IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Europe directorship 3 Apr
sergio
post Apr 4 2004, 07:16 AM
Post #1


CXCC Member
***

Group: Life
Posts: 118
Joined: Mar 2003
Member No.: 58



1st-nellie
2nd-silent sniper
3rd-bill collector
BLT-sideshow joel
ALT-longshadow

ish sucessfuly defended.
ish deck:
1 Build Site
1 CorporateSoft™ DevCampus
1 Hasaku Playground
4 Ops Center
1 RakanWare Superstore
1 Temple of the Grom
3 AP Turret
3 Core Control Officer
4 Drums Mahoney
1 Emergency Action Force
4 The Shooter
4 UN Corp of Engineers
3 UXB Team
1 Many Options
4 Insight
3 Reconstructive Nanoprobes
4 Score!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Josh
post Apr 4 2004, 11:47 PM
Post #2


Forum Moron
***

Group: Life
Posts: 143
Joined: Jan 2003
From: Riverside CA
Member No.: 18



Many Options isnt C/UC..............
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Finalizer
post Apr 4 2004, 11:47 PM
Post #3


Squawk?
**

Group: Life
Posts: 52
Joined: Feb 2003
Member No.: 54



QUOTE
4 UN Corp of Engineers
3 UXB Team
1 Many Options
4 Insight
3 Reconstructive Nanoprobes
4 Score!


Don't mean to raise a fuss here, but isn't Many Options, a rarityless card, supposed to be outlawed in this format?


--------------------
The Finalizer
All hail Emu! That is all!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Game Keeper
post Apr 5 2004, 04:17 AM
Post #4


Young Adolescent
***

Group: Life
Posts: 105
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No.: 241



I agree, I heard a fuss before from KLAW (or someone important) that it wasn't just "no VR/R", it was "UC/C only"

It's an interesting deck anyway.

This post has been edited by Game Keeper: Apr 5 2004, 04:17 AM


--------------------
"So much depends upon
a red chopper bois
glazed with albative armor
beside the white beat and rushers."


-- Based on a poem by William Carlos Williams.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nellie
post Apr 5 2004, 12:23 PM
Post #5


Desperado
*

Group: Life
Posts: 4
Joined: Jan 2003
Member No.: 19



I made quite a big fuss losing to it. My view is

a) the text of the format is specifically "uc/c only"
b ) the spirit of the format is to allow newer players with a small collection ($50ish uc/c guide set) to compete with the suitcases. The only way to get act 3 hq and many options is to buy a megabox (or box) respectively. Hence if those are allowed, in addition to the 50ish for a uc/c set, you need to spend another 75 on a megabox and box.

An interesting aside is that the director cards aren't precisely legal in the format as written (and questionable with the spirit), so a ruling from the CXCC on all cards with no rarity should be made.

Also, clarification on if uc/c promos are allowed should be made. As written, CX Open format appears to allow them, but it seems somewhat contrary to the spirit Klaw has said is behind CX Open.

I don't blame Ish for using it. He asked if somethign was legal (though it seems pretty clear from the text of the format it isn't). The judge said it was legal, so he used it. I think the Judge made an extremely bad call in this case, but they're there to make those calls.

A definitive ruling from the CXCC (and perhaps a change of the text of the official CX Open format) is in order.

Note that it 'probably' wouldn't have mattered in the game. It would have prevented Ish from playing a core control officer, and an insight, which would have bought me a turn, in which I could have gotten 2 8 fp assets through his defense. A turn 'probably' wouldn't have been enough, but now we won't know.

Nellie

This post has been edited by nellie: Apr 5 2004, 12:24 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Game Keeper
post Apr 5 2004, 08:55 PM
Post #6


Young Adolescent
***

Group: Life
Posts: 105
Joined: Nov 2003
Member No.: 241



From what I heard, promos are banned too this month. There was a discussion about this a few weeks ago, so I don't know if someone authoratative was at the discussion. But what it sounded like was if the card wasn't a non-promo C/UC, it would be banned.


--------------------
"So much depends upon
a red chopper bois
glazed with albative armor
beside the white beat and rushers."


-- Based on a poem by William Carlos Williams.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Utopian
post Apr 5 2004, 10:49 PM
Post #7


Nearing Adolescence
**

Group: Life
Posts: 88
Joined: Mar 2003
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canda
Member No.: 60



QUOTE
An interesting aside is that the director cards aren't precisely legal in the format as written (and questionable with the spirit), so a ruling from the CXCC on all cards with no rarity should be made.


Nellie, the director can always play his own director card regardless of format. What would be the point of being Director when you can't play your own card.

QUOTE
A definitive ruling from the CXCC (and perhaps a change of the text of the official CX Open format) is in order


You're serious? Klaw is member of the same group. Where's the inquisition!!

From previous tourneys where promo was allowed in UC/C only decks, it was required that we remove VR and then R from the Manage Deck screen. So as long as the remaining cards did not generate VR/R, the card was legal. (eg Project 1)
From the discussion here, I am assuming that this is what Klaw had refered to as being a legal card or not.

I would rather see it as 'pick uc and c from collection' and whatever is leftover would not be legal.


--------------------
"You thought I was here, but I am not, so leave me a message." - Utopian Ware
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kosh K95x
post Apr 6 2004, 02:21 AM
Post #8


Desperado
****

Group: Life
Posts: 381
Joined: Jan 2003
From: Largo, FL
Member No.: 37



QUOTE (Utopian)
Nellie, the director can always play his own director card regardless of format. What would be the point of being Director when you can't play your own card.

