Anyway cheating is hard to prove, because the most usual kind of cheating is cheating and then, if you get caught, say you just didn't know the rule/didn't notice/forgot. The point usually is that, if you know the guy you are playing against, you will usually know if he is the kind of guy who forgets things and doesn't know the system very well, or the kind of guy who knows every rule on their army and yours but curiously always forget or misinterpretes them on his benefit. I have known some of those and I just don't play them again.
No offense taken. And nobody called me anything. It's just I wanted to explain what happened as I understand it can be an eyebrow raiser that I played the pulpi.
I'm not convinced the Fireteam isn't legal: Special Fireteam: Core. Up to 1 Black Friar (Albedo, Biometric Visor L1) can join a Fireteam: Core of Order Sergeants. Special Fireteam: Core. Father-Knights can join a Fireteam: Core of Order Sergeants. This seems very similar, they are 2 different special fireteams, one allows a black friar to join, another a father knight, but players seem to take this one to mean you can have 1 of each in an Order Sergeant link, despite being itemized as two distinct and separate special fireteam Core options. I'd also strongly argue that "can join" is functionally identical to the Druze's less common "may include" language, they essentially mean the same thing. Similarly: Special Fireteam: Core. Up to 4 Dakinis and up to 2 Deva Functionaries. Special Fireteam: up to 1 CSU can join any Dakinis Fireteam. I've absolutely seen people running 3 Dakinis + 1 Deva + 1 CSU. This seems absolutely identical a situation to me, there's 2 entries, one outlines a clear X AND Y formula, the other offers an unrelated unit, and people mash them together.
That’s immaterial. We’ve long since moved onto slagging the Druze player as a cheater and the TOs either as incompetent or wanting to help a countryman cheat (instead of people just making mistakes), all from several hundred or thousand miles away, as well as casting aspersions on the countrymen of those who played against the Druze player (despite his opponents being good natured and the fact that saying, “yeah, this combination of events isn’t great, maybe folks could be more careful next time” is perfectly reasonable). C’mon, you need to get your torch and pitchfork and irrationally chose a side!
The languages differences are immaterial to the core message though. They essentially say the same thing, as I said "can join" and "can include" are entirely interchangeable.
The "AND/OR" seems pretty clear to me. The issue isn't that it's two separate clauses but that the first clause doesn't/can't interact with the second Compare it to the MO teams – A father knight doesn't care if a black friar is in the team and a black friar doesn't care if the FK is in the team. Two clauses but two independent conditions aswell.
Hey everybody. As my nickname was mentioned a few times here I would like to say a few things. Me personally have no troubles with Pupnik after our game at IP 2019. We both made mistakes during last round of that day and a few mistakes I discovered only in the night when I was making report in my VK group. I talked with the judges in the morning the next day and after the final game they told me my opponent accepted he was wrong. Later that day I wrote a post with all the details because many people from our community were asking me what exactly happened during the game and why the result was changed. I didn't and don't want now to blame anybody. That was a very tough third game of the day and an interesting story from the trip to tell the community - nothing more. For me it was more interesting what judges would do in a situation like that because I'm a TO more often than a player :) So I would like to ask everybody to refrain from accusation based on my words. We discussed with Pupnik the game and the situation afterwards and as I said to him I have no hard feelings after that game. Peace.
@psychoticstorm this might be a good high point to lock the thread at before it cycles around again lol
I am exponentially disappointed by the behaviour expressed in this thread and I would like to not see it repeated. There are ways to discuss and address such potential issues and discuss how they can be rectified in the future, none of these were present in this thread. Thread is closed.
