Player rating for offline Heroes 3 tournaments!

Actually, the conversation has long since drifted off course.

First of all, my entire idea from the very start of the "Best of the Best" tournament was that everyone should play from a single save. Impossible or normal—it doesn't matter... If you've forgotten, check the archives of our private correspondence or read the very beginning of the polemic in this tournament's thread. My last post regarding a single shared save simply pointed out that a single save would more likely be on impossible than on normal.

Secondly, so far I have not encountered a single reasoned comment from a player on "normal" in defense of your policy.

Nevertheless, you claim that "beginners" might be afraid to start on impossible, yet at the same time, you offer them a final battle against a thousand Black Dragons (and that's if they are very lucky, because after six game months, there will be 2,500(!) dragons). So what does this have to do with protecting beginners? A beginner will not beat this map. Because the start is the easiest part of this map. And if they do beat it, they are far from a beginner...

And thirdly, is it really harder to wipe out a legion of dragons than to build up a castle without any resources on the first day? Why is there constant talk here about the difficulty of the "impossible" level? How is it harder than "normal"? The only difference is that it takes a little longer to build dwellings and save up for troops... That's it. The problems of "beginners" lie in the fact that they find it difficult to counter the opponent's tactics (and normal and impossible have the same enemy strength), and the amount of starting resources has no effect on these tactics; it only matters if the encounter with the opponent's main army happens in the second or third week... In that case, if you haven't managed to build up and buy troops, there will be problems... But that is a specific and rather rare case on large maps.

To me, you have simply created a series of windmills and are preparing to attack them. I am trying to stop you and saying—"don't overcomplicate it, this is an illusion." Everyone who sent you a save on "normal" would have played just as well on "impossible" if there had been one save for everyone. Those who consider "impossible" an impossible starting level for themselves (specifically the start, not the game), will simply not send you their final save since they won't have one.

But politics and common sense, apparently, cannot coexist by definition. Therefore, I am distancing myself from the discussion of tournament balance. My goal was to identify and, if possible, fix "obvious bottlenecks" in the system, and in response, I receive statements like this:

That's exactly it, that this is your opinion and understanding, but users are all different and everyone has different opinions. Some play strong, some play weak!

Personally, everything you are proposing suits me 100%. But I made an attempt to point out the imbalance that could manifest regarding any of the discussed sides. But I will no longer speak on behalf of those who do not wish to speak for themselves.

AmberSoler is simply considering a situation for some reason where one of the strong players decides to play on normal in the tournament. Accordingly, he will receive a rating there that does not correspond to his status, since the advantages of the normal level over the hard one may be minimal, while the coefficient brutally suppresses with constant force, regardless of the quantitative indicator of these advantages, because determining them by some other coefficient is very difficult, if possible at all. But my question is: why did he go there? Or better yet—why would he go there if he knew about the assigned coefficients?

There is undoubtedly logic in your phrase. Only I was thinking of a completely opposite point, which for some reason you stubbornly ignore:

Why did you suggest that "all willing" players participate on "normal" and then, long after the start, introduce a reducing coefficient for them for the current tournament? While you yourself agree that this coefficient cannot realistically reflect the difference between starting saves.

And if the introduction of a reducing coefficient is aimed at "pulling" players from normal to impossible, then why introduce normal in the first place? That's what I can't understand! :D Moving in circles...

What difficulty level did you yourself start playing Heroes on? I'm 90% sure it was NORMAL!

Actually, no! Nothing of the sort! I started playing on "knight," because the "normal" level was a bit too difficult for me... And I thought playing above "rook" was completely impossible! :D