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

Well, 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 one. What to do? Either a random draw, a rematch, or a tiebreaker. + of course, you can look at their rating or who won in how many days, but this doesn't seem entirely objective.

And it certainly wouldn't hurt anyone to learn how to play tiebreakers better.

Here's an idea I had. Shouldn't we create a Tournament Player Rating?

The first comparison should definitely be based on head-to-head matches between opponents, but if there are three players and each has won against each other, something needs to be devised.

Here's an idea that occurred to me. Shouldn't we create a Player Rating for Tournaments? Find an algorithm that translates tournament results into numbers and create a table.

It would be convenient for tournament organizers to 1) conduct the draw (we usually try to "sort players into tiers" and do it subjectively), and 2) resolve the issue of qualification when the number of points is equal. And it would also be very interesting.

We divide tournaments by "weight" - their importance (for example, Best, PL on the Portal, RP on Bay - tournaments among the best), by the number of players...
For participating in any tournament (we only consider HoMM3 online), a certain basic number of points is awarded (if at least one game was played). And bonuses are added for the number of players, the quality of the tournament, and the place taken... We'll come up with a formula; I can write a program.

Over the time that Hv tournaments have existed, there haven't been many - everything is in the History, so it won't take too long to calculate. Those who have successfully played in Hv tournaments will automatically be included in this rating. And any player who has participated in tournaments on other resources can provide information - the resource, the tournament, a link, the number of participants, their results, etc. And the rating organizer will evaluate and add it to the table.

Will the tournament rating provide a fair determination of rankings? Is it better than the seasonal one?

Is it only possible to start counting from this year? Otherwise, the question arises as to how deeply to delve into other resources?

Here's an idea that came to me. Shouldn't we create a Tournament Player Rating?

Additionally, a situation is possible where two rating leaders play a match by arrangement, with both advancing from the group. So what would prevent them from colluding?

Such a situation is possible and is already being implemented effectively without any ranking system.

Here's an idea that came to me. Shouldn't we create a Player Rating for Tournaments? Find an algorithm that translates tournament successes into numbers and create a table.

we only consider HOMM3 online

Participating in any tournament gives a certain basic number of points.

Maybe it can only start counting from this year? Otherwise, the question arises of how far back to dig on other resources?

We divide tournaments by "weight" - importance.

Here's an idea I had. Shouldn't we create a Tournament Player Rating? Find an algorithm that translates tournament successes into numbers and create a table.