Morality isn't the issue here; the important thing is that they stay in place. In online play, this is needed to immediately place two walls (for example, in a choke point) or sometimes used in a "wall, damage spell, wall" combination. When damage is insufficient, they need to start immediately behind two walls. From the starting positions, almost all units take significant damage. Then, when they move back through the two walls, the units will die.
Posts from Walkthroughs for custom maps.
Auto-translated
Yes, but I've never seen such tactics used online. Online, if more than two wall segments are needed, they don't use a single stack; instead, they send units in groups of one, which is what your initial battle scenario shows. Staying behind a single wall to unleash a powerful spell on the second turn and reduce the problem to two walls – yes. Staying behind a wall to cast something unpleasant, like Slow or Curse – yes. But I haven't seen a case where a wall is placed right next to the enemy, and then two other walls are placed somewhere else. Yes, I don't watch everything, but the most interesting battles are usually highlighted. If you can provide a real example from online games, that would be a different story. But I don't understand the reference to online play.
I assume Obi and Marlo were on the same wave with Dirty, and Obi's solution involves an instinctive first move, which is more important for some. But the strategy of looking for the "brightest" spot isn't always a good approach.
And can you provide a link to the author's solution, which is hard to find?
I apologize, is it just me, or does page 243 not open? For some reason, any attempt to open it opens page 242.
I think this puzzle with the walls has many more solutions than just one. The fact that at least three people solved it without hints, independently of each other, and obviously in different ways, suggests that the puzzle is not extremely difficult.
And could you provide a link to the author's solution, which is hard to find?
And yes, it's tied to the cavalry bonus.
Actually, the old guard, represented by Dirty, has already shown that the new additions aren't ready to compete with them yet.
I have no doubt that the first 5 rounds, everyone will make the same decision.
And yes, it's tied to the cavalry bonus.
If that's the case, then it's easily discoverable.
But changing one hex of obstacles and imposing a much stricter mana limit in this battle would make that first move incorrect.
Actually, the old guard, represented by Dirty, has already shown that it's too early for the new players to compete with them.
Added 4 minutes later
Yes, due to the "default" "obvious" first move.
But if you change one hex of obstacles in this battle and set a much stricter mana limit, such a first move would be incorrect.
I haven't shown anything for many years, but I dream that someday there will be a tournament where the strongest players of the past and present will meet, and there will be an opportunity to show something. But I'm afraid that this is unlikely in the current reality.
But the problem is that these attempts are very rare. In the last 5 years, during which I've been on this forum, I only remember 2 cases: an exploration of a quick Walkthrough of the Lime maps, starting with cows - but that Walkthrough wasn't even close to being completed, and he tried it just now. He hasn't completed any difficult maps or puzzle maps that test understanding of the mechanics - at least, I haven't seen any feedback about it here. Can Dirty show a good result in a hypothetical offline tournament? Given his past achievements and the fact that he shows signs of activity even online, this is possible, and I would prefer to believe it. Can Dirty and representatives of the old guard easily outperform the new generation? Leaving aside who the old guard is and what the new generation is, I haven't seen any clear evidence of this yet.
You can set conditions that make the battle completely impossible (for example, give mana for only 1 wall).
, but why? I am generally in favor of giving more opportunities for solutions; even extra units would provide many options. Everyone would benefit from this, both beginners and experienced players. But the question is, who is this map for? For the masses or a challenge map where you need to find a single solution?
Or is there some kind of "old guard" of true Heroes masters, and everyone else isn't "true" and generally plays somehow "wrong."
Dirty is a player who appeals not only in online but also in offline games; at least, he occasionally tackles interesting challenges related to battles or small sections of the map.
However, the problem is that these challenges are very rare. Over the past 5 years, since I registered on this forum, I only remember 2 instances: exploring a quick walkthrough for the Limes map, starting with the cow rush – but that walkthrough wasn't even close to being completed, and now he's trying it again. He hasn't completed any difficult maps or puzzle maps that require understanding the mechanics – at least, I haven't seen any feedback about it here.
