well, the original rule was:
View attachment 304
A rule change / extension should be announced at least 24 hrs before being put into effect.
We have announced it on the main page. I also updated the rules to contain this information.In IFBC rules this now still looks exactly the same. I am not sure what channels is @Syntex using for updating rules but imo it is extremely unprofessional to not just update the main rules topic here and inform about the update.
Until this is updated it makes zero sense to punish people they shouldn't be forced to look somewhere randomly over whole platform and other parts of game and forum if possibly there isn't another piece of information contradicting with what is written here.
Whoever is responsible for this and communication in general is doing really disasterous job.
Nothing wrong with it, they are eliminated, others are not. Why would there need to be balance between someone no longer participating in tournament and someone still playing? There is no purpose in playing after you are eliminated anyway.This is just an explanation, because it makes sense that you should not be able to duel players who are not allowed to duel back. That would create an unbalanced gameplay.
There are 2 possibilities:Rules should be the first place where it is updated, before you put it into announcements and wherever else.
Nothing wrong with it, they are eliminated, others are not. Why would there need to be balance between someone no longer participating in tournament and someone still playing? There is no purpose in playing after you are eliminated anyway.
This is correct and I absolutely agree with it.
- If you are eliminated and duel someone who is not, you can cause disadvantage for them.
This makes no sense. Why would someone suddenly have not good clothes because they stopped playing? They would still have their clothes equipped...If you are not eliminated and duel players who are eliminated, you can push yourself if the other player does not have good clothes, because they stopped playing. This could create in theory pushing. Also, if some players choose to still play as eliminated players, it is unfair for them because they are not allowed to attack back.
NOW they are, they were NOT before... Stop white knighting when you clearly know nothing about the situationTowns are clearly labeled ELIMINATED. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out. Besides, its a FF comp and you want consistency... Keep that as the focus and one wont have to worry about little nuances that dont affect the greater outcome.
Bro, you are missing the point. Towns WERE NOT labeled as ELIMINATED when the dicussion here started and when "rule update" was (not) announced...
Nothing wrong with it, they are eliminated, others are not. Why would there need to be balance between someone no longer participating in tournament and someone still playing? There is no purpose in playing after you are eliminated anyway.
If the rationale is so that players dont make a mistake, I completely agree and understand that point. As I said, let it be a warning, and confirm that they understand this. It likely would not be a large enough outcome to warrant a instant ban, unless excessive and intentional, but I would hate to see admins have to incur a heavier load by searching for / responding to pushing instances, when they're already to the brink with organizing the main event.There was an idea to cancel eliminated team towns at all and prevent players from breaking this rule. Anyway Erewan point is that the rule for players who are still in tournament was never mentioned specifically until today and its seems to me that the outcome from this could more affect the teams who are still playing by banning players not noticing rule update than letting them duel "pawns" as there are many "pawns" from other teams still participating.