tw: the following contains an actually serious opinion
i believe the tournament should have been cancelled (thus the flippant quip) or there should have been another method of choosing who reaps the benefits of the dq. i obviously don't think you surreptitiously manipulated the td's decision making process. there are a lot of problems with the bracket remake in its current form that are rather unsettling, however. ignoring the benefits each mazar'd participant gets from there not being a cancellation, u are the sole beneficiary of the disqualification. u play one less dude, and that is absolutely massive in a playoffs situation. if bkc only had to win vs 3 dudes instead of 4 in stour playoffs arbitrarily, i would think much lesser of his win.
now the question becomes: why should u get the benefits of this dq as opposed to any of mazar's other opponents? u cited mcmeghan vs prankster as a precedent, but this is clearly not a parallel. in this instance, the td's retroactively decided that u should be allowed to play one less series while in the prankster case they found out immediately after the r1 of playoffs (i know there was a tiebreaker but it was deemed to just give mcm the w and did marco even ghost vs bkc and co.? my point is just that it was immediately after a round vs a "turn back time" decision). u can't replace mazar's playoff spot with anyone either b.c. he got a r1 bye.....
ideally, we would recreate every open match mazar was involved in.. but that is obviously unfeasible. this decision is trying to balance the pragmatic (cancellation), and the idealistic (redo all games), so the easiest way to determine how far back to redo games is the playoffs boundary.
the logic being employed here (put simply): if ghosting is being policed, it must mean the ghostee has an inherent adv over his competitors. ergo, the battle is unfair and we should provide a redo to all who got dicked... to a certain degree
HOWEVER, if teal6 is going to arbitrarily rewarded a free win, why shouldn't bouff just get the trophy? or why not just have a kingler1234 vs bouff final? there's no real way to determine this. maybe we should have a random number generator with each participant's name put in and the dude whose name pops up is who we reward the free win to.
that wouldn't go over well, but really.
cancelling's downside is that it devalues the effort other finalists put into the tournament, but is the taboo of ghosting gamebreaking enough to create such a lopsided bracket? bouff certainly could have just played better in the finals, regardless of the ghosting. ghosted players lose all the time -- look at a ton of spl games. in the style case, bloo had a HUGE advantage over her opponents because of counterteaming and knowing her opponents teams. here there is a far more equal playing level. who's to say that the other finalists didn't have help either? if information emerges that another finalist received ghosting, how do we tackle it? would we arbitrarily cancel it after the second case, but not the first? there are just a lot of extenuating factors that make me very uncomfortable with this decision.
additionally, the current tiers being played are way different than the tiers that were played during grand slam. these aren't even recreations. they are vastly different metagames (for most of the tiers) that all the finalists have been removed from and will have limited time to relearn (especially in the midst of spl). this is a serious problem as well since it rewards the players who have kept actively playing them for whatever reason while putting others at a disadvantage.
it isn't only because it's 'easy' to cancel, but because the tournament is so fucked up that it makes sense as well. anything but a remake.
i obv wasn't serious, but i was just making it known i didn't agree with this decision. i understand why it was made, but the tournament is so shaky now that i feel as though it should have not come down to this.
i believe the tournament should have been cancelled (thus the flippant quip) or there should have been another method of choosing who reaps the benefits of the dq. i obviously don't think you surreptitiously manipulated the td's decision making process. there are a lot of problems with the bracket remake in its current form that are rather unsettling, however. ignoring the benefits each mazar'd participant gets from there not being a cancellation, u are the sole beneficiary of the disqualification. u play one less dude, and that is absolutely massive in a playoffs situation. if bkc only had to win vs 3 dudes instead of 4 in stour playoffs arbitrarily, i would think much lesser of his win.
now the question becomes: why should u get the benefits of this dq as opposed to any of mazar's other opponents? u cited mcmeghan vs prankster as a precedent, but this is clearly not a parallel. in this instance, the td's retroactively decided that u should be allowed to play one less series while in the prankster case they found out immediately after the r1 of playoffs (i know there was a tiebreaker but it was deemed to just give mcm the w and did marco even ghost vs bkc and co.? my point is just that it was immediately after a round vs a "turn back time" decision). u can't replace mazar's playoff spot with anyone either b.c. he got a r1 bye.....
ideally, we would recreate every open match mazar was involved in.. but that is obviously unfeasible. this decision is trying to balance the pragmatic (cancellation), and the idealistic (redo all games), so the easiest way to determine how far back to redo games is the playoffs boundary.
the logic being employed here (put simply): if ghosting is being policed, it must mean the ghostee has an inherent adv over his competitors. ergo, the battle is unfair and we should provide a redo to all who got dicked... to a certain degree
HOWEVER, if teal6 is going to arbitrarily rewarded a free win, why shouldn't bouff just get the trophy? or why not just have a kingler1234 vs bouff final? there's no real way to determine this. maybe we should have a random number generator with each participant's name put in and the dude whose name pops up is who we reward the free win to.
that wouldn't go over well, but really.
cancelling's downside is that it devalues the effort other finalists put into the tournament, but is the taboo of ghosting gamebreaking enough to create such a lopsided bracket? bouff certainly could have just played better in the finals, regardless of the ghosting. ghosted players lose all the time -- look at a ton of spl games. in the style case, bloo had a HUGE advantage over her opponents because of counterteaming and knowing her opponents teams. here there is a far more equal playing level. who's to say that the other finalists didn't have help either? if information emerges that another finalist received ghosting, how do we tackle it? would we arbitrarily cancel it after the second case, but not the first? there are just a lot of extenuating factors that make me very uncomfortable with this decision.
additionally, the current tiers being played are way different than the tiers that were played during grand slam. these aren't even recreations. they are vastly different metagames (for most of the tiers) that all the finalists have been removed from and will have limited time to relearn (especially in the midst of spl). this is a serious problem as well since it rewards the players who have kept actively playing them for whatever reason while putting others at a disadvantage.
it isn't only because it's 'easy' to cancel, but because the tournament is so fucked up that it makes sense as well. anything but a remake.
i obv wasn't serious, but i was just making it known i didn't agree with this decision. i understand why it was made, but the tournament is so shaky now that i feel as though it should have not come down to this.
