Connection ErrorBad RequestSession 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.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Autosaves: Should they be enabled or not?
In my opinion, you shouldn't take or give auto-wins!
The negative consequences have been confirmed by personal experience. 1. When you know what the auto-win will be, you'll lose concentration, and this will become a habit over time – then it will be very difficult to adapt in Tournaments that go beyond local rules. 2. You'll never learn to calculate the outcome of a battle before it begins, the number of monsters, the size of the stack (!), the probability of morale, etc. This is a step towards a higher level of skill in the game. 3. When you give an auto-win, you psychologically relax again and expect a response – this shouldn't happen. If the game is more for fun, then it's a different story. 4. If I take an auto-win, then I can't consider the victory to be complete: smile50:
P.S. I still give auto-wins, and I try not to take them, even when they are offered – it's very difficult at first, but then it becomes beneficial :)
I don't quite agree. If you get 5 auto-wins in a week, then yes, but if it's 1-2 per game, you still have to do what is written in points 1 and 2: rolleyes:. I don't see anything wrong with occasionally taking or giving auto-wins; situations can be different and not even related to the level of skill that some people revere. For example, I believe that a victory after a requested auto-win can be considered complete, but not after a defeat of an opponent. In general, of course, you should strive to play without auto-wins, there is no dispute, but in an extreme case, it is still permissible. IMHO. Darth – about the poll – I wanted to create one, but I couldn't find how: confused:
For some reason, here, most people believe that auto-play is given when the opponent concedes after getting into a dubious battle. But I think that auto-play is primarily insurance against misclicks, or, for example, an unexpected phone call on a mobile device. And since Heroes is a game that requires time, such moments happen. And concentration, in my opinion, depends on the player.
Also, auto-play often preserves the intrigue in the game. Simply, with approximately equal levels of play between opponents, a random misclick, or confusing the order of troop deployment and losing as a result, can already decide the game. The result is that one player makes normal moves, and the other skips for 3-4 days.
In my opinion, there shouldn't be any regulations about this. Playing with auto-play or without it is a personal matter for everyone.
злой_романтик
Auto-translated
+1, there shouldn't be any regulations here. Playing with or without auto-combat is a personal choice. Asking or, even more so, demanding... In general, I think this discussion is pointless. People will continue to do what they've been doing (I'm no exception, but I've been trying to avoid it lately), and they'll continue to give or not give, and changing the rules... is, in my opinion, at least foolish. Well, I don't want to give auto-combat to this player... and that's it... so who am I after that? Or, conversely... I don't want to ruin an interesting game by letting my opponent lose... so, should I be forced to? So, I think - if an opponent asks, you can give it if you want, or not - you know best how to act... That's all I have to say.
And I don't even think there's a discussion, at least regarding the question of whether or not to allow it; it's really a personal matter for everyone, and by creating this topic, I just wanted to hear people's opinions. But I strongly disagree with arguments like the one that autosaves lead to a decrease in the level of gameplay; there's plenty of room for such argument-loving people like me to debate :rolleyes:.
Added after 11 minutes invisible
My opinion is probably as useful to the topic creator as a fifth leg to a rabbit :D, but I've become more forgiving lately, so I'll also share my noobish opinion :). !
The opinion of ANY person, expressed correctly and with respect for the participants in the dialogue, is always interesting and important to me :cool:. I'm not vindictive at all, but I am mean and have a good memory :D. Seriously, I'm generally a calm and reasonable person, as many here have probably noticed, but I have this trait: when people start to annoy me, I respond very sharply and rudely, and especially after I've had a few beers – it's just awful :rolleyes:. Sorry for the off-topic ;)
~no1_knows_me~
Auto-translated
Hmm... I have a little bit of online gaming experience (say, about 3 months), but sometimes situations arise that you'll remember forever. A personal example: a level 17 hero; after the Dragon Utopia, I decide to break into the Castle (and I got shackles in the Dragon Utopia) and I'm standing against a horde of High Elves with only one harpy, and I can't retreat... The game version is 2.1.1. I really want to finish it, but then this happens; well, what do you suggest I do??? =)
- Почему женщины любят кентавров? - И мужик в доме, и скотина в хозяйстве.
