SoD и Necromancy. — Online Tournaments

Grando

7 years ago

Auto-translated

During the discussion about the upcoming "Favorites" event, several ideas regarding necromancer heroes were put forward. Opinions were very divided, leading to heated (emotional) exchanges and even an unscheduled outburst (of criticism), so this poll is needed to help supporters of both opposing viewpoints cool down and get a clearer picture of the actual situation.

The question is: if you were to play a game in SoD right now, using templates other than "Jebus" or "Anarchy," and with the most comfortable opponent for you, which set of rules regarding necromancers would you prefer to play with? The current rules (i.e., no changes) or some of the new ideas that were discussed (these are the other answer options)?

You need to choose three answer options – one for Tantar, one for Galthran, and one for necromancer heroes in general.

If you don't play SoD at all, please ignore this poll.

P.S. It is unlikely that the results of the poll will affect the rules of the upcoming "Favorites" event (there is only a chance if one of the options receives a truly overwhelming majority, which is currently doubtful). In addition, there is also the issue of technical implementation, which also prevents anything other than the second set of answers. So, please don't connect these two things.
The poll was created based on discussions about the "Favorites" event, but the discussions took this turn not because of the "Favorites" event itself, but because these ideas have been circulating in the minds of some players for a long time. And now, we want to use this opportunity to understand how numerous this group is.
Therefore, the question is formulated in this way, and we ask you to answer it specifically. I have set the poll duration to 45 days.

sir Davos Seaworth

7 years ago

Auto-translated

I believe that creating polls for every whim is a bad practice. Rules can change, but not based on someone's "desires." Someone has another "brilliant" idea. They post it on the forum, someone expresses "support," and the rest remain disgustedly silent (explaining to each such "innovator" that the idea is worthless is quite tiring). They take this as approval and say, "Let's vote!" Therefore, the right approach is this: If someone decides to seriously and permanently initiate a change to any rule (whether it's banning heroes, restructuring, or modifying the mechanics of skills or spells), they should put a lot of effort into it. First, they should gain the support of at least 50 players (with 50+ ranked games each). Then, they can approach the forum coordinator, who opens an official discussion followed by a vote (in which the votes of those who have played at least 50+ ranked games will be taken into account). This would be a serious approach. Until then, all these "wishes" and "polls" are just empty chatter. And the organizers of official tournaments should adhere to the standard rules by default (participants can agree to play with changes). Of course, this does not apply to independent tournaments, sponsored tournaments, and the like, such as those organized by Armag or Yar. In this case, the organizer sets the rules and is not obliged to consult with anyone.

Browser

7 years ago

Auto-translated

Surprisingly, I completely agree with the previous speaker.

arterm

7 years ago

Auto-translated

I suggest we vote on changing the voting rules.

In reply to arterm

korovka1987

7 years ago

Auto-translated

I didn't see a point about generally reducing the percentage of creature growth in the Haven; everything else should remain unchanged. I support this point.

=Lizard=

7 years ago

Auto-translated

I suggest creating a poll to gauge the relevance of polls.

In reply to korovka1987

Meo

7 years ago

Auto-translated

korovka1987

I didn't see a point in the rules regarding a general reduction in the percentage of undead creatures; everything else should remain unchanged.
I support this point.

I agree, and we also forgot Ihromant's suggestion about reducing the effectiveness of Raise Dead (from advanced earth) and the Converter.

However, the question remains: how do we implement this? We can ban starting with Tanta by agreement, and reducing the effectiveness of Izra/Vidomina can be done in practice, but what about the rest?
In general, I'm in favor of decisive action, not just within the scope of a single tournament. We should discuss the rules, have a community prayer to Baratorch, and raise funds.

caliban

7 years ago

Auto-translated

Today, we’ll be taking down all the Necropolis factions, tomorrow we’ll deal with the Logistics factions, the day after that, the Tazar factions, and later, the Miners and other factions. Any other suggestions?

In reply to caliban

AerinSwift

7 years ago

Auto-translated

caliban

Today we're taking down all the Necropolis players, tomorrow the Logistics players, the day after that the Tazar players, and later the Miners and others. Any other suggestions?

And then we wake up in Haven. :D

In reply to AerinSwift

Heroin_HP

7 years ago

Auto-translated

I logged into the online lobby, and it felt just like the good old days. Friends, is it really impossible to replace the current tournament organizer? Is there no one among the respected members of the community who would be willing to run a tournament? (This is the last tournament I played in, and this is what happened). Ban the current organizer! P.S. A strong person doesn't need help, and a weak person won't be helped.

kamukag3e

7 years ago

Auto-translated

I see that Alfein is popular among a wide audience :D

Ashtray

7 years ago

Auto-translated

From a newbie's perspective: 1) You are trying to solve the general problem of the "Necropolis fest" in Conflux with individual solutions. In general, half-measures like banning Tanta or prohibiting Necromancer rushing will not affect the overall game balance (except, again, in specific cases like the "Favorites" tournament), but they will create additional restrictions. 2) Respected active forum users have already spent a lot of time expressing subjective opinions, but no one has parsed the statistics of, for example, 500 games with 1700+ points featuring Necromancer (Tanta) and shared them. Logically, if Tanta's win rate is more than 65-70%, then it's overpowered. I think such a study would be the best answer to the question rather than a vote. 3) Changing the percentage values of the Necromancy skill will create yet another version of the game. Will the community agree to this?

