Posts from Preparing for the "Van Kanegem" tournament. Auto-translated

... My system only takes into account the speed of completing the main task of the tournament. Even the place is not taken into account :)
P.S. Richard, I even tricked you a little. The universal rating was artificially inflated by 33%. My rating is loyal to newcomers and severely affects the accumulated rating of veterans :) Newcomers - everywhere we have a road - veterans - everywhere we have honor ;)

Regarding the speed of completion:
I abandoned "my version" precisely because of its similarity to the existing one (I suspect yours), as it took into account the ratio of the completion time to the "leader" (or to the "basic" version), and not

Oh, by the way... I keep forgetting to remind you or complain!!!
IMHO, the promised point was not entirely followed:

2. The first round is the sword round, in which preference is given to playing as warrior castles.
3. The second round is the magic round, in which preference is given to playing as mage castles.

P.S. In my opinion, only the First, Second, and Sixth stages of the tournament were kept within the framework of these points!!!
I suggest making an amendment that the Third, Fourth, and Fifth stages of the second round will not be as the regulations for the second round suggest, but as indicated in the first round!!!
P.S.P.S. In short... to put it simply... make Barbarians or Knights or something like that in the Heroes 3-5 Tournaments!!!:)

Yes, that was an oversight. I somehow relied on the organizers and forgot about this point. Now, it’s definitely better to correct it this way. I suggest a Swamp creature for the third slot, and a Barbarian for the fourth. As for the fifth… Necromancers are also a quite combat-oriented race, not just magical. After all, their strength lies in their hordes.

Yes... with the fifth installment, it's not that important... there aren't any clearly defined Wizards (except for the Academy members themselves), and it seems that Haven is more inclined towards strength, although it all depends on the hero's development!!!
The other factions are more balanced!!!

Regarding the third and fourth stages, I will need to remind the organizers next time. I hope everything will be resolved.

Everything was fine. In Heroes 3, the elf is slightly more of a warrior than a mage, despite having a level 5 guild. And the starting hero was more of a warrior, and the main force was snipers. In Heroes 4, only the Barbarians don't have native magic, but they were played in the second stage. In the other castles, there are classes of both warriors and mages. The Rogue is a warrior. But the organizers could have gone for maximum diversity and played the third stage with the Swamp faction and the eighth stage with the Conflux faction, because these races are not present in other parts of the game. And if we summarize the first round, we can say that it was definitely a success. However, I still don't understand what principle will be used to determine the overall winner of the tournament.

Here’s a question – approximately how many stages are planned for the King’s Bounty tournament, and what will be the duration of each stage?

Ten stages, two for each version. The results will be announced in early December, before the start of the BB tournament.

I still don't understand what principle will be used to determine the overall tournament winner.

Well, I guess they'll choose the best all-rounder... i.e., the one with the highest overall rating (currently it's IronAxe)... And they won't forget to award the winners of each stage separately... I even saw the winning trophies...:smile01:

By the way, the results for the fifth stage haven't been added to the overall ranking of the Van Koninghem tournament yet, right?
It seems this is due to the absence of Alan and IronAxe!!!

By the way, the rating for the fifth stage still hasn't been added to the overall ranking of the Van Koning tournament?!
Apparently, this is due to the absence of Alan and IronAxe!!!

That’s definitely not the reason… because:
1) Alan has nothing to do with the rating.

2) IronAxe maintains his own rating in the thread: [INFORMATION] Rating by Axe and has nothing to do with the Van Koning tournament rating.
Incidentally, he hasn't updated his rating for a very long time... since April, i.e., since the end of the second stage of VK.

3) The Van Koning tournament rating is maintained by AlexeyPank, who calculated the rating for the fifth stage but hasn't yet added it to the general table, probably due to lack of time... as calculating for all users takes a lot of time.

I apologize for not having updated the Clan Wars rankings yet. The extremely heavy load of the last few days doesn't allow me to do so. Everything has already been calculated, but it takes a lot of time to input it into HTML. I hope to correct this oversight in the next 2-3 days.

Where can I find the rating or ratings for ВК? Which thread should I look in? I couldn't find it. At least, a rating without the final stage would be helpful.

/topic/2131/.
Take a look here, and happiness will be yours ;)

The map was provided to the esteemed VDV_forever AS IS (as is).

What's up, you lazy bum? Why did you change the default magic for the heroes in the tower?!! But, in my opinion, this is precisely what makes the map and playing through it interesting. Still, such changes to the default parameters should be indicated in the tournament announcement. Maybe you also gave someone some art? Now, players need to check each available hero in the editor before each tournament to see what the map author has changed for them?
:)

Added after 6 minutes

That's how it is. Theoretically, Romanuel still has a chance, but in practice, Fireball might join the aforementioned trio in the fight for first place. And there are no other candidates. Romanuel is approximately 100 points behind fourth and third place. It's unrealistic to make up that difference in the remaining three stages. But I won't make predictions - fortune is a fickle girl...

This is because everyone ignores what I write. First, the administration apparently can't answer how the finalists will be determined in the "universal" category at the end of all stages. Second, everyone ignores my suggestion that, to determine the finalists in the "universal" category, we should use only the 6 best results for each player when calculating, instead of all the results from all stages. Then, there will be more participants competing for the prize places in the "universal" category. The argument is that 6 results out of 10 stages correspond to a complete game across all stages for three out of five versions of Heroes. So why shouldn't these players also participate in the fight for prize places for the title of "universal"? It's just that those who play all 10 stages will have more choices for their best results - they need to choose 6 best results out of 10.