The 6 drones a turn was pretty tough to deal with. John made sure that he was always in position to make me deal with 2 turns worth at the same time. The Hydran will struggle to kill 12 drones, without support from the stingers. If the WAX lets the Hydran sweep drones with his stingers all game, they deserve to lose. I'm pretty sure that John realized this, which is why he fired the HB's at my stingers when I launched them. I was lucky that he missed with one.

By Jack Taylor (Jtaylor) on Wednesday, June 02, 2021 - 04:29 pm: Edit

I agree with you Graham.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, June 02, 2021 - 04:57 pm: Edit

A hypothetical weakness of the hellebore is that it cannot be held when it is overloaded. It is only hypothetical, but if you can convince the Hydran to overload and not enter overload range, you can exploit the rearming cycle to get in, hit him at close range with your own overloads, and get out of overload range before he can rearm the weapons. Another is to "invite the overrun" after the hellebores have fired and before they can rearm. If the Hydran has not seen this maneuver before, and you can prepare it adequately, it can be devastating for the Hydran. (Involves a Range 3 tractor and the Hydran not having launched his fighters, I only pulled this off once in a tournament, and the Hydan I pulled it off against was NOT inexperienced but was a veteran player, so even experienced players can be caught by this maneuver, but I will say that it is highly risky.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Wednesday, June 02, 2021 - 05:34 pm: Edit

Indeed! Any situation where you can get your Hydran opponent to accidentally never get inside of R8 when the hellbores are overloaded is a good one :-)

By Justin Royter (Metaldog) on Wednesday, June 02, 2021 - 08:21 pm: Edit

I watched the wax (HHBB) vs the Hydran. I would say the hydran, during this battle, was on the verge of non-aggression for most of the battle he was literally refusing to engage and just running away. If I were a judge I would have warned him around turn 3 that he was not playing aggressively per the engagement tournament rules.

By Brian Evans (Romwe) on Wednesday, June 02, 2021 - 10:13 pm: Edit

Justin, you obviously missed the first turn when the WAX ran away. I would suggest you be careful about making accusations when you don't have all the facts.

By John L Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 09:51 am: Edit

I take it that the Hydran was aggressively shooting down drones!

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 10:49 am: Edit

"Non-aggression" can mean different things to different people. What is the definition? It's fuzzy.

The tourney rules provide detailed notes for judges on determining non-aggression. non-aggression notes

There are really only a few tactics that are defined as non-aggressive: Starcastling (which is complicated by the fact that it is OK to stop and even go speed 0 for a turn or two), retrograde (which is complicated by the fact that moving in reverse is not always a problem), and cloaking (which is complicated by the fact that use of the cloak is OK to reload, etc.).

Perhaps Justin has a low tolerance for tactics that he thinks may be non-aggressive, which may prompt him to engage in the warning procedure stated in the "notes for judges" earlier than other people would. Personally, I'd see such a warning as water off a duck's back, because it's is easy to overcome. It takes four *consecutive* turns of non-aggression to actually result in a judgement of forfeiture for non-aggression. So just be aggressive on one turn in 4 and you'll never get called.

Practically speaking, I, personally, have *never* seen a player actually disqualified for non-aggression. I would be surprised if it hasn't happened before, but at least in my experience it's very rare.

Judges seem reluctant to disqualify players for non-aggression because the SAME tactics listed as being "non-aggressive" get used all the time and are considered legitimate. I can't count the times I've used and had used against me starcastling, retrograde, and cloaking - usually in moderation or to deliver a coup-de-grace or try to avoid an overrun.

It's the overuse of such tactics that makes them non-aggressive - and overuse is hard to judge because the concept of "overuse" is subjective, nebulous, and messy. Because it's messy, we have the relatively long procedure required to actually disqualify someone for non-aggression.

I guess, the bottom line is that, for me, non-aggression has to be really really bad before I even begin to worry about it in a game. I wouldn't call it or even warn the opponent after even two turns of running around the map jockying for position. I'd only start the non-aggression procedure if the person was *clearly* being a "tool" and inviting me to throw myself on his spear without trying to come after me - and for me that is a very high bar.

