOT mean replaying this is the correct solution
nah they would just continue the game 11-0 if they considered that the problem
like 100% agree, wrong ruling, but I doubt that specific one will be the justification
I assume they are more going the route of the ping/dc never being fixed and affecting the whole map, but the admin not granting the correct timeouts
or something along those lines
nah they would just continue the game 11-0 if they considered that the problem
Don't understand what you mean, the issue was on round 3. The round 3 disconnect issue is the official version and from the KOI side they have not mentioned persisting issues through the rest of the map. https://x.com/valesports_emea/status/1926394760685596934?s=46
yes, so you remove all rounds which were affected by the decision
1 lost due to the dc and then 1-2 rounds for economy -> 11-0 or 10-0
that how Riot has done it in the past (the glorious Acend vs VKS ruling being the funniest example)
like im aware of what they said, however they will have had discussions as to why it isnt appropriate behind the scene
so Im theorizing on how you come to this conclusion (hence the initial question as to how they properly justify it in this case)
The only way of justifying it is the mental. KOI got fucked on round 3 and they knew they had been screwed over while playing the whole map, Acend weren't aware of the issue until the end of the game as far as I remember
Removing rounds that affected sounds like a terrible solution to me in any situation, the game is completely different after something like that happens. Keeping in mind that it should not be replayed now, I do think playing from the 2-0 is the correct choice.
It's kind of like in football, imagine there's a very clear pen on min 5 and it's not whistled. The game then ends 1-1. Is it fair to just assume with the pen it would have been 2-1? No, the entire game is different the strategy is different the mental is different
ye but you cant take mental into account when making admin decisions
at least I hope? We'd be in the wild west if they do
How do you determine the amount of rounds affected due to mental?
An extreme example: how many rounds should a team lose if a player tbags, sprays bodies and walks into enemies faces are at waist level due to the equipped finishers?
We've had players fined for these before, meaning they do violate the rules (to an extend), and they're intentionally done to damage the mental of an opponent.
Is it 1 round per offense, or do you just replay the whole map if the opposing player gets tilted early on?
While trying to remove rounds based on effect + econ is anything but perfect, it is way more accurate than something arbitrary like "mental"
Correct solutions would ofc to avoid situations like this entirely, but here are
(Or imo just finally stand behind your admins and make decisions final. Even if theyre shit. And in that case fix the issues that led to the shit decision. But we've never done that in Valorant when public pressure is involved so unlucky ig)
How do you determine the amount of rounds affected due to mental?
And how do you determine the amount of rounds affected due to economy? 1 round for economy? Who says they win the next round? What if they do and send them to eco, cycle ults and win 3 more?
You say taking mental into account can't be done because it's just speculation. But it's the other way around, that is exactly the issue. You can't determine how an issue like this affected the rest of the game in so many levels which is why you don't speculate and say "oh it affected 2 rounds" or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6, who knows, instead you do not speculate by just replaying from the issue
Btw Imo the correct solution was putting out a public statement apologizing for the mistake and probably firing the mf that took made the decision and then just moving on
Then answer the question I posed above: how many rounds for a tilted player? Based on your argumentation it would be grounds for a full replay.
If you have to fully undermine competitive integrity to make it work then its not a good approach. Why go the nuclear route with a factor you cant measure.
To be clear your approach would make tilting someone more severe than abusing reported and officially banned bugs.
Regarding the eco, we dont have to speculate since Riot already has a system for it which theyve used at a masters.
It isnt public however it is something you can model to consistently rule with. The economy is numbers, so you can get deterministic outputs. That makes it very well suited to rules.
It doesnt have to be perfect, it has to allow for consistent ruling.
Indeed you do need a consistent ruling you cannot just speculate. Which is precisely why you go back to the round where it happened. Absolutely ANY other solution IS speculating with how many rounds it did or didn't affect which no, is not as simple as having a formula for economy, I do not buy that.
You're basing your point on the fact that you shouldn't speculate and be consistent but you're not realizing going back to the moment of the issue is the most consistent and less speculative solution of them all
Discord