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 Tournament Committee - general questions.
I agree with my fellow countryman; it's not worth making medals for 2nd or 3rd place. In my opinion, the best newcomer and the player for a specific faction are already known (for example, masters for Inferno and Tower). However, it would be nice to reward participation in the tournament, even if someone just played. And as is well known, people with zero knowledge don't come to our forum; there are quite knowledgeable and experienced players. And the term "Newcomer" is simply applicable because there is a lack of knowledge of the rules and customs here.
Since I received a private message from Pit, I'll write that I don't have any major objections here, and I basically agree with everything. I also don't have any good ideas to offer at the moment.
For the "Rookie of the Year" and "Player of the Year" nominations, awards should only be given for first-place finishes. Regarding the "Best Player" award for a specific faction, tournament organizer, etc., it's possible to create perpetual awards (I completely agree with Kosta N). Because this encourages activity and competition. As for the term "rookie," here's a suggestion: a rookie is someone who has not won more than 12 games in one season against fewer than 4 players. That is, there should be a total of 12 wins, and not all against the same player, but at least once against 3 players and 9 times against one player.
I also received a private message from Pit, so I'll write here.
Baba Yaga is also against it :) Against all the extra medals under avatars and titles. There's no need to create a heavy, non-game-related superstructure – the most active, the best, second place out of three, third place out of two, and so on. And if we start awarding points for all of this, in a couple of years we'll start selling them and turn from a world into a portal :)
Similarly, with catching cheaters. A permanent committee should exist, I agree. But there's no need to overdo it with the proceduralization. And a black mark – let it be. Just for clarity.
What constitutes a "newbie" is a more interesting question. There are two ways to determine a player's skill level: (1) by their knowledge of strategy and tactics, and (2) by their game results. Since the task is for players who have played few games, (2) is unacceptable, and I propose the following criterion: "a newbie is someone who, on average (playing with medium-strength factions, on a standard map), cannot achieve Utopia by the 4th week."
Just in case, I'm writing this. I don't participate in online tournaments. I only play in seasons. I haven't encountered any cheaters.
I also received a private message from Pit, so I'll write here.
There are two ways to determine a player's skill level: (1) by their knowledge of strategy and tactics, and (2) by their game results. Since the task is for players who have played few games, (2) is not applicable, and I propose the following criterion: "a beginner is someone who, with an average setup (using castles of medium strength, on a standard map), cannot conquer Utopia by the 4th week."
I also sometimes can't conquer Utopia with an "average" setup by the 4th week. But no one considers me a beginner. However, the number of wins can realistically assess a player's abilities.
For the nominations of "Rookie of the Year" and "Player of the Year," awards should only be given for first-place finishes. Regarding the "Best Player" award for a specific faction, tournament organizer, etc., we can create perpetual trophies (I completely agree with Kosta N). This will encourage players to be more active and competitive. As for the term "rookie," here's a suggestion: a rookie is someone who has not won more than 12 games in a single season against fewer than 4 players. That is, there should be a total of 12 wins, and not all against the same player, but at least once against 3 different players and 9 times against the same player.
Just don't be offended, but according to your criteria, Pit and Alex_R are rookies for the Spring 2009 season, and LeBron is on the verge. Maybe I'm not understanding something; are you advocating for players to play more often? The top 20 players have an average of 13 wins per season, so it's very easy to fall outside the criteria.
Don't get offended, but according to your criteria, Pit and Alex_R are considered newcomers for the Spring 2009 season, and LeBron is at his limit. Maybe I'm not understanding something; are you advocating for players to play more often? The top 20 players have an average of 13 wins per season, making it very easy to fall outside the criteria.
Well, it's not a fact that the number I set is an objective minimum. Considering that Pit and Alex_R have been playing for more than one season, we can look at their statistics from previous seasons, where they likely have more games. Although, they aren't exactly big names:D. If they didn't meet the requirement, then they didn't pass the test to be considered masters (just kidding).:)
For now, I'm voting for the following nominations:
1. Player of the Year.
2. Tournament Organizer of the Year.
"User of the Year" should be included in the definition of "Player of the Year".
