I feel like if you get negative feedback from something totally OK to push for, and people are being inconsiderate, it’s probably time to find another meta. You’re right about courage, it’s an important quality in people.
2 Likes
Is that an option for most people? Around here, the meta is me and a close friend. That’s it. The nearest SC I’ve ever heard of is an hour away. Maybe it’s different up north or something, but down here in Louisiana, we have to take what we can get.
If I live in a big city, it seems like I have at best 2 or 3 options for ANR play at a serious level. Am I wrong?
3 Likes
If it was me, I would have yelled out to a friend,
“HEY if someone installs an agenda on top of an asset and then tries to score it the next turn, what do you rule as TO?”
and then when they inevitably say something reasonable, I give the TO a dirty look and say, “YOU SURE?”
;D
6 Likes
On the other hand, do they want to turn away the tournament players? They are the ones that buys every single pack that comes out, even if the pack only contains binder fodder.
One more thing, this was a nationals, the second-highest level of competitive play of a 5-tier tournament structure. They are competing for (among other things) a ticket to worlds, that alone should be a good reason to punish the corp in some way.
I don’t like this situation. Now the corp can overadvance a vitruvius with three tokens? Vitruvius with tokens are really powerful. Or atlas, or mf braintrust.
Also, the runner could actually have been in a better place the round before. He might have installed something thinking he had some downtime.
I think either give the runner the agenda (and it is not scored or stolen), or game loss for the corp are the only reasonable actions to take. The case that is presented in OP is not acceptable.
1 Like
So that’s how you won worlds! Good ol’ blame game. 
2 Likes
I think you’re right, since any decent player would’ve rezzed Eve with BBG before you accessed.
Nonetheless, we’ve seen multiple instances of TOs not only refusing to penalize for misplays in one’s favor / cheating, but rewarding misplays when caught. These incentives are really going the wrong way.
1 Like
Cheating or not cheating I think is irrelevant here. It was quite a game changing rule-breakage so I would’ve game lossed the guy, and then bought him a beer.
3 Likes
Yeah. I would be inclined to be more harsh on the one making the mistake. In a game where hidden information is really important, you have to make sure you maintain legal plays when others cannot double-check you. The Corp player must be completely accurate in his plays. All runner errors can be checked by the Corp player. Runners thinking they have enough credits to play a card when they do not, using a BP credit multiple times, etc, is all public information that can be double-checked with the main loss to the runner of having revealed that card in his hand - possibly enough punishment in itself if that card is telling (like, say, Stimhack).
The Corp is another story. You must be accurate in your plays as the Corp an ensure you follow all rules. All runner strategy is thrown out the window if you can hide cards by feigning they are something else. I see two cards go into a remote , I think (asset/agenda and an upgrade). I certainly don’t think I’m gonna see two sexbots (love that term). My example is bad, but the point is valid.
1 Like
In France, that would be a strict and direct game loss.
I don’t know for the alt art of SMC. We’re not supposed to use alt cards in tournament (promo are allowed) but a lot of people does this for IDs and nobody cares.
I wouldn’t care for this (or use of proxies btw).
Somebody made me the same exact move on OCTGN a month ago. I was really pissed off because I could run there and I knew there was lots of agenda in HQ but couldn’t run HQ (first agenda after turn 10 or so…). This can’t really be clumsy I think.
I tried to stop the player from advancing while he was advancing but couldn’t then the opponent yelled at me, conceded and ragequit somehow. We could have replayed 
Been a TO and HJ for Mtg (nationals and stuff) for a lot of years back when Mtg was not so competitive so that i can understand the TO wanting to keep the game friendly and fun.
What I understand is that the Corp did not do that on purpose since it will be really stupid of him since the runner actually knows what is in the server. If the TO want to be light on the penalties, then he can opt to make the corp redo all the scoring turn by taking back the agenda in hand and giving him the turn again from the start, i.e. the corp lost one click and the info that the agenda is in HQ as a penalty, not more.
Trashing the Eve is surely the worst ruling that can be given.
Game loss is reasonable, but are you sure that you want to make and cutthroat and super competitive? I have seen this happen with Mtg and I personally do not like it.
Edit: You should insist on the unfairness of the ruling though, even if this made you look bad. You would not look bad or at least look bad at the people that do not get it. The TO looked bad, but he still gave the ruling. You should have insisted though and maybe an agreement could have been reached. This of course from a guy that allows takebacks from his opponents all the time, if the board state is not changed, even in the final of cronos protocol.
Cheers.
4 Likes
You forgot the info the runner had drawing stuff while “losing” his turn.
Illegal info is almost always a gameloss for the responsable in my book.
The runner gets his turn and then the corp takes back the agenda, not at the first turn of the corp but the scoring turn of the corp.
Edit: you are French, the most competitive players in TCG from the dawn of time (you had DCI before even the DCI in Mtg) and i respect that. So game loss is natural to you and i respect that also. Just different perspectives here.
Looks cool, I would do this in case of agenda fload in UK, pretending with any innocent voice I did not made that on purpose 
(j/k)
Lots of french players would have ruled gamelosses (both sides) aswell in the world finals. I know our culture is different, but installing without trashing an asset is not possible here. This breaks a remote lock and get mess with HQ lock
The corp had acquired illegal info on his R&D topcard aswell. Really impossible here in a national. In a store, why not. But a national victory must be uncontested here.
