Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Akroma]

didn't occur to him to ask though, very convenient.


he did not post fastest after his pick, he simply did it all at once. This defeats the purpose of picking fast altogether, he has had all the time in the world to make his choice, and nobody to rival his choice. It's like winning a circular race by taking first a step forward, then turning around and simply walking through the finnishing line from the wrong direction.




if he genuinely misunderstood, well, too bad for him.


edit: random number generator? so I just *roll* some numbers and thats the order it is chosen then?

fine, the order for choices is Bluerobin, Akroma, Kansa, GWG

[Culise]

You never established a 1 Pokemon per post rule and didn't clarify beforehand either (people have been drafting 2 Pokemon at once all throughout). The burden of rule clarification lies with the person who starts the tourney. Just redo the round with a new mechanic for choosing who gets to choose when.

Edit: Preferably just using a random number generator for maximum randomizing.

Plus, in my opinion, it was rather open to abuse in either case.  My first thought was that you could just open two windows, make your picks in each, then submit both posts one after the other, in which case the delay is precisely as long as it takes to click through the "one new post" warning. 

EDIT: And since arguing incessantly over this is just going to lead to another acrimonious breakdown and possible thread closure, which we have already dealt with before, I strongly suggest that it be allowed to rest in peace.  A random roll set, if you all want it:

4 - Kansa
1 - Akroma
3 - GWG
2 - Bluerobin

[Bluerobin]

Redo the round or I withdraw from the minibattle.

[Akroma]

You never established a 1 Pokemon per post rule and didn't clarify beforehand either (people have been drafting 2 Pokemon at once all throughout). The burden of rule clarification lies with the person who starts the tourney. Just redo the round with a new mechanic for choosing who gets to choose when.

Edit: Preferably just using a random number generator for maximum randomizing.

Plus, in my opinion, it was rather open to abuse in either case.  My first thought was that you could just open two windows, make your picks in each, then submit both posts one after the other, in which case the delay is precisely as long as it takes to click through the "one new post" warning.

not the word "abuse". I was slapping out a 2-minute idea for a small battle and tada, people immediatly pick out loopholes to abuse the rules that were written in less than 2 minutes, and then I get blamed for not making them an airtight legal document? For daring to try and defend the rules from being abused? That's my job.


Fine then


Culise, you pick an order in which the redone round picks pokemon. but seriously, you guys should not let this become a habbit. GWG was abusing the rule loopholes, and even if it was not on purpose, he clearly refused to show any will to reconsider correcting his mistake.

edit: oh hey, he already did. Kansa, you are up

[Kansa]

Butterfree

[Akroma]

munchlax

[GreatWyrmGold]

No, you will not get to autoclaim two picks in a row when you had all the time in the world to make your choices, while everybody else was slapping F5 legitimately, it entirely undermines the point of posting fastest. You are subject to the same rules and circumstances as everybody else, and tried to circumvent the rules via a loophole, and are now even asking the GM of the tournament to logicaly rebuke your reasoning as to why you deserve special treatment?

No.

Make a different pick, or this becomes a 3 vs 3

It's not that I'm ignoring the rules, it's that those rules were poorly-explained.
And what makes you think that anyone was refreshing the page constantly? That's an awfully high opinion you have of your little game.

Frankly, that whole idea of "First to post their pick gets it!" was a bit...jarring. Everything else, we knew who was picking ahead of time. But this one...free-for-all!

We're going to have to redo the round now that the rule's established.

Ideally with a different rule.

didn't occur to him to ask though, very convenient.

Hey, Akroma, do I get to pick my Pokemon?
Hey, Akroma, can I pick a Pokemon twice?
Hey, Akroma, are we counting by time online or time since joining?
Hey, Akroma, can I pick a Pokemon someone else picked?
Hey, Akroma, am I allowed to give my Pokemon items?
Hey, Akroma, do I get to choose my Pokemons' gender?
Hey, Akroma, do I get to pick their moves?
Hey, Akroma, are TMs allowed?
(Imagine I typed a bunch more because I'm getting sick of this and I think I made my point.)

