Effective immediately, teams will no longer be allowed to intentionally drop a player in the 2v2 set to "mineral feed" their teammate before mineral feeding is allowed. Doing so will result in a forfeit for the violating team.
If a team intentionally drops after an ineffective proxy/cheese tactic before the 5:00 minute mark, this will also mark as a potential forfeit. The replay may be reviewed and teams punished for abuse.
We will monitor the progress of matches with this new rule, and make changes accordingly. The new rule is now reflected on the rules page.
We understand that 2v2 is a controversial addition to the CSL league. Bring your concerns to our email inbox instead of your opponents who just want to play. Interpretations of the rule, and regames, are at the discretion of the Match Assistance administrators if two coordinators cannot agree.
Resource trading/feeding is still allowed after the 5 minute mark (the time when the game allows resource trading).
Edit: Clarification by shindigs
The reason we feel the need to ban dropping players to "mineral feed" before the allowed time (5:00 minute mark) is that it goes against the integrity of the 2v2 set in CSL.
As you all know, we polled the community at the beginning of the season and found that 2v2 was quite the controversial topic. We ultimately decided to keep 2v2 for the following reasons:
1) 2v2 has been a part of CSL since the beginning and is part of the identity of the league
2) It adds an extra dimension to match play
3) It can expand the variety of players a school can field without having us to extend to longer formats (bo7, bo9, etc)
4) It makes representing your team more accessible to those who are not as 1v1 competitive.
Utilizing a player drop for fast mineral feeding completely defeats the purpose of a 2v2 match. It effectively turns the matchup into a 1v2 within seconds of the game.
Yes, players should explore new and unique strategies that push the boundaries of the game. However, the drop strategy is outside the scope of 2v2 and removes the essence of 2v2. Intentionally having a teammate not play a 2v2 by dropping is not merit for a team strategy. The strategy also takes a lot of quality out of the games, and is against the integrity of the league and the 2v2 set.
Intentionally dropping a player to gain resources BEFORE resource sharing is allowed is an obvious step outside the intended scope of play.
The 2v2 does not exist so people can intentionally not play it. We still allow resource feeding and unit control after the 5:00 minute mark, because it is still within the boundaries of the game.
What can be defined as "the boundaries of the game" is obviously up to debate. With semantics aside, our main concern is keeping the league fun to play, and having as many people play their game as possible. Intentionally having on player NOT play their 2v2 match for an advantage goes against the intentions of our league.
We will continue to modify the rule accordingly, but keep in mind we solely aim to prevent early mineral feeding.
FAQ
Q: Can we still mineral feed after the 5:00 minute mark
A: Yes
Q: What if a school tries to worker rush/cheese before 5:00 minutes, and intentionally (no lag screen) drop, is it a regame?
A: No, it is a forfeit for the dropping schools (when there is no lag screen, we advise screen shots in case debates pop up).
Q: Couldn't another school disconnect continually and force a lag screen, making the drop seem legitimate?
A: After 2 drops, the opposing coordinator has the right to request a forfeit if the opposing team cannot sub in a consistently connected player. It's best to consult a match administrator and use your judgement to be courteous to your opponent.
Q: What about boundary case X, Y, or Z?
A: The rule is meant to prevent early mineral feeding through dropping a player. If two coordinators disagree on regames or forfeits, consult a match admin by posting in the Match Assistance Forums (the BEST way to get hold of a match admin, really!). The best thing to do is to be respectful and considerate to the other team and use your best judgement. Otherwise, we have match administrators and forums to settle disputes.
If you find yourself in a situation that you think is iffy and require match assistance, save the replay, chat logs, and anything to help us judge the context of the game before making a decision.
Hope that clears things up, let us know here if you have any questions or suggestions!
Subscribe via RSS
Comments (31)
oh i see what you did there.
If one team get's an advantage before the 5-minute mark (like, scouting a proxy), wouldn't this rule allow the team that's losing to just drop intentionally for a rematch? Even if it's just once so it wouldn't qualify as "trolling".
clearly if one team's cheese, such as a cannon rush, gets effectively stopped and they intentionally drop, you can always have the match reviewed as a cheating accusation as with any suspected intentional disconnects
What Phoenix said.
Obviously this is a tricky rule to implement with so many boundary cases. Like stated in the post, we'll keep it for now while we evaluate how we can effectively prevent abusive strategies. We'll also reevaluate the role of 2v2 in the league.
i think this is outrageous discrimination against the usc 2v2 team
WAHAHHAHAA HAHAHHAA
this is so funny :-j...
I thought there was a rule in place that said if any member of a 2s team left the match, their team would lose the match regardless if the remaining player fought on. This 5:00 mark stuff is really tricky and I don't like there being any kind of time limit in a game. Why not make a rule against a single player leaving instead of this wonky time thing
I don't even... LOL
So basically, this all started when my 2v2 partner and I were talking about what builds to use in the games during the coming week. Each week we try to think of something unique and this was something we hadn't seen done before. I talked it over with CSL veteran Nobody who is also in the CSL skype call. Must've reported us or something. LOL.
