Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Alternative Rules (Draft)Auto-translated
I don't understand something: I leveled up, say, Izru to level 4, and all my other heroes are above level 4, and then I get a money hero, say, Enova. I take her and start leveling her up to level 5, but I only get her to level 3, and then the opponent surrenders, and I get a technical defeat??? The main thing is to surrender at the right time and then you win??? :) :) :)
But you can take something from these rules.
And here's another thing: if you don't want a restart at 116, it won't happen, no matter how close your opponent is... The main thing is not to attack him before 177, and everything else doesn't matter!
A ban on upgrading Pixies and building after the Silo are basically the same thing. As an option, you could allow upgrading Pixies after the second guild...
I still don't understand who was offended by the kettle or why?
One of the reasons I play TE is that there are minimum rules there. Walking past shifted guards and red-rushing is forbidden. THAT'S IT!!! There are no more rules there! Beautiful! That's what we should strive for!!! But here, everything is spelled out in three volumes, it's awful!!! But then again, it's SoD damn it!!!
There are so many rules that it's easy to get confused. Or to abuse a borderline case.
I've looked at the new version, and my first impression is that it's not much better than the standard, and in some places it's even worse. Plus, it's more complicated to understand.
Generally, I approve :smile20: except for points 5.2, 5.3, 5.9, 5.10, 5.16, which I would remove from the rules altogether! 5.15 needs to be refined, and I didn't quite understand 5.18. If you make those adjustments, then I AM READY to play by these rules.
I used to suffer from constant hero disconnects. I couldn't prove that I wasn't a cheater, because, firstly, you can't tell for sure from saves; and secondly, a disconnect can happen even during a battle. I remember that back then I even tried to finish battles as quickly as possible, so that, God forbid, there wouldn't be a disconnect and no one would say anything to me afterwards (although there were such people, after which I almost quit heroes altogether!!!) Now I don't have disconnects, but I know those who still suffer from this. In short, IMHO, the rule is not entirely correct!
Yes, maybe I was a bit hasty there... Dunno, maybe something more specific should be written here. Losses are different: in week 1 you can often lose almost all your troops, but then recover if the opponent isn't aggressive (but for that you obviously need an iron will:D), but in weeks 3-4 and later, I think if the saves show that the opponent has no troops left, and he keeps disconnecting and doesn't surrender — in my opinion, that's clear-cut (or 99% sure):smile42:. I didn't mean to accuse or insult anyone in particular, luckily I haven't had such cases myself, I just read about similar things in old threads on the Portal. invisible
Regarding "allowing" the Vial of Lifeblood, that's just lol. The Necklace isn't that easy to find (usually given in Dragon Utopias when you need it most:D)
What's so special about it? The Vial is objectively the most powerful artifact for stats in the game, practically game-breaking. The Sword, okay, let's not touch it, but the strongest artifact that appears in Dragon Utopias not too rarely — needs to be slightly "nerfed". And in general, we need to somehow, at least by introducing this into the Rules, bring life back to useless artifacts: as it is now, it's either a "museum of seamanship" in treasure zones, or you get Eagle Eye in a Dragon Utopia or chest in week 1 :D. invisible
About Necropolis, that's just crazy. I racked my brain over Isra/Vidomina but still didn't understand anything about them)). And dismissing skeletons is nonsense: the main strength of Necropolis is vampires and skeletons. To create a strike stack, you need to build certain structures, which makes construction in Necropolis different from other towns. Having cavalry in Castle while playing as Necropolis is half a winning game, but they are very rarely built in Castle for Necropolis. And finally, after you've gathered some kind of skeleton stack to be able to fight, suddenly half of them need to be dismissed — nonsense!
I've already simplified the Isra part a bit, and dismissal is only in the case of a non-random starting hero. People have long been surprised and outraged that you can freely choose Gosh on World. There's another option to slightly nerf them in a different way — forbid upgrading skeletons when playing as starting Gosh, and that's it:) .
Added after 14 minutes Oelm
IMHO it's chaotic. Some of the gameplay proposals are incorrect game-wise: for the Sphere, banning the construction of a Mage Guild is irrelevant, especially level 3. And why such treatment of Monere?
