Auto-translated
1. We have a random map site, and only a few people play fixed maps. I honestly thought we would have a random map tournament.
2. I think that 200% will only prolong the game, but if everyone agrees, I'm ready to play with 200%.
3. It's a bit small. :)
From RP: Stinger, Starik, Bayazet, Napalm, Sil, and the whole of St. Petersburg play fixed maps...
and 1800+300 is the standard for fixed maps.
and 200% won't prolong the game on fixed maps; the guys in the forums have pointed out that the strategy for 160% is different from the strategy for 200%.
In my opinion, if we want to showcase fixed maps, it's only fair to play the game according to their rules. So, in my opinion, we need to accept this and, gritting our teeth, show that we are versatile and not just talkers. :)-
P.S. Of course, I would like the fixed maps to be presented not in the style of the topic about tactics, where Barb says, "We've been sitting on the repse for 3 months because we can't win, and at the end, there's a pack of dragons."
In my opinion, the main idea of fixed maps is that, with the help of the author's design, it is possible to maximize the tactical and strategic capabilities of the player, which random maps do not always allow. A fixed map should be rich in strategic development options, preferably with close contact, because the best gaming qualities of players can only be revealed through mutual "mixing" on the map. Simply creating a fixed map in the style of a single-player game doesn't really make sense, as the rate of development due to the map's specifics will be approximately the same for both players, and it will all end in a big FF with a lot of units – for these purposes, there is, for example, TK3 – some players from World have already become familiar with it. By the way, guys, how about participating in our TK3 tournament? I think the organizer wouldn't mind; we've only had 1 round so far – it hasn't even finished yet.