Hi everyone,

I wanted to bring up a fustrating situation that happened to me during the Top Cut of a Store Showdown, and get the community’s opinion on both the judge ruling and the wording of CEG 5.2.6 (End of Match Procedure).

The Situation

This was a single-elimination Top Cut match (Best-of-3).

• I won Game 1.
• My opponent won Game 2 by destroying my base.
• Time had already been called during Game 2.
• Game 2 finished during the additional action phase (overtime) and ended normally with my base destroyed.
• The match score became 1–1.

At this point, time had already expired and no Game 3 was started.

The Judge Decision

The head judge ruled that because time had been called during Game 2 and the match was tied, the match should be decided by remaining base HP, and since my base had been destroyed in Game 2, I lost the match and my opponent advanced.

My Understanding of the Rule

Reading CEG 5.2.6, my interpretation was different.

From the rule:

• If the game is incomplete after the additional action phase, the game is a draw.
• If both players have equal game wins in single elimination, the player with the most remaining base HP wins the match.
• If HP is equal, the player with initiative wins.
• If time expires between games, the player who would have started with initiative wins the match.

My interpretation was that since Game 2 actually finished normally (base destruction) and did not end as a draw, the HP comparison clause should not apply. Because the match was tied 1–1 and no Game 3 started, the deciding factor should instead have been who would start Game 3 with initiative.

Questions for the Community

1. In this situation, should base HP from Game 2 determine the match winner, or should initiative for the hypothetical Game 3 determine it?
2. Do you think the head judge ruling was correct based on the current wording of CEG 5.2.6?
3. Do you think the wording of 5.2.6 is ambiguous or could be improved ?

Just trying to understand the correct interpretation and see whether the rule itself could use clearer wording, I wish to no one what happened to me.

For transparency, I’ve already sent an email to FFG asking for clarification, but I haven’t received a response yet.

Curious to hear how other judges would rule this situation.