Experiment with restarts. Volunteers needed! — Polls

КостяN

17 years ago

Auto-translated

One of the main reasons why I don't feel like playing Heroes 3 online right now is the excessively long restart periods. A few days ago, I had an interesting idea on how to shorten them, and I posted it in the thread "Autosaves: To give or not to give?", but it didn't get much of a response there (although that might be due to the thread's lack of popularity:confused: ...). Here's the essence of my idea:

We remove the traditional restarts 111 and 113, replacing them with 1 restart each (112) + 1 autosave (either in the first week or before meeting the opponent - this is still under development); at the same time, we remove the theoretically unlimited number of restarts before encounter 116, replacing it with 1 (i.e., the 2nd restart before the encounter will no longer be possible). According to my rough calculations, this reduces the restart period by almost half!:smile03: Now, this needs to be tested in practice. Key points: 1 autosave is allowed, including to establish strict limits on them, i.e., the rules will prohibit giving more autosaves than allowed. Especially for those who dislike autosaves, I'll explain again: an autosave here is just another type of restart, although the uncorrected generations clearly only complicate, rather than simplify, the lives of those who like to ask for them.

In general, esteemed World players, I ask you to participate in testing this restart format! Moreover, if we gather 8 people, why not hold a fan mini-tournament in 3 stages (quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals)? I promise to ask the powerful World administrators for some kind of honorary badge for the winner to use as an avatar, even if it's small;).

Lider1

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Wouldn't it be easier to have two resets at 111 and one at 116?

In reply to Lider1

Wlk777

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Lider1

Wouldn't it be easier to have two rests at 111 and one rest before reaching 116?

Personally, I think it's a good idea; I feel more comfortable playing when there are no more rests. However, I don't think most people will agree.

In reply to Lider1

КостяN

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Lider1

Wouldn't it be easier to have two rests at 111 and one at 116?

It's not a bad idea, and I wouldn't have to come up with something complicated with these autos, but at first glance, it seems that after getting used to 2 regular rests, a sudden transition to 1 without compensation will definitely not be well received:smile32: ... And why exactly 112, and not 111 - often at 111, it's very difficult to understand what's going on with your situation, but this way, it's quite possible to get to the secondary respawn and assess it.

In reply to КостяN

Kash

17 years ago

Auto-translated

often on 111 it's very hard to understand much about your own layout, but this way it's already quite possible to get to the secondary respawn and evaluate it

In my opinion, rests are originally meant not to evaluate your own, let alone the neighboring respawn for the presence of caches, money, cons, and clues. But rather so that Ufretyn doesn't show up and a ballista arrives, for example. Or so that a strong block doesn't prevent you from leaving your home.
But when we start thinking - oh damn, the sawmill is far away, inconvenient. They only gave Kiryusha 3 elves, I want more. I want my native secondary!!1 and so on - that's how hours of rests happen.
Rests are not a luxury, but a means of prevention!

Added after 37 seconds
I'm not even mentioning auto, that's a bad habit

In reply to Kash

Wlk777

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Kash

In my opinion, rests are initially intended not for evaluating your own, let alone a neighboring respawn, for the presence of caches, money, cons, and clues. But rather so that Ufretyn doesn't come and a ballista shows up, for example. Or so that a strong block doesn't hinder you from leaving the house.
But when we start thinking — oh damn, the sawmill is far away, inconvenient. They only gave 3 elves to Kiryusha, I want more. I want my native secondary!!1 etc. — that's when hours of rests happen.
Rests are not a luxury, but a means of prevention!

Added after 37 seconds
About auto I'll keep quiet altogether, it's a bad habit

So after all, can we agree on 2 rests on 111?Personally, I'm for it. I won't say anything about auto here, there's a separate topic for that...

bRitvo4kA

17 years ago

Auto-translated

My suggestion is simple: 113 -> 112

In reply to bRitvo4kA

Wlk777

17 years ago

Auto-translated

bRitvo4kA

My suggestion is simple: 113 -> 112

So, 2 units of 112, or 111 + 112?

In reply to Wlk777

Forrest

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Wlk777

So, 2 times 112 or 111+112?

A large community has been playing for a long time:
111+111 or 112 restarts. This was devised by the respected Vladimir.
It's a very effective strategy.
If you encounter something unfavorable early on, go for 1-1-1. Then you can add another 1-1-1, and if things are good on the first day but bad on the second, go for 1-1-2, but you won't have that option anymore. It's a really effective strategy. I've been playing like this for about two years, and many well-known players do the same. It saves a lot of time.

2 Kostyan. You're great – always thinking up and writing something new! Well done!
P.S. When are we going to play TC3?
P.S.2 I'm definitely against legalizing auto-play. That would turn it into anti-hero gameplay.

