BEAST - Bannerlord Early Access Skirmish Tournament

BEAST is the first Bannerlord Skirmish tournament in Europe.

Quick Overview

Category
Bannerlord
Language
English (UK)
Total members
277
Total events
0
Total discussions
263

Appeal to admins' decision and a proposition of a rule change

Users who are viewing this thread

Unpopular opinion (maybe) from low rank Div D player. This whole thread is cringe-fest.

First of all, when you sign up to a tournament, you accept its rules by default and agree to accept consequences of breaking them. And rule was simple enough to follow, do not modify game files.

Opinions of other players that "they don't find that modified crosshair advantageous" doesn't really matter at that point. But even assuming it does, perhaps for them it is not. But that one specific player caught using it, used it for some reason. Be it a major advantage or just feeling more comfortable, it is still a thing that other players doesn't use. And while in such tournaments we can't fully equal the fields (like PC specs also play important role in comfort of playing), the one field that can be equal is game files.

Same to opinions of other clans whether default or rematch would be fair. Enforcing rule breaks isn't based on popularity poll but on accepted and posted rules.

Moreover, If admins would bend the rule it would open space for people to experiment to what degree thay can modify the game files to get away with it and not get banned. Do we really want that kind of arms race here?

I have honestly no idea what purpose lies in bringing up that BEAST is non-paid tournament, 100% irrelevant.

"We all as players play here for our results to be decided in game, and our time investement is to be represented as official results of our matches. In that case, we believe that this kind of rulling was in fact unfair. Also the rule that led admin team to take such a decision is too broad"

Cringe worthy. If you want your time investment to be represented as official results, don't mess up with game files. Rule isn't too broad to understand. Do-not-mess-with-game-files. EOT. Moreover, it isn't easy to write specific step-by-step rules that will cover 100% of potential issues (especially talking about unfinished product which in all honesty M&B Bannerlord is). There will be cases that will need interpretation and that lies within admins responsibilities. And while interpretation might be considered for future, changing rules during tournament is bad practice and shouldn't be encouraged.

Be it DM, or any other clan, no matter the division, we all agreed to the rules. And it falls to clans to monitor their own players and prevent them from actions that might hurt match outcome. If you knew earlier about that modification, should have acted on it before official match and have it removed to not risk penalty.
Good post
 
I second this. Rules are rules. If one breaks them, he gets punished.

Also, if admins allow rematch now, it will be a loud announcement: "You can cheat however you want and you will get pardoned, as long as you whine loud enough".
If Admins allow a rematch now, all it means is that HINQ doesn't get ****ed over because of a red dot.
 
@Aeronwen Just asking to clarify if you can. Am i and 1o3 allowed to play in finals when we reach them ?
The ban is for 3 matches, as soon as the ban is served you can play.
Please check the rule thread and make sure you comply with all the rules when you do play. I hope you will also continue to stream.

Just want to be sure you understand, if a team defaults on a match then they chose not to have that match and it doesn't count towards a ban. (if a team is available but the other team defaults then it does count).

Varadin and Nikola were banned after week 3 matches. DM played week 4 but defaulted in week 5.
Therefore at the end of week 5 Varadin and Nikola have 2 matches left to serve (unless week 5 is played).
@Varadin @OneOrThrEe
 
I think the rhetoric is that no matter why a team defaults, if it defaults that match will not count for any punishment their players have to serve out. If the bans are the reason for having to do a default in the first place cause of lack of players this will create an infinite loop where that team will never play again without getting mercs or other people to join.
 
Double punishment.

What happens if you get 6 capped players suspended for 1 match? Does the team have to wait for a new season to play? Does the team have to disband and split their players to serve punishment?
 
Just want to be sure you understand, if a team defaults on a match then they chose not to have that match and it doesn't count towards a ban. (if a team is available but the other team defaults then it does count).

