Posts from Round table

Exactly. I'm such a noob. I was looking at the scenario information and couldn't figure out what I didn't like. Thanks.

How will knowing the garrison composition help? Let's say I know that by the end of the first week, the opponent has angels in their garrison, even though they are playing as the Swamp faction. How does this knowledge help me? What advantage does it give?

If you're planning to rush someone and they've holed up in a castle, you can calmly scout and see who's inside. If that doesn't help, then nothing will.

The information obtained can adjust your plans, meaning you can either rush or hold back for now. However, it doesn't provide an advantage; knowing the enemy's garrison won't increase your army, skills, or secondary knowledge. So, what's the unfairness of such scouting?

So, what makes this scouting method unfair?

Because it wasn't intended by the developers and is actually a bug. Like double-casting spells, for example. Or previewing a hero. Or previewing another player's hero, their skills, and abilities – that doesn't give you anything either!

I’m not saying it doesn’t give anything. I’m saying that viewing castles doesn’t give much. You see that the opponent has so many troops garrisoned in the castle, you think it’s weak, and you go for a rush. And right next to the city, there’s some Crag Hack on uncounted angels, and he’s smiling.
Viewing a hero’s artifacts also doesn’t give much, except for additional information. If you see that the opponent has the Armageddon’s Blade, and you have nothing to counter it with, you can reconsider, but it won’t change the balance of power.

Urgent help for a newbie))), how can I view enemy skills and artifacts????

I never check enemy artifacts and skills, although I've heard roughly how to do it. I do use the city overview feature.

Urgent help for a newbie, how can I view enemy skills and artifacts?

This bug is only available in LAN mode and is prohibited by all the rules.

The information obtained may adjust your plans, meaning you can rush or hold back for now. But it doesn't give you an advantage; knowing the enemy garrison won't increase your army, skills, or secondary knowledge. So, what's so "cheaty" about this kind of scouting?

Looking at the map 111 times before the game also won't give you even 50% more chances of winning, in my opinion. Maybe, based on the same principles you use, we should allow viewing random maps in the early stages?:D

Added 2 minutes later

This bug is only available on LAN. And it's prohibited by all the rules.

I don't know what's happening on LAN, but the program from AlexSPL seems to provide this kind of information.

Cheating by viewing the map in 111 will destroy an important component of the game: the uncertainty of the layout. Interest will decrease. Also, if both opponents view the map, the advantage will go to the stronger player.
I was talking about how viewing secondary information does not harm the game.

Cheating by viewing the map in 111 will destroy an important component of the game: the unknown layout. Interest will decrease. Again, if both opponents view the map, the advantage will be with the stronger player.
I was talking about the fact that viewing secondary resources does not harm the game.

Viewing secondary resources will destroy an important component: the unknown of what is in them. Interest will decrease. This is what I answered to you, using your own words.

I am, of course, flattered that I am being quoted. But if the discussion is only between me and my own quotes, it will become boring. In my posts, I tried to adapt Paul Morphy's thoughts about chess to the context of Heroes. The doctrine of objective strength. Perhaps I didn't express it very well.

The doctrine of objective strength in Heroes lies not in what you see in your opponent, but in how quickly you can apply what you've observed against them...
Many games end for some players precisely because they don't know how to use the tempo of their game against their opponent...

Therefore, on our website and other resources, there is a conditional division into noobs, beginners, advanced players, experts, and masters!!! And moving up to the next level depends on understanding and using any advantage and superiority in general!!!

Cheating by looking at the map 111 times before the game also, in my opinion, won't give you even a 50% chance of winning. Maybe, based on the same principles you use, we can allow viewing random maps in the early stages?:D

Dear Samurai! Don't confuse a male sexual organ with a finger:) .

Added 1 hour 31 minutes ago

On our website and other resources, there's a conditional division into noobs, beginners, advanced players, experts, and "daddies"! And moving up to a higher level depends on understanding and using any advantage and superiority in general!!!

Well, I would rank things a little differently here:rolleyes: ...
3 major categories: noobs (about 50-55%), average players (about 30-40%), and "daddies" - the rest. And each of them can be divided into 3 subcategories (conditionally, of course):
1. Noob noobs - those who build various capitals on the first turn and get upset about how long it takes to move for even one minute:D.
2. Advanced noobs - those who have read something on forums or have some successful noob experience like hotseat, have almost no online experience, but are capable of winning 1 out of 5-10 games against average players (but more often they lose:)).
3. Candidates for average players - those who have played a couple of tournaments or have been playing for half a year or a year, but are not particularly outstanding; they can beat an average player not so rarely, but they can't beat a "daddy" even with their best efforts and luck:). They already understand and try to play with chains, but it's so bad that it's better not to watch it for the faint of heart:D.

4. "Not very good":) - frankly weak players, often able to play more or less only with ranged castles and only with earth, but already starting to fight this syndrome and looking with interest at various miners and "tanks":); they crush noobs, try not to play with "daddies" because the probability of winning there is about 2-3%:rolleyes: ...
5. Real average players - the golden mean, nothing more to add.
6. Strong average players - one of the most interesting categories, Vitalik, who is well-known, was also attributed to this category:rolleyes: (it seems, Nagan-4); they play with the whole chain quite convincingly, but they are always missing something, something is always wrong: someone will be blocked by a horde of dwarves, someone will not be able to handle the 2nd week in the maximum conquest, although they are capable of taking it in principle; in general, they are missing some small thing for top skill.

I thought about it and decided to divide the "daddies" into 2 types:
7. "Good" daddies:) (i.e., tired, distracted by something in real life, haven't played for a long time, or, on the contrary, have just learned how to play properly, but not in all nuances, or they don't play sober, and there may be many other factors...). These are the same "daddies", but they can still be beaten by average players sometimes...
8. Real daddies. No comments here, these are a few: Stinger, Alex (not the one who is "Er";)), Forrest, probably, and some other players from Minsk, St. Petersburg, Moscow, and a bunch of other dinosaurs who are no longer playing...

In general, that's how it is. Please don't take offense and don't take it personally if something is wrong:cool:. This is just a stupid personal IMHO. To be clear: I put myself approximately somewhere between the 3rd and 4th level:o

Kostyan, you're awesome! Sign me up as a candidate :D