That is correct,

Also since he was playing in 300 modern, not the no tactic version.

I agree with this. That was my first thought as well.

Anthony I hear you but player one really has no advantage here. Tiebreaker one and two will resolve the tie I imagine close to 100 percent of the time.

I once watched two world champs play at the convention. They had near mirror teams. They sat down and told each that neither would move out across the board as it was too risky and gave the other player to much of an advantage to get of first strike. That first strike would decide the game. So they decided to go ahead and end the match themselves and roll the dice to determine the winner.

We do not want matches determined by dice rolls at the end. We want them determined by some sort of play. The first two tiebreakers allow an opponent to win by doing the most clicks of damage to his opponent. The third allows continued play but at where the match is not overly extended. Tournaments do have time constraints. Lastly we go to the ole dice roll.

Its too bad we have those time constraint at a tournament and cant just play each match out until one player is totally defeated, but I could see rounds lasting two hours easily. That sucks though. Don't you hate when you got that really good game going with the outcome far from determined and time is called.

Meh, my home venue plays "approximately" 50 minute rounds, where the judge looks at the clock and says the matches end when only one player still has non-KOed figures, so I'm not really used to that whole "if only we had more time to play out this epic game!" When I play at other venues that do use a more exact time, I don't mind when time is called. I have personally gone to a roll off before, I didn't mind that happened at all. It was as much my fault as my opponent's for not KOing anything and we deserved to have luck end the match for us. I mean, that's what this game is all about, right? Rolling dice to see who wins? How is that roll any different from the others?

Even if most ties are broken in steps 0, 1, and 2, the fact that 3 comes before 4 AND that you check at the end of player 1's actions as opposed to only checking at the end of each extended round, giving both players an equal chance to change the game state just seems off to me. It really rewards players to build high initiative teams with long strike ranges and barrier. Be player 1, hide until time is called, you get to take the only action of the game and ping an easy to hit figure for 1 click, now you win. Even measuring a match based on clicks taken seems off. It really warps the meta as players now have to plan around that and incorporate more healing onto their teams.


Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of the ROC. I'm really glad to see such a large scale clix tournament run by the fans. I just find this one rule kind of unusual.

That's a lot of work Term. Nice Job!

In response to this I would point out the note I added. Slow play, like you described, could be seen as cheating, depending on the judge running the event, and could result in a DQ.

You don't have to slow play to bring a match to time, just play a team that can turtle effectively. Hide behind barrier and use non-free actions as move actions to reduce the time on the clock. You can do it in a timely manner, playing at a reasonable pace, and still use the clock as a weapon.

I agree totally. We have 2 player in particular at my main venue that are very good at this. It's incredibly frustrating and I usually end up attacking and losing.

What's the no tactics ruling on bringing in a bystander with a figure? Ie krleaven

You don't get to bring in Gulyadkin, but you can still play Alyosha

Im glad you changed the rules, cuz now i can disregard the ROC and everything it entails because it is no longer an accurate representation of the meta and is essentially no different than just watching some other venues weekly tourney.

Good job making it inconsequnetial for those not playing in it.

I hear they did it just for your sake!

Tulsa occurred on January 11th and these rules apply to January tournaments - I believe it is a fair question.

Also, due to a lack of critical "thinking" if Shuma was played illegally then all places would be effected - obviously.

Next time I will spoon feed the question to enhance forum "thinking" and avoid premature jumping . . . .

OK, I'm sorry. You are seriously asking if these rule changes will retroactively change tournament outcomes?

Seriously?