descentchampions.org

The Ladder Match / Promotion Challenge in Vamped between Diablo and Ernie resulting in a score of 20 – 4 has been marked as a 'practice match'.

On DCL, every kill matters to the rating algorithm.

It has come to the Ladder Staff's attention that the match in question was played by an intoxicated Diablo.

It is the responsibility of both parties to identify whether or not the game is being played to the best of both pilot's abilities. (EX: If the other guy is drunk off his arse...don't play a DCL match with him!)

A similar situation between moh and spud occurred (in the past) and that match was marked as practice as well.

Diablo should not have engaged in a DCL match, much less one for a promotion challenge, while under the influence. Ernie, if he was aware, should not have permitted the game to count.

This match affected the rating algorithm in such a way that all pilots were noticeably affected by it.

Ernie will be required to replay Diablo in Vamped for the promotion challenge. Diablo will be required to submit to a breathalyzer test before the match begins.

The staff will be discussing this incident with both offending parties and will determine if further action is necessary.

That is all.

Nothing to see here.... move along.


--Ladder Staff

After speaking further to Diablo regarding this... He feels very strongly that he was in sufficient command of his faculties for this match to stand as scored.

Diablo, "I told you I played drunk to save face"

Long story short, the game has been reinstated.

Diablo was taken at his word that he played drunk and so we acted on it. Playing drunk is totally unacceptable for obvious reasons....it can result in a 20 - 4 score that plummets the skill ratings into the abyss and can mess up promotion challenges. BUT...since that is NOT what happened in this case.

It is reinstated.

2 lessons to be learned.

1: Don't play drunk.
2: Don't lie to Admin.

Every Kill Matters. Always bring your A game. Your opponent deserves nothing less.

Here is my demo. https://www.dropbox.com/s/i22y8wktcyt9a ... D.dem?dl=0 Do what you will with it. Things like this make me want to go back to old habits. I guess it should also should be known that had a few shots of sake and a cup or two of shochu but that's every night for just about everyone that lives here.

Self-discipline, the ability to manage distractions, and consistency are important attributes for any pilot to possess. Part of this is knowing when you are unfit to play, and this becomes troublesome because on this ladder match performance does impact everyone.

This is now the second significant event of this sort that I've witnessed, and I must caution: if these types of matches are to be brought into question, the ladder administration must make clear whose responsibility it is to ensure match integrity. How does a pilot determine when their opponent is Unfit To Play, especially in the absence of physical presence, or even voice chat? If I muted/deafened in mumble could you tell if I was drunk when my only messages are: DCL? Athena good? gtj GG reported.

If the responsibility is put on the compromised pilot, the consequences are clear: they suffer a humiliating loss. And everyone's skill rating is impacted.
If the responsibility is put on the unaffected pilot, how are they supposed to know, with enforceable certainty, that it wasn't just a bad game?

I would caution the ladder administration to continue to explore a palatable policy solution. I do not have an answer.

Morfod, there is no way for the unaffected pilot to know with absolute certainty should the offending party do their best to avoid any clues verbally/text wise.
We won't be requiring blood tests, urine samples or installing breathalyzers in the pyros.

We just ask that you be mindful when playing people that are perhaps known to be prone to playing under the influence. If Diablo says...hey man I'm drunk...let's DCL!!! You should pass on accepting that. Blow him away for fun if ya like.

That isn't what happened in this case however.

Ernie, please understand that our actions had very little to do with you and everything to do with Diablo saying he played you "DRUNK".

Diablo lost 20 - 4 and the skill ratings for everyone took a huge dive...HUGE. Considering that he said he played drunk (according to his words at the time) it was unfair to everyone on this ladder that we allow that match to stand. It pushed people that were close to being offered a promotion challenge...much further away from it. It pushed people that weren't all that close to a demote challenge to being in danger of demotion...etc.

This decision had very little to do with the fact that his opponent was you specifically. Like we've said...we don't have anything against you Ernie.

Our apologies, in retrospect, if this came across as a hasty action by the Admins but considering the admission of playing drunk to an Admin by Diablo we took it at face value and immediately began to fix the problem for all who were affected.

It was done in the right spirit but apparently done with false information.