But I have this proposal regarding reports — if a person doesn't confirm, they should write the reasons why they aren't doing it. And if they don't write it, count it as unconfirmed. And in the future, one can simply refuse to play with such people.
I disagree with your balance assessment and your proposals for changing it. If you want details, better write to me in PM or on ICQ, I don't want to discuss it here.
As for Pixies — a decent idea, though it's already implemented in TE
I've written about the Sphere many times already, and initially I really wanted to require building level 5 magic for its use, but then I softened its restriction to the limit. In this form (Sphere without any restrictions), playing as mage/papa heroes would certainly be unappealing, but it would be more interesting to play with them at least once every 5-6 games (rather than once every 100, as now).
About Monere — a mistake due to unsatisfactory knowledge of the game mechanics:D, already fixed (eh, I'm a dunce:rolleyes:)...
About confirmations — read more carefully — I'm proposing essentially the same thing!
The balance assessment clearly still needs a long time of tweaking and testing:) ... Maybe we'll figure something out about native secondaries, and finally settle on unit weeks (by the way — I overlooked this, I intend to introduce a rule about mandatory autosave when a Week of Plague or any monster belonging to one of the towns occurs).
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
Why are you so fixated on these starting mages? Why force yourselves to believe in ideas that are inherently flawed? In Heroes, a mage at the beginning is almost always a poor start, and the spellbook is far from the only reason, although it is an important one.
And pay attention: people at the top of the ranking (despite its limitations) are very cautious about changing the rules (with the exception of the revolutionary Britvochka). If they suggest changes, it's usually just 1-2 points. But all these radical proposals, unfortunately, contain a lot of "nonsense."
And regarding the assessment of balance, everything has been known for a long time, thankfully, people have been playing Heroes for over 10 years. The main proposals have either been formalized as rules or implemented in the Tournament Edition (TE). I simply don't like the concept of TE with all these cuts (especially the transformation of neutrals into zombies). But I admit that there are many correct fixes there + the convenience of the interface.
You can actually take something useful from these rules.
And if you don't want a restart at 116, there won't be one, no matter how close your opponent is... The main thing is not to attack him before 177, and everything else doesn't matter!
What exactly can be taken? Everyone is criticizing, but no one is saying what they liked (if they liked anything);).
Regarding the restart – even with these rules, it will still be quite ambiguous: if you want a restart at 116, you go to your opponent, but according to these rules, you can't attack him yourself. But what normal opponent wouldn't be nervous about an enemy scout on their territory?:D
Added 3 minutes later Dirty_Player
You could allow upgrading Pikseis after the second guild as an option...
That's also an option! We can think about it.
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
If you reach turn 116 and are facing an opponent, I think the situation isn't that bad; at the very least, you need to break through their base defenses.
bRitvo4kAGenerally approved :smile20: except for points 5.2, 5.3, 5.9, 5.10, 5.16. 5.15 requires refinement, I didn't get 5.18 5.2 - as an option, we could allow them to hit the opponent with their specialized magic starting from 131 or 141 without upgrades; otherwise, just allowing it has already been proposed and they don't agree:( ...
5.3 - everything is too convoluted there for now, I will simplify it to the limit, and I probably overdid it with dismissing half of the skeletons:rolleyes: ...
5.9 - what, will it be that hard to build 1-2 more levels of magic? I don't believe it! But this could still cause certain difficulties (when draining all resources to zero) - against heroes focusing on Sphere of Banning magic, it is a definite stomp, as there is no counter for it; this restriction is still very liberal in my opinion - you could say it doesn't even exist!
5.10 - Wings, regardless of how hard they are to get, are encountered often, especially in the "mandatory program" - Dragon Utopia (as well as boots of levitation); I believe that expert flight without mana cost is something that practically nothing can be opposed to in terms of control, whether you have DD (once a day :D) or flight for 20 mana, which isn't always plentiful, and various Kiryas with wings are just a complete cheat, IMHO; I think it's impossible without some kind of restrictions on them.
