Personal point of view:
Technically, it's against the rules of CL11.
In CL10, Stats could not do such a sub (before lineups were public even and due to site lag!) and did lose a slot over this with Beren and MotD less than helpful.
However, cheating is partially caused by this kind of technicalities that ruin the spirit of the competition. MHunters tried to sub and were open about it, they didn't secretly take over the account.

Audit panel point of view:
Isn't this what Ethics committee is for?
I would call for the Ethics committee to have a quick chat about this and send us their final verdict, and then we can all move on hopefully.
Given that the sub is done (by the organizers - Farah/TBest) and that the tournament has started, it seems to me that the mistake "is done". Reversing would punish the wrong people (Farah and everyone who joined) and we are not talking yet about possible picks being put in that can give valuable intel about opposing team's playstyle.
Following previous cases, if Ethics feels this is a violation, they can thus give AI a warning, a slot reduction for next season or a minor point loss.

Unless that question is specifically aimed at Edge.

In which case, why should Edge be the one to decide?

If a rule was technically broken, everyone has a legitimate claim to say the tournament should be recreated. So it's not directly aimed at Edge, but to anyone who has a problem with this. I would argue to leave the tournament as it is, but if someone really has a problem with it, i can't do much else than recreate it.

If the Ethics panel decides to recreate the tournament, (or even better, give AI a warn or slot reduction), that's a sign we need to get rid of this panel asap.

It's obviously not fun for MH.
It's not fun for everyone else in A to rejoin the tournament and redo their picks.
It's not fun for organizers to have more work.

Yeah the rule was technically broken, please be more careful next time. For now, let's roll with it and have fun.

It's absolutely ridiculous that people are hating on Edge for pointing out that a rule was broken. Are we going to have rules, or are we not going to have rules? "Even though that still technically counts as a sub, I'm hoping we can just agree that while it's technically against the rules, absolutely no harm has been done." - give me a break with that. Let's just make a simple fix (see #1). "Hey officer, I was driving drunk, but I didn't hit anyone so no harm was done, right?"

1) This seems pretty simple. It's against the rules. Seems to be an honest mistake. Put AI back in his slots and find someone else. Call it a day. Why is THAT solution a big deal?

2) Technically the tournament should not have started yet, so the fact that it has is not M'H problem. So don't complain about having to remake it. Or just make new M'H games and let the rest run. Just decide fast before teams put time into picks and the games all start for real.

3) Whoever is overseeing the subs should be checking this sort of thing.

Whoever decided a tournament with no games played in counts a slot is a dumbo.

No, they're not. They were trying to get rid of an exploit where you can check other people's lineups before the tournament started and then adjust your own lineup to the others with unlimited free subs.

slot != sub

Whoever decided a tournament with no games played in counts a slot is a dumbo.

MotD last season? -_-
And yes, that was a slot with no games played before lineups were even visible.

Edited 2/13/2019 11:30:43

Just to clarify i'm not misunderstanding:

We're talking about the slot-limit regarding a player, not about the sub-limit a clan has?

Oh, you're right. I got confused with subs and slots.

Full story for those interested because it's a similar situation:
I was in a slot in CL10 last season and I wanted to switch to another slot last minute because another player (with only 1 slot) wanted to play another template.

Site lagged in the last hour before the deadline (I was on mobile on vacation in Japan). I was able to do one sub (getting myself out and that player in his preferred slot), but not able to do the second (getting myself in the other slot) because the deadline for submission of rosters had passed.

I never played a 3rd slot, was subbed out minutes after the deadline for rosters had passed with rosters not online yet, and was not able to sub myself in again. I contacted MotD in the next hour or so. He got back to me a day later and claimed it was technically impossible and used the argument that I should have waited until the last minute.

So there, slots = slots, rules are already a lot more lenient in CL11.

Note: this should not have influence on what happens in this case. I would like that people don't have to go through such thing. Kicking AI from both slots (what happened to me last year) would be the worst outcome!


With respect to what Farah says: slot and sub limit are somewhat linked in this situation. Note that a player with 3 slots can never be subbed out and in under the current rules no matter how many subs you have anyway. So if you wanted to do that, you needed to put in a bunch of placeholder players and sub in your real players later without giving them (many) slots early.

Edited 2/13/2019 11:43:35

I'll repeat that if someone actually has a problem with this rule being broken and wants to see a recreated tournament, state so on this thread.
Edit: someone who plays in division A, that is. And before a game has advanced to turn 1

Edited 2/13/2019 11:42:46

Honestly guys, I didn't want to make this substitution. It's not like I saw the lineups and then waited until the last day to change things in my favor. Rogue NK went inactive for unknown reasons when we least expected it. He was our CL organizer and he really cared about that stuff.

