Ladle 85

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

*16
Core Dumper
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by *16 »

sinewav wrote:
*16 wrote:Isn't this a bit suspicious?
two_face does not technically have the authority to remove Oreo from Accel's team list. However, Oreo was also signed up under Blue Moon and when I look at this I get the feeling he is not playing for Accel and this current placement is Oreo's correct position on the Challenge Board . Sloppy editing yes, but there were many sloppy edits this month because players are hopping teams like crazy. Suspicious, no, not unless Oreo or Taz comes forth to complain.

Thanks for keeping an eye on the board sixteen.
I actually didn't mean the oreo swapping teams but the fact that a player who just made a anonymous account on forums signed a team up for ladle. I don't think it's liz, but I do think it's kinda weird and suspicious. Maybe that's just me tho...
Image
two_face
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:35 am

Re: Ladle 85

Post by two_face »

*16 wrote:two_face does not technically have the authority to remove Oreo from Accel's team list. However, Oreo was also signed up under Blue Moon
Oreo agreed to play with Us (Blue Moon) before signups were closed. I PM'd Taz and mentioned this to him and he said "ok ty" Then I removed Oreo from ACL wiki roster and also told Taz which he said he had no problem with. Feel free to confirm this with Taz. Sorry for the confusion.
User avatar
takburger
Match Winner
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by takburger »

Theo has evidence of who is Two Face, I'll double check with him tonight so we are sure. (and it is not Liz)

I agree to disclose this evidence to tournament admins only. People have the right to privacy.
Image
Jrotc2012
On Lightcycle Grid
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:49 am

Re: Ladle 85

Post by Jrotc2012 »

It is not Liz. idk who izissise is but oreo is on our team not accel. glhf
User avatar
takburger
Match Winner
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by takburger »

izissize is a french guy you can meet in sumo servers. welcome him to ladle :)
Image
User avatar
theo
Round Winner
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 12:06 am

Re: Ladle 85

Post by theo »

*mistake*
Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4315
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by Word »

Vogue wrote:I'll be playing this ladle, with a normal ping. Have fun & good luck!
While I sometimes believe that modern psychology often serves as a catalyzer to make everyone adapt to a corrupt system and defame many people just because they don't, I'll never know why you don't get bored and scared by that attitude (and that's fine). No matter if you actually take part or if that was a joke, isn't it a bigger accomplishment to sit that ban out?
User avatar
Magi
Match Winner
Posts: 634
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:35 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by Magi »

Word wrote: No matter if you actually take part or if that was a joke, isn't it a bigger accomplishment to sit that ban out?
A 12 month ban is ridiculous and I don't think anyone in this community would actually follow such a ban, there is no point in even trying to extend it now. The only purpose I can see this having is for 12 months any team that Liz plays on will be disqualified and she won't be able to win ladle. Play it though? She's probably even more encouraged to ruin some team's month for an entire year now.
Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image
Image

bye
User avatar
ogo
Average Program
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2013 1:48 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by ogo »

I personally think 12 months is absurdly long. Who would come back to this game after being banned for 12 months? You're setting yourself for 12 months of trolling, or just losing a good (albeit a little toxic) player from the grid permanently
Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4315
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by Word »

We have agreed on this set of rules to keep the ladle functioning. If one knows them and acts like Liz, he or she has to accept the consequences. If you're organizing/taking part in a ladle, or any tournament, and someone intentionally disrupts it in a way that is unfair to you and everyone else, then a ban is justified, and a year doesn't even seem that much to me. Also, keep in mind that there's not much worse an average player can do to the tournament which we have to deal with as a community (and we aren't paid for that, either). Hacking servers already qualifies as a criminal act, so I think we can agree that playing for two teams or ignoring a ban is still somewhere below that, and the troublemaker should be happy he or she doesn't have to pay a fine.
User avatar
pike
Round Winner
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:53 pm
Location: where polar bears walk the streets

Re: Ladle 85

Post by pike »

Well done Rogue. Nice try Pickup Team, Blue Moon and Serendipity.

Delinquent's -1 (wasn't very stable, felt more like US server really)
Agility's NY -1 (unplayable for EUs)
CT USA +1 (despite the crash it was quite ok)
User avatar
vov
Match Winner
Posts: 568
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by vov »

Thanks for the nice matches, SP, Ww, and CT! \o/

I don't remember what our first server was, that = +1, was good.
CT USA: +1; It held up very well with nearly 40 spectators!
Agility NY: +1; thx Magi :D
Last edited by vov on Tue Sep 09, 2014 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Magi
Match Winner
Posts: 634
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:35 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by Magi »

vov wrote:Thanks for the nice matches, SP, Ww, and CT! \o/

I don't remember what our first server was, that = +1, was good.
CT USA: +1; It held up very well with nearly 40 spectators!
Agility NY vov :P

+1 Agility's NY
+1 CT USA, a lot of people were upset about its crashes but hey, like vov said, it held up with 40 specs, pretty good performance, couple invisible lines but still at least we were able to get into it unlike Compguy's xD

GMs Speeders, Wild West and Crazy Tronners, sorry about seeming impatient/upset about the wait, it happens and you can't control it, I understand, we were just trying to get our guys in before they had to leave :P

See ya guys at the Shovel! (or brawl?)
Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image
Image

bye
User avatar
kyle
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1973
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: Indiana, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe, Multiverse
Contact:

Re: Ladle 85

Post by kyle »

pike wrote:CT USA +1 (despite the crash it was quite ok)
Crash was 100% my fault (sorry about that 15 minute delay) I just happened to click right above what I was selecting, and that was the shutdown button.
Image
Nub
Average Program
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:50 pm

Re: Ladle 85

Post by Nub »

Fun ladle today! Good matches to the teams we faced. So sorry for the delay to Rogue. You guys should try to be seeded so that you have to play more teams next time :D

Deli's was particularly bad for both US and EU. We tried so hard to get Pickup team to switch servers but they flat out refused. I think at one point Krikio even admitted that the server was really laggy for him too. I got a little bent out of shape because we couldn't switch servers, and I think it made the opening round really painful and longer that it needed to be. Because of the lag, both CT and Pickup team were playing super-conservative which made the games drag on. I think we played some more in Delinquents with Blue Moon team, but we also may have had a server swap over to Agility's. I can't remember.

Server ratings:

Delinquents: -1
CT USA: +1
Agility's NY: 0


(not sure if these will count or not as we didn't technically play actual matches in these servers, but rather used them to warmup, trying to find servers better than Delinquent's) Compguygene's server took a dump when we tried to use it after CT USA crashed, and before Compy's crashed, it was very slidy.
Zman's: 0
Compguygene's: -1
Image Image Image Image
Post Reply