HeroesWorld

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!
User Avatar
Offline KobRa_RR
Registered:
Posts: 3,318
#61
Auto-translated
I suggest that the last played match is replayed, which determined 2 or 3 players with the same results. I think this should be a match directly between the contenders. And the winner gets an undeniable advantage over the loser. If there are four such players, then the second-to-last match in terms of reporting time is also replayed.

Another option is to use the minimum number of matches played directly with the contenders for leaving the group (a kind of analogy to the number of goals scored).
Or, for example, for each player, the number of days is summed up: 1/2 of the days from lost matches and the days from won matches. Whoever has the lowest number of days wins!
0
⚖️
0
In reply to KobRa_RR
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,704
#62
Auto-translated
KobRa_RR
I suggest a scenario where the last played match is replayed, determining the top 2 or 3 players with the same scores.
Before the match, there would be a psychological setup where one player needs to win 2 matches, while the other only needs to win one. This also seems unfair.
KobRa_RR
Another option is to use the minimum time of matches played directly with the contenders for advancing from the group (a kind of analog to goals scored).
We also thought about and discussed this. But again, there is a high degree of randomness, as many people really like to lose on turn 113, for example... Or one player has fast turns, and the other has slow turns... There are too many unnecessary factors. There will be match-fixing. Like the last two players will play. One wins against the other. And the loser says: "Let's just write that the game ended on turn 115 instead of 144" :smile42:
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline Forrest
Registered:
Posts: 500
#63
Auto-translated
The number of points scored in head-to-head matches; in case of a tie, an additional match is played. If there are three or four players, the match on Jebus is played as a total score.
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
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,092
#64
Auto-translated
It is possible to organize group games not in a round-robin format, but using a mini-double-elimination scheme. Let's say there are 4 players: A, B, C, and D. Round 1: A > B C > D Round 2: A > C, and A advances from 1st place in the group. B > D, and D is eliminated. Round 3: B > C, and B advances from 2nd place in the group.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Forrest
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,704
#65
Auto-translated
Forrest
The number of points scored in head-to-head matches; in case of a tie, an additional match is played. If there are three or four players, a general match on Jebus is played.
I also had a similar idea. You could even play Jebus roulette. The idea is this: start with all-random. Whoever hits their GO first takes 1st place, whoever is second takes 2nd place, and so on. Play only until the GO is broken. Of course, it largely depends on the setup, and several players may break the GO on 121 (then you can use the sum of primary parameters or the remaining health), and GOs can also be different (dragons are not hydras or wyverns). But still, it's an option. :rolleyes:
A full game with three players requires determining 2nd and 3rd place, which means another game.

2Wicc, the idea is good, as there really won't be any problems, but the group stage becomes somewhat lacking. You can't play randomly; you have to wait for an opponent... But maybe these are minor details. The idea is interesting.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline Javdet
Registered:
Posts: 3,172
#66
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
Only play until reaching the Guardian of Order. Of course, it largely depends on the situation, and several players might reach the Guardian of Order on turn 121 (then you can use the sum of primary stats or the remaining creatures), and Guardians of Order can also be different (dragons are not hydras or wyverns). But still, it's an option. :rolleyes:
A full game with three players requires determining 2nd and 3rd place, which means another game is needed.

Yeah, it's basically a gamble. One player has a long journey to the Guardian of Order, and Cyclops Kings, for example, while another is close to the Naga Castle. The question is - who goes first? Wouldn't it be easier to flip a coin?
Maybe some kind of fix for Might & Magic, like a "boomer," could be used for this?
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Pit for LM
Registered:
Posts: 3,038
#67
Auto-translated
With a more balanced lineup in Favorites, there could have been a truly terrible situation where all five players in a group would have scored 2 points each...

