Inter-clan (ONLINE) tournament for Heroes 3. Auto-translated

Playing a two-player game on L+U difficulty at 160% usually lasts from 3 to 6 weeks of game time (rarely longer). I think that's not very long. If 4 people play, I don't think the game time will increase much. Although it will affect development, as resources will now be divided among 4 players. You can simply test it: generate an M map for four players and try playing against the computer. And you'll understand how cramped it will be. I guarantee that encounters will happen as early as the first week.

Therefore, gathering 1000 skeletons in 3-4 weeks is by no means fantasy

I disagree with that... does a game on L+U last for 3 weeks?

And regarding testing M maps with companions - you're exaggerating... firstly, I was talking about M+Dungeon,

take any map with seasons and play with four players...

Yes, everything I wrote above implies playing on a random map (even if it's a manually edited map).

I disagree with that... does a game on L+U really last for 3 weeks?
Within that time, a player might simply give up, realizing that their opponent has developed well, and they themselves have almost no chance... The actual clash can only occur if the starting locations are close together on such a large map... IMHO, this is the downside of randomness.
When playing with four players, the time will definitely increase because the tactic of winning or losing is irrelevant, and everyone will be cautious...
And regarding the test of M maps with companions, you're exaggerating... firstly, I was talking about M+dungeon, and secondly, what is there to test? Just take any map from the time of year and play with four players... fortunately, almost all of them have at least 4 castles... these are quite playable maps, and that's despite the fact that almost all of them are without a dungeon!!!

and most likely the difficulty will be 200%, which will delay encounters=))

How do you suggest we deal with this?

If the map is random, regardless of its size, it can create a situation where rivals are "too close," making clashes inevitable within the first or second week – the question is: how do you propose to deal with this?

I am completely in favor of randomness, but in this case, I think it would be best to use the same generator to create several maps based on a predetermined template, and then have someone who is not a participant edit them in the editor. Because with four players, just restarting will take several hours. Someone needs to generate several maps and eliminate at least the obvious imbalances. And the template should be chosen for four players.

So, that's why I'm asking: Why make the difficulty 200% if it only delays development, and therefore increases the game time in real life?
You can demonstrate skill at 160% as well...

It won't be difficult... so I suggest a few polls... namely - difficulty (160% or 200%... I'm for 200%), about Necromancers (what to ban?), Dragon Dice (needed or not), and possibly about unit transfer (but most likely yes, since the developers came up with it - so it should be that way) =)

Question!!! How do you suggest dealing with this?

manually edit =) another question, who will do it? the participants themselves or an independent person =) ..

I'm not interested in playing at 160...

and delay development... so that there are no encounters right away....

How do you suggest we deal with this?

Well, I don't know... I'm not interested in playing on 160... I'm not arguing that you can show your skill... but still... the interest fades...

And slowing down the development... so that there aren't encounters right away... i.e., in the first 1-2 weeks!!!=) and it would be interesting to play=))

Why does the interest fade? Is it because the development speeds up a bit?

Or maybe set a time limit? So that direct confrontation doesn't start too early...

That's why I'm asking: Why make the difficulty 200% if it only delays development, and therefore increases the game time in real life? You can demonstrate skill even at 160%...
Best regards.