COMPETITION FOR MONEY $$$ (2012)

In any case, I believe that arguing about where angels come from in the game, how much money should be earned per turn, or why Deemer is so stupid and accusing newcomers of cheating is not a worthy pursuit for a gentleman.
Arrogant newbies should be fed manure.

Stop. It's obviously about this:

Obviously, in a fair manner, if the AI wasn't making mistakes, Deemer wouldn't have been able to win with such a power imbalance.

And as far as I understand, it's about all the units merging into one stack. This is NOT an accusation of cheating! It's a flaw in the game itself, which some interpret as a "feature."

Do you really think that a player of DmitryAS's caliber wouldn't be able to lose against Deemer if "fairness" was emphasized?

I didn't understand the phrase; does "lose" mean to be defeated? And does it require a certain level to lose? :D

Now, about Medstrax:

BACKGROUND

Arrogant newbies should be fed manure.

The thing is, this guy considers himself a true professional and ace player. Perhaps the best in the world (as of yet unknown) (and I'm not joking!!)

This is evidenced by the topics he created earlier, such as: "Can you play?!", "Campaigns by Maxuta-Phoenix," where he discussed how no mortal could complete Maxuta's "Magnificent Four" campaign, especially the first three missions. Particularly the third mission. It's supposedly impossible, and only he can do it.

And of course, his posts in the "[TOURNAMENT] 3rd stage of the annual John Van Caneghem Tournament (2010)" thread, where he argued that it's impossible for us, the forum users, to complete it and "gave it a try." Dirty even made a tournament based on it to show the guy "who's who."

There were also many posts about how the map is impossible to complete in one evening. Which I then did, and was accused of cheating:D. (although I was partly to blame, as I didn't make daily saves, and I had one save with a cheat; I opened it to reveal the entire map and use it for scouting, so I wouldn't have to look in the map editor. But the other saves were clean...)

In short, the tournament ended. He didn't confirm his boast that he would play better and faster than ANY player. And he disappeared for 2-3 years. He simply vanished.

leaving the phrase:

I can understand everything except one thing - na...v. It's a pity that participants use cheats and so on.

So, after all this, to call him a noob? A blabbermouth? I just can't! :D

Currently, there is a slow and difficult process of adapting, breaking down established stereotypes. Such as:

"I'm a pro!",

"no one plays Heroes better than me!",

"Maxuta's campaign is impossible; only I could do it, and maybe a few other mortals, but probably with cheats",

"if someone does something better than me in Heroes, they must be cheating, so we need to check",

"the obsessive thought that I am special",

"there's no one here who can teach me",

etc.

Please understand.

It was said long ago that:

recognizing your (noobish?) level of play is already a level.
not recognizing your level of play is noobism.

something like that. He hasn't realized it yet :D. The guy can't understand that not 1-2 people play better than him, but for almost ten years, offline tournaments have been held where people show results that he can only dream of. And there are about 50 of these people. And the fact that these results have been repeatedly checked for cheating by multiple people. Over the years, an offline culture has developed. You could say that offline has become a kind of e-sport in Heroes, although not a very popular one. (And to realize that you are a loser compared to them... the inner self strongly resists this, gets angry, curses, looks for excuses, looks for reasons to slander others, anything just to avoid realizing THE TRUTH)

And in principle, there is nothing wrong with wanting to check. It's even good. This is where the level and growth in the game will come from. I remember my first offline tournament... although that's off-topic.


Of course, I agree with this:

If conclusions about "cheaters" come before the results of "analyzing" saves, then it can only be cured with manure.

but it's hard for the person to realize that someone can play so much better than him. And without cheats. It's just impossible.

So let him check the saves. But he should also watch his tongue,

Medstrax, before shouting "cheater!"

1. first, find a suspicious moment, and look at it carefully; the answer may be obvious.

2. then, ask the person who completed the map, or here in the thread. And do it in a polite style: "How did you do this and that?", not "You did this, and I don't understand how, so you're all cheaters and jerks!"

3. if no one can answer you, then you can say that the person is a cheater.

And until then, there's no need to blab about your "suspicions!"

This is to avoid looking like an idiot-noob, a noob-idiot.

Otherwise, it will be like with the angels that only live in the Castle, and the computer that went the wrong way.


Can't you just ask nicely? Like, "I don't understand this and that moment here. How did you do this and that?" And then wait for answers and ask additional questions? Why are you alienating everyone? Does that make you happy? Why do you immediately shout that someone is a cheater when you don't understand something? Just behave normally, and everyone would explain everything to you without feeding you manure