The Asterisk Game

[ErMurazor]

Well, the decision was clear before the second game. Everyone was happy to move on after game two. Again, Jiggly says as much. The second sim, for all intents and purposes, should have been the final one.

It seems to me that the only reason this is even up for debate at all is because rosters were changed between sim two and the unforeseen necessity of sim three, so now game two is no longer the final legitimate sim.

That's where the fuck up is. There has been an oversight by the HO/simmers, from what I can tell. Nobody considered the implications of introducing another variable, so now they have to make a call (which it appears they have), and yes, this decision should have been made clear prior to the third sim.

But it wasn't. So now it needs to be clarified and codified for future reference. That way, if the situation arises again, everyone knows where they stand, and there are no arguments.

The change in the player is 100% on me. There were issues with a GM's DC that created holes in it in the sim. In the first game a suspended (Banned?) player was then pulled into the DC to fill those holes. Since we were doing the re-sim, solely because of the issue with the game file, I removed the banned player from the roster to prevent them from playing and had to add a player to meet roster minimums. I probably should have added a bot and moved on, but I added the player the GM failed to add earlier in the week creating the additional variable.

If you take out that aspect, it's still my fault there's confusion! Previously when there were issues caused by the game file itself (SJ vs YK) games were re-simmed to the same result. That should have been done in this case. Of course, yesterday was the first day of somebody trying simming for the first time. I did not tell them follow that precedent and I was not watching the stream, so I didn't realize it until too late.

Obviously the situation sucks to have a loss taken away. A team won the original sim and the software bugged out. If that hadn't happened we would have moved on and had no issue. Any grey area that arises because of a player being changed should not have an impact on the result of that game. If I had removed the banned player (which to be honest, I wasn't entirely sure on if he's banned or what is going on?) there would be no question, I fucked that up. But if the GM had done the job they're paid to do there also wouldn't have been an issue. I don't think setting the precedent that you not doing your GM duties entitles you to a re-sim is a good one to set.

Edit: I also don't think this should turn into a shit on Jiggly party. For the record, there is only one DSFL team I would want me player to play on. At some point over the last season and 2 weeks every other GM has slacked at some point, though admittedly at different amounts. If we're going to attack on DSFL GM for being lazy/less active, it's not fair to only go after Jiggly. There is constant bitching about how the head office doesn't care about the DSFL. But holy shit there are some black ass pots in here.