Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Especially for R55Max. I'm writing in a different color because you wrote so much, but you don't understand what a chess timer is. A chess timer is when you make your first move, e2-e4, in one second, and you spend an HOUR on sacrificing your queen. Don't be an idiot!!! Time in battle has NOTHING to do with it!!!! How can I get this across to you? The idea in Heroes is the same. Save time on simple moves and spend the accumulated time on making serious decisions. Just as you messed up on the zombies, you will continue to mess up. Time in battle is a separate issue!!!! Is that clearer?
Write specifically for me why it's not relevant. After all, Max is right in some ways. For example, when playing Inferno, I watched a lot of Steam Amilu's games. He had trouble with the timer in the late game because of summoning, while his opponent didn't, even though he was doing everything as quickly as possible. Or here's another example: different factions have different starting conditions; with one, you quickly kill the neutrals, while with another, you spend a long time dealing with them. And you can give many such examples. Therefore, the conclusion is that the chess timer is unfair.
Ideally, it would be like this: a replayable campaign, and the battle time would start, say, after 1 minute of the battle. If this is not feasible, then the battle should be without a timer.