Posts from TOURNAMENT TROUBLES!

2 Kyle: The phrase about prohibiting flight over the city seems somewhat awkwardly worded...

Hmm, what exactly is incorrect about it? And how could it be phrased better?

you can try this version, for example :)

1.4. Restrictions on completing a save game:
The use of any cheats or bugs in a clean playthrough is prohibited. The result will be annulled. i.e., the following is prohibited:
1.4.13. prematurely interrupting flight while using the "Fly" spell/artifact "Wings of the Angel" (e.g., by pressing the spacebar) in order to attack cities or other objects.

Hmm, what exactly is incorrect? And how could it be better?

"1.4.13: Using the "Fly" spell/artifact "Angel Wings" to attack towns is prohibited, and prematurely ending the flight (e.g., by pressing the spacebar) is also prohibited."

It sounds a bit awkward in Russian... :D

I apologize in advance if I'm posting in the wrong thread, but I want to raise the issue of changes to the rules for all five versions of the offline tournaments. Of course, one could try to create five threads with a poll for each version... but I'm not a moderator... and I won't be able to move the first post to each new page, etc. Perhaps my suggestion will interest the tournament organizers, who also happen to be moderators of these threads. The point is that in most cases, if two players complete a map in the same number of days, then - in case of a tie in days, the deciding criterion is the sum of primary skills (attack, defense, magic, knowledge) taking into account the equipped artifacts. If this does not determine the winner, then the amount of some resource (usually mercury or sulfur) is considered. There have already been discussions about canceling the third criterion, and the issue is controversial, with no overwhelming consensus. So, I propose making the second criterion - EXPERIENCE. If two players complete the map in the same number of days, then - the hero's level may be the same for both players, and the sum of the four skills may also be the same... but the experience will definitely be different (even if the difference is only 1 experience point - it's already an indicator). In the end, it is preferable when a player has gained a lot of experience. Of course, there is a possibility that two players will reach the maximum possible level (for example, level 40 in Might and Magic V) by using skill-boosting trees, but this is rare, and the organizer should ideally eliminate this possibility (the possibility of reaching the maximum level). It is quite possible that the third criterion will not be needed to determine the winner in a pair, but if it is needed, then it should be determined by the sum of primary skills (attack, defense, magic, knowledge) taking into account the equipped artifacts... and there will be no need to accumulate resources. This is the question I would like to put to a vote in each of the five threads on the offline tournaments.

We've already been through this. Why propose canceling the third criterion? To save players' real time. But if experience is set as the second criterion, it will create even more opportunities for exploiting the system and wasting time, compared to using mercury. And experience reflects the hero's strength much worse than the sum of their parameters. In short, it will be illogical from a gameplay perspective and detrimental in terms of saving time.
And if people happen to have matching days, parameters, and resources, give out two first-place awards; the organizers won't suffer any loss.

If people's schedules, parameters, and resources align, give out two first-place awards; the organizers won't lose anything.

I agree with this 100%...with a small correction – this should apply to any placement, not just the first.

In short, it would be illogical from a gameplay perspective and detrimental in terms of saving time.

Well...you're a well-known fan of blitzkrieg. This is to allow players to achieve a great result in just one or two attempts. But not everyone is skilled enough to immediately succeed and achieve an almost optimal result.

What’s so bad about the third criterion? It seems quite good. There shouldn’t be a first and second place, or any other placements, in my opinion.