HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

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

Online Tournaments
No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
Closed
Simultaneous turns in SoD tournaments
96 voters
Single choice Public votes Closed 2018-08-14
This poll is closed.
Only with OH
35.4% 34 votes
Preferably with Overlord skills, but if necessary, I’m willing to play without them
29.2% 28 votes
Preferably without ranged attack, but if needed, I’m ready with ranged attack
14.6% 14 votes
Without OH
9.4% 9 votes
I don't play / I don't care
11.5% 11 votes
In reply to Sanin
User Avatar
Offline MicroElf
Registered:
Posts: 150
#108
Auto-translated
Sanin


Now, regarding newcomers. It’s actually important for them to play more in tournaments with more experienced players, and this should be encouraged and fostered, rather than suggesting that “they should withdraw after two losses.”

I won’t judge all newcomers, but personally, I would really like to play all 9 games, and that’s why I registered for the tournament. It’s not very pleasant to see calls to withdraw after a few defeats (even though it’s clear that there will always be those who do so). This doesn’t quite align with the tournament spirit, in my understanding.
ICQ 289320583
0
⚖️
0
Offline Wladysha
Registered:
Posts: 387
#109
Auto-translated
It would be great if they offered a subscription for 10 days at 168 rubles. That way, those who play more often would pay more, and streamers who play every day would only need to buy the subscription three times a month. Those who play, say, 3-4 games a month would find that a two-month subscription is enough. They could log in and play for the first day, then, after a week, decide to play another game or spend another day on Heroes, log in, and play for the second day. This would also be more convenient for tournaments, and the subscription would always be available; you just renew it based on how often you play.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Sanin
User Avatar
Offline Roger-ua
Registered:
Posts: 664
#110
Auto-translated
Sanin
Your approach to these realities is fundamentally wrong. You write about it as if it were a normal situation, whereas you should be writing about it with at least some disapproval. And the participation fee should be calculated based on the entire tournament, not just two rounds.


I was also thinking about this; I even have an idea of who to start with. Withdrawal in OFB-9, withdrawal in OFB-10 (see the table at the very bottom), withdrawal in OFB-11 (there are two reports out of nine).

Those who have had 2 withdrawals from OFB should simply not be registered. I myself have never withdrawn, and didn't withdraw even when I had 5 losses after 6 rounds.
Весна 2013.
0
⚖️
0
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#111
Auto-translated
Wladysha
It wouldn't be bad if they made a subscription for 10 days for 168 rubles, like, you just log in.
It means not 10 calendar days, but 10 days when the lobby is actually used (let's say, when you are logged in).
Without looking at the amount and the number of days (there may be different options) - there is definitely a good idea in the thought itself.
If you get matched with a professional dodger in a tournament with a poorly designed group stage and an indifferent referee, you can play one game for 2-3-4 months, even though the actual number of game days was 2-3.
Roger-ua
Those who have 2 disqualifications from OFB should simply not be registered. I myself have never been disqualified, even when I had 5 losses after 6 rounds.
I suggest that the discussion of OFB rules (outside the context of introducing OH) should finally be held in the OFB topic (if Sanin allows it at all).
Forcing people to continue playing in a tournament where there is no longer any point for these people - and in a more general sense - why create such a tournament scheme at all - this is a topic for a separate heated discussion.
A tournament is primarily a sporting event. In ordinary tournaments, the goal is to win the tournament. In OFB, the goal is to get to FB. Where does the idea come from to blame someone who has lost their chance to get to FB and is withdrawing - it's a big mystery. Opinions on this will be diametrically opposed, this discussion has been needed for several years, it is not directly related to the introduction of OH, and it will be completely out of place here.
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dark
User Avatar
Offline positive
Registered:
Posts: 933
#112
Auto-translated
Dark
by the way, it's high time to introduce a register of these players who drop out after 2-3 losses; if they do it systematically, it's easier not to include them!
So, you registered to play again (for the fourth time, it seems) and then drop out?

