Posts from Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments. Auto-translated

Unfortunately, I can't give Sergey a warning for flaming, and I can't give him a negative rating yet. I'll do it later if I remember.

Sorry, what do you mean by "flaming" and "negative rating"?

Flame (from English "flame") - an exchange of messages that turns into a verbal war, no longer related to the original cause of the dispute. Flame messages usually contain personal insults and are often aimed at further fueling the argument. It is sometimes used in the context of trolling, but more often a flame erupts simply because of resentment towards a virtual interlocutor.

Trolling (from English "trolling") - posting provocative messages on the Internet with the aim of causing flame, conflicts between participants, empty chatter, insults, etc.

To downvote (from Russian "минус") - to negatively influence a user's morale.

Heh, I understand, thanks, Viktor )))

But I wasn't planning on arguing with Wlk777, or even debating )))

I think you misunderstood me.

Okay, happy upcoming holidays, and may the new year be filled with joy and goodness!
Less trouble and arguments, more victories and truth! )))))

With respect to everyone ;)

I'll explain once why I don't assign technical wins and losses in the "Novice" tournament, but instead assign zeros to both. It's clear and with examples.

No, Vitya, I don't understand. For example, consider the best-case scenario. If I have one more win than LeBron, and there are no other competitors, can I prematurely celebrate my victory, even though he might challenge me to a match and win, thus winning the tournament? Another thing is that in real life, this challenge didn't happen, and it wasn't beneficial for me to violate the rules. Still, at least if it's clear that one of the opponents cannot play and doesn't deny it, the other should be given a win. IMHO, of course, but I hope you will still listen to my opinion.

Val, I wrote it out clearly for you, just as you like. I can even rewrite it in large, bold letters.
Believe me, everything is fair there, no one suffered unjustly.

Added 2 minutes later
Yes, the previous two posts are a bit lengthy, but if you want to delve into this, argue, please at least read it.

To be honest, I don't understand why there's so much fuss. In the first post of the newbie tournament thread, the rules are clearly stated:

5. Rules. The tournament will be held according to the seasonal rules.
During the tournament, the rules and regulations will NOT be changed.

6. Group stage
Dates: December 2009
7 groups of 5 people have been formed, in which everyone plays against everyone else, i.e., 4 games. Each game is allotted exactly 1 week.

Attention: technical results will be awarded for all games not played on time. Rounds will NOT be extended.

Players, by signing up for the tournament, agree to its rules and regulations, so what are the complaints? Organizing is a very difficult task, and it should be respected, not causing people stress before the New Year. That's my opinion, and I wish everyone a happy New Year.

I stand by my opinion. Dear **maxlewis**, you should admit that you got carried away (but who hasn't?). And then we can talk. IMHO. [U]

Added 13 minutes later
[/U]

but I didn't intend to argue with Wlk777, not even to debate.

I think you misunderstood me.

Well, you've got me... :D I'm really curious, what made you think I wanted to argue/debate with you? ;) Just kidding, happy holidays to everyone.

This guy forced me to lower the database level for the second time in over a year of his presence on our forum. I couldn't restrain myself, but at least I didn't write any bad words in the comment. This McLuis:smile42: :mad: :mad:. His skill seems to be worth a penny, but his arrogance is worth 100 bucks. I was most "impressed" by the swearing because of the length of the opponent's turn – it really gets on my nerves when they rush like that. I'm writing this now: if, God forbid, I ever cross paths with him in tournaments, put a tech port on me – I refuse to play with him categorically:cool:.

Vitya, you are 100% right.

I fixed his little bird for him :) Guys, let's not do that. We'll scold him, and that's it. We'll figure it out :)

Added 2 hours 42 minutes ago

And he was demanding a technical victory over Enik, even though it was annoying and rude, but IMHO, it was still fair.

maxlewis suddenly started demanding a technical victory on 12/29, out of nowhere. Here's what happened before:

Enik (20:07:05 12/18/2009)
Hi))

Kash (20:07:16 12/18/2009)
Hi =)

Enik (20:07:52 12/18/2009)
Will maxlewis from our group be replaced?

