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

OMG!!11 >>>ALL<<< the organizers of Heroes of Might and Magic III tournaments on HeroesWorld agreed not to accept violators of this rule into their tournaments. That is, this rule actually applies to all tournaments on HeroesWorld. I've already written this twice...

As far as I know, ANY user of our resource has the right to organize a tournament. Therefore, any innovation should be discussed and adopted by ALL interested forum participants. Your backroom decision violates the voting rights of other users.
In general, it's not just about this half-baked and non-functional rule. It is necessary to develop GENERAL serious rules for conducting tournaments.

well, I'll try to draft something like that now...
in general, we currently have a concept of a tournament curator - this was discussed by the entire administration; at the moment, I am such a curator for Heroes of Might and Magic III online.

Zhenya, we are waiting for a dedicated topic and a draft of the rules. We will discuss it and try to help. Kostya, thanks for your support.

Here's what happened yesterday:
I was playing with Pete, my Gosh attacks to retreat and gets hit with Implosion on his skeletons. I don't stay in debt either; I destroy his stack and leave. In general, I broke the rule, even though I thought it was allowed... I reread the rules, and I started to think about how absurd the wording of the rule itself is.

5.6. Hit-and-run is prohibited: an attacking hero is not allowed to retreat in the first round of battle if he has used combat magic or any other magic that, in one way or another, has inflicted any damage on the opponent. This prohibition does not apply to the hero who is defending.

As I understand it, the spirit of this rule is to prevent things like running up, hitting, and running away, sometimes repeatedly.
But if the defending player casts combat magic FIRST, then both players are in equal conditions, and according to our rule in the above-described case, the attacking side is already disadvantaged because he cannot respond:smile32:

But if the defender casts a combat spell FIRST, then both sides are in equal conditions, and according to our rule, in the above-described case, the attacking side is disadvantaged because they cannot respond:smile32:

+1 here.

+1 here, I'm all for it

I think everyone, or almost everyone, will be in favor. ;)

Indeed, rule 5.6 of HeroesWorld about hit-and-run is intended by its author to somewhat protect the defending side from numerous raids by the attacker using battle magic followed by fleeing.
In the LT League rules:

Hit-and-run is prohibited. Both players must have a chance to cast magic.

In the "No Rules" tournament, this is not specified at all.
In Seasons for any side in any round:

use hit and run (use battle magic against an opponent in combat and flee/buy your way out during that turn)

Other options are possible.
A universal rule cannot be created due to the abundance of situations that arise in games.
For example, our rule allows the following: the attacker casts Mass Haste and kills as many of the opponent's troops as possible on their turn, then buys off the last warrior and repeats the attack until mana, time, or money runs out. Mass Haste is not battle magic... Imbalance is not regulated...
In our case, if my magic were significantly weaker than the opponent's magic, then acting under the Lithuanian rules, Roman could destroy my troops with several attacks. Similarly, the meaning of the rule disappears...
One could come up with a bunch of other examples. It's impossible to anticipate and balance everything. Yes, probably not necessary either. After all, the game is random; imbalance gives it life. I don't really care what rules to play by. In any case, I'll come up with something to gain an advantage :D . I would just like players to know the tournament rules interpretation and act accordingly. If you know hit-and-run is allowed, sleep with the Sphere of Inhibition.
P.S. In our match, of course, on such a template and at such a stage, crashing into the opponent was somewhat adventurous. You could have run into not only more powerful magic but also the Shackles of War.

This isn't specified in the "No Rules" tournament at all.

Which is logical, considering the name :D

I believe it is necessary to introduce an additional clause in the "Respect" rules.
I have encountered situations many times:
1) When it is not possible to agree with an opponent about a game:
- due to a mismatch of mutual free time
- due to one side ignoring the other
- due to personal reasons, which are sometimes implemented under the guise of the above reasons

This is primarily relevant for tournaments, where the draw is unforgiving.

2) Regarding the "season" - it's simpler there, if you don't want to, don't play!
But there are also pitfalls there. Opponents often avoid finishing matches... at various stages. From the first generation of units to the final battle.

P.S. Forbidden fruit is sweet, but if it is not forbidden...

I believe it is necessary to introduce an additional item in the "Respect" rules.
It is not uncommon for opponents to avoid finishing matches... at various stages. From the first generation of units to the final battle.

I completely agree.

We can add the following to the rules:
If an opponent, for whatever reason, cannot finish a match within, say, a month, they will be declared the loser. Compliance with the time limit can be tracked using save files.

Perhaps there might be a discrepancy in timing, or maybe it's simply better to approach it with a more relaxed attitude?

So, there might be a time mismatch, or maybe it's just easier to approach it that way?

That's what I'm saying, there can be problems with time mismatches in the game – something needs to be done in such cases, otherwise people will use it as an excuse not to play (or finish the game).

Whether you approach it with ease or not is a personal matter, but respect should be present... or at least patience.

