Based on your opinion it wasn't a dick move just as it was my opinion that it was. Just because a move is legal by the rules doesn't mean that it is always morally right. In this case the argument can go either way and as I previously stated, I see it from both sides considering the high stakes of playing in Worlds. I would have let the other player take it back because I would want to know that I won by my opponent playing his best game and not by exploiting his mistake. It may be part of the game to capitalize on your opponent's mistakes, but not everyone plays that way. As I have also previously stated, if I ever do choose to play in a large tournament like Worlds again I may have to change my play style if my opponents are going to be cutthroat in every game I play.

This is a dick move. Weekly tournaments are not Worlds. If a player keeps changing their actions on a regular basis, then not allowing them to take moves back may be justified. Refusing players the chance to take something back, especially if they have not placed a token on the character, is not helping your opponent to be a better player. It's being a dink plain and simple. Letting the other player take back the move, but reminding them of the rules as you play is helping the player.

Yea, yea! We have heard your bragging many times before about how great of a player you are. It really has to make you wonder though. Are you really as great as you claim you are or are your opponents just not that good that you "always win?" Based on what you say about the mistakes that they make on a regular basis (you know, the ones you don't allow them to take back) it makes me think it's the latter.

The civic virtues have no place in the game. Only the game's rules matter.

That's the "Play to Win" answer. So expect VGA to call you a scrub.

Agreed. ::filler::

If that is how some people really feel about this "game," then I really feel sorry for them.

I'm expecting a lot more than that from VGA.

That's what sh...

nevermind.

The thing is, if you allow an opponent to take back mistakes, he's not playing his best game.

And where do you draw the line on mistakes? "No, don't attack with that guy first - if you do three damage my character gets Impervious, and your second attacker can't hurt him anymore. Use the 2 damage guy first." I think most people would say that this is helping your opponent too much, but it is a logical progression from "You may not want to move Metron yet, you can't Outwit me this turn."

Ultimately, in competitive games I think we need to let our opponents make their mistakes and assume that they'll let us make ours. In a more casual environment, it's quite different, as I mentioned above.

The situation discussed in this thread involved a token being placed on the character.

And that's laudable, but a World Championships game is not the time that you should be helping another player to improve his game. He should have brought his best game to the competition in the first place. That's what the competition is for - to find out who plays the best game.

C'mon spit it out ......






















Wait for it........

For 90%+ of my matches, I treat it mostly like an unofficial chess deal (hand on the peice style). If they haven't begun their next action, I see no harm in letting them change it. I want to encourage them to be aware of all the peices on the board to increase their competitive play ability.

On the rare occasion that it is officially a tournament, and that the prize support is a Titans LE of some sort, I go pretty cutthroat. I'm not going to lose out and have to pay $20 on eBay to get a peice, just because I wanted to be a nice guy.

Most of the time it pays to be nice, however, because it keeps players coming back.

Everyone is talking from George's point of view. What about Alan? If you were in Alan's shoes, would you want to win the World Championship because someone gave you a takeback? Wouldn't that then be an empty victory?

Mistakes happen. You gotta live with them.

it depends... if its once in awhile its good sportsmanship to be lenient. if someones constantly doing it... no. they need to learn to think things through.

I understand where you are coming from here. However, I think there is a difference between letting a player take back a move that they couldn't legally make like what happened in the Worlds and playing the game for your opponent.

I was referring to VGA's original post here and not the Worlds game.

I think the issue here is how you would really act at a game at this level. There are a lot of morally high ground people here and I think that's commendable, but would you REALLY be that way if there were some high stakes on the line?

What if the prize had been a million dollars? Would you not have taken advantage of your opponents mistake? It's not cheating. All the rules were followed. Even though the rules are clearly on your side, you would let the opponent take back his move and give up a million dollars? I'm sorry, but you would just be a complete idiot if you did that and I guarantee even your friends and loved ones would agree, no matter how honorable you think you may be. Why even compete in a game like that if you're not in it to win it?

Now keep in mind my comments only apply to a high level world championship game where high stakes and prizes are on the line. I would not act or play like this in a fun, casual game with my friends. There, we allow take-backs and give each other advice on how to win.

This is my opinion only and I am not calling out anyone in particular. I am merely stating how I would act and my feelings on the matter.

I'm going to repeat what the rules deputies have already stated, but what exactly was illegal about Metrons move action?

There was nothing illegal about the move. Nothing. The outwit was illegal but not the move. Folks need to separate these things.

What if it was a different game. Player 1 asks "Do you have any TK on your team?" and player 2 truthfully answers "No". Player 1 then positions accordingly. Player 1 then uses Mikron to remove an object and grant TK to an adjacent fig, after which Player 1's positioning is well and truly hosed.

Was player 2 responsible to answer with "No, but thanks to Mikron I can get there?" Should he have said "Not yet"?

In the spirit of strict "legality," does player 2 even have to answer the question to begin with?