So, the battle would still be passable.
For the masses, I would probably only name Paragon. And that's only because it has a plot + the circumstances were favorable from a marketing perspective. The difficulty of Paragon is not high, but it was a revelation for these very masses. In my opinion, you need to engage the masses with something, and from my point of view, the beautiful and elegant solutions that can be found in half of the battles in this map are definitely the right step towards recognition.
The events of the last few days in this thread give the impression that the single-player community (that is, the one that plays Heroes in single-player maps, and not in Multiplayer) lacks some kind of competitive spirit.
Can Dirty and representatives of the old guard easily outperform the new generation? Leaving aside the question of who the old guard is and what the new generation is, I don't see any obvious prerequisites for this yet.
Or that there is some "old guard" of true Heroes masters, and everyone else is not true and generally plays somehow wrong.
What do we know about the new generation? Well, there are some players who complete certain maps. It's even harder to assess their level. Well, a player completed a map in X days. So what? It's not clear whether that's good or bad. Without a competitive element, it is impossible to determine a player's strength. And you need a new map each time, because the fact that someone has completed, for example, Metataxер, while looking at the description where each battle has already been completed for a long time, doesn't say anything.
Can Dirty show a good result in a hypothetical offline tournament?
Does anyone else find the writings of this witness from DmitryAS's sect about horses and electric pumps strange? It would be good to exclude him from the topic, because you can't expect anything sensible from him in the future.

Otherwise, you might forget to ask.
Just do it quickly, before I change my mind.
Suddenly, people appear who say that someone is playing unfairly (unfairly to whom?).
Or that there is some "old guard" of true Heroes masters, and everyone else is not true and generally plays somehow wrong.
I just meant that when offline play was competitive, there was also a list of banned bugs.
Therefore, using the Admiral's Hat in that negative sense, and even calling it a "walkthrough," is shameful.
But some beer-drinking artmoney enthusiasts are really upset that someone is "preventing" them from playing the way they want.
Questioning their exemplary "walkthrough." ))
За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того
Regarding all these arguments about bug exploitation and the cohort of "true" players, I remembered a post by one of the moderators of the Heroesportal website, who was previously an active participant in offline tournaments and a person who repeatedly took prize-winning places in these very tournaments, including competing with some of the people mentioned in this thread. So, Symphony Messes, in a thread about the Paragon map, writes that in one of his playthroughs for himself (not in a tournament), he used methods that violated the rules of offline tournaments (obviously, including the Admiral's hat bug). But I didn't notice any wave of outrage under his post or exclusion from tournaments based on this fact. Or a sharp casualization of everyone around
It was just fun for him to play that way.I can still understand when claims are made against players if they are unable to complete a map without bug exploitation; there is some reason for that. But both wenwell and sanyassh have proven themselves to be people who have a good understanding of the game. In that case, let them do playthroughs, even if they stand on their heads; it won't say anything about their gaming level, and even less about the gaming level of other people in the thread.
You don't need to ask me. Simply presenting a position in the spirit of "let me just throw it out there and see how it sticks" doesn't make it more convincing.
These are critical bugs in the game mechanics. Critically important. It's good when you're a tester in game development. But come on.
And then nwcredpill is also considered a Walkthrough. And anyone who talks about it seriously should also remember to take their pills.
//I understand.
with somewhat out-of-place mentions by respected people in this topic
(And moreover, even for discussing bugs on the same forum, you'd get a slap on the wrist).
I still understand when complaints are made to players if they are unable to complete a map without using bugs, there is some reason for that.
In that case, let them make Walkthroughs, even if they're standing on their heads, it won't say anything about their skill level, and even less about the skill level of other people in the topic.
"Just for fun," "for the lulz," or "mom, mom, look, I completed the map in one day," etc., but nothing more.
Put a disclaimer so as not to get confused. That's all from me.
За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того