1) Rules serve a purpose. We follow rules because we would like to achieve the purpose, not just to follow a rule. In case of this rule the purpose is to prevent swapping players after lineup-announcement and tournament start to manipulate things in someone's favor. However, we swapped players during that time, but not because of manipulation but because we had to - unexpected. Honestly, that was not an upgrade in our lineup. I even had to sub in a player who didn't really want to play in CL.
Simplay following rules for no real reason isn't really helping.

2) What do we want CL to be? A fun but competitive tournament or a tournament in which you just want to win your games, "no matter how"? Of course, we could put someone else there to play EU. Let me exaggerate this.
Let's suppose that I am the only remaining player in the clan who can lead a team to at least some points in Div A. Everyone else would most likely lose all games. Of course this is not exactly true, but you get my point.
Would you guys like to have someone in the group or would you rather have every clan fielding their best possible lineup?
Because, personally, I'd take 2nd option.

3) I accept that I somehow broke a rule, I'd accept any punishment from the ethics panel, however, that would be a reason for me to not continue with CL.

4) I should've just logged into RNK's account, goddamn.

To Farah, the stance of Statisticians:
* Yes, I have a problem with this rule being broken and it should be addressed to avoid that people think they can get away with the same thing in the future, but I personally do not think AI should be punished for it in this case (but that's not up to me to decide).
* No, I don't want the tournament to be recreated as this is not in proportion to what happened.

Full explanation on my reasoning:
https://www.warzone.com/Forum/330667-clan-league-11-division-official-thread?Offset=105
https://www.warzone.com/Forum/330667-clan-league-11-division-official-thread?Offset=115
Point 4 of AI's reply above shows why we should be lenient in cases like this.

Edited 2/13/2019 11:50:21

Thanks for your input Math Wolf. I do agree that a rule has been broken and i'll check the substitutions more carefully next time. It was around midnight and the tournament start was imminent, so a quick substitution had to me made. We have stated to guarantee a substitution to be made in 3 days; i stayed up late to make sure the tournament could actually start without M'Hunters and Statisticians having no team. I didn't check whether these substitutions could actually be against the rules as i wanted to get to bed. So again, if anyone wants to see the tournament recreated, be my guest and post it here. If someone does, I'll recreate the tournament and inform all the players which tournament gets you points and which one doesn't. There will of course be a 12-day grace period again for everyone to join.

Edited 2/13/2019 11:57:37

Edit: someone who plays in division A, that is. And before a game has advanced to turn 1

I am playing in this tournament on my alt and I want it to be recreated.

I don't think AI or M'H should be punished, I just think the sub should be made appropriately.

Outlaws is considering doing a similar switch of moving one player from one tournament to another and being replaced in their former tourney due to someone being unexpectedly not able to play, so if things stay the same we'll expect the same to apply to us, I presume.

If that would result in that player playing more slots than allowed, then no.

As i mentioned before:
"I do agree that a rule has been broken and i'll check the substitutions more carefully next time."
So no, this incident does not set a precedent as far as I'm concerned.

Why should AI be punished?

It's a general question of the competition and i asked because it didn't made sense to me to count it as a sub but not as a slot. Later i saw that the rules are clear so i pointed it out to make sure everybody is on the same page. If it's going to be allowed than take my posting as a suggestion to refine the rules in that regard.

Why do we need to make a huge discussion about it and expand it into a personal level? That makes no sense to me.

As a solution i think there are 2 options. Either a restart or there is an exception this season that others are able to do the same this season. In our case that specific player wouldn't have exceeded the 3 slot limit, but instead he used the 3rd slot now. So if we take him out of the other spot before that tournament starts we would be able to get that slot back (not the sub). MH would be able to get the slot back for Rogue, Stats for GOA and the others as well. You get the picture. And again the sub obviously still counts against the limit.

The later would be the easiest solution. I think that would be totally fine, since everybody is getting treated the same in the end.
If TBest thinks that this isn't an option than there should be a restart and obviously AI should be able to play Cookies again. If he wouldn't be allowed to do that in such a case it would be nonsense as Math Wolf pointed out with the example of his case.

AI shouldn't be punished. He made a substitution he thought was legitimate. I handled the substitution so in the end i should've noticed. That being said, I'd like to add one other option to Edge's propositions:
We agree that a mistake was made, no harm has been done and minor slip-ups happen when we work with manual creation. Therefore we just continue the league as usual and let this one slip under the radar. It's not as if M'Hunters gained an advantage with this.