Fight Terminations

[Deleted member 1854]

It depends on from which perspective you look at this but there have also been fights where sides were outnumbered with 30+ people that got terminated because of lag, where the outnumbering side obviously would have the winning hand in so if any of these happen in the future, are you going to give them the strength?

 

[Dae_]

It depends on from which perspective you look at this but there have also been fights where sides were outnumbered with 30+ people that got terminated because of lag, where the outnumbering side obviously would have the winning hand in so if any of these happen in the future, are you going to give them the strength?

I believe that's the point of this thread, should they go ahead with this in the future

"

1. Use common sense along with a guideline of rules that dictate what sort of things we are willing to terminate fights for.
   • Pro: Should result in the most 'correct' and fair decision.
   • Con: Maximum chance of subconscious bias and human error."

 

[Thorgny]

Dae yes you can we wiped you guys twice trying to end it and got absolutely steam rolled one fight. Imaging if that comeback was never allowed to happen. I have had team mates throw fights too by running away with charges. Who is to say that doesn’t happen. Gifting someone a win when the fight never ended sets a poor precedent and an inconsistent one.

We arent talking about other fights we are talking about this fight were we were it was 90v3. Stop bringing up other fights.

 

[Perds_]

The fact that this loss has tried so hard to be justified is just funny at this point.

At the end of the day, Regional Powers wiped out BITS twice and could have easily ended the fight within the FIRST warp.

I understand your trying to somehow back your case but you know yourself that you had no potential of even getting close to the win, so why waste your time arguing about it in a forum post. The decision is final by the higher staff team and the outcome won’t change based on the amount of arguments you have on the case.

 

[koi0001]

Yeah, I don't think us having a point of precedent for every mishap is smart.

Every time a glitch occurs it would be good to look at the case uniquely imo like is done here. I appreciate that might take up time but it really is a reasonable thing to do. a hard stance is easier but not really fair.

 

[doota]

Today there was a fight on Balak 4 between the alliances Best in the South and Regional Powers. During the fight, Golems stopped spawning on the attackers inhib (RP) making it impossible for the Defenders to advance the objective. Staff then terminated the fight because I and Crypt have informed them that if there is ever a major bug that affects one side fights should be terminated. Neither of us was around for this fight, but staff did everything correctly based on our policy regarding fight terminations.

However, due to the specific circumstances of this fight, me and crypt have since looked over the data and what happened to decide if we should amend the outcome. Regional Powers were clearly ahead in this fight and on course to win, so looking at the bigger picture, the fact that their golems were not spawning on the inhib made little to no difference to the overall result. This puts us in a difficult position when analyzing whether this fight should remain terminated or the win given to Regional Powers, as that would have been the outcome if the fight had not been terminated (irrelevant to the bug). If we're being completely honest we could make an argument, either way. We tend to always terminate fights when one side encounters a major bug like that, so in that sense, it is consistent and fair with what we normally do. However, there is also the common sense angle, and looking at the specific circumstances of this fight (with data showing there was only going to be one winner) we could say the bug did not have a real/large impact on the fight. While it would be easier for us to simply rule by the book and say there is a bug affecting just one side so termination is fair, it does not feel within the spirit of conquest. We, therefore, feel the most logical, correct, and common sense thing to do is award the win to Regional Powers, as this would have been the result had we not terminated the fight. That puts Regional Powers on 109 Strength and Best in the South on 97 (this will not show up on live immediately but we will re-run the calculations should any fights happen before the new numbers are pushed).

We appreciate that whatever way we rule on this, one side/alliance will feel aggrieved and hard done by. We apologize for that and are aware this issue stems from bugs in conquest. We believe it is one of the remaining bugs introduced by sharding the server (Putting each world on its own PC). With conquest being in a more polished and stable state these days, once these ones are ironed out, conquest bugs should become far more infrequent. Unfortunately, though, bugs are an inevitable part of coding/video games, every Minecraft update, paper update, or patch we make to Loka has the possibility of breaking something. Even major game releases are full of bugs and they have million-dollar budgets and thousands of people testing them. While many of you will not have much experience coding, those that do will understand the difficulties with it. The same goes for fixing bugs, as those that seem simple on the surface are sometimes far from it, and some fixes can even end up creating new bugs. What we can do though is try to fix bugs as soon as we are made aware of them and resolve any issues that those bugs caused. Obviously, we have very limited resources but I promise you we do try our best.

This opens up a conversation that we have had in the past with the community and LCRs, which is how we should handle bugged fights. We effectively have 3 options:

1. Do not interfere with fights at all and let the RNG of bugs decide what happens. If you get unlucky and encounter a bugged conquest fight, too bad.
   • Pro: No possible bias or human error.
   • Con: The least fair and will result in the most 'wrong' decisions/outcomes. People may be able to abuse bugs to manipulate the results of conquest fights.
2. Put in a strict set of rules that cover every eventuality we can think of and terminate fights that fall under those categories, regardless of context.
   • Pro: Minimal chance of bias and human error but will still require interpretation of rules. Will result in the most extreme unfair fights being terminated.
   • Con: No room for common sense to overrule so some decisions will appear dumb and illogical.
3. Use common sense along with a guideline of rules that dictate what sort of things we are willing to terminate fights for.
   • Pro: Should result in the most 'correct' and fair decision.
   • Con: Maximum chance of subconscious bias and human error.

