Time Limit: 6 или 4? — Polls

Hermit

1/30/2009 7:23 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Well, he said it from that point on. See section 5.16 of the rules. :)

Added 7 minutes later

ewgeniy

and the player, after attacking and merging, will proudly say "I don't have time to move"

I actually wrote about this too, but then I thought that point 6 still clearly excludes it.

Loi

1/30/2009 12:54 PM UTC

Auto-translated

As I understand these rules, everything except point 6 can be changed by mutual agreement, so what are you so worried about?

The concern is about introducing a standard time limit by default.

That is, give two additional 6-minute slots. And, for example, let the player say they are taking extra time and use their auto-save.
___________
And the player, after attacking and losing, will proudly say, "I don't have time to make my move."

I have been suggesting this for quite some time. Specifically, in the current "One Save..." tournament, the following time limit has been introduced for testing:

We play with a 4-minute turn time, but each player has the right to load their own auto-save twice during the game. The right to finish the turn is realized as follows:
1 The player passes the turn.
2 They notify the chat that they are using their first (or second) auto-save.
3 They load their auto-save.

In my opinion, this is enough for a working version – of course, it can be further refined to exclude any other tricks, but I don't think it's necessary – here, the inviolable point 6 should already be in effect. In this interpretation of the rules, the level of trust is the same as when conceding in a console game, for example – if the opponent on the other side of the screen wants to cheat, they will. Points 1, 2, and 3 are to make it not too easy to do.
P.S. I think this is a good compromise. I will post the results and opinions of the players if needed, but I still don't think I have the right to publicly propose the introduction of this time limit yet. After testing it in the tournament and in the season, let people express their opinions, because this is a key change in the game format (introducing a new time limit by default).

Стратегия - искусство возможного.

Первое правило форума :
"Хвалу и клевету приемли равнодушно
И не оспаривай глупца" (с)

Новичкам: ВНИМАТЕЛЬНО перечитайте ВЕСЬ первый пост по нижеприведенной ссылке и 90% ваших вопросов отпадут( на остальные 10% с удовольствием отвечу):
Правила онлайн игр

ewgeniy

1/30/2009 8:44 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Well, he said it from that point on. See section 5.16 of the rules.

First, the rules can be changed by mutual agreement.
Second, I only gave an example – how long and tedious a battle can be; instead of butterflies, it could be 1 Devil, for example...
And in general, why are you clinging so much to these rules? In my opinion, the main thing is point 6, and everything else can be changed, and even if you violate it, you can inform your opponent – something like, “I did this and that” – it’s unlikely that he will demand strict adherence to the rules...

Клан"Homo Homini":smile19: Полезные ссылки:smile01:

В. Уэйтс©

Но поскольку я нищий,
у меня лишь есть мечты.
Я разостлал свои мечты пред вашими ногами.
Ступайте бережно, ибо вы ступаете по моим мечтам.

временно ушел с форума, переодически заглядываю. кому нужен пишите в скайп ewgeniy1985. в аське 384385000 очень редко.

In reply to ewgeniy

Neoandy

2/5/2009 1:53 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I was reading and I have my own opinion.
Guys, you're putting yourselves in a dead end!
What does it mean to load the auto-save twice? Why twice? And not once, or three, five, ten? :confused:
Some players experience stressful movement of unit stacks once or twice during a game, but what if the idea is implemented to allow three moves? What should they do? In my opinion, everything depends on the level of the game. Those who don't need two six-minute turns can easily manage within four! And those who don't mind straining their brains to ensure that opponents don't just collect units in clumps can transfer troops almost every turn in the chain.
Besides, the games and generations can vary.
If people say that four minutes is not enough, then increase it to six and enjoy!
Let opponents remember: no one forces you to play for more than four minutes in a season! Agree with your opponent and play for two minutes. But if opponents start preferring six minutes more often, and you "dominate" them with the four-minute rule, then you should think about it...

In reply to Neoandy

Oelm

2/5/2009 3:31 AM UTC

Auto-translated

In my opinion, Neo, you're not reading carefully enough. Here, everyone expresses THEIR opinion, and overall, they differ significantly. The idea of having 2 autos was suggested by Loy, but I, for example, believe that it won't give much advantage in 4 minutes, but it makes sense for 6 minutes of control – this is a compromise between those who are for 6 and 8.

And it's not about some kind of chain, and the fact that you can transfer troops every turn is not a revelation here; even here, they know how to use air scouting(!). :D :D :D

And the extra time is intended for exceptional situations. Like an unexpected encounter with an opponent. For situations when you have to radically change your planned actions on the fly, with the possible sale of resources, etc. And this usually happens once or twice during a game.

And it's not customary on the world map to "dominate" anyone according to the rules.

In reply to Oelm

Dirty_Player

2/5/2009 3:54 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I personally think Neo is right. If the majority voted for 6 minutes, then we should switch to 6. It's that simple! Those who are used to playing with 4 minutes should now learn to think more slowly :D

And the idea of autosaves is just like something from a kindergarten. If you didn't make it, then you didn't make it! It shouldn't be any other way! At this rate, we'll end up allowing players to load autosaves after losing... :smile21:

Loi

2/5/2009 4:07 AM UTC

Auto-translated

At this rate, we'll get to the point where we allow auto-saving during a game...

Actually, why not?)) Saving once or twice during a game is also a common practice among gentlemen...

Стратегия - искусство возможного.

Первое правило форума :
"Хвалу и клевету приемли равнодушно
И не оспаривай глупца" (с)

Новичкам: ВНИМАТЕЛЬНО перечитайте ВЕСЬ первый пост по нижеприведенной ссылке и 90% ваших вопросов отпадут( на остальные 10% с удовольствием отвечу):
Правила онлайн игр

In reply to Loi

Dirty_Player

2/5/2009 4:36 AM UTC

Auto-translated

loi

Trying it once or twice during a game is also a common practice among gentlemen...