Штирлиц шел по коридору. Вдруг одна из дверей открылась, оттуда выскочил Борман, дал Штирлицу сильного пендаля и заскочил обратно. «Гарпия» - догадался Штирлиц.
hm... I have a bit of experience with online games (say, about 3 months), but sometimes situations arise that you'll remember forever. Personal example: level 17 hero, after the Dragon Utopia I decide to clash with the Castle (and I got shackles in the same Dragon Utopia) and I'm standing against a horde of high elves with one harpy, and retreating is impossible... the game version is 2.1.1. I really want to finish playing, but then this happens, so what do you suggest doing??? =)
In such a situation, I would honestly give (and ask for) an auto-save. IMHO any normal player will agree with me ;)
I usually do. And I also take accordingly. But only in the non-contact development phase – fighting monsters, exploring territory. But when active combat and various maneuvers begin, there is no longer a place for autosaves. That is, if an opponent doesn't reach me by a couple of squares due to some mistake, forgets to replenish mana, etc., then I won't give an auto save.
There aren't many interesting games, and winning by letting the opponent lose is just pathetic. Plus, it provides some kind of insurance against fatal accidents.
You said everything correctly; I don't accept reports on levels 111-113. Although, of course, I don't treat everyone the same way :)
Added after 3 minutes bRitvo4kA
I had a game with El Magnifico Sonic`, when towards the end of week 1, I lost my entire army at the secondary resource passage. I didn't surrender even after the opponent took Dragon Utopia, broke through ГО, and captured the capital. As a result, I achieved victory, and that was without logistics.
Incorrect example :))) But, if he had broken through on level 125-131, and you still won, then yes ;)
Added after 1 minute Wlk777
In such a situation, I would give (and ask for) an auto save with a clear conscience. IMO any normal player will agree with me.
Once, I gave one and lost (in the semi-finals of the cup against Starik, it seems)
I once gave him a chance and lost (in the semi-finals of the cup, I think it was against Starik).
But tell me honestly, if I hadn't given him a chance and won... would that have been fair? Are victories like that even necessary? I certainly don't need them.
I really don't understand this logic: "winning by letting your opponent resign isn't a real win," but winning by letting the AI defeat you is okay? To me, it seems logical to say that it's the opposite. I understand that people often play for fun rather than for ranking, but you shouldn't confuse the two. It's one thing to have a fun battle against a combined army that your opponent split up to harass or clear a resource point and then got caught off guard (which shouldn't count, of course), and it's completely different to win because your opponent underestimated neutral creatures (and then that "noble player" posts the victory and somehow climbs in the ranking:confused:). In that case, it's probably not my problem that the opponent attacked the wrong thing and lost. At worst, if my conscience kicks in and the situation is truly hopeless for the other player, I can finish the game without it counting or start a new one, but I won't post this one (it has happened before, and IMO, that's the right thing to do). I think I've said everything.
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 really don't understand this logic: "winning by letting your opponent lose isn't a real win," but winning by letting your opponent lose and then using auto-attack on him is okay? :D In my opinion, it would be logical to say that it's the other way around, IMHO. I understand that often people play more for fun than for rating, but you shouldn't confuse the two. It's one thing to fight against a combined army of your opponent, which he split up to harass or clear a respawn point, and you just happened to catch him (that shouldn't count, of course). But it's completely different to win because your opponent underestimated the neutral creatures (and then this "noble player" will even post the victory :D and somehow climb in the ranking :confused:). I guess it's not my problem that my opponent attacked something he shouldn't have and lost. In the worst case, if my conscience wakes up :), and the situation is really hopeless for the person, I can finish the game without it counting or start a new one, but I won't post this one (it has happened before - I think that's much more correct). I think I've said everything.