2org: maybe it's really time to stop allowing such people into the tournament?
ICQ 31-34-85-264
0
⚖️
0
In reply to positive
User Avatar
Offline Roger-ua
Registered:
Posts: 664
#113
Auto-translated
For me, the position in the OFB (Online Final Battle) more accurately reflects the true ranking, and therefore it makes sense to play until the end. If the goal is to participate just to get into the FB (Final Battle), then the number of participants should be around 30; otherwise, the chances for the rest are practically zero.
Весна 2013.
0
⚖️
0
Offline Grizvald
Registered:
Posts: 1,282
#114
Auto-translated
Regarding the OFB, I remember there was frustration due to the unclear number of playthroughs required to qualify for the tournament, and it was just a bit short of making the cut. Also, the system has long needed to be reworked because it's demotivating to participate in a tournament without a chance of reaching the main event. As for those who just play through the tournament to the end, let them continue to do so; I think with this system, it's easier to simply eliminate the "hopeless" players, as there are plenty of tournaments these days.
Regarding Online Heroes, I can handle it with or without the OH on standard templates; after all, I've spent so many years enduring the pain, whether it's on the SOD timer or with a chess-style 1 hour against 0 for the opponent :D.
Мой стрим-канал: http://heroes3.tv/Grizvald.

Восстановил старый номер аси, теперь тут: 625045517

"Это нам идеально подходит" (с)

"Лабета - папашка на первую неделю" (с)

0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline ЯR
Registered:
Posts: 1,112
#115
Auto-translated
I don't see anything wrong with forfeits either, even though I've never forfeited myself. It's just part of the system, and it's not right to blame the player. If you want them to play, motivate them or change the format.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline MicroElf
Registered:
Posts: 150
#116
Auto-translated
Everything written below has nothing to do with the OХ topic. But it seems that right now all the action and discussion is happening here.

In any tournament, there are different players. Some fight for victory, some objectively do not fight but think otherwise themselves, and others (like me) make up a not-so-unimportant crowd — playing for enjoyment/fun/gaining experience/learning. If you remove this last group of players because they have little chance of winning, it won't end well for the tournaments on HeroesWorld as a whole.

The issue of withdrawals, it seems to me, arises either from simple disorganization or from the second group. That is, a player registers with the desire to fight for victory, and when that possibility disappears, they lose interest in continuing to play.

I don't know the best way to solve this, but personally, I really like the Swiss system overall as a format. With a normal tournament progression under this system, players mostly compete against opponents of more or less equal strength at all levels. The Olympic and Round-Robin systems, of course, also have their own pros and cons. And it's probably good to have some variety.
ICQ 289320583
0
⚖️
0
In reply to MicroElf
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#117
Auto-translated
MicroElf
I don't know how to best solve this, but personally, I really like the Swiss system overall. With a normal tournament progression, this system ensures that players play against opponents of roughly equal strength at all levels.
Now, the question is – how did someone come up with the idea that it's important for players to play against opponents of roughly equal strength during the tournament?
Can't they play enough against roughly equal opponents in regular games, in non-tournament games, by selecting opponents with approximately the same rating? I'll answer right away – they can, I've checked, there's a plus or minus, but overall the system works.
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,032
#118
Auto-translated
Al Feyn
Now, here's the question: how did anyone come up with the idea that it’s important for players to play against opponents of roughly equal strength during a tournament?
As a tournament system, the Swiss system is best at identifying the X strongest out of N participants because, in order to become a leader, you have to beat the leaders. In various Olympic formats or groups, much depends on the draw, and strong players can eliminate each other early on. Of course, there may be questions about the regulations, templates, etc., but I don't understand why people are unhappy with the Swiss system.