Friends. I had an idea to formulate some adjustments into the rules, which have already been discussed, but somehow got lost among other messages. I would like to hear the opinion of everyone, how they think and why, about this. I am putting these few points up for collective discussion. And then we'll see how active the discussion is - whether a poll will be needed or not. 1. Allow upgrading of Imps after building a resource depot (as implemented in the Test Edition at the program level). I don't think they are more dangerous than Mighty Gorgons, what do you think? And in the first week, it's unlikely that anyone will neglect building other monsters just to upgrade Imps and lose momentum in terms of meat production. 2. Allow digging for the Grail. Without visiting all the obelisks and restrictions, or at least starting from level 141. 3. Allow playing with level 4 magic specialists, using their specialized spells, without building a Guild for these heroes: Loïc, Alamar, Jeddite, Xeron. I especially want to mention unbanning Xeron in Inferno; maybe people would play this Castle more often. And he would become more "dangerous." What's so overpowered about him? With a magic power of 10 and expert in fire magic, the Inferno spell deals 180 damage and costs 12 mana! Without fire magic, the Inferno spell deals 120 damage and costs 18 mana! Meanwhile, a Lightning Bolt with an expert in air magic and a magic power of 10 deals 300 damage and costs 8 mana! Without air magic, it deals 260 damage and costs 10 mana. So, where is the super-cheating here? But passing on magical specialties to other heroes using literacy without building a Guild is not allowed! (If you want to use their specialties, start with them, or find them in the dungeon or tavern if you're lucky, or build a Guild). Of course, for the heroes: Solmyr, Demer, Aislinn, and Tant, it is necessary to build a Guild of the corresponding level. And passing on (i.e., using the passed-on) magical specialties to other heroes using literacy without building a Guild is not allowed. 4. Regarding bans, I've been thinking more and more about logistics specialists... Limiting them to, for example, level 10-12, or banning them altogether. Here's an example, I found some useful calculations on a forum once and copied them into my notepad, sorry, I don't remember who the author is. How does the specialty work? If Gunnar has an expert in logistics and is maxed out on speed (11 and above), then his bonus will be 30 movement points per level. A little math: MP = 2000 (from speed 11) + 600 (expert logistics) + 30*n (n-Gunnar's level) Total: Level 5 - 2750 MP Level 10 - 2900 MP Level 15 - 3050 MP Level 20 - 3200 MP In other words, at level 20, we get a double bonus from logistics; a simple hero with expert logistics will have 2600 MP! (Remember that on the road and without a penalty, 1 step = 100 MP). And now let's think. The difference between a simple hero and Gunnar at level 20 is only 600 MP, which is 6 steps (4 diagonally), well, on the road it's a little more... I'll add that if it's on fast roads, it's 12. And now let's calculate how much this will be "per week": 600 moves * 7 = 4200 moves. 5. Remove the 116-day rest (it just drags out the games). 6. And when a week-long monster of level 5-6-7 appears, it should be automatic, and if it's archers and elves, it should also be automatic. P.S. This is not a joke. Although the archers and elves part looks quite funny

Besides points 4 and 6, I generally agree. And what is a Logistician supposed to do if they reach level 12? This is essentially a ban. I am against any restrictions on Logisticians. Regarding point 6, I’ll say it again (since I see some people here can’t read something through in 1-2 tries) – instances where this happens and actually changes the game occur extremely rarely. In my almost 200 online games, it happened once to my opponent (Hydra week), and I still won that game. You still have to build and buy the monsters. However, cases where games were decided because one opponent had a lot of free troops from Griffin Conservatories and Hives (because they were given out more) are dozens of times more common. So should we ban Griffin Conservatories and Hives then? As for banning Mark or Grand week, that’s just ridiculous, or is this an April Fools' prank? Or maybe the whole post is?

5. Remove rest 116. (If desired, it unnecessarily prolongs games).

And even without wanting to, it still prolongs them. Nevertheless, I am against it. I often encountered situations on the general secondary map. For example, Valeska with 30+ archers meets Kirra with 7 elves. And what, let the secondary map be grassy, easy to run around, and everyone hopes for their own territory, so they rush there.

Regarding point 6, I agree completely with Wlk777. It only adds unnecessary save loading.

I believe that simplifying the Grail excavation is not rational, as I once found it myself (on the mini-map there was lava, and the lava respawn was one and small; in three turns I found it, visiting only 3 obelisks).

I will abstain from commenting on the remaining points.

1. Allow upgrading of units after building the resource depot.

also:
- Psychics - after building the resource depot + 4 guild levels (but no earlier than week 3, 131)
- Phoenixes - after building the depot + 5 levels + university (but no earlier than week 5, 211)


2.From 141, one shovel per day.

3. Completely unban Loenis and Xyron, and leave Jadith and Alamar in a group with Solmyr Dimmer and Aislin.

4. Logisticians can be transferred to the group of Isra and Vidomina (strict prohibition on obtaining an expert skill before they are the only one left "last" *Exception - if a monk trained them*

5. No comment.

6. What's the point of weeks? It's not necessary to simplify; it's necessary to balance while preserving diversity.
Level 7 - can buy 1 bonus unit.
Level 6 - 2 bonus units.
Levels 1-5 - monsters without restrictions.

Good suggestion (Lider1) - it would be better to hold votes on all points, and the main idea is to allow as much as possible, not to prohibit even more.
For example, balance the main heroes.
The situation with the Dungeon is terrible = only Shakti, although there are also Gunnar, Alamar, Jadith, and all the other warlords.
It is better to consider not only the 2sm4d(3) template when making calculations.

1. Allow upgrading fairies after building a resource storage (as done in TE at the programming level). I don't think they are more dangerous than powerful Gorgons; what does everyone think? And in the first week, it's unlikely that anyone will neglect building other monsters just to upgrade fairies and lose momentum in terms of meat.

As a TE player, I don't understand why upgraded fairies are so dangerous? Only because, without a response, they can eliminate hundreds of zombies and golems, which are found in random maps in about 1% of all monsters? I think then we should also ban upgrading harpies, because upgraded harpies, with the right location (there have been real in-game cases!), can eliminate any number of two-hex (and possibly even one-hex) stompers!