Forum

Marmot. No offense, but you're saying this because of your own noobishness. Playing against the computer is one thing—it has its own charm at a certain stage—but online is a completely different world and entirely different heroes. It turns your worldview upside down.

<blockquote1. Full control (specifically, Fly and Dimension Door) should be banned in online tournaments.

After that phrase, it's only logical to hear "I stopped reading there." But how do you play HL maps then? Or maybe we should just abandon them entirely? This is lolwhat

<blockquoteEven if there are 40 full controls: whoever is stronger should be the winner!

Here's the thing. Just because someone is stronger today doesn't mean they'll be stronger tomorrow. When it's human vs. human, the "strength" of an army can develop with varying success.

Moreover, I'm saying that while the amount of meat is important, it isn't a guarantee of victory. There are also stats and magic. Or artifacts that prevent casting. Therefore, FB doesn't mean you'll actually win.
It's not all that straightforward.

<blockquoteObvious avoidance of the final battle is a sign of weakness, and in battle, a "hopper" will almost certainly lose.

If we reason like that, what happens? You see an opponent and you're obligated to fight them immediately? If they want it. otherwise it's a "sign of weakness"?
He came onto your territory; are you obligated to holily defend your city with the capitol until death and never run away to gear up otherwise it's a "sign of weakness".
Or are you obligated not to stay in the city, but to go out into the open field and fight "like a man," otherwise it's a "sign of weakness"?

The point is that while the opponent spends their time capturing your cities, using up their move points, you can go somewhere into a treasure zone. Gather some wyverns, break the Dragon Utopia. Return and properly meet them with a superior army and stats. Perhaps even at the very end (like capturing a Castle on the 7th day under threat of vanishing into oblivion)—it's not a big deal to live without a city for a while.
If everything were so straightforward, the game would be boring. This isn't checkers where battle is mandatory.
If player1 has more strength at this moment in time, it's far from certain that player2, who has fly, doors, and portal, won't make their army just as strong, or even stronger, after some time. The same can be said for player1; perhaps they will find fly, or a door, or a mountain portal.

Personally, I liked bubuch's option: either play to the end, or surrender, or flip a coin. Of course, not everyone will find the strength in themselves to play a very difficult game, but as a rule, those without control get wrecked. And if you're getting wrecked and don't have the strength to actually PLAY this—surrender. Or try to negotiate a coin toss. If the option suits both. IMHO.
And do you have the strength? Then fight. The timer and the opponent's mistakes can also play a role. Is too much time being spent? What did you expect? That Heroes isn't a time-consuming game? This is a full-blown addiction to wasting time. Fine, there will be one game instead of two or three. But at least it'll be brought to a logical conclusion.
And yes, I am against draws in principle, but that's a problem with the regulations. Comparisons like "but in chess it's like this" don't convince me. There must be a winner; there must be a loser. Period.