Sanction "Rage Quitting" for Certain "Broken" Strategies on Gemp?

[sgtdraino]

Since Horn is legal in Expanded, you cannot penalize people for using it in Expanded. Period.

Of course you can. People can do whatever it is in their power to do. Unless someone decides to stop him, it is within my friend's power to penalize people who use Gamling/Horn/New Chapter, and he does. If you refuse to play with someone because they insist on using something that is truly broken, that penalizes them. If we all do that, pretty soon they have no one to play with, or they quit using it. The power of peer pressure.

You can request that your opponent not use Horn if you want, but that's about all you can do.

Well, some people can and do ragequit. I agree that ragequitting isn't cool, but please note that it isn't against the rules, anymore so than using Gamling/Horn/New Chapter. It may indeed be against the rules Gemp establishes for the conduct of its users... but guess what? That has nothing to do with Decipher, or anything else official. And if Gemp decides to modify its rules regarding the conduct of its users, that is within their rights and their power to do.

Same thing with LR in Movie Block. She is technically legal, so if you don't want to play against her, ask that your opponent not use her.

As noted, she can be pretty well crippled by that single card. That is not the case for Gamling/Horn/New Chapter, which accomplishes its filtering before you have the chance to do anything at all.

Well, rage quiting is impolite, and a really jerky move. I think Gemp could have a functionality allowing people to add a small description to the games they create while waiting for opponents - outside of leagues, of course - (like "No Horn" and stuff), and that'd be about it. If a player comes into the table with a horn deck, you politely tell them you specified "No Horn", and they'll leave.

My current policy is, as soon as I see my opponent is playing Gamling/Horn/New Chapter, to tell them I don't play against this strategy, and ask for a mutual cancel request. If they refuse, then I concede.

Tell me: What would be your opinion of a player who is using Gamling/Horn/New Chapter, who refuses to grant a mutual cancel and forces his opponent to either concede or play the game out?

If they don't, THEN I think it IS perfectly ok to just leave and let them hang there, it is written in the game's description you don't want to play against that, after all, that guy is the jerk this time (assuming you tell them their mistake and they still won't leave).

So, here is one scenario at least for which someone thinks ragequitting is appropriate.

You justify "I don't want to play against Moria decks packing Such a Little Thing because that is boring for my Boromir ARB deck",

lol. I actually played against this just the other day, but thankfully I wasn't using Boromir as the ring-bearer. It was annoying, and eventually Boromir did die, but it certainly wasn't broken. I can see people who use Boromir as a ringbearer complaining about this card... but it's a BIG difference between a card that really cripples certain specific deck strategies, versus a card (or combination of cards) that cripples ALL deck strategies, by virtue of filtering all free people's cards out of the deck.

or "that Cave Troll deck wrecks my archery fellowship, I don't want to play against that", etc, because you have no official powers to justify the other change, so it's just "your reasoning", and why should anyone's reasoning be held above the others, after all? You cross this line, you corss it. You can't simply say "no, I'll cross it for this scenario, and not others",because you do not have the authority within the game to do that

The people in charge of Gemp have full authority within that playing environment to establish and enforce any rules of conduct they choose. Setting rules that govern ragequitting has nothing to do with Decipher's rules for the game. It is not changing the game, it is simply setting a tone for what is and is not cool to do. And it wouldn't be "my reasoning," it would be the reasoning of the committee established by Gemp for that purpose.

(but you CAN choose who you play against, so I think a description of what you don't want to play - or DO want to play - would work wonders already).

That works fine, so long as you're only setting up tables, and not joining other people's tables. Of course, that is not always the case.

And who decides what's truly broken? You?

No, the committee.

Sorry, not gonna happen, some people like playing broken against broken, for instance, or even fighting broken uphill (yeah, some people like to get hurt, what can we do?). Don't like it? Change formats.

I don't like it, and I choose NOT to change formats. I'm simply going to refuse to play against people who use Gamling/Horn/New Chapter, and it is totally within my rights and powers to do that. I suggest that all other players do the same.

And why should THIS be the only approved rage quit? Who decides?

The committee.

Again, I'll repeat what I say in every single thread about a Player's Comitee: without official powers from the game's owners, you can't do jack squat aside from just having a gentleman's agreement in your own, private games

Gemp is a privately maintained playing environment, and setting conditions for quitting games that don't change the rules of the format are, essentially, gentleman's agreements.

