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 DISCUSSIONS on “Rules for online games in HoMM3 and formulas for calculating player rating.”Auto-translated
2Javdet: I agree, but only with a mandatory rest after each block and with reducing the number of restarts to 1.
Pash, you're talking about a rest after each block. But isn't that likely to lead to endless arguments, with one person claiming that it was a block of impenetrable creatures, while the other insists on the opposite? In the end, they'll both agree to disagree and not play the game?:smile27:
It is definitely possible to fly over Guard Outposts – there have been precedents, and everyone agreed that it’s allowed. And if this “holy of holies” – the Guard Outpost – can be flown over, then why can’t more “ordinary” paths be flown over???:confused: I don’t see the logic! And what’s the point of Flight and Wings then?:D
P.S. By the way, on a similar note: I noticed on the Portal that there’s a ridiculous rule that you can’t even touch visitable structures that give +1 to attack, defense, etc., until you’ve broken through the outpost, under penalty of technical support – is it the same kind of idiocy here:rolleyes:? In my opinion, such structures aren’t much better than a chest and a pile of resources that can be taken from under the outpost...
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
Using Dimension Door, fly, and wings, you can sneak into neighboring respawns without killing the guards (both GO and the rest of the gang). You just CANNOT visit any objects using them!!!
P.S. By the way, on this same note: I noticed on the Portal IMO a ridiculous rule that you can't even touch +1 attack, defense, etc. visitables until the breakthrough under threat of techloss — surely we don't have such idiocy? In my opinion, such structures aren't much better than a chest and a pile of resources that you can take from under shifted guards...
Here, you can't either, but regarding techloss, that's on the opponent's conscience. I've never even thought of demanding a techwin for such a thing)). I strongly advise all those in favor of a revolution to read this entire topic from the very beginning, and you'll understand that this has happened before, like in The Matrix )). There were far more prohibitions and restrictions than there are now. People started saying you could break your head trying to remember them all. That's why they were simplified. If you were to account for every single moment of every case with all possible variations, you'd end up with a collection of writings no thinner than Dahl's dictionary. As soon as rules started being written, and they were written following the template of the HP rules, I wanted to refine them as much as possible and spell out every little detail. But then I realized it was better not to, otherwise it would turn into something like:
"It is forbidden to visit object N without fulfilling the conditions of rule clause №XX1, but at the same time, if this case does not contradict clause №ХХ2, then as an exception, this prohibition is ignored, but only by the BLUE player!!! For the RED player, this prohibition applies in practically all cases, except for one, which is described in the exception to the rules at the end of this section. Furthermore, this exception does not apply on the first day of the week, meaning RED in this situation can use a red-rush without any fear."
This is roughly the nonsense the rules would look like if they were written to cover every little thing, every detail, so that even a top-tier lawyer couldn't find a loophole :). Although you can find a contradiction in anything, even a country's constitution, if you want to :). So, let's keep things simpler. If a controversial point comes up that is not covered in the regulations, you can negotiate with your opponent during the game.
Can you play by moving from one spawn point to another? All that needs to be done is add one line to the rules.
Wouldn't that lead to endless arguments, with one person claiming it was a block of impenetrable creatures, while the other insists the opposite? In the end, they'll both agree to disagree and never play.
That's exactly what I mean. The point was that I'm against Javdet's suggestion. At least because the path to the Guardian Order doesn't always mean there are no prospects.
I'm generally in favor of humanitarian rests.
But your categorical stance has already been criticized, when in almost every other post you fantasize and brag about being able to beat the Guardian Order on the second or first week... when you haven't actually done that before the second month... And an implant without the red orb and cloak is already a victory, at least 90%, if you boost the stats (if there are any). I'm absolutely sure that's how it will be.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. All the arguments, as they say, are made up. In reality, in my games, the Guardian Order is either beaten in the first month or not beaten at all; there are exceptions, of course, but they are rare. Valentin, maybe we can play Heroes for money?
Basically, it's been on my mind for a while. While browsing the thread discussing online game rules, I came across a post by Alex R, where he suggested creating alternative rules for those who don't like the General ones. And that's what I'm going to try to do. The two main goals of their creation are: - to bring back the excitement of single-player mode and reintroduce some things that were previously "cut out"; - to reduce the remaining imbalance that was somehow ignored by the current rules.
Whether they are needed or not is up for discussion. /topic/at/215332/
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
This question has come up for me more than once: Regarding a redraw. Whether to count it as a redraw if the red player "accidentally" attacked the blue player with their week's growth on the first day of the week. For example, at the entrance/exit of an underground passage? In such a case, I propose 2 options: if the attack was on a single scout hero of blue's, where the redraw doesn't matter, then don't count it. If the attack was on the army (or part of the army) of blue, then load the autosave. By the way, blue can exploit this quite a bit by blocking the passage and thereby preventing red from bringing in their growth. It gets too tedious if this is written into the rules, but I've had similar cases more than once that decided the outcome of the game.
And one more point regarding attacking neutral creatures with a "grayed out" stack. If someone doesn't know, let me explain: when a hero attacks unupgraded neutral creatures with a "grayed out" stack and then either flees or is killed, the "grayed out" stack disappears, meaning the number of monsters in the group decreases. Repeatedly attacking such neutrals and then fleeing or having the heroes die allows you to reduce the total number of monsters in the group down to 1. In addition, if all non-"grayed out" monsters are killed in the group, followed by the hero fleeing or dying, the "grayed out" stack completely vanishes.
Because of this, I propose considering the following rule: "It is possible to attack these monsters for the 2nd time, but in this case, they must be completely destroyed."
This restriction could be relaxed by limiting the rule to monsters, say, only level 7 or from levels 5 to 7, or perhaps leave the ban in place for all monsters. On the other hand, repeatedly targeting monsters with a "grayed out" stack requires at least a good supply of gold, and perhaps the ban isn't necessary. I would like to hear opinions.
Until this issue is resolved through joint discussion, what is highlighted in bold will remain in effect.
Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth...
2Invis: In my opinion, only a deliberate attack with reinforcements can be considered a red rush. If you attack in a teleport, then IMHO, it's not a red rush at all. You're the one to blame.
Regarding multi-defeat, my suggestion is to allow attacking with the same hero as many times as you want. If you attack with a different hero, then you must fight to the end.
2Invis: In my opinion, only an intentional attack with reinforcements can be considered a red rush.
You know what kind of bureaucrats you sometimes have to play with?:) You won't be able to prove to anyone later whether you attacked intentionally or not.))
Regarding multi-attacks, my suggestion is to allow a single hero to attack an enemy as many times as desired. If you attack with a different hero, you must fight until the end.
No need for such nonsense. You can attack once to check the enemy's strength, and then attack again and defeat them! That's perfect!
2Invis: you choose the opponents yourself. Based on the last save, it's clear whether you saw the hero there or not. Blue, in the end, might not block the passages. Then there won't be a rush, but then he might let the hero pass.
Well, well :). I already said that you don't need rules at all when playing for rating, because you choose the opponent yourself, and you can agree on the rules. All this is done for tournaments, because most of the tournaments are held according to rating rules, which have long needed to be refined)). I set the voting time to 6 minutes for the same reason. The fact that everyone will continue to play as they did before is obvious.
Blue can eventually stop blocking the passages. Then there won't be a rush, but then he might let a hero through.
It's clear that blue might not block the passage, but he can block it :). In some cases, it may be beneficial for him. That's why I raised this issue.
Дубровин Павел