Yeah, well the policy with respect to playing while compromised has always been something along the lines of "Please don't do that". I'd really like you to develop your own understanding of what counts, and it's a very fine line to walk between "no excuses" and "give your opponent your best", and one I'm still feeling out for myself. You want to show up, in spite of being tired, or sick, or just having had a fight with your spouse, or whatever, right? No excuses. And you want to give your opponent your best, and not play while you're tired, or sick, or . . . you understand. I've had games recently myself where I felt, in retrospect, I'd made that decision wrong one way or the other. Drunk seems pretty far over the line for everyone, but like, how drunk? I'd say that's kind of on you to call. Do your best to be fair, and if you think you're compromised, play another time.

I think, as long as you as a pilot are doing your honest best with that, I'm not inclined to second guess you. The only enforcement I'm really in favor of is asking people what happened, and taking them at their word. The cases I've been in favor of stepping in as an admin have been clearly egregious ones, where we asked people what was up and my reaction wasn't just, "Nah, bro, you shouldn't have played that one" but more like, "What were you thinking??? No! Not here!"

It's definitely more than just skill ratings, though. If you don't really show up for a game, you deprive your opponent of the chance to truly beat you, which can suck if it's a landmark win, or part of a challenge, or something like that. There have been a few opponents in my past where my first win against them was tainted in some way. I'm grateful for the ones that have been off the ladder, because I can just not count them and never mention them. The ones that have been on . . . I don't know, I didn't like having it on my record that way. I wanted to BEAT the guy, not beat a drunk, tired shadow of him, or beat him in a joke level, or something like that.

From the side of the person who's not compromised . . . I would say, if something seems off to you, ask. If they say they're okay, take them at their word. You can't do more, right? Part of the point of having honorable opponents is that you trust them to be honest. If they say something is up, well . . . then I guess you have a judgement call, right? You can always refuse to accept a win if you feel it's tainted, and indeed, if it's tainted enough, we'll expect you to do so.

Yeah, it's all honor system stuff. With the pilots we have, I'm not worried about that, and if there's ever someone around we can't trust, I'd be more inclined to ask them to leave than to build armor plated rules for them. Honor system's okay. And judgement calls are okay. Sometimes I worry that I get out of step with the community on that one, and can be a little to uptight about expecting people to be honorable and take things seriously. I know there should be some room for screwing around and having fun and making mistakes, too, and if I ever get too far out of line with what you all expect day to day, please tell me! But I think doing your honest best to be fair about assessing your own ability to play and your opponents is a pretty reasonable requirement. And I feel pretty comfortable saying, "Playing drunk is too much."

We did screw this one up. When I heard Rethink said he was drunk, it made too much sense for me to look closer. My bad. I should have. I'm suffering some drama fatigue as there's been a lot over the last couple months, and admittedly some of it has been self inflicted, but it makes me less likely to truly dot the i's and cross the t's. No real harm done -- there's nothing we do that we can't undo -- but I'd rather get it right the first time, do the full research, and not surprise people. Ah well. I will try to do better. If you all could try to play nice for a little while, though, that'd be appreciated.

So, I guess full circle . . . what I should be saying about this one is NICE WIN ERNIE!

Since this caused so many people to have a "HUGE" drop in their rating, based on 2 pilots who aren't the most active out of the mix, I'm guessing the system can handle that right? No more than a few games for people to get back to where they belong? How does it handle outliers like this? Many researchers would toss this kind of data, while still reporting that it happened. They just wouldn't let it count toward the end result.

The system can handle it. It's just expecting the rest of us to be able to put up the same numbers somewhat.

There's always been a tradeoff with results like this. If we keep them, we let outliers tip the scale for everyone else, which doesn't seem fair. It's like, "Ernie can beat Rethink 20-4, can YOU?" Well, I mean, Rethink's like that, it could have happened to anyone, but none of us can do it on command. But on the other hand, if we discard those results, then can we really tell people, "If you don't think someone deserves their rating, go fix it in the mines"? Like, isn't that what this is?

So they count enough to move things, but not enough to move things a lot. It looks like a lot when someone is close to a line, though. For example, it set Morfod back a bit because the system is like, "Well, can YOU beat Rethink 20-4??"

It'll even out over time. Some number of crazy results are expected.

But also, the math is a tool. If legitimate results make it give crazy answers, that's the math's problem, not the pilots', and it's the math we'll be fixing. This has confused it a little, but the practical effects are small, so it's all right. At the end of the day, that's why the respect of your peers is the supreme thing you play for, right? Everyone knows what a particular win is and isn't worth, and I trust that more than anything else.

That's always the risk with outliers. Sounds like it will come out in the wash though. Thanks for taking the time to answer.