In the FB-11 thread, there was a post from 06.06.18
Dirty_Player
OFB starts in early July. If anyone has any suggestions, now is the time.
And as usual, no one wrote even a single suggestion regarding the rules. After that, I started looking for organizers and allowed Sanin to create the format according to his own preferences. Therefore, everyone who doesn't like the format should just put up with it silently until next year.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Grando
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#119
Auto-translated
Al Feyn
I suggest we finally move the discussion of OFB rules (outside the context of introducing OH) to the OFB thread (if Sanin even allows it)...
Correction - if Sanin and Dirty_Player allow it.
And, Dirty, you're confusing discussion with expressing dissatisfaction again. Your response clearly explains why the Swiss system is the best format for OFB. But:
1) Microelf wasn't just talking about OFB, but in general (at least that's how I understood it, and I also asked my question in general - maybe I was wrong, and I was thrown off by the phrase he started with - "in any tournament")
2) regarding OFB, the main topic of discussion was withdrawals, but it still didn't become clearer; and the discussion of withdrawals doesn't directly relate to the tournament regulations; these are philosophical debates on the side - someone withdraws, losing their chances; someone thinks it's bad form; and both are permissible at the moment.
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
Offline rebellious
Registered:
Posts: 1,239
#121
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
As a tournament system, the Swiss system is best suited to identify the X strongest players out of N participants, because to be among the leaders, you have to beat the leaders...

And as usual, no one has offered any suggestions regarding the rules.
It was too late to get involved in the discussion and offer suggestions. It could have been done at the end of the last tournament or even during it.
There are variations of the Swiss system, and that's where the Buchholz system will really shine, and it will also motivate players from the lower part of the table not to drop out too early. Intrigued? :cool:
The point is not that the strong play against the strong, but in a mixed order, and with a different order for each round.
For example, in the 1st round, select half of the players (either by drawing lots or by ranking) and give them the right to choose an opponent from the other half. In the second round, select one player from the group, and he chooses his opponent. Then, in some round, give the strongest players (or those from the top of the tournament table) the opportunity to choose. At some point, it will be beneficial to choose strong opponents, or quietly go through the weaker players. The weaker players can play against each other, but they will still remain interested. In any case, there will be constant interest in the tournament situation. The system is quite flexible. But it will identify the best. Perhaps it would be worth holding a multi-round tournament of this type, with 20-30 rounds.

As for the Online Heroes (OH).
It is obvious that money is the deciding factor here, and not some progressive aspirations of players to save time. And you can immediately see who is deeply interested in this. Trying to turn a fan-made, cute game on an engine from the last century (yes, yes, it's that old analog landline phone) into a modern financial platform is at least irrational. And the first complaint here, however much I would not want to say it, should be directed at the author of the mod, who allowed the attempt to monetize or commercialize the game (and it started with a small change to the gameplay, which no one was going to change either). By the way, the copyright holders may take up this issue, strangely enough. Heroes have not yet become free software, and more than 95% of people play on "pirated" versions. As a programmer, he is well aware of these various shareware or proprietary applications, or rather, how they are not respected by the creators of freely distributed software. And about how such experiments can end badly, because they divide the community (by the way, HotA also made a significant contribution to this, but that's a separate topic). And the dynamics of income will also decline. I will not pay for any software in principle, because it is not worth it, and I do not earn money with it. For example, I do not know the motivation of the Creator of this site, but I think that he is a philanthropist. And the survey itself is essentially incorrectly formulated, because the basis of OH (in the current situation) is money. And there is not a word about it.
I have used OH myself when possible. It saves time. But there is also a huge problem when the course of events is disrupted. This has happened more than once in the tournament. And a lot of time and emotions are spent on analyzing the situation.
0
⚖️
0
Offline baratorch
Registered:
Posts: 798
#122
Auto-translated
rebellious
Trying to turn a fan-made, cute game built on an engine from the last century (yes, that's the same analog landline phone) into a modern financial platform is, at the very least, irrational.
It is indeed irrational. What kind of modern financial platform can exist with a couple of hundred customers who are used to spending 0 money on their hobby, when there is an absolutely free alternative (HotA) of their own making?
rebellious
For example, I have absolutely no idea what the Creator of this site's motivation is, but I think he is a philanthropist.
And what is the motivation of the creator of the HD mod? In 2009, a cunning plan was devised to make a modest amount of money from a couple of hundred people after 9 years of development, or something like that?
rebellious
By the way, the copyright holders might take an interest in this, strangely enough.
They might, but they won't. If there were at least a couple of tens of thousands of buyers instead of a couple of hundred, they probably would.
In general, I'm not selling or even distributing their product or parts of it. I'm selling a service and functionality of my own development. The only thing is that their brand is sometimes used (for example, the logo in the launcher), but I can easily get rid of it: "Heroes" - no, "for Heroes" - yes.
GameRanger does (in the case of the lobby) approximately the same thing and earns money from advertising and paid gold accounts. The creators of the paid Exagear earn money for the ability to run Heroes on Android.
And I am more than sure that neither the authors of GameRanger nor Exagear have any agreements with Ubi or permissions from them.
Yes, my product is integrated into the game itself, and this is impossible without reverse engineering the original. And reverse engineering Heroes is prohibited by the user agreement and, therefore, by the law of the Russian Federation, at least.
But in case of real problems, I can move the lobby functionality with HotA to external software without significant loss of convenience for users.
rebellious
He, as a programmer, is well aware of all these kinds of shareware or proprietary applications...
I am as much of a programmer as you are a professional esports player.
I earn money by repairing, servicing, and selling bicycles.
If I were a real programmer, I would have spent those 9 years that I spent on Heroes on much more profitable programming.