Enik (20:08:10 12/18/2009)
Or can we negotiate with him?

Kash (20:08:29 12/18/2009)
I don't know yet how his internet is. Try talking to him.

Kash (20:08:48 12/18/2009)
If you can connect, play, I won't replace him.

Enik (20:08:57 12/18/2009)
Okay
.....

Kash (16:24:11 12/20/2009)
Hi, have you played with Maxlewis yet?

Kash (16:24:26 12/20/2009)
maxlewis

Enik (17:47:40 12/20/2009)
Hi

Enik (17:47:55 12/20/2009)
Not yet, we agreed for tomorrow.

Kash (17:48:12 12/20/2009)
Okay =)
.....

Enik (12:25:44 12/24/2009)
Hi

Enik (12:26:33 12/24/2009)
Damn, it's really inconvenient for me, but I won't be able to finish the game.

Enik (12:29:16 12/24/2009)
I'm leaving today, and I couldn't connect with anyone. Yesterday, we sat for 3 hours trying to connect via Hamachi, GameRanger, and direct IP address(((

Enik (12:29:40 12/24/2009)
I'm so sorry I let you down(((((((

Kash (12:35:00 12/24/2009)
Hi. It's okay =) Thanks for letting me know. Have a good trip =)

Enik (12:36:21 12/24/2009)
Thank you)

Now, tell me, am I supposed to dig around and figure out who's to blame for the bad connection? And whose fault is it that each pair of participants couldn't play? Do you see how much space the logs of the negotiations take up for just ONE game? And can you imagine how much of this I have to read through? This isn't a complaint. I enjoy chatting with Enik, Dariel_Lich, Ney Drake, Vampire, I'm always willing to explain something to Ivengo or Marazhan, I always answer questions from all the Maxim's, I solve problems in games, etc. Why am I also obligated to report, post logs, explain something, and justify my actions? It was said: all those who didn't play will receive a technical result. This applies to everyone equally. When I tried to introduce a different template in the playoffs, I was immediately told to refer to the first post, and they wrote a bunch of nasty things in the database, etc. Okay. We play by the rules. Didn't play - zero. That's it.

I also don't understand why Redwhait couldn't play with me in Might and Magic vs. Magic, and I also got a zero...

Volodya, don't confuse apples and oranges. This is a completely different situation. It's a fan-made fun event, without any formalities. What other technical results could there be? What is this nonsense about technical results? I understand if it's an Olympics, they agreed, and one person didn't show up. Someone needs to advance - technical result. But here, why should a victory be awarded, I don't know. Well, I've ranted a bit. :) Actually, I'm in a good pre-holiday mood, I just earned 600 bucks for a gift for my girlfriend (what a big mouth!))) ... Now I'll just sit down and summarize the results, I don't have any strength left, to be honest... Well, okay, happy upcoming holidays! Now I'll only rant in the New Year. :) All the best!

The regulations for the "Novichok-2009. Winter" tournament state:

The tournament is based on the Rules for organizing, conducting, and participating in online HOMM3 tournaments.

We have been discussing, editing, and supplementing the Tournament Rules and improving the work of the Arbitration Committee (AK) for more than six months. Since there are many rules and not everyone can grasp the text, I chose what suits us:

1. The Organizer must:
l) list in the "Blacklist" topic the participants against whom serious claims were made by both himself and other Participants, with a mandatory indication of comments. Punishment is at the discretion of the Organizer, up to disqualification from all games of the tournament and prohibition from participating in future tournaments. Based on these lists, other Organizers of subsequent tournaments have the right to refuse to accept an application for participation from "distinguished" players....

1. A participant in the tournament must:
a) treat the Organizer, Judge, and other Participants of the tournament with respect;...
g) when controversial issues arise, strive for a peaceful, constructive, and quick resolution, preferably without involving the Organizer, Judge, or AK. If the players cannot reach an agreement themselves, then the disputed situation is resolved according to paragraph V.....
h) play fairly and strictly follow the rules of the game....

2. A participant in the tournament has the right:....
c) appeal ... to the AK if they disagree with the decision of the Organizer on any issue;....