I ask again, please don't take it personally, but besides the quantitative indicators, there are also qualitative ones.
For example, in the Spring 2009 Season, Avern-o had 4 wins, and Blacpoint had 3, but one of them was against Dubrovin Pavel.
I'd trade my 4 wins for one like that :)
And in general, if we're being serious, in the Winter 2009 Season, the average number of games for the top 20 was 29, with 18 wins.
In the Spring 2009 Season, the average number of games was 17-18, with 13 wins.
So, top players don't tend to play a large number of games, but these are mainly Tournament matches and against Strong opponents.
Although, for example, none of the strong players refuse to play against beginners. Many agreed to play with me, which means our leaders don't have "star disease," which is good. And I think it's not about boosting their rating; they're just good guys.
Hello! Questions: 1. Which nominations do you support? Do you have any other suggestions? What are the criteria for determining the winner in each nomination? 2. How do you envision the Main HOMM3 Online Tournament - regulations, participants...? 3. Currently, only tournament winners are awarded with a medal displayed next to their avatar. Should we also award the runners-up - 2nd and 3rd place? 4. Can you define the word "newbie" in the context of our forum? 5. Perhaps we should "award" the Black Mark to user Djede? We ban not only cheaters, but also users who ban themselves. I want cheaters, even if they are banned, to be recognized. If the players agree, I will write a request to the Creator in the "Wall of Shame" thread. 6. Do you think we could award the Black Mark for a certain number of unconfirmed reports (how many?), for repeatedly missing tournament deadlines, and for other things? After all, these are also manifestations of dishonesty towards other players. 7. What controversial situations in online games requiring the intervention of a third party have you encountered?
1. I support all of the listed nominations. The criterion could be a vote by forum participants. 2. The main tournament should be one in which games are played on various maps + with fixes and with a large number of games, to objectively determine the winner. 3. I would only award medals for 2nd and 3rd place displayed next to the avatar for the winners of seasonal ranked games. 4. A newbie on HW is a person who recently joined the forum and has a weak level of play in HMM3. 5. I don't object. I have also had to deal with a cheater named CelestialArchangell. 6. This is not a rational method of punishment. 7. A seemingly ambiguous interpretation of the rules (red restart on turn 113 when it is blue's turn)
- No new suggestions yet. - Regarding tags - I agree to give them to those who haven't received them yet. - Regarding current nominations: *Organizer of the Year* - yes *Player of the Year* - yes *Rookie of the Year* - yes *Clan of the Year* and *Offline* - not within our competence, although we can revisit this later. *Unconfirmed Reports* - I agree that such people should be noted, but perhaps not with a "black mark" - but rather a "list of undisciplined players" can be placed next to the tournament table or add a column to the rating table (for notes).Blacpoint
Although, to be honest, these aren't exactly big names:D If they didn't meet the requirements, then they didn't pass the test to become masters (Just kidding).:)
No, this isn't a joke - it's a valid point. There's a concept of "form" - when there are few games, it's not necessary to list them as rookies, but also not to include them in the TOP.Blacpoint
We can look at their statistics for previous seasons, where they probably played more games.
Well, for example, I have a maximum of about 15 games per season, and on average from 3 to 10 games, and it's unlikely that I'll ever play more than that
I'll trade 1 victory in Heroes for 2 wins in online poker :) And in general, I'm voting for: -Player of the Year -Rookie of the Year -Organizer of the Year
"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
Establish a tradition of annual awards in several categories. 1) Honorary user of the forum - it's unclear what criteria to use for selection. Against. 2) Organizer of the year's tournaments in 200x - "Any work should be rewarded." For. 3) Player of the year 200x - For. 4) Newcomer of the year 200x (work for the forum administration) - I'm not sure how to answer. Best player for each of the 9 races - For. Questions: 2. How do you envision the Main HOMM3 Online Tournament - regulations, participants...? - I can't even imagine. 3. Currently, we only award a medal under the avatar to tournament winners. Should we also award the runners-up - 2nd and 3rd place? - I agree.
