Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Playing on L-shaped maps.Auto-translated
medstrax, it seems that you, Damacon, and I are all on the same page.
medstrax
"we need to think differently, but that's not something online players are used to"
Exactly! That's what I'm saying! Why do you play "Heroes"? If it's just to quickly "defeat" all your opponents online (for speed), then you need to act in your style. But I believe that the game should bring pleasure, regardless of whether you set a record or not. Otherwise, I wouldn't even play it!
medstrax
I suggest a bonus for whoever completes mission 3 first.
Sorry, where is this mission 3? Maybe I'll try...
Ah, you probably mean the Campaigns from Maxuta-Phoenix? Please clarify!
Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було… (Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
Perhaps each of us has our own reason for playing Heroes. And we derive pleasure from the game in different ways.
Playing just to lose doesn't really appeal to me, and the desire to win against an opponent motivates me to improve my approach in Heroes for Victory.
The game is unpredictable, and there's no guarantee that everything will always be good; the opponent might also have everything going their way. And without the skills to fight Neutrals, find Treasure Zones, and take risks, there will be no victories.
I've played quite a few games, and I still don't get tired of Heroes; the development in each game progresses differently. Sometimes, knowing the opponent, the game strategy changes, and either you play calmly, or the opponent forces you to take more risks.
I wouldn't say that I'm constrained by the thought that in the first week, certain buildings are usually taken, in the second week, others, and in the third week, others, and so on. And everything works towards one Goal - TO WIN, and that's what I enjoy.
I suppose we have different views on the goal of the Game, but that shouldn't divide us...
Basically, any strategy on any map works toward one goal—to win. But aren't you tired of the same old thing—in different variations, in a different sequence—the dwarf town, the conserve, Dragon Utopia? Occasionally diluted with Pandora's boxes, Naga banks, etc. And most players consider this "art" to be the pinnacle of skill. Isn't that just stupid? Breaking into the dwarf town while losing 0 troglodytes—is that mastery in your opinion? My foot. All random maps cover no more than 5% of hero diversity. And people fight over those 5%, it's sad....
But aren't you tired of doing the same thing over and over?
I'll note that in chess, the moves are also quite monotonous – a pawn only moves straight, and a knight moves in an "L" shape. However, people still play this simple game for some reason. We play online, and we enjoy it. I'm not asking you if you'll take 4 angels on level 121 in a castle, or a maxed-out Utopia on level 131. And I don't consider that the pinnacle of skill; I just feel satisfaction when I succeed. But according to you, completing a mission is the limit of human genius. Of course, fighting a human in the final stage is more interesting than fighting monsters, but you still need to prepare for the final stage. So, you have to quickly rush through the dwarf/swamp areas. And these movements are not as monotonous as you think. In the last game, I somehow managed to win by exchanging a third of my skeletons for a fire spell in the treasure room. I didn't have much meat or magic, I just killed everyone with a berserker. It was worth rushing through for such a final stage. :)
P.S. An advertisement looks much more convincing when you understand what it's about. "Mission 3" means absolutely nothing to me
I don't know, I don't know, medstrax - for me, on the contrary, all sorts of Campaigns seem pathetic:) . Online play is much more interesting than bragging about how you "killed 7 computers on King" and so on:D :D :D
By the way, those same dwarf towns are often taken differently, not by a single algorithm, not to mention Dragon Utopia:rolleyes: ... Is it our fault what their generator produces?:) And if you don't put up a single money-making building - now that is stupidity, I don't see where the interest in the game is - in building up the capitol as fast as possible or what? and then spending a couple of months accumulating power (your own, mind you, not from free boxes, cons, hives:smile25: :smile54: :cool: !!!) - now that's actually creative, a flight of fancy, [censored]!..
Ибу ибуди - хуйдао муди - Шаг за шагом можно достигнуть цели (китайская мудрость)
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
Maxuta's third mission is, as I understand from what you said, the pinnacle of perfection in Heroes.
"But doesn't it get boring – even with different variations?" (talking about Maxuta's campaigns :D)
"And such 'art' is considered by many players to be the height of skill. Isn't that silly?"
"All random elements cover no more than 5% of the diversity of heroes."
Well, if you feel like a genius at playing tactical battles, meaning not just random maps but also TC3 for example, then you can show yourself there ;)
And if you think about it, there is some truth in his words!
All randoms cover no more than 5% of the diversity of heroes.
True. Kirr, Shakti, Valeska, Tazar, Gurnisson, Craig Hack... And what about the rest? :confused:
But hasn't it become tiresome - the same thing, in different variations?
True. For many, online play means taking Valeska, upgrading archers, and building knights in a castle. Isn't that right?
But playing the campaign against the AI is also not an option, because the pleasure comes from competing with another person! This leads us to offline tournaments. But to achieve the optimal result offline, you need to spend a lot of time and do the same thing over and over again... From this, we draw the main conclusion:
EVERYONE PLAYS HOW THEY WANT! The main thing is to enjoy the game and not try to force everyone to follow the "true path." (By the way, this is also true for the debate between TE and SOD).
Not at all, one takes Dimension Door in Dragon Utopia, the other takes the water book. It's a crap question as to who is more effective, with few exceptions
That's true. For many, online play is just about taking Valesk, leveling up archers, and building horsemen in the Castle.
So, I'll say this: offline play is about finding a hero with Logistics and Diplomacy skills and slowly making your way to the exit, picking up hordes of neutral creatures along the way. Isn't that right? ;)
So, I'll say this: offline play involves finding a hero with Logistics and Diplomacy skills and strategically maneuvering towards the exit while gathering hordes of neutral creatures along the way. Isn't that right? ;)
Well, Logistics is needed everywhere. And on some maps, Diplomacy might be disabled (as well as Logistics). But you need to level up your Logistics skill. Some people did it on level 111, and others on level 112, and they're already behind. There are many nuances. There are many unique features and nuances. There are maps where you just "run and fight," but there aren't that many of them.
The main advantage of offline play is that no one will ever say "you were lucky." 100% skill decides! Not 99%, but exactly 100%!
I agree, the skill of finding the shortest path to the exit and repeating battles until the desired morale is achieved is key.
You're not well-informed about the rules. There's been a limit on morale for a long time. And the shortest path isn't always the shortest. Trust me. I've seen some things in offline play. When you think you've done the absolute best, and then you see the results and find yourself in second place. It's a bit of a shock :D
For example, in the last offline tournament that you also organize, there are no restrictions, so it's a big question who is still poorly informed there.
Read carefully, especially the highlighted phrases:
1. All battles conducted in the tournament may be subject to verification by the tournament organizers to confirm that they can be reproduced on any computer, and participants may be asked to provide accurate descriptions of the battles they conducted. When battles are repeated, the outcome of morale/luck/abilities should not be a decisive factor in victory (preserving the army) and is not mandatory when the tournament organizer repeats the battle. The player has the right to deviate from these rules and base their victory on a single instance of morale/luck/abilities and ask the tournament organizer to replay the battle several times to ensure the reproducibility of its results. In the event of a deviation from these rules, as well as the inability of the tournament organizer to repeat any of the battles in the tournament within 25 attempts, the final save of the tournament participant will be canceled.
About the 25 attempts – that’s funny =). And regarding the rest – it’s a shame you deleted your posts and asked the moderators to delete others in that thread, but I’ll remind you of the gist: “If the grand factions have low morale in the first round, there will be no questions; if it’s in the first 4 rounds, questions will arise, but it doesn’t mean we’ll automatically disqualify them because of that.” P.S. – I would require offline play with the “Spirit of Despair” enabled so that everyone is DEFINITELY on equal footing.
Marmot
