Kingmaking in Warbarons

[Igor]

Some tricky things happened on 1v1 Ladder at the end of 17th season.
1. Darkh had 2 games vs Vicontic, going in the last day of ended season and many games with other opponents.
2. Vicontic keeped 2nd place in the last day of the season.
3. Darkh was going to take 3rd place.
All looked going normal way, but then strange things happened.
4. Darkh surrendered 2 games to Vicontic in the last day of the season (Darkh lost 2x11 and Vicontic got 2x22 points).
5. Vicontic took top place with 1371 (+25 to second place 1346), after he got 44 points from Darkh.
6. Darkh didn't take 3rd place, having 1183 (missed 15 to third place 1198) after he lost 22 points.
7. Darkh surrendered 5 games to other opponents in the first two days of the new season (has now 0/5 and -5 Cold on the ladder).

Resume: Darkh surrendered 2 games specially for Vicontic in the last day before the season ended, and he surrendered other 5 games with other opponents in two first days of the new season.
These 2 games, which Darkh surrendered to Vicontic, gave Vicontic 44 ladder points and top place, also they took 22 points from Darkh and took him out of 3rd place.
Darkh set Vicontic onto the top of the ladder. This looks as kingmaking.
Dirty thing, dirty win.

In the time when all European community fights for fair play and against negotiated matches, such things are happeneng in Warbarons.
I think this deserves blame and condemnation.

[Vicotnic]

You could have talked to me or Darkh before you made this topic and I could have filled you in on what happened.

First the game state of the two games:
One of the game had been over for several days and I controlled most of the map while Darkh had a Sorceress holding a hard to access city and one or two cities on the way to fall. The game would have finished with the 70% rule.

The second game was not as obviously going to finish, Darkh held 11 cities and I held 25 (I'm fairly sure those are the numbers but I might be off, if you want to know for sure you have to watch the replay) I also judged that I had quite a bit more buildings, units and heroes then him, the game had been going on for long and Darkh had been stalling (not pausing but waiting each turn out) and had some lucky battle the last turns. If the game would have ended with the 70% rule I'm not sure, I think it would have fallen slightly short.


Since I was unsure if the second game would end and I held priority (one can only surrender during ones own turn) I reached out to Darkh on the 30th or the 31ist, I'm not sure which of them. I told him that I thought I held close to 70% of the resources (not having perfect scouting information) and asked him if he wanted to surrender it.

Let me make it clear why I asked him this:
1) I did not want to pass the turn if he did not intend to surrender given that would give him one more turn of gold and units making it more unlikely for me to win by the 70% rule and he would not have to pass the turn back to me.
2) If he could not catch up to smursh (which seemed likely to me given that I already had a sure win vs him and that we had 3 more games going none of which would end this season) it made sense to me for him to want to take the lose this season rather then next, especially since he had mentioned that he considered surrendering a bunch of game if he could not catch up to smursh becourse 4th place was the worst place.


After our initial talk Darkh surrendered the first game (the one that would surely have ended with the 70% rule). Late on the 31st (by then I was leading over Igor with a few points and it seemed likely that was how the season would end, I still had hopes for two of my other games to end with the 70% rule and I had an active game on Hammer Mountain going that I though I could finish, but all of that was uncertain) he told me he would not catch up to smursh and I was surely winning the game anyway so he would surrender the second game, so I past priority to him and he surrendered it.



In the end I finished the season 25 points ahead of Igor, it is possible that I would have been just 3 points ahead if Darkh had not surrendered the final game.

[Igor]

Gentlemen, we see a collusion in it's pure kind.
Vicontik had conversation with Darkh to surrender 2 games to let Vicontic win the ladder. Just enough to read what Vicontic writes himsef.
What we need else to define this as collusion? This is even more than Whitelord did. If Whitelord asked to some players to play a lot of exclusive games with him, Vicontic directly discussed with Darkh about surrendering of 2 games in the last day of the season.
What evidences we need to call this a collusion?
All looks clear here.
Dirty things and dirty win.
If to be in trend of Europeat traditions of fair competitions, the results of both game should be annuled. And both participants of the collusion should hear that this is not applicable way to win so in Warbarons.
I think Warbarons ladder should be kept as fair competition.

