Discussion of the Mirror Jebus rules. — Tournament History

=Lizard=

8 years ago

Auto-translated

I was denied regarding the timer in a private message, so I'm writing in the general topic for discussion. I, Lizard, a player who won one of the crazy blitz tournaments with 8+4+1 and has played over 30 matches on mirror Jebus so far, propose setting a timer for the mirror Jebus tournament: 24+9+2. In games with Hellight and Gomungul (players who are far from the slowest, perhaps only FTS, Dark, and Jurist are faster), even the standard Jebus timer of 24+8.30+1.30 almost always reaches 122-123 in the final turn, and this is with very good and active gameplay, without lengthy pauses like "which cell on the map should I place the creature in to collect resources better." In general, solely for the purpose of improving the quality of the tournament: 24+9+2. Please don't move this to the "Tribunal" section; this is an important and fundamental issue.

Wicc

8 years ago

Auto-translated

You will also be denied here.

It would be better to raise the issues on which we had common ground.

In reply to Wicc

Grando

8 years ago

Auto-translated

I want to draw the attention of those who have attention. :rolleyes:
Not that much time has passed since Lizard, discussing blitz, said that there is some meaning/fun/skill/value in not doing the best you are capable of, but in correctly prioritizing under the given circumstances.
But now Mirror-Jebus has come out (IMHO also the best thing currently in Heroes in terms of the combination of dynamics and competitiveness of the game), and now even Lizard supports a timer that will allow playing Heroes with quality, rather than "prioritizing under the circumstances created by Vic".

Perhaps this can be extended to our life in general? When it comes to something subjectively valuable to us, we try to do the best we are capable of. And if we don't try, or defend half-hearted positions, then we simply, deep down, don't really care?

But as for me, I need to be in the Tribune, I haven't won any Tournaments, I haven't played on Mirror-Jebus

u2noob

8 years ago

Auto-translated

=Lizard=

I was denied regarding the timer in a private message, so I'm writing in the general topic for discussion. I, Lizard, a player who won one of the crazy blitz tournaments with 8+4+1 and has played over 30 matches on mirror Jebus so far, propose setting a timer for the mirror Jebus tournament: 24+9+2. In games with Hellight and Gomunguls (players who are far from the slowest, faster perhaps only than FTS, Dark, and Jurist), even the standard Jebus timer of 24+8.30+1.30 almost always reaches 122-123 in the zero phase, and this is with very good and active gameplay, without hesitation about "which cell on the map should I place the hut in to collect resources better." In general, solely for the purpose of improving the quality of the tournament: 24+9+2. Please don't move this to the tribune; this is an important and fundamental issue.

I fully support this. I wonder how many MT Jebus games Vic has played.

In reply to u2noob

=Lizard=

8 years ago

Auto-translated

The question regarding the timer remains open, as I want Gomunguls, Bishop, and others to participate in the tournament. "Other questions": 2. Remove dungeons from the treasure map. This can be done in the template editor right now. 3. Ban Alamar, Miriam, and Beatrice.

In reply to =Lizard=

Sav

8 years ago

Auto-translated

=Lizard=

2. Remove prisons from the treasure generation. This can be done in the template editor right now.

3. Ban Alamar, Miriam, and Beatrice.

Heroes can also be banned in the template editor.

And regarding prisons, I'll clarify just in case, since not many people understand the capabilities of the template editor.
Prisons of different levels are separate objects for the generator. They can be banned independently of each other, they can have a limit set on the maximum number in a zone independently of each other. Their average frequency can be changed independently of each other. And all of this can be done both for the entire template and in each individual zone.

That is, the template editor, in this aspect, has a powerful and flexible toolkit, and, in addition to a simple ban, it allows you to set restrictions of various kinds. For example, ban prisons of levels 20 and 30, and set a limit of 1 per zone for prisons of levels 1, 5, and 10. And any other variations of this kind.

