DISCUSSIONS on “Rules for online games in HoMM3 and formulas for calculating player rating.”

I don't quite understand, if your rating is low, are you matched with stronger players?

And is it often the case that players are matched based on their rating, rather than a subjective assessment?

And most importantly, if you're afraid of losing, should you even play? What difference does it make if you're playing against a strong or weak opponent? If you can't beat the strong ones, then you're not a contender for the tournament winner.
That's the whole logic, in my opinion. And sooner or later, you'll meet them anyway, sooner or later doesn't matter.

If your rating is low, you'll be placed in a lower tier. Let's say the participants are divided into 5 tiers based on their rating. A player who doesn't care about their rating might end up in tier 4. When forming groups, they'll be matched with players from tiers 1, 2, 3, and 5. But if they were in tier 2, they would avoid playing against a player from tier 2, and instead, they would be matched with a player from tier 4. Or, they might also use double seeding (partially or completely separating higher-ranked players so they don't play against each other for as long as possible). This type of draw is becoming increasingly common. Pete, Scorpion, and I have used it partially, and I think others have too. While it's not difficult to determine the first tier based on a general impression, it's harder to assess players of average and lower levels. There isn't always enough information about them, and a subjective view will often be less fair than the rating.

I agree that you shouldn't be afraid of stronger players, but often, players of average level want to try to advance as far as possible, continue participating in the tournament, and enjoy the tournament atmosphere. A single "extra" strong opponent in a group is often a major obstacle. These judgments are somewhat abstract, but there is a rational basis for them, as I see it. This is especially evident in well-established ranking systems in major sports. I think the tennis system is the most suitable for Heroes. There, the 100th-ranked player can beat the 10th, but overall, higher-ranked players win more often. And based on the mathematical expectation, if a player is lower in the ranking and is given stronger opponents, they will lose more often than if they were given slightly weaker opponents. So, if they are given stronger opponents, they will win less often, which means the ranking needs to be adjusted to give them more chances to win. If a player doesn't care about the ranking and only plays for fun, then the ranking should not matter to that player. Let that person have a harder time and fewer chances to win, while those who want a higher ranking and fairly want to have more chances to win in tournaments will be rewarded because of these players.