In tournaments, everything goes, or you file it under "casual" format.

Unless I'm mistaken, League play is pretty much what Gemp has for tournaments, and it is fairly routine for the people who manage those Leagues to set special rules that prevent certain extra-broken strategies from being used.

There's NO such thing as "Movie Block - no LR" for a TOURNAMENT that expects people to follow the rules associated with it,

...and as you saw downthread, yes there is.

It's a fine line between "adjusting" the rules and "ruling", and most people are not ready to cross it.

Setting rules of conduct for players on Gemp, is NOT changing the official rules of the game.

No, not 99%, 100% of the time, unless they're actively being an #$&*@!

In other words, yes, 99% of the time. Again, what do you think of a Gamling/Horn/New Chapter player who refuses a mutual request cancel, if it is made at the very beginning of the game? Is that player actively being an #$&*@?

For consequences, there are. You just don't play them again.

Hmmm. How about a thread specifically for listing players who play with Gamling/Horn/New Chapter, and refuse mutual request cancels?

If they can still find games, then I think there are probably quite a few players that are ok with playing against Horn, so again, a nod that if YOU don't like it, YOU should be the one to adapt, not expect the world to bend and adjust.

I have adapted, in pretty much the same way you and Bib have: I don't play against those decks. I simply haven't quit Expanded altogether, because there's still a lot of fun to be had there. I see no need to quit a format completely, just because of one broken strategy used by a few players. That'd be like performing surgery with a sledgehammer.

If you care about your stats, then man up and face real competition, what good are stats when all you do is play against the decks you consider "fair"?

Gamling/Horn/New Chapter is not real competition, it's simply a broken strategy. You've admitted so yourself.

On an aside, I want to say I think Horn IS broken, and it IS an oppressive strategy.

 

However, like I said a million times, without actual, real powers to legally change stuff around, I think stuff should no be changed

Setting rules for when and how players can quit is not changing anything official about the game.

and the players should adapt themselves, because there's a fine line between "fixing a broken strategy" and "tailoring the game to whatever you want",

So, how do you think Expanded players should "adapt" to handle Gamling/Horn/New Chapter? What do you think is a good strategy to use against that filter?

I really wish we did have an official Player's Committee for this game.

We can't have an official Player's Committee governing the game, but there is no reason we can't have an official Player's Committee governing conduct and behavior on Gemp. Gemp is basically a house where the game is played, and the house can set its own house rules.

Because one rule I would love to implement is that a player cannot replace his or her own site; you can only replace a site that your opponent has played. That would curb a lot of abusive strategies in Expanded/Standard that have your FP stay behind and constantly manipulate the site path to mess with your opponent's FP.

I think that's a great idea. Since that does specifically manipulate the rules of the game, it would probably be best implemented in a new Gemp format, i.e. house rules.

But it's a moot point, and that's why I avoid Expanded unless there's a league in that format.

Why wouldn't you also avoid Expanded in league play?

Well, in fact in latest Movie Block league played on Gemp one serie used this format (while another one used Movie Block as it was left by Decipher).

Exactly. The good folks who manage Gemp can and do make special rules which fundamentally affect the official Decipher rules.

I haven't played in this league, I'd be interested in some players commenting on how meta game changed if it changed significantly between those two series.

Same here.

I know lots of people run 2-4 copies of Terrible as the Dawn in Movie Block games where LR is legal.

Which is why LR is not really in the same class as Gamling/Horn/New Chapter.

Thing is, it's still not "Movie Block", it's "Casual". I think it's OK to shorten it and explain "it's the same as movie block, but with LR in the X-List", but if I create a game calling for "Movie Block" decks, LR is still legal.

I'm not seeing the difference. It's a tournament that was run on Gemp where LR was made illegal. How is that any different than a tournament run on Gemp where New Chapter is made illegal? Because that's all it would take to diffuse the Gamling/Horn combo.

In the end, it's just your playgroup playing casually with your own rules, which is more than fine, but they simply don't have the power to enforce the changes and force them onto the other players.

Gemp has total power to enforce changes, and force them onto the other players. I don't envision ANYBODY quitting Gemp because New Chapter got outlawed.