And I also didn't like that out of 5 people, only 2 advanced. After losing the first two games, interest in the tournament and the games practically disappeared. And no one fought for 3rd place in the group anymore. Perhaps, it would have been better to send the first-place winners (8 people) directly to the final, and have transition games between 2nd and 3rd place. This would have smoothed out the difference in level between the groups a bit, and the players would have been more motivated.
Javdet
Maybe some kind of MKU fix, like a "boomer," could be adapted for this?
And what should I do in Seasons? You can't just settle scores on Jebus, the arena, or a specific map...
If I can somehow attach a rating to Favorites, then that's completely irrelevant here...
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Javdet
Registered:
Posts: 3,172
#68
Auto-translated
Yes, I understand that it's not relevant, but since we're talking about the game before the "Game Over" (GO) point, which is practically offline (without contact), we need conditions that are equal for everyone. And randomness will never provide such conditions.

Added after 26 minutes
Another raw idea, but maybe it will inspire someone: A mini-nostalgia game for 4 players (which also works well for a game with 3 players), each with their own computer, in a treasure hunt after the "Game Over" point, with a mini-treasure (of a specific type to avoid confusion, for example, sand) containing some object. The first player to take the object wins, and the remaining players continue to compete among themselves. This minimizes the likelihood of "alliances" and, at the same time, makes it quite likely that players will interact in the treasure hunt itself, which means it won't be "offline."
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,092
#69
Auto-translated
I think the simplest solution is to allow time for additional games.

After all, online tournaments don't have strict deadlines.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline SpiriTT
Registered:
Posts: 876
#70
Auto-translated
Full double elimination? This would be suitable for tournaments like the "favorites" tournament. As for seasonal tournaments, it's definitely possible to play with a fixed map, as Roma suggests. Seasonal tournaments and random tournaments are fundamentally different, and it won't be possible to combine the rules.
ну это вообще всем аргамездец!© Kash
без авто:smile20:
Человек - игрушка Бога. Этому - то и надо следовать. Надо жить играя.
Платон.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Wicc
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,704
#71
Auto-translated
Wicc
Online tournaments aren't limited by time.
Who said that? Only RP-3 is unlimited in time! :D
But seriously, why should anyone wait? Waiting kills the tournament!
Yeah, it's like a roulette, one person has a long way to go to the Guardian of the Grove and Cyclops Kings, for example, while another is not far from the Naga Castle. The question is - who will be first?
I wonder, is it possible to create a template so that everyone has the same Guardian of the Grove? Or is it only possible to do it manually? Well, even if it's done manually (so there are no restarts), just copy the Guardian of the Grove and go, go, go.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline PReDS
Registered:
Posts: 1,493
#72
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player

...
I wonder, is it possible to create a template so that everyone has the same starting conditions? Or is it only possible to do this manually? Even if it's done manually (so there are no restarts), you just copy the starting conditions and go.
It's probably possible on erm, but then technical expertise is required:eek:
It's just unclear what this semi-offline mode is for; it's better to just run TC.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to PReDS
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,571
#73
Auto-translated
The least time-consuming option for playing Team Kings. Moreover, the factor of randomness is much lower here than in all other proposals.

As for the lack of motivation after three rounds, this is an inevitable consequence of the group system. Therefore, I believe the best scheme for tournaments is a double-elimination bracket. Well, for really top-tier players, a standard bracket could also work.
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Oelm
User Avatar
Offline Javdet
Registered:
Posts: 3,172
#74
Auto-translated
Oelm
The least time-consuming option for playing Team Kings. Moreover, the factor of randomness is much lower here than in all other options.

Hehe... I also suggested Team Kings 3, but as a last resort, if nothing else reasonable can be found...
Team Kings 3 is a completely different discipline; it's like making Carl Lewis, in his prime, pole vault. I, for example, don't even understand how to play Team Kings 3 properly. And here, it won't be the factor of randomness that matters, but the factor of skill in this discipline.
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Javdet
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,571
#75
Auto-translated
What reasonable suggestions could there be? It's a classic situation. One player won against everyone. And three players behind him have the same number of points – each won against the next. What to do? Either a random draw, a replay, or the Tournament Committee's decision. + of course, you can look at their rating or who won in how many days, but that doesn't seem very objective.

And learning how to play better would definitely be beneficial for everyone.
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0