This needs to be eradicated forever! There shouldn't be thoughts like: "Should I attack or not? I'll try, and if something goes wrong, auto-combat will save me..."
And then it starts: "I lost, give me auto-combat, I want to win!"
And if you don't give auto-combat, they get offended...
And who is wrong in this situation? The one who asks for auto-combat or the one who doesn't give it?

In reply to Dirty_Player

Hermit

2/5/2009 5:19 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

Personally, I believe Neo is right. If the majority voted for 6 minutes, then we should switch to 6. It's simple! Those who are used to playing on 4 can now learn to think slower :D

But why slower? If they finish before 6 minutes, they can just pass the turn, and that's it. If a 6-minute turn leads to them stopping their rush and therefore thinking longer because of it, then they can set some kind of timer for themselves.

Dirty_Player

And the idea with autosaves feels like some kind of kindergarten. If you didn't make it, you didn't make it! There should be no other way! At this rate, we'll end up allowing loading an auto after a loss... :smile21:

It's not that simple here... Six minutes is generally enough, but indeed, upon an unexpected encounter with an opponent (their arrival), you sometimes have to completely change plans and rethink everything... In such cases, even 6 might not be enough...

Added after 9 minutes

Dirty_Player

This needs to be eradicated forever!!! There shouldn't be thoughts like: "Should I attack or not? I'll try, if anything happens the auto will save me..."
And then it starts: "I lost, give me an auto, I want to win!"
And if you don't give the auto, then come the grievances...
And who is in the wrong in this situation? The one asking for the auto or the one not giving it?

I completely agree, although I've taken autos myself when offered. Indeed, if an opponent is trying their hardest to beat me, diving into hives, cans, Dragon Utopia to build up an army for a rush and arrive at my place before I'm prepared, then why should I provide him with an auto if he overreaches and fails? If he doesn't want to fail—let him not risk it and develop slower!!! And then when it comes time for contact, maybe I will be better prepared!

In reply to Loi

Loi

2/5/2009 6:59 AM UTC

Auto-translated

loi

Well, why not?)) Doing it once or twice per game is also a common practice among gentlemen...

That was just a joke and a friendly jab. But seriously, banning such players is the right thing to do; they're all over the place...

Стратегия - искусство возможного.

Первое правило форума :
"Хвалу и клевету приемли равнодушно
И не оспаривай глупца" (с)

Новичкам: ВНИМАТЕЛЬНО перечитайте ВЕСЬ первый пост по нижеприведенной ссылке и 90% ваших вопросов отпадут( на остальные 10% с удовольствием отвечу):
Правила онлайн игр

In reply to Loi

LeBron

2/5/2009 7:16 AM UTC

Auto-translated

loi

It was just a joke and a friendly jab.
But seriously, banning players like that is justified...

Ah, I feel like I'm going to get banned soon for having good intentions:( But think about it... we spent 2 hours on restarts, then another 2 hours on the first 6 days, and then the opponent just quits: "I lost!" So, what does that mean? I wasted 4 hours for nothing? Personally, I'm not interested in the rating at all, and I just want to have a good game. Why not give the opponent an automatic win, at least for that purpose?

"Это нам идеально подходит!" [Новосибирск, 2013]
"Красавчик! Если только не читер.." [Киев, 2014]
"Это Вам не шутки - нажрался Dust в маршрутке" [Новокузнецк, 2015]
Сам ты фиш (с) :D

Loi

2/7/2009 3:43 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Well, of course, you should ban, ban such... they're all over the place.

And this was just a joke and a friendly jab.)))
P.S. I'll probably get banned soon for excessive spam and off-topic posts...

Стратегия - искусство возможного.

Первое правило форума :
"Хвалу и клевету приемли равнодушно
И не оспаривай глупца" (с)

Новичкам: ВНИМАТЕЛЬНО перечитайте ВЕСЬ первый пост по нижеприведенной ссылке и 90% ваших вопросов отпадут( на остальные 10% с удовольствием отвечу):
Правила онлайн игр

Pit for LM

3/10/2009 12:17 PM UTC

Auto-translated

First post by invisible, last by loi.

invisible

Basically, most of the players I know are already playing with 6 minutes, while the season rules still state 4. So, let's conduct a poll among Heroes of Might and Magic III players: what time do they actually prefer? On the Portal, a vote concluded that it's time to switch to 6 minutes, and why should we be any different?
In short, the voting will last for a month, and based on the majority, we will make adjustments to the rules if necessary.

The voting is over: more than 60% voted for 6 minutes, and less than 40% voted for 4 minutes. We are no worse than the Portal.
If the respected online game moderators consider this result sufficient, please make an amendment to the "Rules for online games of HoMM3 on HeroesWorld".

In reply to Pit for LM

vbn

3/10/2009 12:45 PM UTC

Auto-translated

38.5% of participants voted for 4 minutes. 61.5% of participants voted for 6 minutes. Changes have been made to Rules for online games on HoMM3 at HeroesWorld.ru.

Клан Homo homini

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...

numOne

3/10/2009 1:01 PM UTC

Auto-translated

About a month ago, I voted for 4 myself, but recently I've had to play on 6 quite often, and I, you know, really felt the beauty of those extra 2 minutes. I realized how much more comfortable they make the game! And, most surprisingly, the games don't become longer because of it, but rather the opposite.
In general, 6 is definitely better than 4 in every way!:smile20:

Пусть мой враг будет силен и страшен. Если я поборю его, то не буду чувствовать стыда.