rebellious
Auto-translated
It seems to me, or can any topic be reduced to a SoD vs. WT argument? :D
It just came to mind....
No matter where you look, everything ends in a brawl like at a typical wedding. Although, it would be strange to see a fight between games. With each new iteration, this supposed rivalry becomes more amusing; the arguments may be dwindling, but the source is still active. In general, I came to the conclusion that, in reality, two types of people are clarifying their relationship, not antagonists (like black and white) – two shades of gray, for example, working in the same heroic field. But there is also a division, a partition like between old neighbors, behind which something enviable or contemptible is visible.
Enthusiasts added scripts to WoG, introducing performances with all sorts of Santa Goblins, second upgrades, etc., significantly changing the gameplay and making TE (WT) with balance. Not the best, not the worst, but different. But with promotion – more balanced and correct (only no one has seen the libretto for this "opera"). At the same time, the integrity, concept, and balance of the SoD fairy tale (in an exaggerated form – modernism was inserted into the baroque facade, a dead man is given a human appearance, grandma is put in sneakers so that she can run faster, even though she is old and walks with a cane, wings were attached to Poseidon, he has swum enough...) were overthrown. And it is precisely because of the amateurish approach to a holistic gameplay process that I did not develop a fondness for WT.
Heroes is a game. And, like any game, the balance in it is the author's idea within certain temporal (historical, fairy tale) frameworks, and not what you want to see. And there is always someone in this world who is stronger, smarter, scarier, and it is not necessarily you. Heroes is a very versatile game. And proving superiority in skill in it is a delicate and unrewarding task. There is an opinion that in WT, the global variability has been reduced, which allows a certain group of players to still demonstrate and show their true ability to play. It doesn't allow the crab with DD to mock the old man without DD for too long :) But Heroes is a strange game – one misclick – defeat, one step in the wrong direction – and goodbye, utopia, or you can even write GG (but the opponent turns out to be faster than you in writing texts, he is ahead by a second – and he already writes GG to you... oh, and they don't even let you lose with dignity...). So, you try, you do everything according to the canons of the highest skill... :smile41: And some noob jumps to your respawn point and knocks you out with some kind of explosion. This is unfair (incorrect, imbalanced). This cannot happen in WT :smile08: It is especially interesting to understand how this is consistent with the stated fact that WT players are the only ones in the championships. But it's simple – these are just players with healthy ambitions (slightly higher than others), fueled (including) by playing on their version (fashionable, the version of the initiated, although they themselves are not obsessed with this idea, but it is necessary – out of spite), a broad outlook (initially believing that greater success can be achieved in WT) and free disposal of their time. If they claim that a strong WT player will be strong in SoD (although what is there to argue about?), then a strong SoD player will also be strong in WT – the game mechanism is the same, the difference is only in the time spent studying additional material.
As for the nomination.
Let's take the well-established procedure from football. Who do we choose? The best player in general (as coaches and captains do, whose votes are considered less objective)? Or the best player of the year (as journalists do, their votes are more objective)? Here, you can divide the votes – in one pool – organizers, judges, hosts, moderators (parallel to journalists), in the other – the top 5 (3) of all tournaments, in the third – all the others (or combine the last two pools). The tournaments of the past are so diverse in terms of composition, regulations, and criteria for the winner that simply summing up the results or determining the percentage of victories will be incorrect. In those same Favorites, Stinger was obliged to play for the Tower. The OFB selection was irrelevant. SoD-free tournaments do not fit due to the narrow coverage of players. And let's not miss the opportunity for Twaryna and the chatters, who, if they want, can push him into second place :smile01: The main criterion should still be the "sporting" principle. And since there were no tournaments similar to the World Championship, it is worth paying attention to the minimum requirement for the nominee in terms of the number of tournaments (games) played.
