Posts from Introduction of Haven in the Stronghold vs. Dungeon tournaments.

I am against mandatory Online Heroes in Heroes tournaments. They should be available to everyone. And I personally prefer playing with Online Heroes.

As for tournaments... Statements like "I'm a great player, I won't play here without Online Heroes"... Without major teams, like Italy and the Netherlands, the World Cup would lose some of its appeal. Without Korea, Japan, Peru, and Costa Rica, it would lose much more, in my opinion.

I request that playing in tournaments with OH be made a mandatory rule.

As a player, I am all for it; I now play only with OH myself.

As an organizer, I am not sure if this is a good idea. This would essentially make SoD tournaments paid. Moreover, a typical tournament lasts about half a year, which means the cost of participation could reach 1000 rubles. Yes, in most tournaments, play is single-elimination, but the same OFB guarantees nine games to everyone, and to play them, one would have to pay 1000.

And whether such barriers to participating in SoD tournaments should be established is a very controversial question. It is clear that this is beneficial (from any point of view) for experienced, skilled players, but it is completely obvious that this measure creates obstacles for new players to participate specifically in SoD tournaments (while HotA remains free).

For now, it seems to me that OH should be mandatory only in the most prestigious tournaments, such as the Final Battle itself and the CIS Championship (these tournaments, by the way, have shorter timeframes, meaning the cost of participation is lower), while entry to more mass-market tournaments should remain free.

However, if AK (in the absence of an active Tournament Committee) decides that OH should become mandatory and this is written into some rules, I will have nothing against it. But I do not want to take responsibility for making SoD tournaments paid.

When Heroes of Might and Magic Online (OH) appeared, there was a lot of talk about why it wasn't in Shades of Darkness (SoD). Now that OH has appeared, the whining about payment has started again. For example, I paid for OH twice and played only 2 games in SoD in those 2 months. The question is, we're already spending this 168 rubles a month on something like beer, cigarettes, or 5 packs of gum, so why, when the question arises of giving these 168 rubles to the OH developer, who might not have been in SoD at all, does such a heated debate begin?

Let's create a poll, and then let the Arbitration Committee make the decision.

Maybe there can be a higher tier subscription that cost 2-3 times more, but will allow you to play OX with anyone.

Just in case, I'd like to point out that you're not quite discussing the real problem. On one hand, you're exaggerating its scale, and on the other, you're downplaying the real consequences. Even if a tournament doesn't have an Overtime (OH) rule, two players who want to play with OH will play with it. Even if a tournament does have an OH rule, two players who don't want OH (either because they rush the timer or have some other personal preference) will agree to play without it. Furthermore, in this case, some players simply won't play because (for various reasons) they can't afford it (since Zhenya is surprised, I'll just say it plainly – there will be such people). But this loss is unlikely to be significant in the long run. The problem only arises when a player who wants to play with OH meets a player who wants to play without OH. Considering that this doesn't happen in every game, I'm not sure why people are being so inflexible and refusing to sign up for tournaments. But I won't criticize them for it. Playing against noobs is boring anyway, and if it also takes up extra time, it's doubly boring. Here, I wanted to point out that a relatively small number of games are being discussed. And the decision is about prioritizing one over the other. I believe that an open vote is the ideal way to make this decision. But not to decide the issue by a majority vote. Rather, to see how people will behave when making one of two decisions. The answer options could be something like: "at the moment" 1) I'm only willing to play with OH, 2) I prefer to play with OH, 3) I prefer to play without OH, 4) I'm only willing to play without OH, 5) I don't care either way. It's a vote in form, but in reality, it's a survey of opinions. And the most important thing to understand before making a decision is what percentage of participants the tournament will lose in one case and what percentage in the other (answers 1 and 4) – so that the organizer can make a decision knowing the consequences. Answers 2 and 3 will be useful to decide at what stage of the tournament OH will be in effect, if you're thinking about a different approach at different stages (for example, I think that OH shouldn't be used in the more massive early stages, but in the later stages, where only the top players remain, the conditions can be made stricter – like, you came to the tournament to test yourself, to prove that you're very good – prove it with OH).

