Game #1270 Tournament game#57 | Round 7 : 2019 PBEM Duel Tournament #57

Killing with death mark...thank you Keika for the good explananation.

So what hili want is fix balance to make his tactic is best tactic.

I really can't understand what's wrong with no city game.

The game now focused on more clearing force is better than more cites and I can't see any reason for revert it.

Since we touched MC topic, I will provide list of converted units with turn I tried to convert them (should be quite accurate list I hope with very few mistakes).

My early conversion attempts were with at least 55-65% chance and you can see below that unfortunately I didn't manage to convert key units early and my early 11 level on turn 7 didn't pay off much.

Later attempts were with much higher chances (80% or so), but sometimes even they failed. For example "09" and "10" was with ~80% and both failed.
To convert key units I tried to do my best and was using everything I had to increase my chances.

For example to convert nagas I applied monkey's disgusting stench, curse, 30% holy weakness from inflict despair, broken spirit from elite banshee and immolation from sabretooth chariot.
If you didn't see that battle with whispers of the fallen, it was really painful and tedious 20 rounds battle.

Here is conversion attempts list:

01) - orc shocktrooper t7
02) - draconian flamer t7
03) + goblin skewer t7
04) - draconian elder t7 (in forge!)
05) - baby shock serpent t9
06) - draconian elder t9 (in forge!)
07) + golbin butcher t10
08) + orc hunter t11
09) - dwarf crossbowman t11
10) - dwarf prospector t11
11) + node serpent t12
12) - frostling apprentice t13
13) - goblin apprentice t13
14) - baby shock serpent t13
15) + orc shocktrooper t13
16) + orc shocktrooper t13
17) - banshee t14
18) + kobold t15
19) + bear t15
20) - yeti t15
21) + yeti t15
22) + naga slither t16
23) + naga guardian t16
24) - storm sister t17
25) + orc apprentice t17
26) - goblin big beetle t18
27) + goblin warg rider t18
28) + vampire spider baby t19
29) + baby shock serpent t19
30) + baby shock serpent t19
31) + goblin untouchable t20
32) + sun guard t21
33) - hell hound t21
34) + hell hound t21
35) + goblin apprentice t21
36) + draconian apprentice t21
37) - frostling scoundrel t22
38) - tigran scoundrel t22

Thanks for the report keika. That's more or less what I guessed had happened. Level 11 on turn 7, very impressive. In the video for the last turn, you'll see that I wonder if you had managed to reach that on turn 7 because we can see a bump in your military score (but probably rather linked to the Quest).

I screwed up on turn 20 because I kind of forgot the T3 you recruited from the Inn and saw the mercenaries too late (after moving my hero). And I didn't expect your Theo to move that fast (forgot Barren Running + Builder). But even without that, I don't think I could have won because you just had too many good units.

We still have the same old issue of "no city economy" (even though here you had cities, but if I had razed everything, you would have slimmed down a bit and continued): http://aow.triumph.net/forums/topic/fixing-the-no-city-economy/

Basically clearing earns too much gold.

Another noticable battle.
Not so much to tell about that since similar was already discussed in recent game, but here is screenshot of the battle:



Sometimes you don't need to bring all your best warriors and fight a bloody battle like a real man and "true" player. And then cry about lost champion or celebrate great victory when you managed to do that barely survived on low HP.

It was quite challenging battle with very strong defenders and I was thinking about how to take it without risk and not taking much damage a lot.

Initially I wanted to take it with two battles (and then continue moving leader stack) - weaken it killing two warbreeds first and then finish it with two additional shocktroopers. It was possible and without much risk to lose units, but my shocktroopers would be seriously wounded and I didn't have reanimators near to heal them up.
So I started thinking about another way.

I calculated my leader stack movements for next three turns and realized that I don't necessarily need to move after ziggurat - I could clean the very same sites regardless if I lose move points after second lost battle or not (there were haste berries on my way).

It meant that I can do 2 or 3 (or even more) battles to take ziggurat and so I decided to not involve shocktroopers into battle, but simply take it with leader, hero and two node serpents.
It was very safe, because in that case all my units had undying and even if something went wrong, they will be revived and retreated if necessary. So this battle was not about win or lose, but about how much HP I lose (experience didn't matter much, my leader and hero already had 13 lvl and both serpents had key "elite" rank).

So the battle.

1) Stage 1

Killing two warbreeds with death marks. Had to sacrifice two baby shock serpents. It was a bit sad, but I didn't have any other good candidates and most likely I will not be able to evolve them in near future.



