1 minute ago, Helias de Nappo said:

The OP has clarified multiple times that his 'I'm going to cheat' statements are rhetorical devices. He's also invited others to offer lesser penalties than that for which he called in the original post.

Every lesser suggestion was dismissed out of hand. Only the blood price can pay for the wages of sin.

Even rhetorically, the moral high ground gets mighty slippery when you repeatedly declare yourself to be the boogey man you hunt.

58 minutes ago, Helias de Nappo said:

The OP has clarified multiple times that his 'I'm going to cheat' statements are rhetorical devices. He's also invited others to offer lesser penalties than that for which he called in the original post.

Sure, they can be rhetorical devices but they're not useful because no one disagrees that outright cheating should have harsh consequences. The problem is that the incident he describes isn't the equivalent of outright cheating and is something that can happen accidentally during a game.

People have presented plenty of lesser penalties that are --in fact-- quite reasonable, but as mentioned, those have been dismissed out of hand with no other alternative from the OP despite the fact that almost no one agrees with it.

59 minutes ago, E Chu Ta said:

Every lesser suggestion was dismissed out of hand.

Exactly. Every suggestion that is less than effectively an execution, with no burden of proof required to carry that sentence has been dismissed by the OP a number of times.

So E Chu Ta's posts are fairly onpoint, and not even remotely ad hominem, or perhaps they're the legit version of what is normally a fallacy. If someone insists that community change and the change is both drastic, severe and done simply because one person says so... Despite this being clearly an unwanted change, I think it's completely fair and accurate to call them on it.

5 minutes ago, AlexW said:

Sure, they can be rhetorical devices but they're not useful because no one disagrees that outright cheating should have harsh consequences.

That's the other major problem with the OP's stance. He keeps throwing out the strawman of how cheating should have consequences as if no one here already agrees with that. Then he equates a honest mistake with cheating, because it may not be possible to prove if any given case of this as being intentional, so all cases of it must be treated the same way, with the most severe punishment possible.

Edit: and on a completely unrelated note, I just noticed that my Likes are higher than my post count, which given my post count is I think really cool

Whether or not you find the rhetorical device useful, whether or not you're frustrated that he hasn't found any of the compromise offerings satisfactory, insulting the man personally is not called-for, nor does it engage with his position.

He's not engaging anyway, he's just trolling.

24 minutes ago, Helias de Nappo said:

Whether or not you find the rhetorical device useful, whether or not you're frustrated that he hasn't found any of the compromise offerings satisfactory, insulting the man personally is not called-for, nor does it engage with his position.

Let's reset this discussion, too much of it is getting bogged down in side arguments about the argument itself.

Me and Helios find NH Gunsmith's suggestions workable. They're not without flaws, but his punishments for looking at a dial usually aren't worth doing it. I still think a game loss is cleaner and just makes sense considering that you >looked at an opponent's dial<, but NH Gunsmith's suggestions are half way there.

Regardless, NH Gunsmith's or any suggestions better than his are still better than the poorly thought out, off the cuff rulings that FFG employees or Worlds Judges have made. With no codified procedure or examples, judges in these types of situations have no guidance. If I was that Worlds Judge, I would have said, "I see no other alternative to a game loss, sorry dude."

NH Gunsmith's ideas have problems. There isn't much value in repositioning a ship wherever you want it when facing a turret, and ships may already be in the optimal location with the optimal maneuver choice, especially in the case of Biggs or other ships that want to fly in a formation. It has problems, but still far less problems than simply allowing an opponent to get away with it once an event, or simply trading dials.

9 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

He's not engaging anyway, he's just trolling.

Because sometimes I have to sleep or work or whatnot. Sometimes I check here and get 7 novella responses to one thing, some of which have legitimate points and others which are just personal attacks.

32 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

Let's reset this discussion, too much of it is getting bogged down in side arguments about the argument itself.

Tactic: Agree: Okay!

Am I correct in reading that a great deal of your discomfort with the current situation is that there are no codified rules on record to govern it? You disagree that the resolution of the problem presented should be left to the officials and judges staffing the event. There must be law, and the judged must execute an agreed upon ruling. The judge will not have to do anything but enact the rule as written.

