ENT Gaming

Team -

The LIHL rules have been thoroughly updated. We have removed the 4 different topics that piece together the rules and consolidated them into one easy to read and easy to access topic!

Note that none of the actual rules have changed, we have merely reworded everything for clarity.

If you have any questions on the rules please feel free to post here for more clarification - your questions and suggestions are always appreciated!!!

IT IS EVERY PLAYER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO READ AND UNDERSTAND THE RULES

Nice job on updating the rules It is all really clear and packed together now.

I do have a question about the disconnecting part. I thought I finally knew how the penalties work, but the new rules section seem to suggest otherwise.

So here is what I thought the rule was:

iightfyre wrote: The DC penalty has been implemented! Now, when a player has a suspicious DC from a game you can post in the LIHL forum to have the ELO adjusted! The mods will be responsible for adjusting the ELO as it will not be handled automatically (so that no one will get punished for bot crashes, etc.).

I thought that this means that if and only if there is suspicion of a PP the ELO will get adjusted. This led me and Eldryan (and maybe others) to think this:

mickeythemousie wrote: Lol in fact eldryan is right. In the current system you are allowed to pp on pain of an elo reduction.

In other words: the dc penalty is there for possible PP, and 'normal' discs are not punished.
In the rule section it actually is different again. First of all, the 'suspicious dc' is not mentioned:

4. DISCONNECTING If a player DC's during a game, a DC penalty may be enforced whereas the DC'ed player will lose ELO and the remaining players will all gain ELO.

Second of all, a suspicion of PP will be further investigated:

Any suspicions of intentional "Plug Pulling" will be investigated by the Moderators.

This leaves me quite dazzled. What is the 'disconnect-rule'? Is it to punish PP by taking their ELO, or is it punish disconnecters by taking their ELO? (And PP a different rule which is punished differently)

I hope you can see where my question lies. The initial reason for elo-reduction was to punish PP. And if it is this, it seems strange that it should be again punished separately by an investigation, since the original ELO-reduction is already aimed at punishing PP. But now it seems like the rule is not for PP but for disconnects, and that a different rule is installed for PP. So my question is either of those two, depending on your answer on the above question:

1. If your answer is that the rule is there for all disconnecters: Why did the ELO-reduction system change from aiming at punishing possible PP to punishing all disconnecters?
2. If your answer is that the rule is still only there for PP: Why is the ELO-reduction for PP there at all if you are gonna punish any disconnecters separately by investigation anyway?

Hope you can answer this for me, because I am quite confused.

Again, splendid job on the new rules section! This one is just a bit unclear for me.

Thanks for your question, Mick. I think it leans more towards #1 let me try to clarify.

MickeyTheMousie wrote:1. If your answer is that the rule is there for all disconnecters: Why did the ELO-reduction system change from aiming at punishing possible PP to punishing all disconnecters?

The DC penalty applies to all disconnects. I would not say that anything has "changed" - this is how the system was intended to work. The idea was that if ALL DC's get punished by losing ELO then we could deter anyone from PP because there would be no investigation needed. It would be black and white "You DC, you lose ELO" - so the act of pulling the plug would actually cause a player to lose more ELO then merely losing the game. (-20 ELO vs -15 ELO). Then, on top of this, anyone who was still attempting to PP and take the ELO loss would be investigated and potentially lose their right to play in the LIHL.

Does this make sense? I'm trying to word it so that it does, but we can discuss further if I need to be more clear on the subject.

PS -

MickeyTheMousie wrote:The DC penalty has been implemented! Now, when a player has a suspicious DC from a game you can post in the LIHL forum to have the ELO adjusted! The mods will be responsible for adjusting the ELO as it will not be handled automatically (so that no one will get punished for bot crashes, etc.).

- I believe that I wrote this unclearly. It does imply that only suspicious DCs will get a penalty but that is not how the system was designed to work. That's my bad on that post.

Thanks, it makes things perfectly clear . I really believed that only suspicious DC's would get ELO-adjustment, and in my experience a big group of the LIHL-community did so too. This was indeed probably caused by the term "suspicious DC". Also, 2 posts later Supersexyy added this:

Supersexyy wrote:Note: all games that are remotely suspicious will get an elo penalty. If you were obviously losing and genuinely DCed then bad luck.

EDIT: Also the "how to post a dc penalty request?" thread seems to suggest it needed to be suspicious:

iighfyre wrote:Subject should be "DC Penalty Request"

Here is an example of the body that we recommend:

DC Penalty request - Player DC at level 18 after a fail send on level 17. Please review:
https://entgaming.net/findstats.php?id=1437257

Thank you

Keep it short and sweet please!

Why should you state something like "after a fail send"? That would only be relevant if it is a suspicion of pp. If this does not matter you will only have to state that he DC'ed. (I added this just to show there was reason for confusion ) /EDIT

I think it is good for everybody to know now that the disconnect does not have to be suspicious, but that all disconnects will get an elo adjustment.

Thanks for your quick and enlightening response!

Rules looking good and clear now, but I have two questions:
1) What f someone DCs after level 20 and the game isn't drawn. The DCer gets the usual penalty I guess. But are the other people (especially the winners) still getting a few extra ELO? Would be a bit strange if the winners get a bonus for winning 4vs3 lol.
2) I remember a rule which said if all players but one !draw the game (for what ever reason), the last player has to !draw aswell, but I can't see this rule anymore. Is it still there or not?

Thanks Diablo for your questions, here is some clarity:

1) Unfortunately, this is the only way that we can adjust the ELO. So in this case, the winners will receive a "bonus" even if they won 4v3. :/

2) Thanks for pointing this out! That rule has indeed been removed. Anyone has the right to hold out on the !draw vote after lvl 20 now, it is purely optional.

3. THE !DRAW RULE

If any player DC's prior to lvl 20 then it is mandatory for the remainder of the players to !draw the game.
If a player DC's after lvl 20 then !drawing the game is optional.

There was a question about this in a game we just finished. Ygg (east) dced few seconds after level 17 started in which east sent demons etc. Everyone but Drahque (east) voted to draw immediately but Drahque was argueing that this isn't fair cause nothing changed for us for this level, so he didn't draw. After several minutes of argueing (we paused the game, it was still uncertain what will happen on this level) we then decided to not draw (since Drahque didn't) and play the game till the end.
So it would be nice to make this rule a bit clearer. Are we supposed to !draw immediately or let the current level finish? It's true that in this case nothing changed for us for this level, but what if someone of our team had dced? Then we would be one heal short etc.
Easiest solution would be to draw immediately and not finish the current level. A sometimes fairer, sometimes unfairer solution would be to play the current level to the end and then draw if the game isn't over.

It is compulsory to draw the game when someone has disconnected. This means that as soon as someone disconnects everybody should !draw should draw immediately and the round will not be played out.

Thank you for noticing, I will adjust the rule in such a way that this becomes clearer.

I disagree. I think if someone drops, everyone should play the round out and then !draw. Reason I say this, is because if a team has been saving up since lvl 12 to send on lvl 17 and someone drops right when 17 starts, its unfair to the team that saved. If both teams hold...... !draw, if one of the teams fails, then they lose. Just my thought....should we vote on this?

For me there is no reason to vote on this. "We" have decided to draw after someone disconnects because otherwise it will give unfair (dis)advantages to themselves and the other team. This point is defeated if you play the next round out. Besides, why is it unfair if you saved for the next round, and not for 2 rounds after? So if you save from lvl 10 to lvl 17 it is unfair if someone disconnects before 17, but not if he disconnects before 16?