I wasn’t 100% convinced of the cheating at first, but after watching the videos carefully and seeing the sock puppet, it seems beyond reasonable doubt at this point.
1 Like
As heinous as this all is he’s probably got some issues he needs to deal with. The whole creating a second account fiasco seems particularly messy. As a Buddhist I should pray for his enlightenment.
4 Likes
Between the FB group and the cardgamedb thread, this is pretty epic.
2 Likes
We should probably split the discussion of this development into a new thread rather than keeping it in FFG Floor Rules. Does anyone have that capability?
1 Like
I doubt people would want a “this guy cheated!” thread. We could probably move on, I suppose. Don’t want to seem like a bunch of gawkers.
3 Likes
There’s obviously going to some discussion; I was just thinking that it would be best not to clog up this thread.
1 Like
You know, ready his response, it was a little TOO generous.
This reminds me of the old joke about the Democratic Republic of Congo.
2 Likes
Going home for the day, PM me if there are any new scandals
2 Likes
This is so beyond absurd, it would be comical if it wasn’t so sad.
Not that anyone has said anything to the effect so far, but I would caution against thoughts along the lines of “so glad the Netrunner community is above this” that I have read in the past. This isn’t a time for pats on the back, but more a time to double down and be vigilant to make sure our community stays as pure as possible.
9 Likes
TIL that Netrunner is facist. 
3 Likes
The problem with ID is that the tournament structure is not robust enough to endure it. As you said, you can go 4-0 in two rounds, then ID 3 rounds to get 14 point finish and have a decent chance of getting in. This is because there’s only 1 point difference between a Win and a Draw. (Someone that wins one game a round gets 10 points.)
What if Wins were 3 points and Draw was 1 point? Is 18 points still good enough to get you in? (Two sweeps, then ID from there.) (Someone who won one game a round has 15 points…) Three sweeps can usually ID from there, which I think in a 5-round tournament, anyone who managed a 6-0 record is probably good enough that they can stop playing in Swiss now… (That’d be 22 points in a 3-1-0 point structure… Definitely better than the even case of 15 points.)
There are very specific reasons why Tournament matchpoints and brackets are the way they are. We don’t HAVE to follow MtG’s lead in this regard, but if we aren’t, I would like to hear convincing reasons why we aren’t. Just because we’re not a Symmetric game is not enough of a reason to disregard their years of tournament experience.
On that note, Be Careful of heading down the rabbit hole of making Game State a shared responsibility. To an extent, it should be, but Magic learned, painfully, that making you keep track of your opponent’s triggers and helping them win does not feel good and is not something we want to try and enforce.
My only actual gripe with the floor rules (besides the insanity that is the Collusion section) is the ‘Revealing Hidden Information’ infraction. I could rant about it, but instead I’ll just accidentally drop a card and get a gameloss because reasons. 
Ultimately realize that these rules are to cover Unintentional Infractions. Intentional Infractions all go in that nice section labelled ‘Cheating’.
1 Like
[quote=“CrushU, post:152, topic:5257, full:true”]What if Wins were 3 points and Draw was 1 point?
[/quote]
Not possible - early Netrunner tournaments showed that. There really is no such thing as a “draw” in a match of tournament netrunner, just 0, 1 or 2 wins. Deciding a winner in a fair and consistent manner is not possible without seriously warping tournament decks.
I think CrushU meant you get 3 points for a win and 1 point for ID. I guess a modified (timed) win may be worth 0, 1, 2 or 3 points depending on what your feelings on determining the winner before the end of the game/punishment for slow play should be. If you win both games you score 6 points (If I’ve understood correctly)
So thus we have 0, 2 or 4 points. A two point difference between ‘Sweep’ and ‘ID’. If you go to 3 points/win… 0, 3, or 6 points. A three point difference between ‘Sweep’ and ‘ID’. Also the idea of getting an extra point for a Sweep is also to try and deter ID results. You could get 0, 2, or 5 points a round.
I did, but Numbers are Hard, and I forgot to take into account that an ‘ID’ entered for Netrunner would be equivalent to a ‘Split’ result. He is correct, that you can’t have a different point value for ‘ID’ than for ‘Split’ or else everyone that wanted to ID would report Split as the result.
Axioms that I’m working with: We want to setup a tournament system whereby the Best Players play each other, and then after log(n) rounds, those Best Players advance to a Double-Elim. You cannot know whether players actually played a game. All you know is what was written on the slip. Players that wish to ‘Draw’ wish for both players to gain the same amount of points for the match. So, scorekeeper has no way to differentiate between a ‘Draw’ and a ‘Split’, since both are reported as ‘1-1’. So, how do we setup a tournament so that we still cut to the Best Players? Remember that Best Players understand tournament mechanics as well as game mechanics, and will seek to maximize their chances of making it to the double-elim, minimizing the chances they miss out because their opponent hit 3 agendas on a single TME. (Playing a Game is Inherently Hazardous to Winning a Tournament.)
One way to do so would be to play single game rounds for swiss as well as elimination. Determining sides similar to in a Chess tournament. That’s a whole different can of worms.
4 Likes
One of MtG’s more elegant solutions was to make who Chooses to Play/Draw First in the Elimination portion determined by who was higher seed after the Swiss. This way, even if you are both the only undefeated players, there’s a reason to play it out, so that you’ll have an advantage later in the Elimination portion.
Is choosing to Corp or Run an analogous enough of a decision? You could use that for Netrunner, if ever it would come to a Random decision, let the Higher Seed choose instead. (But still have to play each side as evenly as possible…)
3 Likes
That’s a rather interesting idea, when you think about it… Since we have the computer handling the pairings anyway, the computer could randomly determine whether you’d corp/run… And make that part of the pairing printed on the sheet… We could have shorter round times (40 minutes?) and just double the number of rounds…
And now I’m starting to wonder if this might need to be split into a different topic. xD
Oh! And I forgot in my original post: HOORAY WE HAVE FLOOR RULES. Even if they’re bad (and I don’t think they really are), bad rules are way way better than no rules. 
2 Likes
Netrunner already has that, and more: as well as picking side, the highest finishing in Swiss plays the lowest seed in Swiss in the cut. You get an easier double elim if you do well in Swiss.
2 Likes
I’ve wanted to run a tournament like this for a while, but haven’t managed to get support.