In reply to Sav

Wicc

8 years ago

Auto-translated

Regarding prisons – according to Lizard, the main issue with them is that well-placed prisons create an imbalance in resource distribution, favoring the red player (to the point where "if the blue player appears, they are immediately captured"), while the absence of prisons or poorly placed prisons favor the blue player. I don't know how relevant this problem is; we need the players' opinions. As for the advantages of prisons, they significantly increase the pace of the game; you don't have to travel to all the castles yourself, and there's also the spectacle – a complex move involving clearing a large area of the map through a chain of prisons looks very impressive. Overall, my opinion is neutral, so a simple majority of votes from the participants will be sufficient. Regarding Miriam, Beatrice, and Alamar, the situation is much more complex... the fact is that banning these heroes won't fix the hero imbalance in the tavern, so the conversation might continue with "what about Thazar," "what about Crag Hack," and "what about Grindan," etc. That is, somewhere we will have to stop, so it is important to develop a criterion – what distinguishes an overpowered hero from a hero who is just slightly stronger than the others. In my opinion, the criterion for being overpowered should be the demoralizing effect of "damn it... the opponent has Jeremy, with a strength of 117." I have observed this many times in relation to already banned heroes (Logistics-Luna-Jeremy), and it was actually the reason for their ban. Is there such an effect in relation to Miriam, Beatrice, and Alamar... I highly doubt it. That is, my opinion on this is pessimistic, but I am willing to listen to the players' opinions on this issue, but only if more than 2/3 of the votes are in favor of banning them.

In reply to Grando

Wicc

8 years ago

Auto-translated

Al Feyn

Not much time has passed since Lizard, discussing blitz, said there is some meaning/enjoyment/skill/value in doing not what you are best at, but rather correctly prioritizing in the given circumstances.
But now Jebus Cross mirror has come out (IMHO also the best thing currently in Heroes in terms of combining dynamism and competitive play), and now even Lizard advocates for a timer that allows for quality play in Heroes, rather than "prioritizing in the circumstances created by Vicq".

This is the case for many players. Most Heroes players perceive the game emotionally rather than analytically, so depending on current impressions, evaluations can fluctuate greatly - winning with an imbalanced setup creates positive emotions and makes one more lenient toward it, while losing with an imbalanced setup creates negative emotions accordingly.

Therefore, when developing rules or modifying gameplay, I prefer impartial analysis and formalizable evaluation criteria. From a pure spectator's perspective, this is easier to do than from a player's perspective, as there is no risk of falling into the psychological traps listed above.

For example, the "did everything I wanted" criterion is quite difficult to formalize; it is a subjective feeling of the player. But criteria like "match duration" and "action density" are quite measurable. Therefore, when choosing a timer, I rely precisely on them; to this end, I regularly watch streams, monitor the structure of timer usage, the number of technical-tactical actions, the number of actions a player wanted to perform but could not due to the timer, etc.

So do not think that I am pulling these numbers out of thin air. At the moment, the timer as stated in the rules seems optimal to me; I will continue watching streams and testing this assumption.

With that, I propose to end the discussion about the timer. If you want to play on a perfect, unchanging timer and under perfect, unchanging rules - wait about 2-3 years. For example, it is quite possible that one of the changes outlined in the previous post will be implemented into the rules directly during the tournament. If this prospect scares you - it is better not to sign up for the tournament.

In reply to Wicc

Gomunguls

8 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

Regarding prisons – according to Lizard, the main complaint about them is that well-placed prisons create an imbalance in resource distribution, favoring red (to the point where "blue appears, and is immediately captured"), while the absence of prisons or poorly placed prisons favors blue.

I don't know how relevant this problem is; we need the opinion of the players.

The advantages of prisons include a significant increase in the game's dynamics; you don't have to trudge to all the castles yourself, and there's also the spectacle – a complex move involving clearing a large part of the map through a chain of prisons looks very impressive.

Overall, my opinion is neutral, so a simple majority of votes from the participants will be sufficient.

Regarding Miriam, Beatrice, and Alamar, the situation is much more complex... the fact is that banning the listed heroes won't fix the hero imbalance in the tavern, so the conversation might continue with "what about Tazar," "what about Craig Hack," and "what about Grindan," etc. That is, somewhere we'll have to stop, so it's important to develop a criterion – what distinguishes an overpowered hero from a hero who is just slightly stronger than the others.