2) Stage 2

Killing warbreed with invoke death and node serpents. I don't remember if I did it in one battle or maybe I had to "reroll" independent's first turn by retreating.



3) Stage 3

Kill watcher and 2 phoenixes.

I retreated several times in this battle before I actually did the real fight. The reason for the first retreat was quite silly.
Everything was good, but I forgot to swap items between hero and my leader after second fight. My leader had only 80% spirit resistance and since I wanted to split watcher with it, it would be better to have 100% resistance to avoid be petrified. Next few retreats (as I remember) was because independents acted on first round and so I wanted to "reroll" it.
Finally I did everything else - splitted watcher and one phoenix with my leader (100% spirit and fire resistance) and with my hero and two node serpents killed another phoenix.
Then baited another phoenix with cadaver (raised from phoenix), splitted watcher and killed it. And then killed last phoenix.

---------------------

It was one of the most challenging battles (from tactic perspective), but the most challening I think was the battle for box of cataclysms where I lost my leader and my hero (but of course revived because of undying). Absolutely shitty 50CP pickup for such unbelievably strong defenders - 2 air elementals, 1 frost elementals, node serpent and frost wyvern (3 units with phase and 3 units with inflict stun/freeze abilities). Comparing to casting catalyst defending by 4 wisps and which gave me 54 (or 64?) casting points it is absolutely hilarious.
But the true reward I got from it was converted node serpent.

In the final battle I tried to attack in way that units in second stack will be far away main fight for 2-3 turns, but unfortunately I didn't have enough MP to place my units properly and also node serpent and unicorn rider has phase, so I didn't work as I planned.
I placed by bets on knight and bone collector. There should be a lot of corpses in the battlefield, so I hoped that collector survives few turns and then consumes them all and win the battle.
I didn't expect my theo hero survive in battle (90-95% chances) so I spent all my skills points to maximize damage (and also dropped wand which I thought will be stupidly used by AI to make 2-3 damage from range attack). Besides "must have" holy champions and sacred arms skills I also picked undead slayer and monster slayer to maximize personal damage on my hero.
I expected my hero during first rounds to cast "smite", bestow iron heart, use "divine vengeance" item, do massive damage to one unit with all buffs and flanked charged attack and then die.
I prayed that AI will not screw up "divine vengeance" ability - with holy champions ability it should do massive 15 fire damage + 20 shock damage to many units, only one this item could turn battle into victory, but stupid AI didn't even try to use it.
I expected that at least one support unit will be dragged out of main battle by secondary stack and easily killed by multiple units. Partly it was successful, but in video you can see that silly AI still failed to do it properly and I don't know why.

From Hiliadan's side I expected his heroes to cast something (I hoped not something devastating) and use healing ability first turns, so no much damage from them early.
Also his hero was far enough and using healing ability on first turn, it will not be joined into the battle for 3-4 turns.
His wounded cadaver should be killed on first turn and so I expected that first 3 turns it will be 14 vs 7 battle (or ideally if 2 units with phase didn't reach me, even 14 vs 5).



You can check in the video what was predicted right and what was not (3:10 timing)
https://drive.google.com/file...

Finally report of the game from my side.

Started underground, had 3 mana nodes in domain. Not so bad, but not the best.
Wanted to have magma forge to reach important 60/63 breakpoints to produce builder/laboratory/sun guards early without losing additional time/gold, but no luck.

Took shadowborn specialization for potential greater life stealing for sun guards (with vampiric hunger) and life stealing for bone collectors under "embrace darkness" spell.
Also for 57 production cost for sun guards which guarantees one turn production in town size city without relying on production buildings/sites.

Unfortunately didn't have research scrolls and so first reanimators were quite late.

Put all efforts on leveling first hero and was very successful in that. At the end of the turn 7 I had 5 lvl leader and 11 lvl hero and started converting units (not so successful early as it could be).

Now I think I made a mistake in skills managing that I didn't take inflict despair early. I was thinking that it will be enough to have reanimators for that, but as I said first reanimators were produced and joined army much later than I started converting.

On turn 7 I completed vassal's quest and got another sabretooth chariot, but turn later I discovered necromantic circle at the corner of the map behind river. It was really annoyning because in order to kill them I had to waste 2 full turns movement. I could not waste so much time with my army, so I decided to leave new chariot behind to be able to kill spawned lost souls.