We are more than happy to talk about this again. The last time it was discussed the community landed on option 3. Back in the day we had no concept of terminating fights and option 1 was what always happened. There are of course pros and cons to each and everyone has different goals/motives so will likely gravitate to different options.

We want to terminate as few fights as possible, a balance between competitive fairness and fun. People put a lot of effort into preparing for fights and it sucks if it was all for nothing because the fight cannot go ahead. There are also plenty of peeps that show up for fights purely for fun and they would prefer if fights continued even if they are disadvantaged by bugs. This is why bugs that affect both sides we usually let slide. Obviously, if you are hyper-competitive you can argue these bugs could suit one sides fighting style more than another, but we feel that crosses the fun to competitive balance line. The same goes if a small handful of people are unable to warp from both sides. I suppose you could even make the argument that terminating a fight for one of these reasons would advantage one side over the other because they have fewer opportunities to gain strength if they are behind, it opened up their vuln, gave away a specific strat etc.

We also don't have every tool under the sun at our disposal. Things like 'simply' restarting a fight or refunding attacks may not be options we or staff have. As time has gone by we have added more and more tools to deal with potential issues that could arise in conquest to help smooth them out, but as with everything they take time and effort (and in this case for things that should not happen very often). Conquest is a complex feature so unless we have specifically coded a tool to do something we often can not do it at all (not even manually).

It is also worth noting that holding off fights until the end of the month runs a risk. There is always a chance a bug pops up or the server is ddossed etc. so that must-win fight may never get a chance to happen. Obviously, we want to avoid these issues cropping up but you can play it safer by getting a lead earlier in the month (if possible, we respect sometimes it is not).

In conclusion, we apologize for the bugs that have occurred in conquest recently as they are far from ideal from all party's perspectives. We will try our best to eradicate them and want to open up the discussion with the community on the best way we can deal with the incidents if they crop up. We'd love to get everyone's feedback on the topic.

thank you magpie man <3

 

[Kippehz]

You can when the other team gets wiped twice and didn't get any charges at all Kippehz..

i got 4 kills with bombs

 

[idk69420]

u cant just assume that we would lose we won when they outnumbered by 20 and was so close to winning an outnumber by 30 so u cant just assume that

u cant just assume that we would lose we won when they outnumbered by 20 and was so close to winning an outnumber by 30 so u cant just assume that

80v3

 

[Constantine10]

I was there fighting with BITS, we were wiped easily. There was practically no chance of us winning at all. RP deserve the win and the month. I genuinely cannot see how people who were actually in the fight and saw what happened could think that the outcome would be anything other than a RP win.

 

[coolkidsupa]

I was there fighting with BITS, we were wiped easily. There was practically no chance of us winning at all. RP deserve the win and the month. I genuinely cannot see how people who were actually in the fight and saw what happened could think that the outcome would be anything other than a RP win.

Yes but that's not the point we're trying to argue, if staff are going to term fights due to bugs and then give strength then why not do it to our fight? Shulkers and echests are a really important mechanic of conquest and undeniably helps outnumbered sides in ANY scenario as the outnumbered will use more pots than the outnumbering side. I'm not saying RP didn't deserve that win, they did. We were getting kill farmed but if staff are going to be giving strength then why not give us our strength back from a fight that was tampered with?

 

[koi0001]

Yes but that's not the point we're trying to argue, if staff are going to term fights due to bugs and then give strength then why not do it to our fight?

As the post made clear, this fight specifically was a make or break fight for the month. If we had brushed this fight off, an alliance would have possibly lost an entire month they shouldn't have because of one fight.

then give strength then why not do it to our fight?

If you can really prove that the fight in question would have made a massive difference and that it was clear who would have won otherwise, I agree. The case here is that many people agree that one side would win by a considerable margin.

I'm not saying RP didn't deserve that win, they did. We were getting kill farmed but if staff are going to be giving strength then why not give us our strength back from a fight that was tampered with?

As I said above in my prior post, it would be wise for all fights that are messed with to have a public note that clearly explains why the fight was terminated and what will be happening because of that, just for clarity.

Honestly, I'd argue that this fight was such an important fight and enough people complained and agreed about it; the same would be done for other fights that must be terminated if people were just as vocal or held similar weight. Simply having a precedent that overrules all isn't the best for this scenario. Moving forward, if these terminations were discussed somewhere openly, that would be best.

 

[jakeman5]

If you can really prove that the fight in question would have made a massive difference and that it was clear who would have won otherwise, I agree. The case here is that many people agree that one side would win by a considerable margin.