I see what seems to bother you as a strength. I find comfort in the idea that a judge will make a decision based on the situation at hand, not bound to lay down a specific punishment without regard to circumstance. I like the idea that two players can resolve an inappropriately exposed dial without the intervention of a judge, as two people playing a game. The fluidity is of particular help for dials, because, as discussed elsewhere n the thread, certain resolutions are of almost pointless insignifigance because of the extremely specific vagaries of the timing of the infraction and the state of the game board. The selfsame resolution under very slightly different specifics could be outlandishly harsh.

The judges at major events do have guidance, even if that guidance is not a bulleted list of crimes and punishments. They have a rulebook, they have their experience, they have fellow staff and they have precedents set and established. I think it's a bit of a disservice to take the "judgement" part of their duties out of their hands.

Have we decided on which pit to throw players who look at the wrong dials yet?

Just now, Koing907 said:

Have we decided on which pit to throw players who look at the wrong dials yet?

No, and the fact that the OP keeps arguing that we should, despite a nearly universal rejection of his suggestion is starting to push him firmly into the realm of a troll. A reasonable person would make the argument, would offer points and counterpoints, but after 2-3 pages of no one agreeing with him, would get the point and move on. But between that and the 'off with their heads' for an honest mistake, I think it's clear just how reasonable he really is.

Just now, VanorDM said:

No, and the fact that the OP keeps arguing that we should, despite a nearly universal rejection of his suggestion is starting to push him firmly into the realm of a troll. A reasonable person would make the argument, would offer points and counterpoints, but after 2-3 pages of no one agreeing with him, would get the point and move on. But between that and the 'off with their heads' for an honest mistake, I think it's clear just how reasonable he really is.

Let's work on a solution that is less severe than a game loss then. NH Gunsmith's ideas aren't perfect but they're a start.

If I can just bump a ship so that I don't bump it with my maneuver once a game and get away with it then people are just going to do that in every tournament.

Ship bumping should result in a game loss.

dDtto for a single sloppy maneuver, barrel roll or boost. GAME. LOSS.

Also for forgetting any mandatory game effects like rebel captive or stress after a red maneuver. If we don't immediately force a loss then people will just keep doing it all the time.

Heck maybe a game loss isn't harsh enough. Summary execution should do the trick though. Then we won't have to worry about anyone cheating.

These suggestions are reasonable and anyone who disagrees is a snowflake who lets cheaters roll over them.

/s

4 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

Let's work on a solution that is less severe than a game loss then.

Why? You are pushing really, really hard for a "solution" for something that just hasn't been a problem.

5 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Why? You are pushing really, really hard for a "solution" for something that just hasn't been a problem.

Yeah if this was actually an issue, then FFG would've addressed it by now. But in all the major tournaments over the last couple years, has anyone heard of this being widespread or even anything other than extremely rare?

It is once again a solution in search of a problem, and it is also a problem which already has a solution, it's called the Judge doing what they're supposed to do, and making a judgement call based on the situation at hand, rather than simply pulling the trigger.

11 minutes ago, VanorDM said:

Yeah if this was actually an issue, then FFG would've addressed it by now. But in all the major tournaments over the last couple years, has anyone heard of this being widespread or even anything other than extremely rare?

It is once again a solution in search of a problem, and it is also a problem which already has a solution, it's called the Judge doing what they're supposed to do, and making a judgement call based on the situation at hand, rather than simply pulling the trigger.

Making a judgement call based on the situation at hand. Which would mean if I was a judge they'd get a game loss.

1 minute ago, Turbo Toker said:

Making a judgement call based on the situation at hand. Which would mean if I was a judge they'd get a game loss.

Which is why ti's good you aren't a judge.

2 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

Making a judgement call based on the situation at hand. Which would mean if I was a judge they'd get a game loss.

That's fine, I guess. You'd never be invited to be a judge again, probably. (I'd certainly never play in an event you were judging.)

It's isn't so much this specific ruling, it's that you've shown yourself to be unreasonable and recalcitrant. In other words, you have very poor judgment. That is, unsurprisingly, a bad quality in a judge.

43 minutes ago, E Chu Ta said:

Tactic: Agree: Okay!