Varadin and Nikola were banned after week 3 matches. DM played week 4 but defaulted in week 5.
Therefore at the end of week 5 Varadin and Nikola have 2 matches left to serve (unless week 5 is played).
@Varadin @OneOrThrEe

You literally make up the rules as you go. Show me the rule that explains it. Default match is still match since it have a match result (12 0), so you won't make it work.
Also as we can see you didn't even discuss it with other admins and just figured it out уouself
 
I think the rhetoric is that no matter why a team defaults, if it defaults that match will not count for any punishment their players have to serve out. If the bans are the reason for having to do a default in the first place cause of lack of players this will create an infinite loop where that team will never play again without getting mercs or other people to join.
I'm sure it was. If Varadin wasn't banned he could have taken over and lead the match. And they probably also would have had enough to play. They are already being punished by having to face RM with a weaker roster now.
 
Just want to be sure you understand, if a team defaults on a match then they chose not to have that match and it doesn't count towards a ban. (if a team is available but the other team defaults then it does count).
We wish we could have chosen, but simply lacking players to play match forced us to default it. It kinda makes no sense to me how their bans are not counted for this week, as if they weren't banned we could have someone to IGL instead of me and enough player force to play the match.
 
We wish we could have chosen, but simply lacking players to play match forced us to default it. It kinda makes no sense to me how their bans are not counted for this week, as if they weren't banned we could have someone to IGL instead of me and enough player force to play the match.
That what happen when you are trying to fix the ladder of the semifinals. Karma hit you back.
 
Just want to be sure you understand, if a team defaults on a match then they chose not to have that match and it doesn't count towards a ban. (if a team is available but the other team defaults then it does count).

Varadin and Nikola were banned after week 3 matches. DM played week 4 but defaulted in week 5.
Therefore at the end of week 5 Varadin and Nikola have 2 matches left to serve (unless week 5 is played).
@Varadin @OneOrThrEe
You are insane now for real. Just say if you want me and nikola perma banned . This is now ridicilous and out of control . You start making rules day by day ….
 
We wish we could have chosen, but simply lacking players to play match forced us to default it. It kinda makes no sense to me how their bans are not counted for this week, as if they weren't banned we could have someone to IGL instead of me and enough player force to play the match.
So basically, you are saying that If they will not open Varadin and 1or3 ban you are going to give default win to RM? Since you can't able to find players because nothing changed? :grin: I bet any of them are cabaple of leading a team or even Varadin can lead through to stream and I even bet this would be better than 12-0 default score? :party::party:
 
What tells you that DM had infact 6 players ready to play? Two of them are banned and Hairless wasn't home. Ofc he could be lying but you're just expanding their ban on pure speculations and no actual proof.

This is a bizarre post.

I have no idea why DM defaulted on the match. It is irrelevant for the usual application of the rule.
I think the rhetoric is that no matter why a team defaults, if it defaults that match will not count for any punishment their players have to serve out. If the bans are the reason for having to do a default in the first place cause of lack of players this will create an infinite loop where that team will never play again without getting mercs or other people to join.

That would be a good point if teams were limited to 7 players. But they can have 11, so missing 2 should not prevent them from playing for an entire week.

You literally make up the rules as you go. Show me the rule that explains it. Default match is still match since it have a match result (12 0), so you won't make it work.
Also as we can see you didn't even discuss it with other admins and just figured it out уouself

As usual you are wrong in your assumptions. LaPache removed himself from admin discussions a while ago.

While deviating from accepted interpretation of the rules would be a reason for discussion, adhering to it isn't. As it happens I never make admin decisions individually but always seek consensus.
 
Last edited:
What happens if you get 6 capped players suspended for 1 match? Does the team have to wait for a new season to play? Does the team have to disband and split their players to serve punishment?
Building on that, what if a team forgets their tags for a match? They might not be able to play at all after and the default would not count, leading to a vicious cycle of exclusion.
 
Which exactly rule?



Yes since Roman left you are just using your "yes madam" man ikea to do whatever you want.

I dont recognise your portrait of Ikea.

I dont know why you think he agrees with me all the time. I find that 2 admins rarely agree on most things let alone eveything.

It is not OK to simply fabricate untrue accusations as you and some other people seem to be doing almost all the time.

I would hope that most people on this forum are able to apply some semblence of critical thinking and consider whether your wild accusations are likely (let alone proven).

In the end if a team breaks a rule they are responsible for the consequences. Putting pressure on the admins is not OK and is likely to lead to admins resigning or making less than optimum decisions.
 
Back
Top Bottom