At the same time I discovered first two mythical sites. Both were quite close to my throne, but it were castles of the Lich King. That was a bit dissapointing because with death marks and invoke death I was ready to try to take challenging sites, but not the castles - these abilities don't work at all or limited and I didn't have any elemental damage at all.

Turn 10 I have captured goblin's outpost and made first army split - I sent reanimator, cheetah, converted skewer and orc hunter to explore left part of the underground (yellow army).

My scout found Naga's dwelling and I received quest from them for naga slither and gas breath item (at this point I thought that it is quite good item for me). Also I found another castle of the Lich King on the way to Naga's and I started thinking about how to take it, because most likely I would not be return back for it.

At turn 12 I finally was able to convert good unit - node serpent. I also was lucky to get theocrat hero and start transfering holy symbol to the leader. At turn 13 I summoned my first banshee and with that army I was ready to take castle.
My both leader and hero had "undying" and with "reanimate undead" I took it on turn 14 fairly easy.

(missing battle screenshot leader, hero, champion sabretooth chariot, converted node serpent, banshee, cadaver (as bait) vs 2 dread reapers and 4 banshees)

I got "mass curse" spell as a reward and at this point I thought that it is quite "ok" (ha!).

At this point I opened another front with second hero, chariot and two reanimators to clean bottom right of the underground (green army).

Turn 15 completed Naga's quest and turn later captured them converting two more nagas. Unfortunately they didn't split and all stayed in the central hex, otherwise I could convert even 4 nagas.

Also this turn we encountered with Hiliadan first time and I was surprised to see him playing necromancer. I had theocrat as an option to pick and I thought that he will not take a risk to play necromancer vs it.

Turn 17 I took wizard tower (got "chant of unlife" :facepalm. It was guarded by two horror eldritch which was quite dangerous and also I had very low resistance on my leader and hero (didn't get any items with resistance), but I weaken it killing one eldritch and then captured with nagas.



Slitted again with red army.

I was thinking about rushing Hiliadan with all my converted army, but I didn't know anything about his main army and also middle of the UG map was flooded by wetlands, so many of my units were walking only 4-5 hexes there. Additionally I found that the way to his cities is blocked by mountains on surface.

One more UG entrance which I found upper from his cities, was either on separate island or it was peninsula on the same continent but it would took me 5-6 turns to reach his cities.
Another UG entrance I believe was in the corner of the map, but most likely on separate island near his natural neighbour.

So it looks like Hiliadan had very good throne position with only one ground way on surface. He built few towers near central underground entrance, so he knew when I am going to attack him. Also he had eternal cadavers under regrowth which never decay (perfect scouts with blight and urban concealment for only 2 mana). In general he was very good in scouting and preventing me from scouting him quite successful.

He also had "whisper of the fallen" spell casted and I didn't know how exactly "hexes" are calculated. As I scouted a bit later, his forts were quite close to the middle and so most likely he saw every single battle I did underground starting from Naga's dwelling.

In meantime, I have discovered that crystal tree close to underground entrance near my throne has been cleared.
I didn't see his main army anywhere in the middle of the map and understood that he could be on the way to my cities, but I thought that I have couple of more turns to clean both castles of the Lich King and maybe even block UG entrance with leader and bone collectors. Unfortunately I didn't have enough time for that.

I think it was my big mistke that I didn't scout well surface way to my cities. During the game two my scouts have been killed there and so I had only limited vision. At least I expected him to go through flowrock quarry on the road, but it looks like there was some another way through mountains.

I still didn't know what to do with my main army and I had an option to return 3 nagas and elite banshee using shrine of mermaid and haste berries on their way to support throne army, but most likely they still will not be there in time.

I decided to clean couple of more mythical sites with my mobile leader's stack while my secondary armies are earning gold and searching for another UG entrances to Hiliadan's cities.
I also bought few units from the inn near my city on turn 20 and turn 21 and building bone collectors each turn.

With my main stack I cleared ziggurat on turn 20 and I was rewarded with 391 gold and warning for that battle.
I also took castle of the Lich King with my secondary theo "stack" on the same turn and went back to my throne to join with the rest of my army.

I still didn't know all Hiliadan's army, but I knew that it was quite powerful since he took another castle of the Lich King near the UG entrance.

I think at this point we both didn't know what was the opponent's situation. Hiliadan still thinks that my question about will be round prolonged or not is unimportant question, as well as about score by victory.