Horn can be beaten

How? The biggest thing Gamling/Horn/New Chapter does, is filter all free people's cards out of the deck on the first turn, before the opponent can do anything to prevent it from happening. What is your counter to that? It seems to be that the best you can hope for, is to MAYBE get really lucky at site 2. REALLY lucky. So what's your answer? I built one of these decks to study how it works. You want to come on and kick its butt sometime?

Both are probably NPEs for the opponent, but if you don't like the game/format then don't play it, simple.

I don't play it. But one strategy is not equivalent to an entire format. I'm not going to quit a whole format just to avoid playing against one strategy. To me, that is absurd.

http://www.gempukku.com/gemp-lotr/game.html?replayId=MuadDib85$72dk6zz8b6b66v9m

Here is a link that helps show why Madril DoO is comparable to horn deck in power and also why it could be considered a NPE for the opponent.

Madril is in no way comparable to Gamling/Horn/New Chapter, because it is not a filter. The strategy is also easily countered and crippled by a single card requiring no culture enforcement (Ships of Great Draught). Give me a single card that I can cripple Gamling/Horn/New Chapter with, and I'll stop complaining about it. If people really thought Madril was broken, they'd be running SoGD against it. The fact is, I play Madril all the time, and almost never see that. People run TatD against LR in Movie... but not SoGD against Madril. What does that tell you?

I'm sure there are better examples, this is the first time I build and use Madril deck. I won this game on player time out...

Whoopy. Play 30 games with it, and tell me what your win percentage is. I think you'll find it is faaarrr from unbeatable.

[bibfortuna25]

Ragequitting is never appropriate under any circumstances. If you don't want to play against a particular deck, concede. It's that simple. In fact, there should be penalties against those who ragequit on a regular basis. That shows a lack of sportsmanship and integrity. You will never get people to agree with your method of dealing with Horn or IB, so you just need to stop whining and actually deal with your problems in a mature adult way.

[sgtdraino]

Ragequitting is never appropriate under any circumstances.

Your opinion has already been noted.

If a player comes into the table with a horn deck, you politely tell them you specified "No Horn", and they'll leave. If they don't, THEN I think it IS perfectly ok to just leave and let them hang there, it is written in the game's description you don't want to play against that, after all, that guy is the jerk this time (assuming you tell them their mistake and they still won't leave).

...and is not shared by everyone.

If you don't want to play against a particular deck, concede. It's that simple.

Your suggestion is noted. I think I prefer my way better.

In fact, there should be penalties against those who ragequit on a regular basis. That shows a lack of sportsmanship and integrity.

As does playing with Gamling/Horn/New Chapter.

You will never get people to agree with your method of dealing with Horn or IB,

Ragequitting is not my method of dealing with them. I don't have a problem with people who deal with Gamling/Horn/New Chapter that way, though.

so you just need to stop whining and actually deal with your problems in a mature adult way.

This is the adult way: Open discussion. Telling people to just stop playing Expanded, on the other hand... you're basically taking your ball and going home. Is that adult?

[bibfortuna25]

No, the adult thing is to deal with the situation in a sportsmanlike way. You either play the game out or you concede. Period. It is not my "opinion" that ragequitting is unacceptable; it is a FACT. And if you don't like the game, don't play. You can't expect people to play by your own rules that you have made up.

Horn and Madril might not be fun for you to play against, but guess what? That's part of the risk you take when you play Expanded. Just like if you play Fellowship block you might run into choke or Saruman KoI. Or Dauntless Hunter in TStandard and movie block. You have to expect you'll run into those NPEs when you play the formats they're legal in. You cannot expect people not to use them just because of your own preferences.

Lets try an analogy. In a city park, there are four basketball courts. In one court they are playing five-on-five, another is one-on-one, another is HORSE, and another is just folks messing around and shooting hoops casually. If you decide to play on one of those courts, you've got to abide by the rules of the kind of game they're playing. If a HORSE player makes a seemingly impossible shot, you can either try up make it yourself, or politely walk away from the game. It is NOT okay to throw the ball away as hard as you can and laugh while the other players run and fetch the ball.

Horn and Madril are annoying, but they're not invincible.

[Cw0rk]

You either play the game out or you concede. Period. It is not my "opinion" that ragequitting is unacceptable; it is a FACT.

I'm 100% with you. Rage quitting or quitting for any reason other than a computer or internet problem is ridiculous, especially when its so easy to just click on concede.