In reply to Forrest

Javdet

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Forrest

A large community has been playing this for a long time now – 111+111 or 112 restarts. It was devised by the respected Vladimir. It’s a very effective strategy. If you encounter something unfavorable early on, go for 1-1-1. You can then take 1-1-1-1, and if things are going well on the first day but poorly on the second, take 1-1-2, but you won’t have as many resources left. It’s a genuinely effective strategy. I’ve been playing like this for about two years, and many well-known players do the same. It saves a significant amount of time.

P.S. I am, of course, against legalizing auto-farming. That would turn it into something akin to anti-hero gameplay.

I also support this strategy; it definitely saves an hour or two.

In reply to Javdet

КостяN

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Thanks to everyone for the interesting suggestions! We still need to decide what to do with the practically endless (in theory) rematches – and I’ll probably add a poll (as will be done in the official rules in the future). I’m almost certain that in at least 35-50% of matches on the ladder, if desired, it’s always possible to arrange a rematch according to rule 116, just as it’s not a secret that an experienced player who has played at least 50 games can quickly find a way to challenge their opponent:D (I think the same applies to 8mm6). IMO, it’s one thing when a match happens by chance, and quite another when one player persistently tries to arrange a rematch to their advantage. So, I’m waiting for your ideas on this… And I’ve already expressed my opinion: a rematch should be limited to a maximum of 1 per game; otherwise, fight it out:cool:. And here’s another thing – of course, those who care about their rating will jump on me now:smile41: :D: I think that for victories achieved by exploiting an opponent’s surrender (this should be indicated in the reports), the full number of points shouldn’t be awarded; awarding more than half or two-thirds is wrong, IMO, although points should still be deducted from the player who surrendered, as before!;) The same applies to auto-match enthusiasts:) : for a victory in an auto-match (for ANY reason!), the full number of rating points shouldn’t be awarded, and again, the player who allowed it should have the full amount deducted – because it’s not right:p! In both cases, I think half the points would be just right, simple and effective. The only thing is that for victories due to an opponent’s surrender, we need to specify that this applies only to the first week; in the second week, the game is already in full swing – there, the opponent’s surrender is usually due to pressure or in high-value objectives, so it would probably be fair to award 100% of the points… P.S. If anyone got the impression from some of my recent posts that I’m a supporter of auto-matches, that’s not the case at all – those who know me will confirm it. It was just an attempt to limit them somehow, and eventually phase them out completely, if possible:rolleyes:.

In reply to КостяN

Javdet

17 years ago

Auto-translated

KostyaN

Thanks to everyone for the interesting suggestions! We still need to decide what to do with the practically endless (theoretically) rematches – and I’ll probably add a poll (as will be done in the official rules in the future). I’m almost certain that in at least 35-50% of matches, if desired, it’s always possible to arrange a rematch according to rule 116. Similarly, for an experienced player who has played at least 50 games, it’s not a secret how to quickly engage the opponent:D (I think the same applies to 8mm6). IMHO, it’s one thing when a match happens by chance, and quite another when one player persistently tries to arrange a favorable situation for themselves in this way. So, I’m waiting for your ideas on this… And I’ve already expressed my opinion: a rematch should be allowed a maximum of 1 time per game; in all other cases – fight:cool:.
.

Regarding rematches, we can discuss the following: if one of the players sees that the opponent is not on the road, they must inform the opponent. If both agree to continue playing, there will be no rematch according to rule 116; if at least one is against it, then a rematch is allowed.

In reply to Javdet

Dirty_Player

17 years ago

Auto-translated

Javdet

I also support this scheme; it will definitely save an hour or two.

+1! Also, remove the RE for the meeting, or set it to 11:4.

In reply to КостяN

Forrest

17 years ago

Auto-translated

KostyaN

We just need to decide what to do with the practically endless (theoretically) rematches – and I’ll probably add a poll (as will be done in the official rules in the future).

Rematches should be scrapped!

Heroes is a great game. But it has a major flaw – it takes up so much real time that the kids are already going to school. Remove the rematches and let’s get on with it. Prepare for the match right away, not sometime later. And scout. Send the scout into the already explored territory – that’s the skill it’s for. I’ve been in games with 6 rematches! It’s incredibly annoying. Those who want rematches can agree on them, but only by mutual consent. But officially, they need to be removed. That’s just my opinion.

Lider1

17 years ago

Auto-translated

But when GO is played on rough terrain, it's not a game at all, in my opinion. I used to play on a portal and met Valèska on map 114 (playing as Tazik); it was a terrible experience.