I thought that Hiliadan had much better economy that me - he had 3 vassals (two dwellings (?) and natural neighbour city size (?)), most likely he had much less army and so it was easy to maintain them.
I thought that he could have full stack of storm sisters and/or initiates in his throne. With units bought from his inn twice, I think it would be quite hard to capture it without my main stack (and attacking with leader would be quite dangerous) even if I had more powerful units.
At the same my throne was in danger, there were not so much army and I didn't know what exactly Hiliadan had.

Also I had no gold, more than 400 overall upkeep and with few razed forts, I had -200 net income.
So for me it was really important question are we going to play 5 or 10 more turns.

Fortunately, I didn't have to make a decision, because game has surprisingly ended on turn 22/23.

I wanted to catch Hiliadan's main stacks with outnumbered forces, bought several units from inn on turn 20 and turn 21, produced couple of bone collectors with hurry in my throne and pulled everyone back who can potentially participate in main battle.
I didn't expect that I could catch him because Hilidan was playing very carefully and calculate movements very accurate and also scouted well, but I did try and it worked.

With partisan army I concealed bone collector and two banshees (only one was able to participate in battle) near my throne in forests, one sun guard from the opposite side and brought cheetah from goblin's city. With built road by builder I also was able to bring my theo hero involved into the battle and managed to attack 14 vs 9 units and won.

To be honest I didn't expect to win this battle. I estimated my chances to win like 30-35%.
But the goal of this battle was to
1) trade my army (since I had huge upkeep and could not support it for long time)
2) weaken his main stacks much and prevent them to take high level sites (ideally kill key units like storm sister, leader, hero, node serpent, knight)
3) weaken his main stacks so that they could not capture my throne

I was expecting that he will win and have hero, unicorn rider and node serpent or knight alive.
If that happen I think it will be enough for me, because I still had 3 bone collectors, banshee, reanimator and also 9 cadavers in the throne.

Writing this report I think that I made a mistake on previous turn, I could drastically increase my chances to win if I conceal 6 cadavers in mana node near the throne.

Anyway after losing his main stacks Hilidian has surrendered on next turn.



Knowledge score:



Military score:



My final army at the end of the game:



Surface map:



Underground map:



Yellow army:



Blue army (unfortunately lost one silver medaled cadaver with 60+ experience in one hard battle):



Red army:



Leader stack (and units pretending to be in leader stack, but they were too slow for it):




Part of the green army and future theo stack:

As I had said, the game would end before the deadline.

I made a big strategic mistake on turn 20 and I paid it immediately on turn 21 (and I did actually worse than I thought because I didn't expect keika to move his Theocrat ahead of his stack to pick me with it too, well done). I'm surrendering as it makes no sense to play 2 or 10 more turns for the same result. My Leader stack is dead, keika has at least 5 good stacks roaming the map and I have no way to take his Throne, no way I can win this.

Very well played from keika. Though I do think several cheesy tactics (in tactical combat) were used and I hope he reports them so that we see if we can fix them or not. It's good to play vs players like this, because it helps improve balance.

Also happy to see Bone Collectors played for the first time, I've always thought they were too good, but nobody tried to use them before (in games I played or saw reported).

Match has been reported, please confirm!

@Mahimka

To not flood the game blog with unnecessary comments, you should write a PM where we can discuss it.

The exact amount of battles (2,3,4,5,6 etc) before it becomes an exploit could take a while to get unanimity on.

1 is clearly too little, 2 is a clear possibility, but since the judges are only 2 and involve more would require a longer time frame to get a "community acceptance", 3 was considered a "softer" target than 2 for now. What is your argument for 4 if 2 is one of your options? (reply in PM please and it will be added to the "votes" for the future).

Remember, this is a new rule that we never thought we would need to implement, and there can be arguments for any amount (below 4, IMHO). Rules in sports/e-sports change by a player behaviors and findings/"exploits" they use - some things are never seen before and require the rules to change accordingly.

@Keika, you raise a few good points, I will copy and paste the relevant parts and share with Jonny in a PM. Warning with proof is not the end of the game, and after you provide the video as requested of your turn together with the new information you posted it might be downgraded to "warning with proof" but for now, losing 7 battles (6 without killing a single enemy) at one site is an exploit (doesnt matter if other players use same tactics - it wasnt reported during a tournament match and therefore not considered before).

The 2 cases of exploit/actions that warrant a warning was 1) Not reporting the loss of morale/empire happiness (this you have challenged and will be considered again) and 2) Doing 8 battles at 1 site to ensure full HP and MC chances (this is not challenged and remain a case for a warning) = 2 cases of "exploit/offenses that warrants a warning" with 1 being raised for new review.

