Bad Gemp Players' List

[CoS]

Thank you for the heads up, i had concerns about Angela playing on the same IP as Dami. This game replay link just proves my suspicions...

[Eukalyptus]

He wanted a report, here is one:

[Jul 30 10:25:26] x1: tribon: gay tribon: cancel game
[Jul 30 10:25:32] x1: http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?gameId=19450
[Jul 30 10:25:51] x1: report him pls

[bibfortuna25]

Language report:

[Jul 30 08:26:58] Draconic: mmm why everyone play so #$&*@! cowardly decks??? maybe cause everyone fears that his boring deck will lose match with orc lackey

[CoS]

I'm on page 6 of citations now, is anyone interested in creating a spreadsheet of offenders with the number of warnings attached to each screen name for ease of use by the community? If a TLHH mod would then sticky it that would be amazing.

[Legion]

I have to say that I feel that the 1 day ban on Skeeve seems very harsh.  Looking at the game, he clearly was not exploiting the bug by playing CTFF in spite of the NBOO, but trying to cycle his hand.  This is assuming he did not know about the bug when he played it at site 3 (which might be slightly harder to justify, but he clearly wanted to cycle there, too, as shown by discarding his Fell Beast in the regroup).  Using it at site 7 was the only way to unclog his hand, and the "bug" probably went in his opponent's favour by allowing him to discard all his minions, perfectly cycling through his hand whilst leaving poor Skeeve clogged with 4 now useless Skirmish events.  Had the bug not existed, ironied would have had to decide whether to play any minions, allowing Skeeve to use his events, or have no fellowship cards to play next turn thanks to a hand full of shadow cards.  It couldn't have gone any better for ironied!

I know I probably am not going to make any friends by saying this, especially with people who have the power to ban my account, but I don't think I am technically breaking any forum rules (which I have read carefully, and I do believe I am putting this as respectfully as possible). However, I cannot idly sit by when I see one of the true Gemp Legends having his name tarnished on a page normally reserved for the dirty cheaters who enter multiple accounts into the sealed leagues.  Also I was hoping to see him in the FotR Daily tomorrow!

[bibfortuna25]

Yeah, there is no reason to ban someone for using CTFF with NBOO in play. Just fix the bug so that can't be exploited anymore.

[Eukalyptus]

I'm with Legion on this one. A warning would have sufficed.

[Skeeve]

I am curious about one thing in this whole debacle:  I think it was Merrick who stated something in chat about me not being able to play CTFF if NBOO is in play, but that can't be right, can it?  The cost is to exert, the effect is to reveal their hand (regardless of the current effect in the bug).  I'm pretty sure I have used Sting/Glamdring with NBOO in play and still being able to exert to no effect (and saying "duh" afterward).  So technically I could exert to pitch the card.

I did know about the bug, as I discovered it in TS League and lost against chet_manly.  However, at the time we weren't sure if it was a bug, because of the wording on CTFF (reveal hand, period, *then* discard, we assumed NBOO just negated the first part ).  However further discussion in general chat confirmed it.  While I am a bit distressed about my reputation of being a model gemp user being tarnished, I am  amused that the only person I have ever reported on Gemp is myself, not to mention the irony of games with CoS convincing me to play CTFF, then him suspending me.  If it is truly a 24 hour ban, I should still make the next tourney.  I wouldn't sweat it guys!  It's all part of the evolution of Gemp.

Although I am still dumbfounded about what to do until the bug is fixed.  I refuse to meta for a bug (change my decks).  Which means I'll have to stop playing TS Block until it is fixed, my favorite block.

[Legion]

Yes, you definitely could exert to play the card even if there was no bug (just for no effect, which as I said earlier would have suited you better than allowing your opponent to cycle for free!).  That's why you definitely should have played it to cycle your hand.  If you should do something when there is no bug, I feel that it is very unfair to force you to self impose a hindrance just because of a glitch that is certainly not your fault.  I'd have done the same in your position, and would be complaining about even a warning.

Play Towers Block instead!  It's way more fun

[bibfortuna25]

The simplest solution is to just fix the bug, rather than impose artificial restrictions on how a player can use the cards in his deck.

[UnPapayaCoconut]

The simplest solution is to just fix the bug, rather than impose artificial restrictions on how a player can use the cards in his deck.

Well it's not that simple since only 1 person can fix it, and up til then theres gotta be some rules on how to get around it, until it gets fixed.

[CoS]

Game Hall Chat from yesterday:

 
[Aug 6 21:44:17] CoS: Papoi- come back and use the concede button in option tab
[Aug 6 21:44:36] CoS: It is bad form to just leave.
[Aug 6 21:45:12] Papoi: The game was ended properly
[Aug 6 21:45:16] CoS: It is also against the code of conduct to rage quit and leave
[Aug 6 21:45:24] Papoi: Look at Finished tables..
[Aug 6 21:46:09] CoS: Ok it didnt show you conceded when you left. Thanks
[Aug 6 21:47:49] Papoi: Try to take a closer look next time before you start to lash out and scream about code of conduct.


Just an FYI: before the above dialogue occurred this image was displayed on my screen for a period of time. (Sufficiently long enough for me to leave the game room and go back to the main hall and ask him to hit concede.)

[sgtdraino]

I have noticed that when somebody concedes, it will not immediately show up in the chat box until the next action is taken.

[bokizg]

CoS are you seriusly ofended by that ??
Guy conceded without saying gg or whatever, but to take time and make report... you sure have some extra time spare huh? 

[CoS]

@ bokizg- I'm not reporting. Just explaining why I requested him to come back and finish the game or hit concede. As SgtDraino has explained the error may be with the program here, not either of the players.