Regarding 5.16, to my surprise, the fierce defenders of bugged passages and shifted guards are silent for now :) ; I am sure that chasing a horde of pixies or fifty dwarves a kilometer away from the road is complete nonsense and, perhaps, because of this, taking a secondary town not at 117, but at 121 - there's a difference, right? ;)
5.15 - I still need to think about the Teapot, but making life slightly harder for its carriers probably wouldn't hurt - I went too far with upgrading all buildings here (heaven knows: maybe limit it to some Capitol...).
And regarding 5.18, everything seems perfectly clear to me: you take Kirya, and if she is given level 20 and control somewhere on the 3rd week, for example - is there any point in playing against her further? Logisticians also need to be brought down to earth a bit.
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
According to clause 5.15: The helmet (+6 all) is an overpowered artifact (class: relic), and it is equivalent to three artifacts of the same class (relic), for example, the Sandals of the Saints (+2 all). There's no point in comparing it to sea relics, which have a value of 0 in skirmish maps without water and which also need to be removed somehow. And luck can often influence the outcome of the game; for example, one player in a low-level map might get the Sandals or Boots of Levitation, while another gets the helmet. Where is the fairness? This factor definitely needs to be minimized in some way, but not by creating conditions that only allow the use of this artifact, because that would disadvantage the player who gets it. I believe that it should be technically implemented so that it, and probably also the +5 all sword, do not appear on the map. According to clause 5.18: It is possible to agree with an opponent before the game to play without logistics.
Regarding point 5.15: The helmet (+6 all) is an overpowered artifact. (class: relic) and it is equivalent to three artifacts of the same class (relic), for example, the Sandals of the Saints (+2 all). What's the point of comparing it to sea relics, which have a value of 0 on land and also need to be removed somehow? And luck can often influence the outcome of the game; for example, one player in a minimal underwater map might get the Sandals or Boots of Levitation, while another gets the helmet. Where is the fairness? This factor definitely needs to be minimized in some way, but not by creating conditions under which this artifact can only be used, because that would disadvantage the player who gets it. I believe that we need to find a technical way to prevent it, and probably also the +5 all sword, from appearing on the map.
As for the technical issues, that's not something I can address. I can only suggest what we can do with the artifacts that currently appear on the map, so that even the useless ones can be useful for something, and the "overpowered artifacts" are slightly toned down. This is better than doing nothing. And besides, it is unlikely that this is technically feasible – what you are talking about. Let the tech enthusiasts correct me, but I don't think even they implemented this in the past...
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
I'd like to add a few words regarding point 7.1, the "stalemate" situation.
I believe that the attacking side (e.g., 100 dwarves) should be required to pay a ransom or retreat only in the case where it attacked a town. Otherwise, the defending side should be required to retreat or pay a ransom (similar to boxing, where the victory is awarded to the more active side).
What I liked:
When playing as Necropolis, building the Necromancy Amplifier and the improved Estate is only allowed after building ABSOLUTELY ALL other structures in the castle, including all dwellings and their upgrades, 5 levels of the Mage Guild, the "smokery," the Capitol (!), and so on (except for the Grail).
After that, upgrading vampires is allowed.
In Conflux, upgrading to level 1 is allowed either after building the Resource Repository ("upgrade" of the Market for 5000) or starting from level 131 (I agree, even if it's from level 141).
The Grail can be dug up and built without restrictions.
I would even add these points to the current rules.
Сейчас балуюсь этим https://vcmi.eu/download/ За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того
In general, after thinking it over, I decided that the current rules don't really need such a significant adjustment (especially considering how complex it is). In my opinion, it's enough to simply add points 1.2-1.4 from this project + limit the use of magic by a hero based on their corresponding wisdom stat + the presence of a Guild Hall of that level. I would also ban, for example, Angel Wings for the first month, and limit Red Fireball based on the wisdom of the hero using it and the presence of a Guild Hall of level 5 in any castle. I think the heated debates about upgrading Pixies, Vampires, and Necromancy Enhancers are pointless because these situations are extremely rare (in 90% of cases, churches exclude Necropolis and Conflux; in any case, this can always be done if you're worried about these points). I would definitely ban the +6 Kettle, at least for the first month. It gives too much of an advantage. So, that's roughly what I think.
Hermit
