HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

    Loads video thumbnails from YouTube, which lets it see your IP address. Off until you turn it on, and remembered in this browser only.

Posts from DISCUSSIONS on “Rules for online games in HoMM3 and formulas for calculating player rating.”

Online Tournaments
5.0 (1 rating)
In reply to Yakudza
User Avatar
Offline Hermit
Registered:
Posts: 3,465
#356
Auto-translated


I would just like the reason for the non-confirmation to be reasonable, and not something like “it seems to me that he…” :smile30: With evidence!!! :smile51: :smile51: :smile51:

Всё не так плохо как Вы думаете. Всё намного хуже!
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Hermit
User Avatar
Offline КостяN
Registered:
Posts: 1,150
#357
Auto-translated
It's been a bit quiet... Everyone (or at least many) wanted some measures to be taken against debtors :rolleyes:, so why are you all silent now?
Allow me to quote some notable people on the forum who have already supported this idea earlier (let this count as part of the "discussion":) ):
Dreamcatcher
On Heroesportal, this problem is solved by the fact that if a player has debts, i.e., unresponded reports against them, their subsequent victories are not counted in the rating until they respond to the debts.
Oelm
I support Dream 100%. IMHO the best solution to the problem.
Dirty_Player
+1
I consider it optimal!
Xaker

As for the "debt" system.
It is entirely optimal.
I fully support it.
Vigo
I fully support Dream!!!

Only I'd like to suggest an addition, if you will...

I propose introducing a panel of judges, to whom the last save of the game day is sent in case of a "non-confirming" player — they then determine the situation at that game moment and personally inform the Tournament Host that yes, the game took place, the saves were seen, and the "person who filed the report" is the winner in this situation. (Or something similar)
Only the judges should be skilled players (who know what they're talking about) and hold game-related and moral authority among beginner, developing players, and just the residents of HeroesWorld.
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)

Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
0
⚖️
0
In reply to КостяN
User Avatar
Offline vbn
Registered:
Posts: 1,035
#358
Auto-translated
The changes have already been made to the Rules.
I just wrote this as a notification.
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...
0
⚖️
0
In reply to vbn
User Avatar
Offline Дубровин Павел
Registered:
Posts: 1,805
#359
Auto-translated
It’s a pity that the rule wasn’t approved, which stated that if a “Monster Week” of level 6-7 appears, the game would automatically pause it.
С истиной где-то рядом...





Лето 2010.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Дубровин Павел
User Avatar
Offline vbn
Registered:
Posts: 1,035
#360
Auto-translated
This issue is currently still under discussion. As an alternative, in the event of a +5 level monster increase occurring 6-7 times (5?), players could be offered the following options: 1) Load an autosave until a neutral week occurs. 2) Without reloading, players simply agree not to purchase these "free" monsters. The second option is suggested for two reasons: 1) In rare cases, loading an autosave hundreds of times does not help change the week (it always results in a +5 of the same monster). 2) Not all players enjoy additional reloads; some simply cannot tolerate them. And another point. Should the +5 increase be prohibited only in players' starting castles, or in all castles in the game? Regarding the plague week, it's a rare and original feature. Perhaps it shouldn't be reduced. Also on the agenda is the question of what to do with the doubling of monsters at the beginning of the week. Should it be prohibited? And if so, which levels should be prohibited?
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...
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Дубровин Павел
User Avatar
Offline Wlk777
Registered:
Posts: 2,544
#361
Auto-translated
Pavel Dubrovin
It's a pity they didn't approve the rule that when a "Week of Monsters" of levels 6-7 occurs, the game auto [surrenders/loses?] until it's over.
Pavel, I don't understand your concern about this issue. In the last 3-4 months I've played over 100 games, and only 1 (one) time did my opponent get a hydra week (from 2 to 3), the funniest thing is that I won that game quite easily, even though the opponent is not a Новичок. So what if it's a monster week, you still have to build and buy them, it's much worse (and much more common) to get a bunch of FREE (and also + valuable experience) angels and Wyverns from conservatories and Dragon Fly Hives. So the issue is not very relevant IMHO.

Added 5 minutes later
vbn

Also on the agenda is the question of what to do with the doubling of monsters at the start of the week. Should it be banned? And if so, which levels should be banned?
Personally, I am for not banning monster growth at all, but I would limit magic by requiring the appropriate Wisdom skill for the hero using it and a Mage Guild of the corresponding level. I am firmly convinced that this will make the game more interesting. Just my IMHO =\\
2
⚖️
0
In reply to vbn
User Avatar
Offline Дубровин Павел
Registered:
Posts: 1,805
#362
Auto-translated
I support this option:

In the case of increasing monster levels by +5 for 6-7 players without restarting, simply don't purchase these "free" monsters.

Restrict the +5 level increase only to the players' starting castles.

Plague Week is a rare and original feature; it shouldn't be reduced.

Doubling the number of monsters at the beginning of the week should not be prohibited.
С истиной где-то рядом...