Am I correct in reading that a great deal of your discomfort with the current situation is that there are no codified rules on record to govern it? You disagree that the resolution of the problem presented should be left to the officials and judges staffing the event. There must be law, and the judged must execute an agreed upon ruling. The judge will not have to do anything but enact the rule as written.

I see what seems to bother you as a strength. I find comfort in the idea that a judge will make a decision based on the situation at hand, not bound to lay down a specific punishment without regard to circumstance. I like the idea that two players can resolve an inappropriately exposed dial without the intervention of a judge, as two people playing a game. The fluidity is of particular help for dials, because, as discussed elsewhere n the thread, certain resolutions are of almost pointless insignifigance because of the extremely specific vagaries of the timing of the infraction and the state of the game board. The selfsame resolution under very slightly different specifics could be outlandishly harsh.

The judges at major events do have guidance, even if that guidance is not a bulleted list of crimes and punishments. They have a rulebook, they have their experience, they have fellow staff and they have precedents set and established. I think it's a bit of a disservice to take the "judgement" part of their duties out of their hands.

Agreed. My mother has always said that some people simply cannot live comfortably with uncertainty. I too see this as a strength.

@Turbo Toker - Don't bother talking to these people about tournament play. These forums are very casual so you'll always get a very casual response. Casual play is very loose and a lot of these users have probably made this mistake and aren't willing to lose a game over this, despite it being their own fault. Yes, accidents happen but we're talking about tournaments, not someone's basement. One time, I accidentally looked at someone's dial and immediately offered to concede. I was very tired after a long day at work and wasn't thinking. Regardless, I saw no other reasonable recourse. The integrity of the game was ruined. I think you're very shady if you handle that any differently. The objections to a game loss are hilarious. Never ask a casual audience how they'd handle a competitive situation.

42 minutes ago, AceWing said:

@Turbo Toker - Don't bother talking to these people about tournament play. These forums are very casual so you'll always get a very casual response. Casual play is very loose and a lot of these users have probably made this mistake and aren't willing to lose a game over this, despite it being their own fault. Yes, accidents happen but we're talking about tournaments, not someone's basement. One time, I accidentally looked at someone's dial and immediately offered to concede. I was very tired after a long day at work and wasn't thinking. Regardless, I saw no other reasonable recourse. The integrity of the game was ruined. I think you're very shady if you handle that any differently. The objections to a game loss are hilarious. Never ask a casual audience how they'd handle a competitive situation.

That was a massive assumption. I generally hold myself to tournament standards in all games and still think it is too severe a punishment.

48 minutes ago, AceWing said:

@Turbo Toker - Don't bother talking to these people about tournament play. These forums are very casual so you'll always get a very casual response. Casual play is very loose and a lot of these users have probably made this mistake and aren't willing to lose a game over this, despite it being their own fault. Yes, accidents happen but we're talking about tournaments, not someone's basement. One time, I accidentally looked at someone's dial and immediately offered to concede. I was very tired after a long day at work and wasn't thinking. Regardless, I saw no other reasonable recourse. The integrity of the game was ruined. I think you're very shady if you handle that any differently. The objections to a game loss are hilarious. Never ask a casual audience how they'd handle a competitive situation.

Um.... A lot of the answers have come from things that happened in tournaments. Did you read the entire thread?

This can be easily solved by dials face down on pilot cards. Honestly, dials on the play mat just adds clutter anyways imo.

19 minutes ago, RevJJ said:

This can be easily solved by dials face down on pilot cards. Honestly, dials on the play mat just adds clutter anyways imo.

Indeed. I much prefer doing it this way. Makes so much more sense to have your cards lined up on the edge of the board and put the dials there.

Board looks better too.

3 hours ago, RevJJ said:

This can be easily solved by dials face down on pilot cards. Honestly, dials on the play mat just adds clutter anyways imo.

That's what my and my brother do.

On 4/15/2017 at 9:59 PM, Sir13scott said:

My semi finals match against this guy was coming down to the wire. He accidentally picked up my dial and in compensation the ship he was still planning he offered to not take an action on top of me being able to change my maneuver.

I thought that was pretty fair

I think they should rule that one of our opponents ships of your choosing has to perform a 2 red forward. This has been done by me and done to me several times. Most times it purely accidental, but there has to be a penalty for it. This is why more and more people are putting their dials on their ships cards then on the table.