Possible Unsportsmanlike Conduct?

Jussi wrote:

I have to agree with KevinM here.

Although I have some opinions of my own.
- Player "A" did not play well, giving his prey an oust.

Given the play to win rule, your sentence above is the undersatement of the year.
Giving your prey a VP and 6 additional pool is in most cases a recipe for disaster.

Given the situation that A's prey was at 1 pool (Anarch Revolt in play!), there is absolutely no compelling reason for him to
1 - stealth the bounced bleed through
2 - pump it up to ensure Eric gets ousted

That reeks. If someone tries that kind of bullshit to me in a tournament, I call over the judge. I would be tempted to think that A is having out of game considerations to oust me instead of his prey.

If A was a noob or a weak player, maybe I would accept his actions as bad play. However, this was at the NAC, so I have to assume that attending players are at least somewhat competent players and can evalauate the decks on the table base on their performance and assess the table.

And even further, if A was concerned that Eric would foil his first oust, there is absolutely no reason *not* to talk with Eric and see if they can find some agreement so A can safely oust (and then break the deal to get the GW, whatever).

From Eric's description the only direct conversation he had with A was regarding the suddened Villein, which was kind of hostile towards him and totally unwarranted.
So I get the impression that A didn't play to win, and that indeed there was some out of game consideration in play. Maybe Eric had forgotton to invite him to a beer the day before?

My conclusion: taking Eric's description of this table, there was definitely no bad play involved, but rather some other agende.

As an afterthought: it happens that players enter a tournament in various states of drunkenness. (I had the misfortune of experiencing such thing on one of my tables at an EC once.) If A was having trouble concentrating or getting has facts straight, I'd call that also unsportsmanlike conduct - if you sit down with other players to play VTES, you should be able to do so to the best of your abilities. Being drunk (or having a serious hangover) makes the game skewed and unfun for others. Judges are normally ejecting such players at top-notch events.

Perhaps the deck was perceived to be the most threatening deck for the Kindred Spirits deck so that player decided to make sure that it was removed from the game?

Not getting any points dafter that kinda shows how useful that oust was for him though.


Playing with a deck that seems to be a certain kind of deck, but isn't is kinda hazardous. Even if it "just" a harmless fun/stupid non-threatening gimmick deck. The other players WILL assume the worst if they have any kind of experience.

(Heh, my prey in Prague EC was playing with Panders who attempted to get titles via Crudases. He was very angry when I started torporizing/burning his minions with my deck said seeminly rather angry/frustrated: "It is NOT that kind of deck!" -Yeah, sure! What kind of Pander voter it is then? No hard feelings though =D )

The fact that you know (or at least claim) that you're playing a "trick deck" doesn't mean that the rest of the table sees it that way. The actions you describe don't make your deck sound harmless, on any level. Also, you brought out Lutz, that's like bringing out Una and then wondering why everyone wants to kill you.

I see no problem here, the !Malk decides you're a potential threat and ousts you. Situation normal. The fact that he/she ended up not gaining much by it is just bad luck (or due to an already losing table situation).

Why are you bringing this up here, instead of asking the judges at the site? What's *your* agenda, here?

PetriWessman wrote:

Why are you bringing this up here, instead of asking the judges at the site? What's *your* agenda, here?

Oh god, why so much aggression ? You were the !malkavian or have personal grudge against echiang ?

Maybe because his agenda is not being aggressive ? Because if you make the judge intervene, there is the real threat of "I believe you have cheated my of my victory" while here he can both more or less talk to people external to the situation without trying to get "compensation"

In any situation, cross table ousting is at best very risky and almost alway a bad idea.

In this situation, it was a bad idea. Unsportmanship would need for me a proof that he know it was a bad idea - like having a side benefit to do that, which does not seem likely.

Haze wrote:

"I'm not dumb."

Probably related: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect :)

I think it was bad play by your grandpredator, who lost his goal, ousting the prey, out of sight. That cost him the chance to get a game win.

Surely it wasn't your best idea to suggest a diablerie against your grandpredator. That way you upset him for sure. I would have been also if I were in his shoes. Furthermore it is not in your interest that your grandpredator is weakened, because your predator can attack you easier afterwards.

As mentioned by some before playing a most hated minion was another point, regardless what deck you played. How should the others know that you don't play many KRCs although you didn't show one before? Maybe your deck didn't run well and recovers. You were a threat, shutting your prey down, possibly bleeding for at least four at stealth and banishing minions plus doing pool damage at the prey in one action.

So I don't believe in a hidden agenda or unsportsmanlike conduct. It was simply bad play by your grand predator and to some extend by you .