V. Resolution of controversial situations in tournaments.....
2. Controversial points during the tournament are decided by the Organizer.....
4. In case of difficulties in resolving a dispute, both the Participants and the Organizer and the Judge have the right to apply to the AK.....
7. The decision is made by the Organizer; it can be appealed by the dissenting party to the Tournament Judge and/or the AK. The AK's decision is final and not subject to further discussion or appeal.

And from the rules governing the work of the AK:

4. The following responsibilities are assigned to the AK:
a) monitoring the progress of tournaments, control over compliance with the rules and deadlines of tournaments, assistance to Organizers;
g) control over compliance with behavioral norms by players;

The irony is that neither side has contacted the AK. Therefore, despite the fact that everything written is in the AK topic, the AK cannot make any decision)))

There are two situations here.
I. Doubts about the correctness of assigning those zeros in the Novichok tournament.
II. Rude behavior of one of the players.

Player maxlewis may contact the AK if he disagrees with the result set by Tournament Organizer Kash.
Although after reviewing the logs provided, I don't see much point in this. But if there is additional information, the AK is ready to consider it.

Organizer Kash and player mals have the right to apply to the AK to discuss the behavior of player maxlewis during the tournament match and in personal communication with them.

The AK is ready to make decisions in both cases.

In my opinion, I recently expressed on HP, I will copy it here:

Controversial situations occur in almost every tournament, a compromise can be found not always, often a decision is made in favor of one of the players. There are always those who do not like this decision. What can be said?
1. It has become our tradition to discuss and criticize all the judge's decisions.
2. The decision is made based on all the information that the judge/host has. Usually, there is significantly more information than what is posted on the forum. A discussion begins, and the judge must somehow explain in detail to everyone on what grounds he made the decision. First, he spends half a day in ICQ dealing with the players, then reports for a week to each user.
3. The judge is often accused of bias/incompetence.
4. At the same time, users appear who generally have nothing to do with the tournament.
All this is very unpleasant.

A solution to these problems can be found above.

The issue is closed until either side contacts the AK.

Happy New Year and good luck to us all!
Good luck to both the organizer and the participants in the Novichok tournament!

I want to congratulate everyone on the New Year and add a few words about the situation that has developed, in which I was, in a way, involved, since I asked Maxim to register for the tournament. Now, let's get down to business: 1. I was trying to promote the tournament and give it the importance it deserves, so I asked Maxim to contact Viktor, a highly respected organizer, and ask if he could register him for the tournament instead of the "dead souls" – and it turned out there were quite a few of them. 2. I played about 6 games with Maxim, in which I didn't give him a chance, so I asked him to take first place, because, to my surprise, he defeated the main favorite of this group (and maybe even the ENTIRE TOURNAMENT)... and therefore he had such a great opportunity to take first place. 3. Yes, Maxim is very impatient, and when we play, he asks to set 4 minutes per turn; sometimes we even play with 2 minutes (no, first we played with 2 minutes per turn, but then he changed his approach and started setting 4 minutes). 4. Yes, his temperament is hot, but we are people, and sometimes we have problems that we face in this world, and that's why we are the way we are, shaped by the world around us. But this, of course, cannot serve as an excuse for him – but I understand such situations. I hope this information will reveal the whole picture that unfolded in Group B due to my indirect involvement. I congratulate all participants of the "Novichok - 2010" tournament and the respected AC on the New Year and wish you good luck in the new year.