I find the "arguments" about how the game is better without the "OH" (presumably referring to an in-game feature) and that it's harder for newcomers with it to be quite amusing. Someone even claimed that experienced players who play quickly are just looking for an extra advantage:smile52: :smile35:. People, go and look at how many actual newcomers play and see that they all use the "OH." Or maybe we should go back to the days of the "sod timer"? Why have progress? Let's set a 10-minute "sod timer" everywhere, wait an hour for some turns, but then a few people can play "better":smile54:.
And I'm really amazed by the ingratitude of some people, how accustomed people in Russia and the CIS countries are to getting things for free, that when it's not available, they even try to come up with some "principles"...

P.S. The comparison with football was just ridiculous.

It's much simpler, and there's no need to argue. Everyone should play the way that's most comfortable for them. And if they make simultaneous turns mandatory in the rules, then those who like to play quickly can do so. And those who prefer to take their time and think can simply skip their turn. And then they can think on the fly – bam!

Added a poll.

I would also suggest adding an option to only apply Overhaul to XL+U, because they are the ones that can take up a lot of time).

I think a poll is needed here... I don't know why it's needed, but if there are people who can't afford to pay for it, then this measure is unacceptable, at least in the existing tournaments that have been running for years. I, of course, like many here, am willing to pay this small amount, but to impose it...
Dirty, when will there be a tournament with a prize pool?), that's where it would be most appropriate.

I think a poll is needed here... but I don't know why it's needed)), if there are people who can't afford to pay for OH, then this measure is unacceptable, at least in already existing tournaments that have been running for years. I, of course, like many here, am willing to pay such a small amount for my own time, but to impose it...
Dirty, when will there be a tournament with a prize pool)?, that's where it would be perfect.

There will always be an opponent to any change, even the most logical and necessary one; this is not a reason to not change anything, right? Besides, I haven't heard a single person say: "I can't afford to pay 168 rubles a month for my hobby, which takes up a significant part of my free time." I've seen only two types of justifications:
1) I fundamentally don't want to pay every month - it's like a loan; I would rather have a lifetime subscription. I don't have any polite words to comment on what I think about such principledness.
2) It's difficult for me to play with OH, I don't have time, the game is of lower quality. The arguments in this reason are exactly the same as those of the supporters of the SOD timer, so why did we abandon it, and here we should consider the "slow players"? Why should a bunch of people who are keeping up with the progress ultimately waste even more of their time because of this?

So many whiners have gathered... they're all grown men, yet they're complaining: this isn't right, that isn't right... they say it's a waste of their time to spend an extra 2 hours! Have you ever calculated how much time you've spent playing Heroes? No? Then calculate it... My personal opinion: no one should be forced to play with the "Online Hub," pay for the lobby, etc. Everything should be on a voluntary basis.

Tsekotukha, you're not framing the question accurately. The time spent playing Heroes, in general, was spent for enjoyment. (And here, it's not far from the question of the meaning of life, so it's better to choose words carefully when talking about "whiners"). But this topic is about the time that is suggested to be spent without any enjoyment, because a hypothetical "dad" (like Vanya or Zhenya) is simply twice as fast and efficient as a hypothetical "slow, mysterious opponent" who doesn't want to play with OH (Overpowered Heroes). (I myself am very slow, and I'm trying to reason objectively). (And once again, I'll remind you of the idea that, in my opinion, the idea of OH on the later stages of tournaments, where those same "dads" are already measuring the length of their skill, looks really logical).

Oh, my eyes, more brackets, more... tomorrow Baratorch will shut down the shop and all questions will settle themselves... I'll stick to my opinion: against making OH mandatory in Tournaments!