1 Like
Had the same thing happen in Belgian Regional today.
I want to point out that it was not entirely the same situation:
- in the situation described by the OP, the runner already knew the face down card was an Eve Campaign from a previous run. Thus he rightly assumed that the next card installed without trashing the Eve, could not be an agenda.
- in the situation in the Belgian regional, the runner had not seen the Eve Campaign yet (I believe the corp player had both Eve and Ash in hand, and unfortunately installed the wrong card). Thus, when the agenda was put into the server, the runner player could not assume it was not an agenda. In fact, he ran at that point, and when the corp player wanted to rez his “Ash” which was not there, then the error was noticed.
I’m not disagreeing or agreeing here with the resulting penalty, I just feel it is fair to point out that in the OP’s case, there was a misrepresentation of the board state (whether it was intentional or not), which was not the case in the Belgian Regional.
I do feel that in the Belgian Regional case, simply trashing the Eve could actually be sufficient, as the runner player then steals the agenda and does not have to pay for an Ash which was “intended” to be there. There simply is no case here where the runner would have ran but didn’t, because the agenda was not masked as an upgrade.
But I understand that as a community we are trying hard for “though but fair” rulings for this kind of things.
4 Likes
The thing about the belgian regional is that the corp already scored another agenda on this server with eve still inside, and let an adonis run for full duration also with Eve in the same server. I knew I trashed an ash in HQ at some point and it’s totally possible that it was the ash that should have been in the server instead. At this point, there’s no way to come back to the previous state since the previous state was like 5-6 turns before.
3 Likes
It is difficult to make a perfect call in these difficult situations. On the one hand, we sympathize with the player making the mistake, because really, we’re all human. On the other, we recognize the unfairness that has (presumably accidentally) been inflicted upon the innocent player, and want to rectify it. I think it’s reasonable to ask for a good call, but be aware that a perfect call will be rare.
When I played in the SHL, if I make an illegal play or outright cheat by accident, once it’s discovered, my first thought goes to “Is resigning the match appropriate here?” Something like not waiting for Clot to be brought out can be fixed and the game continue with minimal issues, so not in that instance. But double-installing an asset/agenda, having a whole turn pass, and then illegally scoring definitely qualifies. And remember, I’m talking about the SHL - no prizes, no trophy, no bye to a higher-level tournament up for grabs. In an official tournament, the onus of taking blame and responsibility is on the player who committed the mistake.
And whether it’s right or wrong, the level of the tournament matters. Mistakes in a drunken casual game at your house is not the same as mistakes at the top table of Worlds. The higher the stakes, the more important being correct in applying the rules becomes.
EDIT: Removed a bit I’m not sure I believed in.
2 Likes
The thing about the belgian regional is that the corp already scored
another agenda on this server with eve still inside, and let an adonis
run for full duration also with Eve in the same server. I knew I trashed
an ash in HQ at some point and it’s totally possible that it was the
ash that should have been in the server instead. At this point, there’s
no way to come back to the previous state since the previous state was
like 5-6 turns before.
Ok, I was unaware that the server had been used multiple times. I’m totally okay with the ruling, and as it was not my game, I don’t even feel like I have any right to agree or disagree.
Still, I think the situation is different from the OP post, where the intent of the play is more dubious. I think in “our” case, while a rules error was made, it was 100% an honest mistake.
Still glad to see this talked about, as we are in need of a firm guideline and me and the player from the situation described are both in favor of (slightly) harsher penalties at high levels of play than what is usually seen. Respect to him for putting his money where his mouth is, and offering the game loss himself!
2 Likes
I don’t see why this has to be so complicated. The TO doesn’t have to drop the ruling with the fire of a thousand blue suns, but this is a premier tier event and that means
Players are assumed to be familiar with the game’s rules, as well as the latest FAQ and tournament rules, and should expect all rules to be strictly enforced.
(Emphasis mine.)
I vote game loss. The TO can be gentle with the explanation - “there’s really no fair way to unwind this situation after making an error like that, so we can’t continue the game” - but the rules need to be followed properly. There’s always game 2 and the other rounds to play more Netrunner.
4 Likes
I’m not sure that applying the rules strictly is the same as applying them harshly, is it?
Even in the worst case of outright cheating (which we aren’t suggesting this case is), the organiser may choose to throw the offending player out of the tournament. Strictly following the rules gives the organiser the choice, it doesn’t compel them to choose one way or the other.
I think that the best rules will be ones that so leave that discretion with the judge. No-one wants to feel compelled to act in a way that ruins peoples enjoyment of an event in order to keep to the letter of some stringent rule.
Having said that, the subjective judgment may have been found wanting on this occasion. I wonder if it was a communication problem? (Did the OP categorically state that the installation mistake lead to their choosing not to take the opportunity to run the remote? It might be easy to miss the implication in the heat of the moment if not categorically stated.) It may just have been a bad judgment that rewarded an illegal play. It will happen, tournament organisers are people too (awesome ones). Occasional bad judgements are preferable to frequent unfun ones though.
I wonder what the opponent’s view was? I’m surprised they didn’t question the ruling if it didn’t seem fair for them to profit from their mistake.
It isn’t, but I’m not advocating a full DQ, just one game loss.
2 Likes