I didn't even know that something was being discussed here. To clarify the situation further: maxlewis (18:26:26 16/12/2009) and I practice a lot; I play very well. maxlewis (18:26:31 16/12/2009) I already fought Cyb twice. maxlewis (18:26:39 16/12/2009) Is he in 9th place in the ranking? maxlewis (18:26:41 16/12/2009) He is. mals (18:26:49 16/12/2009) What do you mean by "Cyb"? maxlewis (18:27:09 16/12/2009) cyb maxlewis (18:27:12 16/12/2009) In short, maxlewis (18:27:14 16/12/2009) practice. I lost like this: maxlewis (21:56:15 21/12/2009) Come on in. 346047955 (21:57:12 21/12/2009) I'm in. 346047955 (22:00:36 21/12/2009) It kicked me out again; I'll restart now. maxlewis (22:03:05 21/12/2009) Okay. maxlewis (22:03:12 21/12/2009) I have one autosave for Wishgranter. 346047955 (22:03:42 21/12/2009) Load it. 346047955 (22:03:53 21/12/2009) Or should I load? maxlewis (22:03:56 21/12/2009) Come on in. 346047955 (22:05:31 21/12/2009) That's not right. 346047955 (22:05:42 21/12/2009) Swap them around. maxlewis (22:05:45 21/12/2009) Come on in. maxlewis (22:05:46 21/12/2009) Okay. 346047955 (22:08:55 21/12/2009) It crashed again. 346047955 (22:09:31 21/12/2009) I give up; write a report. maxlewis (22:09:47 21/12/2009) What do you mean? 346047955 (22:09:57 21/12/2009) I keep crashing. maxlewis (22:10:00 21/12/2009) Damn it. maxlewis (22:10:05 21/12/2009) I don't know how to write a report. maxlewis (22:10:09 21/12/2009) :-[ 346047955 (22:10:25 21/12/2009) Just write something like, "I won," and see how others write them. maxlewis (22:10:40 21/12/2009) I don't even know where to go or what to do. maxlewis (22:10:43 21/12/2009) Can you... maxlewis (22:10:46 21/12/2009) give me a link? maxlewis (22:10:46 21/12/2009) ? 346047955 (22:10:49 21/12/2009) Coming up. 346047955 (22:11:37 21/12/2009) /topic/6573/ Here is the topic. maxlewis (22:11:38 21/12/2009) Dude, maxlewis (22:11:46 21/12/2009) sorry I yelled at you then. maxlewis (22:11:50 21/12/2009) I didn't mean to; okay? maxlewis (22:11:59 21/12/2009) I want to play with you all the time. maxlewis (22:26:49 21/12/2009) Dude, maxlewis (22:27:02 21/12/2009) can you show me on an example from our game how to write a report? mals (22:47:31 21/12/2009) maxlewis (red, Rampart, Kirr, Kirr) def mals (blue, Dungeon, Shakti, Shakti) 2sm4d (3) 214 mals (22:47:55 21/12/2009) That should be enough. maxlewis (22:50:02 21/12/2009) Aha. maxlewis (22:50:03 21/12/2009) Thanks. maxlewis (22:50:04 21/12/2009) Man. maxlewis (22:50:09 21/12/2009) Let's play sometime. maxlewis (22:51:03 21/12/2009) What do you mean you gave up? maxlewis (22:51:11 21/12/2009) You had a good position, right? mals (22:51:51 21/12/2009) Yes, it was okay. mals (22:51:56 21/12/2009) The position. maxlewis (22:52:06 21/12/2009) Then what happened? mals (22:52:46 21/12/2009) Well, I just wanted to lose, so I lost. maxlewis (22:53:06 21/12/2009) That's weird. maxlewis (22:53:08 21/12/2009) Why? mals (22:53:21 21/12/2009) I have to lose sometime. mals (22:55:20 21/12/2009) Write the report; I'll confirm it. mals (22:55:26 21/12/2009) Or I can write it. mals (22:55:32 21/12/2009) You confirm it. maxlewis (23:00:04 21/12/2009) Let's pause for now. maxlewis (23:00:07 21/12/2009) Thanks for helping. Later, there were of course offers to play: maxlewis (14:03:17 27/12/2009) Aren't you playing? maxlewis (20:56:22 29/12/2009) Hello. maxlewis (20:56:25 29/12/2009) Want me to beat you up? maxlewis (20:56:25 29/12/2009) ? And there were also suggestions to friends: Maxim?:(20:59):*HI* Yegor?:(20:59):hello Maxim?:(21:01):want me to beat you up? Yegor?:(21:01):the beater hasn't grown Maxim?:(21:01):ha!!let's check Yegor?:(21:01):can't now, a little busy But somehow, I just don't feel like it anymore; my nerves are more important after all.