Regarding the forum administration: 4. Try to define the word "newcomer" in relation to our forum. - We need to clarify, is it a newcomer to the forum or a newcomer to the online/offline game? If it's the forum, then it's clear that it's someone who has just joined. But a newcomer to the online/offline game is someone who not only has just joined the forum but also doesn't know the rules and intricacies of the online/offline game. Regarding the tournament committee: 1. Should we "reward" user Djede with a "Black Mark"? We ban not only cheaters, but also users who ban themselves. I want cheaters, even if they are banned, to be recognized. If the players agree, I will write a request in the "Wall of Shame" topic to the Creator. - I don't know about cheaters, they have already been punished with a ban. But I am for: 1. Violations of forum rules. 2. Failure to confirm reports. 3. Disrupting tournaments. 4. For unfinished games and unwillingness to finish them for some absurd reasons. 5. Establish a time limit within which a player must finish a started game; otherwise, the player who cannot finish the game must submit a report of defeat, regardless of the reasons why they cannot finish the game. For failure to comply with these rules, impose penalty points; after accumulating a certain number of penalty points, add players to the "Hall of Fame" and give them a "black mark." 7. In what controversial situations in online games requiring the intervention of a third party have you been involved? - I think there's no need to remember them
Message from Pit for LM Hi! Questions: 1.Which nominations do you support? What other suggestions do you have? What are the criteria for determining the winner in each nomination? 2. How do you envision the Main HOMM3 Online Tournament - regulations, participants...? 3. Currently, only tournament winners are awarded a medal under their avatar. Perhaps we should also reward runners-up - 2nd and 3rd place? 4. Try to provide a definition of the word "newbie" as it applies to our forum. 5. Perhaps we should "reward" user Djede with a Black Mark? Not only cheaters are banned or self-ban. I want a cheater, even a banned one, to be marked. If players agree, I will write a request to the Creator in the "Wall of Shame" thread. 6. Do you think a Black Mark should be awarded for a certain number of unconfirmed reports (how many?), for repeatedly missing tournament deadlines, or for something else? After all, these are also manifestations of dishonesty towards other players. 7. In what controversial situations in online games requiring third-party intervention have you been involved?
1. I am FOR the "Newbie of the Year" nomination. Only, it should not be determined by tournament results. If a tournament is only among newbies, who will check if this newbie is actually strong? The nomination should reflect how a person progressed over the year, how they grew, how many force majeure situations they encountered and how they handled them, how restrained they were, what they achieved—I think we need to approach the definition of criteria as seriously as possible. As an example—to make it clearer—I think Newbie 2008 should be chosen unequivocally, because he deserves it. FOR "Great Contribution to..." presumably to the development of the ON-line movement—this needs more thought. There is an idea here to make nominations where several people are chosen, presumably 3, their achievements are listed, and a winner is chosen by vote. FOR "Player of the Year," criteria are needed; perhaps the same as the previous award. 2. Why isn't Best of HW the main tournament? Right now, it's the first time, so there might be some dissatisfaction or blunders. Everything happens the first time! But later, as planned, there will be a separate qualification and a separate final. Time will pass, and everything will fall into place. 3. It's possible, but only from point 2, those from the main tournament, because it should be prestigious to be among the prize winners of such a tournament. 4.A newbie is a player for whom it is important to learn the level of their game, who has questions during the game like "Why...", but who cannot answer them themselves due to inexperience and lack of knowledge of many tricks. Moreover, this player should not be afraid to ask such questions to players of the following "categories": mid-tiers, tops, legends =) This is purely my opinion—that is how I see the structure of our forum. I would call all other players "slackers"—players who deeply don't care about their opponent; extremely unserious people. 5. Question resolved. 6. I think no, it's not worth it. Perhaps only supplement the Dreamcatcher system: a player who has not confirmed X reports is prohibited from posting reports in principle—until all previous reports are confirmed (refuted, or resolved by the appropriate authorities). 