External market at M-200%. — Tournament History

Ihtiandr

13 years ago

Auto-translated

Is it advisable to ban the use of the external market in M-200% tournaments?

This question has been raised many times before, and a similar poll was created on sc2tv. But in my opinion, the right decision was never reached. I think that poll was poorly designed, and many people who voted were not knowledgeable on the subject, simply wanting as few restrictions as possible. Here, on HeroesWorld, there are many experienced players who can make a sound assessment of the situation.

I'll share my opinion on this matter. It's clear that when playing by HeroesWorld rules, the external market doesn't change anything. But in M-200%, it's just a super-bonus. There, money is worth its weight in gold. And the external market provides a huge advantage in this regard. Many a game I've won solely thanks to the external market; without it, I wouldn't have been able to come close to victory. Likewise, I've been beaten by it many times. Most of the more or less experienced M-200 players understand this and readily agree to, or even suggest, playing without the market. In short, in my opinion, such an imbalanced element absolutely needs to be fixed.

Naturally, the outcome of the vote does not obligate Kalababa in any way, but I hope it will give him food for thought.

Alessandro

13 years ago

Auto-translated

I suggest playing without restrictions on external markets and with a 160% limit.

Ihtiandr

13 years ago

Auto-translated

Playing at 160% in a traditional M-200% tournament... Great idea!))

ariputra

13 years ago

Auto-translated

instead of a market, another useful object could have been generated, which could be used.
that is, part of the value that is spent on the market simply goes nowhere and does not bring any benefit to the player + it also takes up space.

it's like a cake for a diabetic, money (value) is spent, space in the refrigerator (takes up space on the map), but it cannot be eaten (used).

Ihtiandr

13 years ago

Auto-translated

The same can be said about the fort on the hill and the cartographer.

In reply to ariputra

JustObserver

13 years ago

Auto-translated

ariputra

instead of a market, another useful object could have been generated, which could be used.
that is, part of the value that is spent on the market simply goes nowhere and does not bring any benefit to the player + it also takes up space.

it's like a cake for a diabetic, money (value) is spent, space in the refrigerator (takes up space on the map), but it cannot be eaten (used).

If anything, the market has such a low value that it is not even guarded, so instead of it, for example, a seer's hut could have been generated.

ariputra

13 years ago

Auto-translated

at least the fort on the hill and the cartographer have some guards – providing some benefit in the form of experience, while the market takes up space, has no guards, cannot be used, and might block a passage.

an external market is an additional motivation to fight for resources, medusa lairs, demon gates, and cyclops lairs.
as an experiment, for variety, this M-200 map can be played with a market.

kalababa

13 years ago

Auto-translated

actually, all the previous tournaments were played with the market enabled, with a mutual ban =) the market value is very low, but you can still pass through it, just don't trade anything :nc:

In reply to ariputra

twaryna

13 years ago

Auto-translated

ariputra

At least the Fortress on the hill and the Cartographer have some guards – providing some benefit in the form of experience. But the Market just takes up space, has no guards, can’t be used, and might block a passage.

An external market is an additional motivation to fight for resources, against Medusa lairs, Demon lairs, and Cyclops lairs.
As an experiment, for variety, this M-200 map could be played with a market.

These are just the thoughts of someone who probably hasn’t played M200 in the format of the proposed tournament. An external market is definitely a negative element here and should be banned by the rules, not by mutual agreement.

Heroes13

13 years ago

Auto-translated

You can find fault with anything. Even the first/second-tier consumables have a significant advantage. One player gets it, another doesn't. Does that mean we should ban everything left and right?

numOne

13 years ago

Auto-translated

I voted for the ban, but now I'm thinking I shouldn't have. Nothing should be banned in this tournament; it should remain as it was originally, and that's why people love it.

In reply to twaryna

ariputra

13 years ago

Auto-translated

twaryna

These are the thoughts of someone who probably hasn't played Might and Magic 200 in the format of the proposed tournament. The external market is definitely a negative here and should be banned according to the rules, not by mutual agreement.

In this format, I've played over 50 games; it's my favorite format, and I like the time limit.

heroes13, in my opinion, wrote correctly: the external market will undoubtedly give a huge advantage, but it also adds motivation to fight for resources, Medusa lairs, Cyclops dens, etc. But a 1-star or 2-star creature will give at least as much of an advantage, or even more, in the form of tempo, easier and earlier breaking through ranged blocks, and so on. So, should we ban 1-star creatures as well? At least for the dungeon.

Then we'll end up banning Necromancer as well. On M-U templates, games usually end by the 2nd week, at most the 3rd. There isn't that much meat from the base growth, but you can summon quite a few skeletons in that time, and what should you use to fight them? How do you deal with this advantage gained "out of thin air"?

Wladysha

13 years ago

Auto-translated

leave everything as is, or we can remove it by mutual agreement, but otherwise it's allowed.

Ihtiandr

13 years ago

Auto-translated

ariputra

The external market undoubtedly provides a huge advantage, but it also adds motivation to fight for resources, medusa dens, cyclops pens, etc.

So what if it adds motivation to do something? Even without capturing medusa dens and cyclops pens (by the way, I've never seen anyone capture a cyclops pen on m200))), if you exchange all the resources you've fought for into respawn by day 121, it will significantly increase the chances of buying out the entire growth and moving into Trek on the same day.

kalababa

as a matter of fact, all previous tournaments were played with the market, by mutual ban =)

Wladysha

leave everything as is, it can be removed by mutual agreement, otherwise it's allowed

I don't understand why everyone has been saying the same thing for years — "it can be removed by mutual agreement." What does that have to do with anything?! By mutual agreement, you can allow anything at all, even diplomacy. How does that relate to solving the problem?!

ariputra

but a cons 1 or a cons 2 will provide at least as much, if not much more, advantage in terms of tempo, easier early breakthrough of shooter blocks, and so on

I strongly disagree with this. The external market typically provides tempo that is much higher than a cons-two, because it allows for a better build on day 1 and buying out the entire growth much earlier. And before you can take a cons, you need to buy out properly — which again requires money, of which there is very little on m200. As I already said, the economy on m200 is very different from, say, SM, and it has a much stronger impact on tempo.