A message arrives, reading it takes 2 seconds
Opening minimized heroes - 1 second
Finding the game - 5 seconds
Loading takes 3 seconds
Entering the code nwcwhatisthematrix - 4 seconds
Searching for the enemy's main hero - 10 seconds
Reviewing the army - 3 seconds
Writing an unsubstantiated complaint in ICQ - 5 seconds
2+1+5+3+4+10+3+5=33 sec => opponent has 60-33=27 seconds to respond

That's what comrade Skuns wrote. I decided to conduct my own investigation.
But... if you carefully examine everything, it's not so simple. Let's look at the logs.

496616750 ‎(23:23):
Alright, let's finish tomorrow
my time is up
come back tomorrow around 12
Stasya ‎(23:27):
I won't be there tomorrow
496616750 ‎(23:27):
dude, you broke the rules
Stasya ‎(23:27):
did you even save before quitting?
what rules did I break?
496616750 ‎(23:28):
you recruited wyverns
Stasya ‎(23:28):
what makes you think that?

Let's assume what would have happened if comrade Skuns really started digging into and opening the game save, as he wrote, only after reading the message at 23:27 -- "I won't be there tomorrow". I really don't want to assume that it arrived exactly at 23:27.00, because that's too unlikely! So, is it precisely coincidental that it was the start of the minute -- down to the second -- so that everything could then happen within one minute? The chance that it arrived in the first 6 seconds is even small - 10%, and with 90% probability it would arrive later! But let's assume "luck was on his side", and the message "I won't be there tomorrow" arrives in the first 1 second after the minute started. That is already not in comrade Skuns's favor, making assumptions that wouldn't happen with 99% probability. Next, let's count the seconds. Comrade Skuns, obviously, wasn't staring at the ICQ window and waiting from second to second for HeadHunter's response for a whole 4 minutes between 23:23 and 23:27. Most likely he was doing something else at the time. Therefore, when a message arrives via ICQ, purely based on human reaction time - it takes 3 seconds to move the mouse and open the window. This is making a second assumption in favor of comrade Skuns, that he immediately decided to read it at that very moment. I pictured this myself - I assumed someone wrote to me, timed it, moved the mouse, and calmly opened ICQ. Next, comrade Skuns writes that reading takes 2 seconds. I agree with that. What could the next actions be? Skuns will later write that he realized he couldn't play tomorrow, decided to surrender, but then decided to first review the save to check if comrade HeadHunter had played honestly. After reading the message, Skuns would hardly start opening the game and analyzing the save with lightning speed - humans are just not wired that way, they need some time to comprehend what they read and decide what to do. If you mentally replay the words "so... he can't play, I can't do it on Monday. I need to surrender. Oh... let me check if he played honestly." that takes 5 seconds. Then you move the mouse and open the minimized heroes - not in 1 second, but in 3 seconds. There's no need to downplay that. I tested it myself. Moving on. Finding the game takes 5 seconds, Loading takes 3 seconds - tested on myself, indeed, correct. Remembering the code. "So, what's the code? Ah, right nwcwhatisthematrix" - 3 seconds. That's if you know this cheat code well and don't need to look up where it's written - on a piece of paper or elsewhere. It's impossible to believe that the brain, without thinking anything through, instantly makes all these decisions like an automaton. In the case I describe and tested on myself - all these time delays are even longer. Pressing Tab, entering the code nwcwhatisthematrix and Enter - 20 key presses total, for me it took 10 seconds, but let's assume Skuns has a typing speed like a professional typist - 200 characters per minute. That would be 6 seconds, but by no means 4. Next, fine, we'll agree - Searching for the enemy's main hero - 10 seconds, Reviewing the army - 3 seconds. Next - comprehension - "Oh, why does he have so many wyverns?? He's probably playing unfairly. I need to write to him." Definitely 4 seconds. Exiting Heroes and activating the ICQ window - 4 seconds. It could be more, I'm taking everything at a minimum. This is how it all works out for me if I try to do everything at lightning speed. Writing an unsubstantiated complaint in ICQ - 5 seconds. "dude, you broke the rules", Enter. 27 key presses in 5 seconds? Then Skuns's typing speed would be around 330 characters per minute - a bit more practice and he could go to the world speed-typing championship! Well, okay, let's say it's 5 seconds. Next, suppose the opponent opens ICQ - 3 seconds, reads the message - 3 seconds. Comprehends it, thinks about what to answer - everything at a minimum - 3 seconds. The reply "did you even save before quitting?" - 10 seconds. The reply "what rules did I break?" - 5 seconds. The opponent spent, counting at the minimum - 24 seconds. Now let's tally the statistics. The sum of all seconds 1+3+2+5+3+5+3+3+6+10+3+4+4+5 + 3+3+3+10+5 == 81 seconds!