1) @marcuspers @Jonny Thunder could you please tell me which second case of violation you are talking about?
I can confirm that I did more than 3 battles to the same site on turn 20 taking ziggurat.
What about other case?
I thought that I did that too on turn 17 taking wizard tower, but I checked my screenshots and I see that at the end of the turn my hero moved the wizard tower. It means that he didn't lose move points and so it must not be retreated more than once.
I remember that I weakened guards killing one eldritch horror and then retreat and I have screenshot where other 5 defenders are killed in the same battle. So it should not be the case.

I am not refusing that I could do that somewhere else, but I can't remember the other case, I don't remember any other noticable challenging battles where I could do that.
Please let me know what is the other case and so I can confirm it or not.

2) About attacking site more than 3 times in one strategic turn.

I disagree that this is exploiting bug or weakness. I think it is the same as using other "tricks" or "features" which are kind of "legalized" now.

Experienced players know that you can try to "reroll" first independent's turn, farm additional experience (legally with guerrilla tactics) and use some abilities extra time (with guerrilla or not), etc. These tricks are not considered as explots or weaknesses (at least I didn't hear anything like that from anyone).
Unfortunately there is no list with what is prohibited or not and it is hard to understand that.
Sometimes I heard about "fair" play word, but you should agree that it is very vague term - some players consider one thing as "not fair" and some are ok with it.
That is why my opinion on that is it must be clearly outlined in rules or somewhere.

Funny thing that I revealed such behaviour for myself only in this game (while it is quite obvious and it is required to think about that for 5 minutes).

I realized how potentially it could be powerful, but it is still legit. I absolutely understand judges' concerns, but I think it is wrong to tell now that it is prohibited. And it is absolutely unfair to punish for that reason at least for now - as I said you could do similar things and it is not prohibited.

Even from game mechanic perspective there is disadvantages you get if you do that:
- lose your move points
- lose an ability to gain experience
- guards gain +100 morale and +150 morale for winning battles.

Perhaps is not enough, but it is question for future mod balancing.

3) Last thing about guerilla tactics.

Again I realized such behaviour only in this game (as far as I remember it was in ziggurat battle, but I might be mistaken).
It was surprized me - as judges I thought that it is a bug, but I checked in-game description and realized that it is king of expected behaviour.

I think you are referring to description from AoW wiki, which I believe incorrect.
Below you can find in-game description of guerrilla skills.



It clearly says that there is no moral penatly from retreating at all, no matter how much battles you retreated.
I think it is quite powerful, but that convinced me that everything is ok and it is not a bug/exploit.

I strongly disagree that judges gave me a warning for that.

To judges: with information above, could you please revisit our decision and tell me result.

Hi guys,

OK, a bit of an update:

First of all, it have come to our attention that Keika have used an exploit (it is however available for all players, but its still an exploit) where he attacked the same site 8 times. His intentions in that battle is not known, but its the judges decision that this is a clear exploit of the game mechanics, as it improves the odds of MC, allows healing to full and also taking advantage of a poorly written description: 

(Guerilla Tactics - incorrect/vague description highlighted)

• Retreating from combat does not count towards the Lost Battle Happiness Empire Happiness penalties.
• Unit keeps its movement points and experience gained
• Can only be used once per strategic map turn.
• The last point would indicate that all above only apply once, or else it should be stated after each point that X apply unlimited amounts and Y applies unlimited amount of times. As it stands, you can lose an infinite amount of battles without any morale/empire happiness penalties, but only retreat once and keep movement and xp gained once.

The judges settled with a warning without proof as there is 2 cases of violation:

• Rule 11: Players should not voluntarily exploits bug or weaknesses in the game. Players should report any bug or exploit to judges or on the official forum when they discover them. Judges can decide to ban players using exploits from the tournament.

In this case there is a clear exploit (7 lost battles in a row, before finally a battle won at the same site). The second part is to not report it when it was found. After you realize you lost 3 battles and not see any morale/empire penalty, it is clear that the game mechanic have failed and should be reported.

In accordance with rule 7: "When the rules are imprecise or do not cover a case, Judges have flexibility to take the most appropriate decisions." The judges will update the rules to cover cases like this with an indication of what is a "fair" amount of lost battles in a row on a specific site to not have MC abuse where you can try an infinite amount of times to MC a unit of your desire. But to not lose time during judges decision in regard of this, no more than 3 attacks on the same site is allowed until further notice.

