Messages

Setting the min/max level difference to zero in the Advanced Options allows only your friends to join the table.

L79  (39) JoMa  3 - 4  (118) tufftaeh

Rated, so Scavenger knows the game numbers.

It's the other way around. It works for reveal windows (e.g. Lurker), but not for ordering windows.

Ah, right, that's quite possible.
I believe I tried it when watching an Advisor or Envoy reveal, most probably not an ordering box (Sentry, Cartographer).
But does it make sense that these two behave differently?

Try to click inside the selection box but outside the card. That works for the ordering box at least.

For me, DESIRED_VERTICAL_USE = 0.37 looks fine. I have a quite wide resolution (1920x1040 = full HD minus menu bar, four rows of tabs, url control and favorites), however, so your mileage may vary.

[in the log]

Just in case Cave-O-Sapien's partially garbled quote still hasn't made it clear:
Right-clicking on the card names in the log (at the top, where the set aside boons are listed) works.
Really!

You can right-click on card names in the log in order to see the text.

First!

L66: (118) tufftaeh - (274) Der Quasi  4:0

#7925361
#7925965
#7926270
#7926719

The Overlord ceases to be a Wine Merchant as soon as it is on the tavern mat because it has left play. So you will never get it back into your deck before the end of the game.
Recommendation: Don't use Overlord or Band of Misfits as Reserve cards. ;)

... ninja'd ...

/Inn

... where can I sign up for round 3?  8)

match 122:

capuuh: no show
tufftaeh: waited for half an hour

Have you tried to set "Min relative rating" and "Max relative rating" both to zero in the "Advanced Options" after creating a new table? For me, that works fine and only my friends can join as players.

Taking statements at face value, it seems like Adam has a very specific request that doesn't seem unreasonable at all. You think it's impossible to clarify rules 8.3 and 8.4??

Not at all. But I think that the answers to Adam's specific questions are almost all obvious common sense.

I'm not making the rules but here is my guess what they currently mean implicitly:

8.3 Some games may be streamed by third parties.

Up to the round of 16, this can happen only if both players agree on the specifics.

8.4 From Quarterfinals onwards, every match will be streamed.

The matches will be streamed in spectator mode with delay and commentary. Moderators will decide about the commentators. If a player is unable or unwilling to have their match streamed or commentated by the selected commentator, they forfeit the match.

Organizers may influence the scheduling to ensure no overlaps.

Moderators will undertake reasonable effort to consider both players' time zones and other commitments. If a moderator decides that one player's missing flexibility is responsible for not getting the match played during the scheduled week, that player forfeits the match. This can apply to both players of one match.

In other words: Moderators do sensible things and if necessary, they take the hard decisions.

Does this help?

It's a little baffling to me that you seem to be arguing that it's better to turn people away from the tournament than it is to write a better rule set.

Not at all. I certainly agree that it is better to have good rules beforehand. But it seemed to me that it might be impossible to write rules which could be acceptable for you personally so I suggested the only remaining solution.