7. I don't think there's any point in describing them specifically—you know them yourself. The situation with Shadowman—exposed a cheater, which I still consider something to be proud of )))(I'm a modest person :smile26: ) Situation with Kreg Xek—opponent's violation of rules in the quarter-finals, showing a lack of respect. Situation with Oelm. lost unconditionally on 117. (Please don't take it seriously if it's offensive) Situation with Wlk777, also funny, it wouldn't have happened since everything was decided in ICQ, but it turned out how it turned out. It is very significant for me that the person knows how to apologize, and he did, so 0 grievances. Situation with Captain—here, due to my inexperience at the time, I accused him of not breaking through the guards :D I was young, completely green. I repent) I apologize once again. So, I think that's all. I didn't think it through, but it turned out to be quite a lot... Regarding the awards—Pit asked me to reply. My suggestion regarding the appearance of the awards— Player of the Year—on the coins, on the reverse side, an image of a Rider piercing a snake—I think that might suit us. (Actually, it's the coat of arms of Moscow from different years) Regarding Great Contribution—I suggest making some kind of brick—something like a contribution to... and our forum is built of bricks. Another suggestion arose—let's finally set a limit on tournament participation—so that we don't have a guy with 1 post: "I'm 15. I play Heroes great, let me in, I'll crush everyone!" and then everyone says how bad it is to disrespect other people's time—why let such people in at all? I propose introducing a rule: before registration for a tournament, the organizer must personally communicate with the candidate via ICQ to determine their intentions. Of course, not with everyone—only with those who are hard to take seriously at first glance. All of this are just ideas. I can't draw, so everything needs processing, refinement, or maybe it's all complete nonsense—it's for all of you to decide. Discuss! P.S. This entire post resulted from processing a conversation in ICQ with Pit for LM. - like a credit for co-authorship =)
1. Which nominations do you support? Do you have any other suggestions?
Against - best player for a specific faction. Introduce - cheater of the year, unconfirmed player of the year, or other anti-nominations.
What are the criteria for determining the winner in each nomination?
Voting. Everyone or the Tournament Committee.
2. How do you envision the Main HOMM3 Online Tournament - regulations, participants...?
Based on Besta's idea. It can be supplemented with a playoff, for example. But no group stage.
3. Currently, only tournament winners are awarded a medal under their avatar. Should we also award the runners-up - 2nd and 3rd place?
Absolutely against it.
Regarding AB 4. Try to define the word "newcomer" in relation to our forum.[/B]
A person who: - is not in the TOP-10; - has not been among the top 3 in any tournament (or a larger range, depending on the number of participants). - has played less than 20 ranked games or 10 tournament games. - has never won against more than 1 player from the current TOP-10 or a winner of any tournament. This applies to Hv, but it is also necessary to check other resources.
Regarding AK 1. Maybe we should "reward" user Djede with a Black Mark? We ban and self-ban not only cheaters. I want cheaters, even if they are banned, to be marked. If the players agree, I will write a request to the Creator in the "Wall of Shame" topic.
A Hall of Fame would be better. The Black Mark is for the cheater of the year.
6. Do you think we can award a Black Mark for a certain number of unconfirmed reports (how many?), for repeatedly missing tournament deadlines, and for other things? After all, these are also manifestations of dishonesty towards other players.
A Hall of Fame must be created. Everything will be visible there.
7. What controversial situations in online games that required the intervention of a third party have you encountered?
For example, I didn't know that after a restart, the red player could choose another faction/hero (from the remaining ones). Sometimes, the opponent would ask us about using scrolls. In general, it was just a clarification of the rules.
P.S. A wish for tournament organizers: do not accept a person into the tournament who has played less than 10 tournament games or 20 ranked games. If this is known to everyone, it will become clear who is striving to get into tournaments and who is not. And don't give discounts to those who have been penalized. Good luck!
SEM_56
