HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

Posts from Rules for organizing, conducting, and participating in online Heroes of Might and Magic III tournaments.

Tournament Committee
No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
In reply to bRitvo4kA
User Avatar
Offline Volodymyr
Registered:
Posts: 366
#31
Auto-translated
bRitvo4kA
So, yes, that will be a motivation to play on the site. And if you choose opponents with the highest rating, then five to ten games will be enough to overtake the competition. But if there is no time for games, where will you find time for additional matches?
So, if I haven't played on the forum before, do I need to win another ten "for fun" games to advance to the next round of the "favorites in battle - 2" tournament?
bRitvo4kA
But if there is no time for games, where will you find time for additional matches?
A more or less normal rating is 8-10 games, at a minimum, and an additional game is just one; I didn't understand your comparison.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline Javdet
Registered:
Posts: 3,093
#32
Auto-translated
By the way, it's a bit of a utopian idea, but as an option, playing in a group of three could be interesting. We tried it out to determine the best player, and it was quite engaging.

Added 1 minute ago
Volodymyr
So, if I haven't played on the forum before, do I still need to win ten "for fun" games to advance to the next round of the "favorites in battle - 2" tournament?
+1

________
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline KobRa_RR
Registered:
Posts: 3,259
#33
Auto-translated
For the future, we need to establish a system for additional matches. Everything else is rather subjective. The rating, unfortunately, only reflects the player's activity.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Javdet
User Avatar
Offline Forrest
Registered:
Posts: 498
#34
Auto-translated
I suggest that instead of considering the players who withdrew, we should select the best third-place finisher from all groups. There are players who played only one game and still advanced, while Piterius won three games but didn't.
The regulations didn't specify that the next player in line should advance after a withdrawal. This would be a great incentive for players to play their group games more promptly in the future.
РП (Реальное папство!)
*Автосейвы не беру и не даю.

Скачать WT (Чат, античит, одновременный ход) http://www.heroeswt.net/download.php

Награда Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за Оплот
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Javdet
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,032
#35
Auto-translated
Javdet
By the way, it's a bit of a utopian idea, but playing in a group of three could be an option. We tried it out to determine the best player, and it was interesting.
Roma, do you remember the tournament on TE, where you, Pit, and Dream competed for a spot in the next round? There were extra games. We should remind everyone how long it lasted and how it ended. ;)
Vova
So, if I haven't played on the forum before, do I need to win ten "fun" games to advance to the next round of the "favorites in battle - 2" tournament?
No, you can prove your strength directly in the tournament, just like Forrest did. Extra games are definitely not an option. Suggest another criterion for determining the two best out of Andrey, Peter, and Mikhail? All three deserve it, but only two can advance. :(
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline bRitvo4kA
Registered:
Posts: 1,107
#36
Auto-translated
Do you think that a single game can reveal anything? For example, player A wins against player B once. Does that mean we can definitively say that player A is better? It's quite possible that in the next games between them, player B will win. The more games they play against each other, the more objectively we can compare them, and the smaller the role of chance.
В дикім полі
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline Volodymyr
Registered:
Posts: 366
#37
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
Suggest another criterion by which we can determine the two best out of Andrei, Peter, and Mikhail? All three deserve it, but only two can pass. :(
/topic/at/301604/
bRitvo4kA
Do you think that one game shows anything? For example, player A won once against player B. Does this mean that he plays better?
And what about 10 games against Uncle Petya showing that player A is stronger than player B?
bRitvo4kA
The more games they play against each other, the more objectively they can be compared, and the smaller the role of chance.
Exactly, against each other!!!
0
⚖️
0
In reply to KobRa_RR
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,032
#38
Auto-translated
KobRa_RR
For future tournaments, a system for additional matches needs to be established. Everything else is quite subjective.
Tem, how do you implement additional matches? Should everyone wait a month while three people play? Otherwise, the other participants will lose interest in the tournament.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline KobRa_RR
Registered:
Posts: 3,259
#39
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
Dark, how do you schedule additional matches? Should everyone wait a month while three people play? Otherwise, the other participants will lose interest in the tournament.

Allocate a week in the regulations for completing the matches, and set super-strict deadlines, with games scheduled from above. If someone can't make it, they automatically lose without discussion. The game can be played on a small map, TC3 to 2 wins, or on any other fast map, up to a fixed map; in general, this is up to the organizer.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,032
#40
Auto-translated
I've always been against determining the winner based on the time spent playing matches. And how do you account for tech choices? What if someone is deliberately dragging out the game? If the last match is played simultaneously for two players, then even more criteria need to be introduced... :confused:
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Pit for LM
User Avatar
Offline Piterius
Registered:
Posts: 768
#41
Auto-translated
Pit for LM

We used the summer rating as a criterion. Firstly, it's clear.
Clear, yes, but not at all objective in this case, as it reflects the results of an unequal, or even almost unequal, number of games played by the tournament participants. It's like participating in a rating of the richest people in the CIS – it's equivalent in meaning. You are somewhere on that list, but it doesn't make you feel any better or worse.
For example, I don't have the motivation to participate in the seasonal rating, but I do have the motivation to participate in a separate tournament.

And this approach
Pit for LM

Secondly, it encourages player activity.
significantly reduces this motivation. Not everyone has the time to play both in the season and in tournaments.

P.S. The leader of the Heroes rating has expressed his position. We can end the discussion here.
Хаос - это порядок, которым сложнее управлять.

icq: 407907277
skype: piterius_i

1
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline Volodymyr
Registered:
Posts: 366
#42
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
I have always been against determining the winner based on the time spent playing matches.
In any case, this is better than determining the winner based on the number of victories against people who may not even be participating in the tournament.

And if a person has managed to play with everyone in the shortest possible time, they deserve to be considered in a higher group.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to KobRa_RR
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,032
#43
Auto-translated
KobRa_RR
, Tournament 3, best of 2 matches
We were talking about Tournament 3. I suggested this idea. But Tournament 3 can also have long games. And a week to finish the games just doesn't seem right. Do you think our Group D would play three games in a week? :D

Well, really, additional games are not an option. And what if the situation repeats after the extra games? Again, one wins against another, and another against a third, and the third against the first (which has already happened in practice. Pita, Javdet, and Dream were waiting for a month or even two). Should we play more?

Added 2 minutes ago
Volodymyr
In any case, this is better than determining it by the number of wins against people who may not even be playing in the tournament.
But why? The rating is at least somehow related to the gameplay. And who played earlier, it's just luck.

Well, let's say the rating isn't the ideal criterion. Let's come up with another one, one that is better. But definitely not who played earlier.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline Volodymyr
Registered:
Posts: 366
#45
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
Honestly, additional games are not an option. But what if the situation repeats itself after these extra games? Should we keep playing?
Kostya, if you want, you can manage with just one game :)
Dirty_Player
Why? Does the rating have anything to do with the gameplay? And who played earlier, it's just luck.
What does "luck" mean? To agree, to adapt to the opponent, to find time. Where is the luck here? The tournament starts at the same time for everyone, and ends at the same time. If I sacrificed something, adapted to the opponent's time, and played, isn't it fair that I get priority?

With this system (determination by rating), you can get 3 points and just ignore the last games and play for fun, increasing your rating :)
Wicc
What about using the head-to-head result as a criterion?
But three players have the same number of points, and each has one win and one loss in their head-to-head matches
0
⚖️
0