[Vicotnic]

If you read what I wrote I never asked Darkh to surrender the first game, it would in fact be in my best interests to have it finish by the 70% rule (I see that you're trying to cast doubts over whether it would in another thread but the replay exist and anyone who wants to can look at the game themself, it was played on daradon valley with me as yellow and Dark as green, when I get to a computer I can provide an ss). If it is unsportsmanlike to ask someone if they want to surrender a game that is over I'm guilty. To me it seemed worse to stall out games that should be over using credits then to actually try to get them to finish.

[Moonknight]

It is common to surrender any games you are likely to lose at the end of a ladder season if you aren't in the running for a top spot. Darkh is a seasoned player, he can decide when to surrender and when not to.

[Igor]

I can agree that Darkh may look as season player, and he really could take 3rd plase, for which was enough:
1. To continue both surrendered games to get real chance to win for two reasons: either both games wil not be ended with 70% rule or just one of them wil not be ended and Smursh also wil lost a game with 70% rule as well, that gave Darkh 3rd place. Also Darkh could accept my offer, done after he surrendered first game to Vicontic, to play real time game on Central Sarara map some hours before the end of the season, and if he won he easily took 3rd place, but he didn't try.
2. To surrender all his 7 "weak" games before the end of the season to become "pure" for next season. But Darkh surrendered 2 games for Vicontic at the end of last season and 5 other games in one-two days after new season started. (If Darkh as a season player was trying to become clear of "weak" games for the new season why then he didn't surrender other 5 "weak" games but did this only at the start on new season?) Thus Darkh didnt try to get 3rd place last season and hasn't become clear of 'weak' games in the current season, he is deep at the bottom now.
Darkh did nothing for himself neither in the ended season nor in current season but only helped Vicontic to get top plase opposite own intrests.
This is that objectively can be named collusion and should get much negative reaction.

[smursh]

If Dark did not accept your speed game it might also be because he expected if he started winning you would change it to standard play and delay the game out. Playing speed games at end of season and then changing to non-speed and delaying is essentially rigging the system. Do not say you would not do this. In game with me I would have easily won vs you if I had one more turn but you used extra time to delay that game two weeks. You cannot say you could not take your turns if you had time for so many other games. Extra time is meant for going out of town where you do not have game access or if things come up preventing you from playing you are not penalized. To use extra time to play games at season end without risk of losing those games is very unsportsmanlike. If you want fair play you should also play fair.

[Igor]

Smursh you blame me again and again on things which all may do and which are legal and fair in Warbarons. Why do you do this?
All you said was already answered here and in News thread thus you may reread and don't flood farther.
If you are disagree then try to contact Piranha and Snotling to change this rule.

Also Smursh you have no base to blame me in pausing real time games or even in thoughts of this. You should't continue this line without any evidences.

[smursh]

Igor, you continually accuse me of collusion without any evidence since I played no games vs whitelord when you say I colluded with him. Yet still I get accusations from you again and again. Why keep making accusations without evidence or cause if I disagree on your position?

With regard to the current situation there is nothing in the rules to prevent Dark from surrenduring games so this also is legal despite your complaint so why the many threads and accusations on it?

[Igor]

Smursh, your participation in the collusion with Whiteord and Gil, when you 3 were in the same team, this was already proved including your own words. Game creators Piranha and Snotling made investigations on this and put the desition: annulate all games between you and Whitelord and between Gil and Whitelord except one game for each of these pairs.
This is proved collusion with completed decision. And you was a part of it. Don't try now to cover another one.

Your second thought looks like absurd. Negotiated matches is blamed amost all around the world.
But probably nowhere in the world exist a right which don't let to use additional time to win.
If you will put a look on chess matches, which is a competition most close to Warbarons, you will see that each player get some period of time for a game, one hour or so, depend on what kind of game - normal or fast one. And do you know something about that one of players use absolutely all his time, to the last his minute, and something other started to noise that this is not fair? I think you don't know anyone chess player who noises so, because probably there is no one chess players who does so. If chess game top managers decided that each player get some time to play then he is in right to use all this time to the end. It's legal, it's defended by chess rules, it's is inside chess traditions.
Similar rule exists in Warbarons. Is this good or not - this is separate question and it's off-top for this thread.