rebellious
And the dynamics of income will be on a downward trend.
yes, it will.
rebellious
I won't pay for any software in principle, because it's not worth it.
This is really unpleasant and offensive to read.
I read this as: "I won't pay for software because it's not worth a penny" and, therefore, as:
"the labor and time spent on creating this software are not worth a penny."
I can understand such a justification of one's position: "Suck my long cock stupid fat fuck, I have better ways to get rid of my money, papashka shit. Go search better ways", or something like: "the author has completely lost it", but what you wrote - no.

rebellious
It is obvious that money plays a role here. And not some kind of progressive aspirations of players to save time.
I completely agree with this.
rebellious
I myself used HotA when possible. It saves time. But there is also a huge problem when the course of events is disrupted. This has happened more than once in a tournament. And a lot of time and emotions are spent on analyzing the situation.
So far, it seems to me that the main problem is that many people do not realize and do not fully understand how HotA works, hence all the emotions.
And if there are problems, why not state them, clearly formulating them? And why not suggest solutions?
Sir Davos even wrote somewhere recently about a lot of bugs in HotA, among which there are significant ones. But what these bugs are - is apparently a secret.
HoMM 3 HD:

последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)

последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8

полное подробное описание
0
⚖️
0
In reply to baratorch
User Avatar
Offline sir Davos Seaworth
Registered:
Posts: 1,274
#123
Auto-translated
baratorch

Even Sir Davos recently wrote somewhere about the large number of bugs in Heroes of Might and Magic Online, some of which are significant. But what these bugs are remains a secret.

How is it a secret? I've already described some of them in that same post. For a long time, I tried not to pay attention to them, but I've started writing about them, and repeatedly. And I intend to continue.

P.S.
1. The bug where the opponent's movement bar disappears has not been fixed.
2. When restarting the game using the button, with mixed road types, the road type is always the same as it was during the initial generation.
3. I also want to mention another drawback of the lobby. When a "parent" player plays with a non-"parent" player, and the last player disconnects during their turn, it's impossible to load the battle save (neither the "parent" nor the other player can host). You could say that this is the other player's problem, but it also affects the subscriber. And it's not always possible to find an opponent for Heroes of Might and Magic Online, especially in the morning.
"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479
0
⚖️
0