I also don't want to offer what some may perceive as an insult by accusing non-aggression when the other player might just be jockying for position. So, again, I tend to give two or even three turns of "messing around" before I'll even invoke the first turn of the procedure. (Unless of course, they do something really obvious, like go into a corner and stop.)

Personally, I've never done so as I haven't needed to do so.

YMMV

By Graham Cridland (Grahamcridland) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 11:51 am: Edit

I know that "nonaggression" is a bugaboo in these parts, and not having been involved in the original conflicts, I don't feel like I need to be the person talking about it now.

That said, running away and not engaging at close range is not really the same thing as anything I have heard referred to as nonaggression. On a fixed map, running away is an inherently limited strategy, and maneuver and range control is the heart and soul of the game (at least in a tournament duel) so I would think that interfering with those decisions in the name of "nonaggression" would be... an odd decision.

I mean, every plasma ballet game involves one player or the other "running and not engaging" the whole game. People run away from fully loaded Feds or doubled Orions too.

[I also would not have realized that anyone would accuse a Hydran of nonaggression, given that passive Hydrans kind of die horribly to obvious tactics because they have no firepower outside R2 and not a lot of guns that shoot backwards.]

By Justin Royter (Metaldog) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 02:24 pm: Edit

I watched the entire game, yes, the wax corner dodged turn 1 but then you spent the next 2 turns literally running away with your #4 pointed at him the entire time, watched literally every impulse of this game. there are no accusations here, relax. I watched the entire game and to me the hydran was not in line with the aggression rules, its an opinion, take it or leave it.

you also more or less star castled on the final turn, if you think somehow your tactics were in line and not non-aggressive I do'nt know what to tell you. You literally ran away from the better part of 2 turns then more or less star castled on the final turn, the wax then made the mistake of engaging you instead of just running away himself.

Once again watched EVERY impulse of this battle and that is my opinion, don't really care if you don't like it, its just an opinion based purely on evidence and fact, lol.

By Jean Sexton Beddow (Jsexton) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 03:52 pm: Edit

Justin, I would suggest that if the two players in the game are satisfied, that you let it drop. If they have an issue, they can appeal to the judge who is Steven Petrick.

Jean
WebMom

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 04:49 pm: Edit

Just on the academics of "Non Aggression", as Ted pointed out, the original (first version) Non Aggression rules addressed three specific things:

-Stoping and TAC-ing

-Retrograding

-Cloaking

Running away did not fall under the rubric of the original Non Aggression rules. Every game sees every player running away at some point all the time. Stoping to TAC started the "Non Aggression Clock". Retrograding started the "Non Aggression Clock". Cloaking started the "Non Aggression Clock". Running away with your guns pointing away from your opponent didn't really and comes with a great deal of disadvantage (i.e. you aren't shooting your opponent, you are facing away from your opponent, you need to turn around to face your opponent, the walls restrict where you can go and give your opponent a reasonable idea of where you will be and when you will be there). The current non aggression rules are a lot more vague, yes, but basically "you know it when you see it". And I don't know that spending a couple turns running away is thst.

In my life, I have certainly played games against opponents who I felt were skirting up against the edge of (if not outright crossing over into) Non Aggressive play, as per the notes on Non Aggression. But most of those instances involved Romulans and cloaking (Romulan slows down to cloak; Romulan can't speed up due to being cloaked; Romulan comes out of cloak at speed 0 as it is less disadvantageous than coming out of cloak at speed 10; Romulan launches plasma and proceeds to cloak again, etc. for, like, 10 turns...), and very seldomly non cloaking opponents who simply move speed 0-4 for turns and turns and turns. I don't know that I have ever seen anyone who bordered on Non Aggression as the result of running away. And I see lots of opponents running away all the time.

By Justin Royter (Metaldog) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 05:31 pm: Edit

some very thin skins around here, lol.

By Jean Sexton Beddow (Jsexton) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 05:46 pm: Edit

Justin, enough. No more poking at people. This is an official warning.