[sgtdraino]

You either play the game out or you concede. Period.

Why do you invent stuff? Request cancel is an option. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have been programmed into the system.

It is not my "opinion" that ragequitting is unacceptable; it is a FACT.

No, it quite literally is your opinion. It's one that I share in most circumstances, but it's still just an opinion.

And if you don't like the game, don't play.

Who says I don't like the game? I love the game. If I didn't, I wouldn't play. I don't like the Gamling/Horn/New Chapter combo because it is undeniably broken, therefore I choose not to play against that combo. That is within my power and right to do.

You can't expect people to play by your own rules that you have made up.

I haven't made anything up. It takes at least two people to play this game. If they want to play against me, then they won't be using Gamling/Horn/New Chapter. If they want to play you, I guess they won't be using it either, since you've abandoned the whole format.

Horn and Madril might not be fun for you to play against,

I don't have a problem with Madril. I don't have a problem with the Horn either, just that particular combination.

but guess what? That's part of the risk you take when you play Expanded.

No it isn't, because I'm not going to play against it.

Just like if you play Fellowship block you might run into choke or Saruman KoI. Or Dauntless Hunter in TStandard and movie block. You have to expect you'll run into those NPEs when you play the formats they're legal in. You cannot expect people not to use them just because of your own preferences.

Considering they already ran a league series where LR was forbidden, it seems to me that you can expect people not to use certain strategies, under certain conditions. Gemp has the power to enforce what it wants.

Horn and Madril are annoying, but they're not invincible.

Madril is far from invincible. Gamling/Horn/New Chapter is pretty close, though. It offers an extremely unfair advantage, without any need for skill, coupled with the irritation of having to sit around for ten minutes while the G/H/NC player plays out half his deck. And apparently you must agree with this on some level, because you don't play Expanded.

In fact, considering you don't even play the format being discussed, why are you even in this conversation?

[bibfortuna25]

Because you are trying to justify quitting without conceding, which is one of the most unsportsmanlike thing you can do in this game. I have no problem with someone conceding near the beginning of a a game if that's what they want to do. It is never okay to quit and make your opponent wait 10 minutes for the win.

[sgtdraino]

Because you are trying to justify quitting without conceding, which is one of the most unsportsmanlike thing you can do in this game.

I think it ranks right up there with Gamling/Horn/New Chapter. And as far as I'm concerned, an eye for an eye.

It is never okay to quit and make your opponent wait 10 minutes for the win.

How about making your opponent wait around 10 minutes so that they can almost certainly lose? Because that's what Gamling/Horn/New Chapter does. You sit around and stare at your screen for about ten minutes while your opponent plays out every free people's card in his deck. Then, when he's finally done, you have the privilege of losing.

But you have dodged a few questions: You've said that you'd play expanded in league form, just not casual. Why? What makes League different for you?

Various folks have given variations on "man up and adapt," and insisted that Gamling/Horn/New Chapter ain't all that horrible. Okay, let's have some specifics then: What do you do to counter that? What makes it beatable? At least one person thinks it's comparable to Madril. I have an excellent Madril deck, but it's win % is still only around 65%-70%. So, how do you beat Gamling/Horn/New Chapter?

[bibfortuna25]

You're saying that Horn is an auto loss? It's not. There are no auto losses in this game. Decipher was kind enough to provide the players with multiple ways to win.

I play Expanded in League because I want to. I don't need to justify my actions to you.

You beat Horn by playing smart. I'm not going to help you specifically because all you're going to do is whine and complain. Grow up. It's really pathetic the way you keep carrying on.

[Ringbearer]

I think we should just leave this thread. It seems draino goesnt get the point we make, and as the bad sportmanship player he is, leave him be and just dont play him in Gemp. he isnt worth it.

[FM]

Ok, this is on the verge of derailing into flaming, so I'm locking it and calling it quits. If the thread's owner refuses to get the point being made, people that think he is a whiner can simply choose not to play against him. As for the rage-quitting issues, I think it needs to be discussed with MarcinS, because a lot of players are in fact complaining about people doing this, and I think something needs to be done within Gemp, so I suggest people who use Gemp(I'm still a GCCG player because of the economy and trading aspect, though I haven't logged in in quite a while) contact him directly.