In my opinion, the criterion for being overpowered should be the demoralizing effect of "damn... the opponent has Jeremy, with 117 attack." I've seen this happen many times with already banned heroes (Logistics-Luna-Jeremy), and it was actually the reason for their ban.

Is there such an effect when it comes to Miriam, Beatrice, and Alamar... I highly doubt it.

That is, my opinion on this is pessimistic, but I am willing to listen to the players' opinions on this issue, but only if more than 2/3 of the votes are in favor of a ban.

I support Kostya!
1. The timer should be longer so that the game brings joy and not irritation. (24+9+2) I think that would be just right, as there can be very intense battles in the center. (24:8:2) would also work.
2. I believe banning prisons is essential; in addition to the tempo, the heroes can greatly influence the game with their development. For example, (I once managed to win with a hero who had Earth magic, Logistics, Scouting, Air magic, and Literacy) against a hero with poor skills.

Regarding banning heroes – I still don't think it's a good idea. To make a hero viable, you have to work on them and then get results. And you can still choose a decent hero from 8. In the worst case, there are restarts.

In reply to Wicc

Freeman

8 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

Regarding prisons – according to Lizard, the main complaint about them is that well-placed prisons create an imbalance in resource distribution, favoring red (to the point where "blue appears, and is immediately captured"), while the absence of prisons or poorly placed prisons favor blue.

I don't know how relevant this problem is; we need the opinion of players.

The advantages of prisons include a significant increase in the game's dynamics; you don't have to trudge to all the castles yourself, and there's also the spectacle – a complex move involving clearing a large area of the map through a chain of prisons looks very impressive.

Overall, my opinion is neutral, so a simple majority of votes from the participants will be sufficient.

Regarding Miriam, Beatrice, and Alamar, the situation is much more complex... the fact is that banning the listed heroes won't fix the hero imbalance in the tavern, so the conversation might continue with "what about Tazar," "what about Craig Hack," and "what about Grindan," etc. That is, somewhere we will have to stop, so it is important to develop a criterion – what distinguishes an overpowered hero from a hero who is just a little stronger than the others.

In my opinion, the criterion for being overpowered should be the demoralizing effect of "damn it... the opponent has Jeremy, with 117 attack." I have observed this many times in relation to already banned heroes (Logistics-Luna-Jeremy), and it was actually the reason for their ban.

Is there such an effect in relation to Miriam, Beatrice, and Alamar... I highly doubt it.

That is, my opinion on this is pessimistic, but I am willing to listen to the opinions of players on this issue, but only if more than 2/3 of the votes are in favor of the ban.

I am in favor of banning prisons and banning heroes. I have repeatedly lost to prisons when the game was evenly matched, especially against opponents with well-developed heroes, particularly mages. Regarding the ban on heroes, I am primarily in favor of banning Miriam and Beatrice; they provide too much information. Alternatively, you could change the specialization of these heroes or make their special ability +1, +2, +3 at levels 10, 20, and 30, respectively, in addition to their base scouting ability. As for Alamar, simply remove the "schoolboy" starting bonus, and that's it.

In reply to Freeman

PaTRioT

8 years ago

Auto-translated

Wow, things are getting heated here; they want to increase the timer :rolleyes:

Wicc

8 years ago

Auto-translated

I created a poll. Only votes from players who registered for the tournament will be counted; others should click "View poll results."

For dungeons, 51% is required; for heroes, 67% is required. Voting for each hero is separate.

In reply to Wicc

Wicc

8 years ago

Auto-translated

Moved the discussion here from the tournament thread.

Jubi-Juby

8 years ago

Auto-translated

I agree with Kostya Lizard. We need a longer timer. And I'm in favor of banning heroes.

In reply to Jubi-Juby

Dirty_Player

8 years ago

Auto-translated

What about a compromise option, like leaving the dungeons with heroes of level 1 and 5 (maybe 10)? Is that not being considered?

Added 5 minutes later
And regarding the heroes, it's becoming a real circus. Okay, when it was about Luna, or even about Logisticians... But now, even Alamar is interfering... Okay, scouts, they can break the game when they appear in the center of dungeons at levels 20-30. But maybe it's worth solving the dungeon issue first, and then moving on to the heroes? What's next? Grindan? Tazar? Kreg?