Jean
WebMom

By Ted Fay (Catwhoeatsphoto) on Thursday, June 03, 2021 - 11:45 pm: Edit

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not offended. I'm just pointing out that different people can have entirely legitimate different feelings and ideas of what "non-aggressive" means in the SFB tournament setting. The rules are sufficiently nebulous, that's unavoidably, really.

He didn't, but if Justin were to call me "non-aggressive" for a turn or two, I (personally) would ignore it as irrelvant. So long as I turn in and go for a battle pass one turn in four, there's no chance I would ever be disqualified for non-aggression.

So, personally, I don't bother with trying to accuse opponents of engaging in non-aggressive play unless they're really, really bad about it. If Justin believes differently and wants to start the clock in a future game with him, no skin off my back.

Out of curiosity, does anyone have any *actual* instances where a player was disqualified from a RAT tournament using the non-aggression rules? I've never seen it, like, ever - but some of y'all play a lot more tourney than I do.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Friday, June 04, 2021 - 10:42 am: Edit

I think in the last decade, maybe 1 or 2 games ended up being adjudicated due to significant non-aggression. Maybe.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Friday, June 04, 2021 - 04:54 pm: Edit

Like, on a conceptual level, I think the *main* issue with tactics that are arguably "Non Aggressive" is that (generally speaking) one player is spending 15-20 power on moving and the other (Non Aggressive) player is spending 15-20 power on overloads/tractors/shield reinforcement and just sitting and waiting to get attacked. That is, generally speaking, why "Non Aggressive" tactics are a problem, if they are a problem.

If, for (an extreme) example, T1, I just move directly to my closest corner of the map, and then on T2, I just park and TAC for the rest of the game against the map edge, that is Non Aggressive play, but the main issue is that while, yes, I'm placing all the onus of engagement on my opponent, I'm also just saving a ton of power by not moving, which is funneled into overloads or tractors or reinforcement. Which is where the actual jist of Non Aggressive play comes from.

When someone is running away, they are still spending that 20+ power on movement every turn (and point their guns in the wrong direction), and yes, if they are pursued and cornered, they will probably stop and TAC on the next turn, but as the pursuer, you *know* this (i.e. my opponent has been running for 2 turns, they end up in the corner, I end the turn 8 hexes away from them, they are almost certainly going to stop the next turn), and can act accordingly, at which point, it isn't really an issue.

I don't think running away from someone (which, again, happens *all the time*, every game, for both sides, generally speaking) falls under the main rubric of Non Aggression, as they aren't getting any of the *benefits* of Non Aggressive tactic, with most of the disadvantages.

By wayne douglas power (Wayne) on Friday, June 04, 2021 - 08:41 pm: Edit

The Tournament fixed map is a good balance.

By John L Stiff (Tarkin22180) on Saturday, June 05, 2021 - 01:24 pm: Edit

A Gorn would love that kind of player. Close to range 10, launch 2 S torps (or envelopers), circle, and repeat. True, one has to go thru up to 4 WW's before any real damage is done. But the turns go quickly. By turn 13, it is like starting over except one player has no shuttles and is not moving!

By Seth Shimansky (Kingzila) on Saturday, June 05, 2021 - 10:05 pm: Edit

Please put in as a replacement if there is an opening

By Justin Royter (Metaldog) on Monday, June 07, 2021 - 08:40 pm: Edit

Just wanted to give a quick apology to anyone, especially Brian, that I offended with the whole non-aggression posting. I am sorry if anyone was offended, and I probably should have worded my post differently. I did not intend for anyone to feel that they were being accused of cheating or of not playing within the spirit of good clean competition. Again, I am sorry! Game on!

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, June 08, 2021 - 04:00 pm: Edit

All good from here :-)

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Friday, June 11, 2021 - 05:45 pm: Edit

Brian Evans (Romwe) in the Hydran and Justin Royter (Metaldog) in the Romulan FireHawk are the final match of Sapphire Star VIII.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, June 12, 2021 - 11:57 am: Edit

Final Round is Officially on hold. Brian Evans and Justin Royter will need to delay starting their game.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Saturday, June 12, 2021 - 04:57 pm: Edit

Brian Evans and Justin Royter can proceed with the final round. The issue has been cleared.