Keika is asked to record the following 3 turns and during the first video show a full history of battles made (should cover the last 3 turns) in the "Event History" (top right buttons in the in-game menu). Make the videos available via YouTube or similar services and send link to judges (Marcuspers and JonnyThunder) for confirmation.

In regards to an extension of the game you are granted an extension of 4 days to start with, if the game is not decided by 1st of October the judges will ask both players to make a short video of the current status, show armies, cities etc. and if its deemed like its too close to call a further extension can be granted to allow for the game to continue.

If anything is unclear let me know in a PM and we will clarify.

/Marcus

To clarify: I'm not judge on this game of course, so don't take MY answer as a judge's answer.

And I find it problematic that you consider going for a score victory when it's pretty clear that in 10-15 turns, the only chance that the game is not finished is that we both are throneless and wandering on the map with the remnant of our armies. By that time, I would surrender if I'm clearly losing and I'd expect you to do the same in the opposite case. Going for score in that case would be a proof of sportsmanship IMO.

Score victory is for games where everyone still has an empire and the game is really undecided.

@Hiliadan I consider your answer as "no, we will not extend round timeline unless force majeure". Made my turn.

Answering your questions.

Yes, I hesitated to pass my turn for couple of hours today to know the answer. I don't know why do you represent this question as unimportant.

We both know that game will be finished when there is no throne and leader is in void. And second condition might not be met for long time.

So yes, I think that game could be finished by score with quite high chances and I need to consider this an option as well.
And depending on answer there are decisions which could be different like should I sell my cities or raze them, disband unimportant units to save gold or buy new from inns, plunder vassals or keep them. These aspects could be important for maximizing score.

Hi guys,

We have received the request and will discuss it.

Only reason as I can see is that the game was paused for (around) 4 days because of Hiliadans crash, and in similar cases such delays have been added to the deadline when the game is close and such an extension will be beneficial.

/Marcus

Why do you expect a time extension when there is no good reason to give one?

Also, are you not playing the turn because you're considering whether you go for a score victory? Can't you just play? It seems pretty obvious to me that we will finish in time given the current state of the game.

@Hiliadan, @marcuspers, @Jonny Thunder

Will be round 7 timeline extended or September 27th is the final deadline? Official judges' answer, please.

Hi again,

Both judges agree that the video Hiliadan shared is clearly showing the game frozen and non-responsive.

Therefore a warning with proof is given to Hiliadan and you can continue the game.

/Marcus

Hi guys,

Hiliadan managed to send the information and I´ve sent my feedback to Jonny so a decision should be ready soon.

Thanks for your patience.

/Marcus

 game is going very slowly...

Hiliadan, you know I can't sleep well without my turn

Hi! I just got a crash in a fight I was very clearly winning... Fortunately I was able to make a video without the game closing. I'm sending it to judges...

Sorry about that, it's quite unclear what caused the crash.

Hi! I just got a crash in a fight I was very clearly winning... Fortunately I was able to make a video without the game closing. I'm sending it to judges...

Sorry about that, it's quite unclear what caused the crash.

I'm probably going to struggle to play my turns until Sunday as I'm attending a big event starting Thursday evening and I'll be on the train and transport from noon. Sorry for the delay.

Please click here to read the rules. In order to avoid advantaging one team or the other, for each match, the team who will host the match was randomly selected. The first team in the "turn order" above (who is also the team on top in the tree here) must host the game. Any of the players in the team can host. Tournament Game #57 Round ! When players do not show up for their match, the Tournament Judges have the right to change the match!

Joined the game.

Settings seems good now!

Good luck to both of you.

/Marcus

Good catch! I thought I would be good with "Tournament" game flow but it seems I should have changed the game flow and then put it back to "Tournament" to properly reset settings to tournament ones. I think the Many Dwellings came from a test I made for v1.3 or something. Sorry about that!

Anyway, rehosted:

Round 7 - match #57 2

Password: battlefield

Hi guys,

Many dwellings appear to be wrong, should be few.

otherwise Settings looks good.

both players class/race is received. 

/Marcus

Joined the game. Sent class/race to marcuspers.

Game is up:

Round 7 - match #57

Password: battlefield

The settings:

I sent my class/race.

Hi keika! We finally face each other, I hope not to ridicule myself!

I'm going to send my class/race and host the game soon. I'll record that game.