In reply to Ashtray

Russel_lDHl

7 years ago

Auto-translated

Ashtray

From a newbie's perspective:
1) You are trying to solve the General problem of the "Necropolis" in SoD with individual solutions, which are, in general, half-measures. For example, banning Tanta or prohibiting playing Necromancers will not affect the overall game balance (except, again, in specific cases like the "Favorites" tournament), but will create additional restrictions.
2) Respected active forum members have already spent a lot of time expressing subjective opinions, but no one has parsed the statistics of, for example, 500 games with 1700+ points featuring Necromancers (Tanta) and shared them. Logically, if Tanta's win rate is more than 65-70%, then it's overpowered. I think such a study would be a better answer to the question than a vote.
3) Changing the percentage values of the Necromancy skill will create yet another version of the game. Will the community agree to this?

Everything is correct, and I agree with much of it. But the problem is not only in the strength of the Castle or a specific hero. Very often, many games with any Castle are played by any available Necromancer, for obvious reasons. The community may not agree to this either, as they are used to this style of play.
I remember when I shared my opinion about the introduction of WoG, thinking that - finally, there are so many really good changes. And the response from some segments of the Heroes community was: there are no Necromancers there, so forget about such heroes!
But I would definitely vote for reducing the percentage.

In reply to Heroin_HP

Grando

7 years ago

Auto-translated

Heroin_HP

I logged into the tournament as I used to in the good old days. Friends, is it really impossible to replace the current host in this tournament? Is there no one willing to run a tournament among the respected members of the community? (This is the last tournament I played in, and this is what happened).
Ban the current organizer!
P.S. A strong person doesn't need a crutch, and a weak person won't be helped by it.

If you have any legitimate concerns about the tournament rules, please post them in the discussion thread.
This poll was created to move the discussion about the Necromancer out of the main tournament thread, but without silencing anyone.
Neither those who don't like the Necromancer, nor those who like it so much that they are ready to silence those who don't like it.

I am really not a fan of silencing people or ignoring well-reasoned ideas.
But it is also clearly too early to introduce significant changes to the Necromancer in the tournament, and this line of discussion needed to be separated.
If you are unhappy with the organizer's personality because he doesn't interrupt discussions, you can also say so. This is actually true - I believe that forums exist for the exchange of information and ideas, and I support discussions, even if they don't lead to anything concrete right now - in my professional life (as a programmer), I have seen how ideas mature into high-quality implementations over the years.
If you are unhappy with the organizer's personality for any other reason, you can also say so in the tournament discussion thread.

In reply to Grando

Nodl

7 years ago

Auto-translated

I understand that judging by the main factions in the reports might not be the best approach, but just in case someone thinks that the Necropolis faction doesn't win much in the "Favorites" mode:

Favorites 9 Finals:
20.10.2017 FireToSky (Red, Tower, Ain, Nila) def Dark (Blue, Castle, Valeska, Eislinn) Mini-Nostalgia 135 confirmed
29.10.2017 FireToSky (Blue, Tower, Ain, Sandro) def Dark (Red, Castle, Valeska, Eislinn) Mini-Nostalgia 133 confirmed

Favorites 10 Finals:
20.09.2018 Dave_HUN (Blue, Dungeon, Alamar, Tamika) def BISHOP (Red, Dungeon, Shakti, Gunnar) Mini-Nostalgia 145 confirmed
22.09.2018 BISHOP (Red, Dungeon, Alamar, Charna) def Dave_HUN (Blue, Dungeon, Shakti, Shakti) 6lm10a 144 confirmed
30.09.2018 Dave_HUN (Red, Dungeon, Alamar, Moandar) def BISHOP (Blue, Dungeon, Jedidiah, Tant) 6lm10a 133 confirmed

I'll add some more statistics:
Favorites 9 (all games)
213 games.
Of these, the Necropolis faction was not chosen at the start 357 times, and the games ended with the Necropolis faction winning 51 times.

Let's try to separate the playoffs
39 games.
Of these, the Necropolis faction was not chosen at the start 66 times, and the games ended with the Necropolis faction winning 13 times.

Favorites 10 (all games)
469 games.
Of these, the Necropolis faction was not chosen at the start 770 times, and the games ended with the Necropolis faction winning 109 times.

Let's try to separate the playoffs
128 games.
Of these, the Necropolis faction was not chosen at the start 196 times, and the games ended with the Necropolis faction winning 33 times.