Specific format rules aside, I would prefer the rule to be that the only Director card that can be played is the one for that map. That way, a sitting Director gets to use the Director card to defend his seat. That makes sense. But I don't think that a Director card should be used in order to obtain other Directorships.

However, I do agree that banning the Director from using the Director card during the challenge match due to the format would be going against the "flavor" of the Director's tour.

QUOTE (Utopian)
From previous tourneys where promo was allowed in UC/C only decks, it was required that we remove VR and then R from the Manage Deck screen. So as long as the remaining cards did not generate VR/R, the card was legal. (eg Project 1)....
I would rather see it as 'pick uc and c from collection' and whatever is leftover would not be legal.

I thought I remember seeing a Director's tourney ruling that clarified rarity based formats as the "pick so-and-so rarity from collection" that you mentioned. The CXCC site (and consequently the list of rulings) has been revamped, so I can't verify this statement.


--------------------
- Kosh K95x
"That's because it's so full of mercy!" - Nicholas D. Wolfwood
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nellie
post Apr 6 2004, 10:24 AM
Post #9


Desperado
*

Group: Life
Posts: 4
Joined: Jan 2003
Member No.: 19



http://cxcc.org/protour/faq.htm

This is the page I was using for rulings clarifications.

http://cxcc.org/protour/cx_open.htm

This is the page I was using for the CX Open format, note that at the bottom a special note that Promotional cards are not allowed appears (which I had missed the first time).

There is a reference to clarifications perhaps being made on the official cx forums. I would expect these clarifications under the "Directory Tournaments" category http://chronx.ipbhost.com/index.php?act=SF&f=11&st= however, nothing is apparent there either.

In none of the places where a ruling of this sort should be posted, is it. Perhaps it's been released to the judges, in which case Sergio must have made the correct call. If that's so, I would humbly apologize, but still ask for all rules clarifications to be made public at some point (fine to give somebody an advantage for a tournament if they bother to ask about it, but don't punish those of us who assume a pretty clear text is really clear more than 1 tournament).

Yes Utop, Klaw is the head of the CXCC. I don't think I ever implied he wasn't. By asking the CXCC for a ruling, I was essentially asking Klaw for a ruling (or, if Klaw is away for an extended period of time, whoever is 2nd on the CXCC, etc. etc. etc.). No need for an inquisition (though a good old fashioned inquisition might be a suitable punishment for the CXRC) :-)

A ruling in one of the aforementioned locations would be greatly appreciated, to avoid confusion in the future.

Nellie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Capowski
post Apr 7 2004, 03:43 AM
Post #10


CXCC Member
**

Group: Life
Posts: 47
Joined: Jan 2003
From: New York
Member No.: 39



i guess im the #2 cxcc dude.

not really sure. probably a 4 way tie for 2nd (sergio, matt, crash & myself)... all of us a few notches below klaw.

i haven't talked to other members of the cxcc about this yet, but i plan to. my initial instinct (don't hold me to this) is to do the following:

only cards specifically labelled as uncommon or common are allowed for the month. the only exceptions are:

1) you can use the director card of the MAP you are using.
2) any redclaw movement member can use a sprinkling of VRs and Rs in their decks.

again, i need to talk to Klaw and others, but that's my instinct.

also, as a heads up to the community and to the cxcc, i might as well put this out here now... i am on assignment (work) from april 12 though april 27th. i probably will have no internet access during this time... so no judging or playing CX for me.

This post has been edited by Capowski: Apr 7 2004, 05:16 AM


--------------------
-Capowski
CXCC Member
RedClaw Movement Faction Leader
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Metal Knights
post Apr 7 2004, 06:47 AM
Post #11


Desperado
***

Group: Life
Posts: 156
Joined: Jan 2003
From: Toronto Canada
Member No.: 27



If there's no ruling against a certain aspect where it's not indicated in the PRO rules, then it's up to the Judge to decide what goes until a decision is made by klaw.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nellie
post Apr 7 2004, 09:22 AM
Post #12


Desperado
*

Group: Life
Posts: 4
Joined: Jan 2003
Member No.: 19



Thank you for adding nothing whatsoever to the discussion MK :-)

I'm reasonably certain everybody here recognizes that it was Sergio's call to make. What's being discussed is if it was the proper call to make.

At least 1 CXCC member seems to at least partially agree with me on this issue, that it wasn't.

So now we have conflicting policy positions from 2 CXCC members, which even more strongly supports a call to have a definitive ruling before tomorrow's tournament.

Nellie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kosh K95x
post Apr 7 2004, 12:28 PM
Post #13


Desperado
****

Group: Life
Posts: 381
Joined: Jan 2003
From: Largo, FL
Member No.: 37



Cappy, please add one more exception: players may use Promotion HQs which are clones of the Regular HQ. It's probably something many would take for granted, but it doesn't hurt to spell it out.


--------------------
- Kosh K95x
"That's because it's so full of mercy!" - Nicholas D. Wolfwood
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CptHowdy
post Apr 8 2004, 12:05 AM
Post #14


Lil' Kid
**

Group: Life
Posts: 11
Joined: Feb 2004
Member No.: 275



straight from the rules page=="You may always use Promotional HQ's that are regular HQ "clones" (25 HP with no specials, such as the Anniversary HQ's, BN2HQ, Faction HQ's etc...). You may NOT, however, use any other Promotional or Special Edition cards in the Open". Dont think we need to clarify this anymore or do we?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th January 2020 - 04:26 PM