A bit rambling... but of course, I respect your opinion. However, I don't agree with everything. My opinion is that a victory should be earned through gameplay, meaning that at least one final battle should take place. Otherwise, it's not a real victory. And rating is nothing; the game is everything. IMHO.
I really don't understand this logic: "winning by letting your opponent lose isn't a real win," but letting yourself lose and then using auto-combat on them is okay? :D In my opinion, it should be the other way around, IMHO. I understand that people often play more for fun than for ranking, but you shouldn't confuse the two. It's one thing to fight a combined enemy army that they split up for scouting or clearing a resource point and then they just got caught (that shouldn't count, obviously), but it's completely different to win because they underestimated the neutral creatures (and then this "noble player" will even post the victory :D and somehow climb in the ranking :confused:). I guess it's not my problem if the opponent attacked something they shouldn't have and lost. In the worst case, if my conscience wakes up and the situation is really hopeless, I can finish the game without it counting or start a new one, but I won't post this one (it's happened before - that's just my IMHO, and it's much better). I think I've said everything.
+100. I don't think you can call someone a "great player" if they lose to neutral creatures, especially when those neutral creatures are easily dealt with. And underestimating the strength of neutral creatures is also a sign of low skill. Excuses like "I was distracted" or "I didn't notice how many there were" just don't hold up, because I've never heard of really strong players like DC_Vasya, Paladin, Stinger, and MikeSpb having anything like that happen. IMHO, a player's skill level is determined by the number of auto-combats they request. I personally keep my own statistics on requested auto-combats and try to eliminate them, but it's not always as successful as I'd like, but it's still happening: out of my 41 games: in the last 20, I requested auto-combat 4 times, once in 4 games (the last one was 3 games ago against Bayazet). in the later 21st game, I requested auto-combat 11 times, once in 6 games, twice in 1 game (Markon), and three times in 1 game (the highly publicized case :D with DirectX). I always give auto-combat (this is more because I play with trusted opponents), except for one specific case that everyone has heard about :smile28: and which falls under the "great player" scenario.
Moderated: OFF-TOPIC in the message
P.S. I don't think I wrote anything bad, I didn't want to offend anyone, I was just expressing my personal IMHO on this issue, but knowing how KVERTI feels about this, will he ban me for it?:confused: :confused: :confused:
Avern
Auto-translated
To be honest, when an opponent surrenders on neutral territory, they put their opponent in a difficult position, forcing them to choose between morality and objectivity. Especially if the opponent is strong, and the game is a tournament match. By the way, Pasha Dubrovin always solves this problem clearly and simply. As for me, I don't even know what to do in this situation because posting such a victory... it's just embarrassing, as is asking for an auto-win. I've trained myself to avoid auto-wins, and I hope to break this habit as well. Because that's not really a victory. In general, you've raised a difficult question, Wlk777. But it's an important one... You can't take an auto-win from life
In general, you've raised a difficult question, Wlk777. But it's important... You can't take Auto from Life
Yeah, I agree, it's not a simple question.
I remember times when I wouldn't give Auto when I revealed an opponent's native Castle, but that was a long time ago. Now I look at the situation more simply and always give it.
Sometimes, an Army loss happens to a Player because they overestimated their strength. LeBron used to force me to lose by coming in on Week 2 with 20-49 Vivs, etc.
And sometimes, it's just due to inattention, accidentally clicking in the wrong place.
For the first case, as categorical as it sounds, I would write the following rule: - A Player who has lost should not ask for Auto, and the other side should not give it.
For the second case, always give it.
С истиной где-то рядом...
Лето 2010.
Hermit
Auto-translated
I won't give auto if the opponent rushes into the Conservatory or Hive without scouting and gets wiped there, because those battles with twenty angels and fifty wyverns by the second week already...
Всё не так плохо как Вы думаете. Всё намного хуже!