And after all, comrade HeadHunter could have written the first message "I won't be there tomorrow" somewhere in the middle of the minute, not exactly at 23:27.01 as I assumed! No, guys, whatever way you look at it, if you approach it from an analytical point of view - you can reach an irrefutable conclusion - comrade Skuns OPENED the save and examined it after he himself wrote "Alright, let's finish tomorrow". He studied the map and was glad he caught his opponent on an alleged violation regarding recruiting wyverns. He didn't want to Alt-Tab and write complaints right away because it was more interesting to study the map first. But then a message arrives. He has to see what it says, doesn't he? "I won't be there tomorrow". Well, since he's already in ICQ - he can scare him about the wyverns.

PS. HeadHunter, please check the ICQ history. The messages should be saved with precision down to the second, I'm afraid that the gap between "I won't be there tomorrow" and "dude, you broke the rules" might turn out to be 20-30 seconds. I wonder what excuse Skuns will come up with for that.

Isn't Skuns a map hacker after this? I don't believe it (C) Stanislavsky.

PPS I would review all cases of map hacking strictly, but fairly. I know many nuances and exactly how the play of a map hacker will differ from that of an honest player.

Mathematicians :) Sergey, there's no need to dig into "imho" here, we've already figured it out. Skunks just got carried away, that's all. And there were "unfounded claims" against me when my gargoyle walked 4 times, we also seemed to have figured that out. There's no map hacking here, there's just a lack of understanding of some nuances for now :) Let him play, he'll learn over time.

Added 5 minutes later
Just a warning: Don't start a flame war in this thread - I'll delete everything and close the thread.

OUTLAW(red, Swamp, Vestan, Vestan) def temofey(blue, Castle, Valeska, Gundula), 2SM4d(3),1-2-1
Start with fast roads, no laces arrived - I build them immediately. At 112 with lizard build-up, 30 of them accumulated, Vestan with log.
At 113 I break through the crocodile stash, scout the cons(1). At 114 +1 angel, break into the underground via metro, +1 to defense.
At 115 - another angel from the second cons, I see a fork in the road - meaning an encounter is just around the corner. 116 - I clear the general Dungeon, head towards the opponent.
117 - specifically decline basic Earth to max out Shooting to exp, Vestan lvl 8 with exp log, in the Dungeon I placed a summoning portal, hoping to buy crocodiles, but got gnolls, whose stash I had already cleared at 111; at home - 1-6 in the castle, a chain is in place, Vestan is preparing to hit the metro to the opponent.
At 121 - disconnect on my end.... I go online - message the opponent - he is silent.... Subsequent messages are ignored.
After that, I open the saves - and it turns out Gundula was wiped by mummies at the end of the week, no money; horses would have been spawning in the Castle, but at 122 there is nothing to oppose the opponent's 2m angels + full growth with bonuses from stashes......
I consider it fair to post this game, because after the time spent by both sides, he could at least answer questions on ICQ....

