Posts from Heading towards CIS-2020.

I'm also for HotA only; besides the version's popularity, there is another very important point for an offline tournament. HotA is played noticeably faster, and even games on HL templates usually fit within 5-7 hours.

This isn't arrogance; it's objectivity. The probability of spectators not attending due to the game version is extremely low (there are very few, and they usually don't come anyway). Considering the desires of those who are attending (like rewarding them for coming) is pure nonsense; you could end up giving the owner of the venue a say. Meanwhile, the number of players who won't attend because of the game version could be much higher. What Kirill is writing seems to me like a simple attempt to manipulate the votes. The money I collect "from outside" is my "work" and doesn't affect the organization of the event in any way.

What Kirill is writing seems to me like a typical attempt to manipulate the votes.

Why manipulate them when you can just take a stance, as was done this year? And after the majority voted for a mix, invent a "wheel" with an incomplete mix. But even here, a third of the games and a third of the participants played SOD.
Regarding regular viewers, let Romantic make the decision. I think that the opinion of regular viewers can be taken into account in some way, but it should not be decisive, that is, it should be valued lower than the opinion of the players.
Yes, I am more interested in observing the clash of versions. But this year I will come regardless of the decision that will be made - a mix or HOTA. Because this year it will be decided based on completely specific and reasonable criteria.

Added after 12 minutes

the probability of viewers not coming due to the version is extremely low (there are only a few of them, and they usually don't come anyway)

This year, Georgia was missing at least 5 people because of that mess and confusion. And these were precisely the ones who "usually come" (among the players, for example, OsFaraon and, as a result, Preds).
But this is an absolutely fruitless and unproductive dialogue, because I am reasoning as a manager and organizer, and you are telling me that the absence of several people does not affect you personally, although in this specific case, it affected it by about 15 percent. Whether this is a lot or a little is up to each individual to decide.

This isn't arrogance, it's objectivity.

Arrogance is looking into someone else's pocket. You understand what I mean. So stop acting like that and quit it.

Oxy, you're getting out of line. I'm not your dog, and I might remind you of that when we meet, so don't act so cocky. Regarding the 5 people, I've already explained where the downside is and where the upside is.

Let's wrap it up. I understand everyone's opinion, and it's too early to start an argument.

Oxy, you're getting out of line. I'm not your dog, and I might remind you of that when we meet, so don't act so cocky.
Regarding the 5 people, I've already explained where the downside is and where the upside is.

Remind me, Anton. Please do. He's threatening me now.

But it's better if you reread what you wrote and what I wrote.
If you behave like this, you'll be put in your place. If not by me, then by someone else.

Agreed.

I like to use examples from professional sports. For instance, in football and basketball, where trillions of dollars are at stake – far more than in Heroes – and where most of that money comes from viewers, the rules and regulations of tournaments are determined solely by professionals, and the opinions of those who truly understand the subject matter are taken into account. If it were otherwise (and if they actually asked every viewer, "Should we play with two balls? Should we blind Messi to make it fair?"), the overall viewer interest would be much lower because the game would be of much lower quality.

Maybe we should blindfold Messi so it's fair?

It's about time. And it will only attract more viewers. :smile54:

I propose gladiatorial battles in a pool – the winner gets to choose the tournament rules.

I love using examples from professional sports. For instance, in football and basketball, where trillions of times more money is involved than in Heroes—and mostly, this is one way or another the spectators' money—the rules and tournament regulations are determined exclusively by professionals, and only the opinions of those who truly understand the essence of the matter are taken into account. If it weren't so (and if every single spectator were actually asked: maybe we should play with two balls? Maybe we should blindfold Messi to make it fair?), then in the end, viewer interest would be much lower because the game would be of much lower quality.

In sports, there are basic rules of the sport, and there are rules for conducting Competitive events.
For example, the "golden goal" rule, which was cancelled not so long ago, does not belong to the basic rules.

I don't understand why there are so many arguments in the first place. It is obvious that the default version should correspond to the preferences of the majority. It is equally obvious that the vast majority have been playing HotA for a long time. It seems to me that SoD by agreement sounds more than adequate for today

I suggest we consider the main version – a limit on the number of units. Thank you.

I suggest we consider the main version – a limit on the number of turns. Thank you.

I support that. Please.