Лето 2010.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Yakudza
User Avatar
Offline Lider1
Registered:
Posts: 3,371
#363
Auto-translated
I also agree about the monsters. P.S. Warlock. And imagine a week of bird creatures for a Conflux :)
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Lider1
User Avatar
Offline Wlk777
Registered:
Posts: 2,544
#364
Auto-translated
Lider1
P.S. Warlock. And imagine a week of birds for a Conflux :)
Imagine 5 creatures, 2+2+3+3+4, within a distance of 2 days' travel. Believe me, this is much more realistic (or something like that), and it happens more often than a week of monsters. Besides, I don't understand why exactly 5 birds? After all, this is obviously the weakest monster of level 7, isn't it? :rolleyes:
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Wlk777
User Avatar
Offline bRitvo4kA
Registered:
Posts: 1,107
#365
Auto-translated
Wlk777
Imagine 5 consecutive encounters with monsters of levels 2+2+3+3+4 within a two-day period. Believe me, this is much more realistic (or something like that), and it happens more often than a weekly monster encounter. Besides, I don't understand why exactly 5 birds? After all, this is understood to be the weakest level 7 monster, isn't it? :rolleyes:
+100. Recently, in a game with Lebron and Smoke_mk, I experienced something similar. As for the weekly monster appearing and deciding the outcome of the game, I can't remember such an event happening throughout my entire online hero experience (which also includes over one hundred games). It’s very unfortunate that mages aren’t dominant:
vbn
Well, Valeska became the most popular hero, chosen in 20% of cases, which means she participated as a starting hero in 40%! of the games. Kyrie, Shakti, and Tazar were slightly behind her. However, Valeska didn't become the best hero. If you look at the graph, the heroes whose graphs are closest together will be considered "the best." Thus, Tazar has the highest win rate (63.33%). Galtran (63.16) and Gurnisson (62.07) are close behind. Then come Kyrie (60), Ivorn (56), Crag Hack (55), and Shakti (50). Valeska only managed to win 32% of the matches when she was selected.
Therefore, my suggestion to exclude point 5.2 from the rules and strengthen them remains valid.
В дикім полі
2
⚖️
0
In reply to Yakudza
User Avatar
Offline ewgeniy
Registered:
Posts: 1,633
#366
Auto-translated
I suggest adding the following point to the rules: to improve skills and prevent conflicts, we recommend using the program for automatic renaming of save files RolAutosaver
Attachments 1
1 file attached • Total size: 475.5 KB
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.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to bRitvo4kA
User Avatar
Offline Wlk777
Registered:
Posts: 2,544
#367
Auto-translated
bRitvo4kA
Suggestion to exclude point 5.2 from the rules and strengthen several others remains valid.
I might be repeating myself, but it seems to me that my proposal regarding limiting the use of magic by requiring a corresponding level of wisdom and a well-developed Mage Guild simplifies things and makes the game more interesting. IMHO =
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Wlk777
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,556
#368
Auto-translated
Unfortunately, I have to repeat myself. Regarding the Grail, the ban on the Grail, as far as I know, is a tribute to the Chaos rules. Personally, I don't see ANY reason to ban it in the current version of the rules. The second point is that the ban is in place to prevent viewing the map, and I also support trusting online players. What else? Is the Grail overpowered? No. So why ban it?

P.S. The fact that mages aren't chosen as starting heroes is a problem with the template, not the rules; in many fixed maps, for example, mages are very effective.
1
⚖️
0
In reply to Oelm
User Avatar
Offline Lider1
Registered:
Posts: 3,371
#369
Auto-translated
Oelm
Unfortunately, I have to repeat myself. Regarding the Grail and the ban on it, as far as I know, this is a tribute to the Chaos rules. Personally, I don't see ANY reason to ban it in the current version of the rules. The second point is that the ban is in place to prevent players from viewing the map, and I also support trusting online players. What else? Is the Grail overpowered? No. So why ban it?

Yes. They didn't nerf the Grail; they outright banned it...
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Lider1
User Avatar
Offline КостяN
Registered:
Posts: 1,150
#370
Auto-translated
Here's what I also thought: why do we even need this restart before meeting until day 116 — what are we, kindergarten:) ? On the portal, people play their whole lives without it, and they're fine — alive:smile01:. Such a game can be way more fun and, importantly, faster:smile44:. Just now I played a tournament game with Alone ekb, where I was Vale, and he was Dwarf. Yes, I lost on day 113 after all the restarts (in less than 3 hours), but check out the scenarios:

1st — I'm on fast roads by day 112 with a Necro secondary and basic Tactics, then out of nowhere Shakti pops up, visits my (almost privatized:D) experience stone and misses the first scout hero by one hex; I hit the griffins for the arena — that's +2 to attack — and I attack myself with nearly 30 marksmen and a fairly fat stack of 5-2 against 3-2, but as expected he already has advanced Tactics:mad: plus 20+ lizardmen from Vistan, which easily crushed my defense; but day 113 I had:) .

2nd scenario — on slow roads and without even getting a boost by day 113, I'm level 5 with Logue, even though neither a 2nd-level upgraded building from the start nor a decent 2nd hero from the tavern (Stracker:( ), I run literally to the doorstep of his capital at the start of my turn and foolishly dive at 20 pit lords with a stack of 3 piles of 6-7 pokemons and 1 griffin — wipeout:rolleyes:, but if it were a slightly different setup, even just with a 2nd hero or if the swords had already been built — it would've been far more interesting: I'd sit in his dungeon with eyes from the external dwelling and citadel — and there were no restarts left, so I'd have won 90%... :smile08: It was all in vain, oh so in vain we play here with this restart;) !

From now on, I'll negotiate (if the rules aren't changed) — to play without a restart before meeting until day 116.
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)

Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
0
⚖️
0