Added after 56 minutes
OUTLAW(red, Rampart, Ivor, Ivor) def Dubrovin Pavel(blue, Dungeon, Shakti, Shakti), 2sm4d(3),136 [/B]
Start on slow roads, 9 free elves arrived, so at 112 we have 16 grands. There is a cons near the city.
At 113 the chain breaks the max crypt, Ivor with returned money, advances along the road. At 114 I hit a GO (pack of grey grizzlies), turn around...
A hive is spotted nearby, golden bow behind the mages. 8 heroes are already running, but even with them on slow roads, I can't really keep up....
At 115 the money-hero spends the night at Müllich's before the block to the secondary on the grass. At 116 I break through there, the money-hero ran along the chain to clear a bunch of resources and chests in the depths of the respawn. Frantic searches for great stashes yielded no results(((. 117 - scouted the approaches to the secondary on lava, found another hive. At home - horses with the castle, Ivor spends the night before the guard of the first hive.
121 +8 viv, heading to the second hive, Ivor grabbed Earth. 122 - beat the hive guard, spend the night nearby, took tactics with the 5m slot. At home, horse and pegasus upgrades are preparing, Müllich is marauding on the grass of the Conf.
123 +6 viv, I split home with Ivor for a book and run to the cons, meanwhile scouts are breaking the imp-nest and the crypt.
124 - horse and pegasus upgrade, break the cons(3) with basic slow, lose all the sustain and 3 vivs, grabbed log in the 6th slot. Planning to go into the basement to the opponent's adjacent, counting on an early encounter.
125 - beat the shield+4 already on the opponent's land. 126 - maneuvers, pulling scouts under the hive spotted in the cleared treasure - intending to break it without losing tempo, but still don't make it in time.... Scout with pegasuses clears the Conf.
127 - I trigger the overview in the basement and see Shakti before the home secondary with 2!!!! packs of a pack of gr.minotaurs.... brutal... :smile41: Nearby is a cons, slightly below - a utopia and another cons, but the road to them is blocked by a pack of blue caps, the scout has no chance to scout the 2nd cons))). In short, I decide to hit a link in Pasha's chain, not letting him bring the growth at 131, speeding up with angels and pegasuses in the dark, money-hero nearby...
At 127 Pasha breaks the cons, the dwarf-nest, and spends the night in the home secondary. Just as I expected, his scout didn't reach the 2nd cons :smile04:
At 131 delivery of growth, which I leave in the bushes, Ivor, having picked up the amulet of courage(+++), breaks the chain and advances towards the Miner's capital, trying to lure him out of the secondary....
On his turn Pasha reaches my scout on a pack of gr.pegasuses(( - a pity, the Miner is now nearby....
At 132 - dwarf and kent upgrade, I bring the remains of the army and attack the Miner, forgetting to put the grands in the middle for a box :smile33: :smile33: :smile33: - after all, I knew, damn it, that Shakti would have exp tactics....
In short, 46 grands end up blocked and a battle that should have been won with small losses becomes disastrous for me because of Pasha's mass slow.... Anyway, we fought for a long time, Pasha retreated with 3 minotaurs and a pack of troglodytes. I am left with 2 unicorns, 11 viv, nearly 20 grands, 8 stumps and 17 dwarfs. I rush to Pasha's home secondary for the cons and in hope of maxing my Earth to exp...
The Miner with growth and bonuses from the minotaur stash runs after me((((... Here Pasha made a big mistake, giving me the opportunity to set up a mana vortex, although he could have liquidated it on his turn with a scout...
I run in there, double the mana and spend the night before the blocks to the utopia, cons and a chest.... On his turn the Miner retakes the secondary, spends the night there.
I break all blocks, eat the chest (500 exp(((), Earth didn't upgrade((((. I go into the cons without scouting - come what may - if it's a 3 or 4 - I'll surrender)), but I got lucky - it's a 2!!!
On his turn the Miner attacks, here Pasha hides his beholders with tactics. My crew goes for boarding)), on morale I manage to get close!!! We exchange magic, Pasha - arrow, I - lightning))), then mass slow - I respond with haste. Again my units get morale.... Here Pasha makes a mistake and on the remaining 1 harpy and 8 trogs he gives me the right to cast haste on 8 viv, instead of buying them out... :smile41:
Haste on viv and GG!!!
Thank you for the great battle and the series of mutual mistakes)))!!!!
(Adrenaline was off the charts!!!!!)