^ pretty much.
well we've gotten report about this happening with much more frequency, and talked about implementing the rule at the start of the new year.
Oh. Sorry. ):
Didn't know it was against the rules. Just thought it'd bring something interesting to the table.
u have an information leak. im not saying the informant we have is NB, but i can say it is definitely not.... not NB.......
zzz troll moar... im having a good time laughing =))
Hahaha this rule just brought 2v2 ambiguity through the roof
The rule change is open to discussion, feel free to post your thoughts on why it should stay/be removed. We will make changes (including removal) if necessary.
The rule change is open to discussion, feel free to post your thoughts on why it should stay/be removed. We will make changes (including removal) if necessary.
First off, let's not act like the strategies coming from this are unstoppable. If a partner drops to feed a zerg's ultra-fast 6pool, the other team can react by either dropping one of their players instantly (if a Z is present), or walling/cannoning fast (T's and/or P's). Remember that a player dropping is information revealed to everyone in-game!
If we decide that we want to get into eliminating strategies, however, we will need a rule that is much more specific and better worded. I'm a bit disappointed that this rule was enacted before the CSL admins and top players congregated to scrutinize it for possible exploits. Reading the news post in its panicking tone was pretty awkward. I sat down with RUchemiker from the Rutgers team this morning and even just casually chatting, we pointed out several reasons why the rule raises more issues than it solves.
To get you started, just one example:
Random 2v2 players. They are now allowed to intentionally drop before 5min if they don't get the race they want, and can then remake indefinitely to achieve a double race comp. This can easily be masked behind "Whoops we d/c'd" because of the high 33% probability.
For my personal opinion, I actually applaud whoever planned a strategy based on a partner dropping early. I think what makes StarCraft and the CSL great is how teams push the boundaries/rules to create strategies that manipulate the opponent whether in-game or in their heads. If a 2v2 team is truly great, then shouldn't they know the proper reactions to the given information? Some will call it cheese or at least a 'risky' strat, but isn't that the true CSL flavor? We do play Best of 1, after all!
I approve of this change.
@eXwOn
Why? Just wondering
@arthur:
thanks for pointing out this flaw in the rules
To get you started, just one example:
Random 2v2 players. They are now allowed to intentionally drop before 5min if they don't get the race they want, and can then remake indefinitely to achieve a double race comp. This can easily be masked behind "Whoops we d/c'd" because of the high 33% probability.
Going to think about how to prevent this, but yes it is definitely not allowed if we find it.
I agree this rule is iffy, I've been editing the post while thegilayboy made the initial post. I agree its a clever strategy, but it completely defeats the purpose of 2v2 in the league. I'll make a detailed post in the OP and we can move on with the discussion from there.
I think maybe if we just reword the rule to a more direct: "We will not allow for any "drop" strategies for early mineral feed". It's more direct toward what we want to prevent and there is less ambiguity.
Classic gee lah boi
updated, everything about this comment is referring to the old post without the edit for clarification. thanks for the input everyone!
I am very happy with the new wording, because the league's intentions on the issue are now very clear. Thank you shindigs.
One thing to work out before closing the case for good is the protocol for handling legitimate drops. In 1v1, such a situation is much more straightforward -- the game cannot continue. Either a winner is declared, or a regame occurs. In 2v2 however, the remaining teammate has full control and maintains the ability/possibility of continuing the match. Unfortunately we are restricted by Battle.net and can not resume from a save point.
Are there any instances of this in the past? (I'm sure there are) How were they handled? We will need to clarify the governing rule, and at what point the match assistance staff is involved.
I've never dealt with a situation like that, will consult match admins to see if its come up.
I can't think of a general solution right now. I want to see if we can pause the game and consult the situation. Obviously if a game is 50 minutes in, does it constitute a regame in 2v2 or is it gg for the dropped team? Is it fair to grant the regame? Definitely something worth discussing.
Will probably post more thoughts when I have food in my stomach and I can think clearly again!
Thanks for your devotion to the intricacies of the issue. I appreciate that you're tackling the issue from every possible angle, supported with articulate description. Glad to see that someone who is open to discussion and debate is in the proper leadership position. Cheers, and to a successful CSL in 2012!
Wow, thanks for the amazing compliment. Really couldn't have taken a step in the right direction without the help our match admins, NB for spilling his team's strats (we were going to implement the before, i swear), community members from TL (Chill, Torte De Lini, Kiante), and yourself along with everyone else that provided feedback. It's all a collaborative effort!
Everyone loves Tim, he's soh cooool
Wow u made my action sounds so dirty... its simply a kick to make the machine run smoother dont u think ;;)
"We still allow resource feeding and unit control after the 5:00 minute mark, because it is still within the boundaries of the game."
This implies that unit control sharing is not allowed before the 5 minute mark.. was that intentional? I've personally never heard of that before and dont really see why it would be a rule.
Although this is kind of off-topic, I'm still not really sure why double racing is not allowed in CSL.