How do you prove this. It was one of the last fights in the month and we were outnumbered with the inability to reshulker without losing the shulker. That’s a massive bug especially when you are outnumbered. Letting that fight continue when such an important thing as shulkers were messed with and just giving RP the win there is quite honestly BS.

Saying it affected both sides is also a joke as the side who doesn’t outnumber is obviously going to use more pots so there is an inherent advantage there.

 

[koi0001]

How do you prove this. It was one of the last fights in the month and we were outnumbered with the inability to reshulker without losing the shulker. That’s a massive bug especially when you are outnumbered. Letting that fight continue when such an important thing as shulkers were messed with and just giving RP the win there is quite honestly BS.

Saying it affected both sides is also a joke as the side who doesn’t outnumber is obviously going to use more pots so there is an inherent advantage there.

As I said above in my prior post, it would be wise for all fights that are messed with to have a public note that clearly explains why the fight was terminated and what will be happening because of that, just for clarity.

Honestly, I'd argue that this fight was such an important fight and enough people complained and agreed about it; the same would be done for other fights that must be terminated if people were just as vocal or held similar weight. Simply having a precedent that overrules all isn't the best for this scenario. Moving forward, if these terminations were discussed somewhere openly, that would be best.

If you felt so strongly about it, you should have made a forum post. Also, I'd argue proving it, in this case, is a pretty good example. Many players from both sides agreed that it was a landslide victory.

Simply having a precedent that overrules all isn't the best for this scenario. Moving forward, if these terminations were discussed somewhere openly, that would be best.

I really want to put emphasis on this specifically. It may feel unfair that past fights weren't ruled on but it would be worse if future fights suffered because of this. If the fight your talking about was discussed openly on the forums (Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall seeing it discussed here) it may well have been awarded to you guys if you could really argue it would have been undoubtedly a fight you would have won.

I think it's kind of disingenuous to not recognise how much of a one-sided fight this one specifically would have been and then compare it to others.

 

[kSleep]

How do you prove this. It was one of the last fights in the month and we were outnumbered with the inability to reshulker without losing the shulker. That’s a massive bug especially when you are outnumbered. Letting that fight continue when such an important thing as shulkers were messed with and just giving RP the win there is quite honestly BS.

Saying it affected both sides is also a joke as the side who doesn’t outnumber is obviously going to use more pots so there is an inherent advantage there.

If the shulker bug actually happened you think someone would point it out earlier bruh (if they did i am just blind)

 

[jakeman5]

If the shulker bug actually happened you think someone would point it out earlier bruh (if they did i am just blind)

We pointed it out as soon as we tried to re shulker. Staff never did anything.

 

[Lampp_]

We pointed it out as soon as we tried to re shulker. Staff never did anything.

For the shulker fight prove to us that you would have won without a shadow of a doubt against rp that’s why we got the strength for this fight.

 

[coolkidsupa]

If you felt so strongly about it, you should have made a forum post. Also, I'd argue proving it, in this case, is a pretty good example. Many players from both sides agreed that it was a landslide victory.



I really want to put emphasis on this specifically. It may feel unfair that past fights weren't ruled on but it would be worse if future fights suffered because of this. If the fight your talking about was discussed openly on the forums (Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall seeing it discussed here) it may well have been awarded to you guys if you could really argue it would have been undoubtedly a fight you would have won.

I think it's kind of disingenuous to not recognise how much of a one-sided fight this one specifically would have been and then compare it to others.

we're not trying to say that the fight yesterday was winnable for us. It wasn't and anyone that fails to acknowledge that is blinded by bias but the fight where we couldn't reshulker didn't have a point where it was COMPLETELY wiped, we couldn't tell a definite winner as the fight was tampered with. Loka has always terminated fights whether win/lose as long as there was a bug in it and I don't see why that fight wasn't terminated.

 

[kSleep]

We pointed it out as soon as we tried to re shulker. Staff never did anything.

ok then you're good my bad

 

[D4ndyO_O]

Freshlemon victory.

 

[koi0001]

we're not trying to say that the fight yesterday was winnable for us. It wasn't and anyone that fails to acknowledge that is blinded by bias

Credit for acknowledging that for sure.

but the fight where we couldn't reshulker didn't have a point where it was COMPLETELY wiped, we couldn't tell a definite winner as the fight was tampered with. Loka has always terminated fights whether win/lose as long as there was a bug in it and I don't see why that fight wasn't terminated.

Unfortunately that's just down to the nature of the glitch then. In that scenario that's such a game breaking glitch where the core mechanics of the game have been broken and there isn't much other option than to disregard the fight. Whereas in this scenario all players were able to fight to the best of their ability without anything really stopping them.

In a fight of this scale golems really wouldn't have made a massive difference.

Lastly, as mag said it really is down to specific circumstances.

However, due to the specific circumstances of this fight, me and crypt have since looked over the data and what happened to decide if we should amend the outcome. Regional Powers were clearly ahead in this fight and on course to win, so looking at the bigger picture, the fact that their golems were not spawning on the inhib made little to no difference to the overall result.