Hey, Akroma, why the heck would I waste time asking a question about how the TIMED PICKING ROUND works?

not the word "abuse". I was slapping out a 2-minute idea for a small battle and tada, people immediatly pick out loopholes to abuse the rules that were written in less than 2 minutes, and then I get blamed for not making them an airtight legal document? For daring to try and defend the rules from being abused? That's my job.

Oh, sorry, you're right, it's unreasonable to expect you to think things through. And even more so that we asked you to think through the unlikely scenario of someone posting in the round before

You can hardly blame me for your lack of forethought.

[Culise]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

No, you will not get to autoclaim two picks in a row when you had all the time in the world to make your choices, while everybody else was slapping F5 legitimately, it entirely undermines the point of posting fastest. You are subject to the same rules and circumstances as everybody else, and tried to circumvent the rules via a loophole, and are now even asking the GM of the tournament to logicaly rebuke your reasoning as to why you deserve special treatment?

No.

Make a different pick, or this becomes a 3 vs 3

It's not that I'm ignoring the rules, it's that those rules were poorly-explained.
And what makes you think that anyone was refreshing the page constantly? That's an awfully high opinion you have of your little game.

Frankly, that whole idea of "First to post their pick gets it!" was a bit...jarring. Everything else, we knew who was picking ahead of time. But this one...free-for-all!

We're going to have to redo the round now that the rule's established.

Ideally with a different rule.

didn't occur to him to ask though, very convenient.

Hey, Akroma, do I get to pick my Pokemon?
Hey, Akroma, can I pick a Pokemon twice?
Hey, Akroma, are we counting by time online or time since joining?
Hey, Akroma, can I pick a Pokemon someone else picked?
Hey, Akroma, am I allowed to give my Pokemon items?
Hey, Akroma, do I get to choose my Pokemons' gender?
Hey, Akroma, do I get to pick their moves?
Hey, Akroma, are TMs allowed?
(Imagine I typed a bunch more because I'm getting sick of this and I think I made my point.)

Hey, Akroma, why the heck would I waste time asking a question about how the TIMED PICKING ROUND works?

not the word "abuse". I was slapping out a 2-minute idea for a small battle and tada, people immediatly pick out loopholes to abuse the rules that were written in less than 2 minutes, and then I get blamed for not making them an airtight legal document? For daring to try and defend the rules from being abused? That's my job.

Oh, sorry, you're right, it's unreasonable to expect you to think things through. And even more so that we asked you to think through the unlikely scenario of someone posting in the round before

You can hardly blame me for your lack of forethought.

GWG, please, leave it be.  We're here to have fun, not bicker and argue about who killed who.  The use of a random list as per Bluerobin's suggestion has already been adopted.  Akroma's picked, so it's your choice, then Bluerobin. 

[GreatWyrmGold]

So what, Akroma gets to call me a filthy cheater and/or an idiot and I just have to sit here and take it?

[Akroma]

For the sake of the thread, yes.


I apologize if my reasoning was insulting. To avoid further fueling the flames, I shall refuse from saying any more words on the matter.
As the OP of the thread, I ask you to please do the same.


Take Munchlax, I will not participate in this battle.

[GreatWyrmGold]

As the OP of the thread, I ask you to please do the same.

I feel a bit insulted that you felt the need to edit that in...

[Akroma]

Don't

[Praefectus Screptum]

Now I can say I saw everything. Yesterday a magikarp, and today a shedinja.

Aaaand swiftcheroo with choice scarf is annoying.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Akroma tests a monormal team.

AkromaBay12: yeah, for a team that has all it's main statmoves resisted, vs a mega and an ex-uber, the result was fine

[Culise]

Akroma tests a monormal team.

AkromaBay12: yeah, for a team that has all it's main statmoves resisted, vs a mega and an ex-uber, the result was fine

AkromaBay12: wat
AkromaBay12: how is it faster?

Mega Evolution occurs after move order is calculated, so the Mega Evolution's speed and ability do not get taken into account.  This benefits M.Garchomp, which ignores its speed drop, and completely knocks over M.Banette, which loses Prankster.