Posts from Playing on L-shaped maps. Auto-translated

The 25 attempts are funny =). And regarding the rest – it’s a shame you deleted your posts and asked the moderators to delete other posts in that thread, but I’ll remind you of the gist: “If the grand players’ morale drops in the first round, there will be no questions; if it happens in the first 4 rounds, questions will arise, but it doesn’t mean we’ll automatically disqualify them because of it.”
P.S. – I would require players to play offline with the “Spirit of Despair” so that everyone is DEFINITELY on equal footing.

25 attempts are indeed funny. No one will count the attempts. A player can always justify their battle. I checked many battles for factual accuracy. I only canceled one, and that was for a different reason.
You understood correctly about the grand players.
The “Spirit of Despair” was suggested. There was even a suggestion to simply skip the morale check by pressing the spacebar, or to cover the entire map with cursed lands, etc. But all of this detracts from the game... So we decided to introduce this rule.

I thought about it for a long time, you dirty player. Hello! Your statement that "online play is interesting because it showcases skill here and now; everything is done in one attempt!!" made me think. Even if the game is somewhat monotonous and much depends on chance (artifacts/hives, etc.), random cards are still limited. Right now, there's a tournament going on with fixed maps (which I'm actually playing in..., but probably won't finish... but that's not the point). These maps are specifically designed for online play and have been rebalanced. That's also interesting." However, I have a couple of objections. In particular, regarding the "one attempt" aspect. It's no secret that the outcome can vary, and it's impossible to play optimally in just one attempt. The "skill here and now" can be negated due to the variance in morale and luck. Someone mentioned an unsuccessful comparison with chess – it's very wrong. If I'm playing at a KMS level and you're at a second-class level, nothing will help you. At the same time, in Heroes, morale and luck at the right time and place can decide the match. And even if we were only talking about morale, a simple mini-con against maximum stats often affects the result. So where are the skills? Yes, getting max stats isn't always easy, but for extra-skilled players, it's as easy as pie. To summarize: despite all efforts to minimize the influence of external factors using templates, they still exist. A random event can bring down a super monster against a newbie. Added after 24 minutes Kash, especially for you /attachments/16618/ Play through the campaign ""The Magnificent Four," at least up to mission 3 (the rest are easier). I would appreciate daily saves. But you won't complete it. P.S. If you're good at chess, welcome - 226575498, let's discuss

There are, however, a couple of objections. (c)

It's no secret that the layout varies and you can't play optimally in a single attempt. "Skill in the here and now" can also be nullified due to the variance of morale and luck.

I think the skill of an online player is precisely the ability to foresee and account for everything, including the variance of morale and luck; knowing when to take a risk and when to tread carefully. That is, it's the ability to produce a result as close to optimal as possible. And don't think everyone just blindly follows the same "crypt-gnomium-conservatories-artifacts-Utopias" template and gives up if the neutrals suddenly get moral. The same Dirty, in an online game with me, takes a 114 conservatory-minimal with 7 fakes. Explain to me how I, a noob, can bring him to his knees, even if I have not just a max conservatory, but a Dragon Utopia right next to my castle!

At the same time, in Heroes, morale and luck at the right time and in the right place can decide a game.

For some reason, almost nobody takes the Leadership/Luck skills.. I don't remember a single final where these factors decided anything, though I've seen it in reports. But it seemed to me like another attempt to justify one's defeat by bad luck :) Although I recall a case with wild anti-morale on the opponent's troops, but I didn't force him to take troops from every castle in a row or push him into that grave :)

It would be one thing if it were only about morale, but even a basic mini-conservatory versus a max one often affects the result. So where's the skill here?

I already gave the example with Dirty's conservatory (taking it, by the way, is in his signature). And I'll also say this: if you're dealt something bad, and your opponent something good... go and take it from him :) That's where the skill is. If some Paladin takes 7-8 Dragon Utopias by week 3, it's unlikely that each one will give him junk, right? Although again, there will be those who like to argue that Paladin was lucky in some way. Lucky scoundrel, no matter what you say.

To summarize - no matter how much you try to neutralize external factors on templates, they haven't gone anywhere. Ordinary luck can bring a super-monster to its knees before a noob.

To summarize. If you want to play without them - you're welcome, there are fixes, TK3, campaigns, offline tournaments - who's stopping you from playing all that? And I really don't remember a noob ever bringing a super-monster to its knees.. Well, unless the latter got a lot of upgraded vampires at the start of the castle or something like that

Thanks for the archive, I'll find time to check it out.
If it gets me hooked - I'll play through it; if it seems uninteresting - I'll drop it. I've been kind of lazy lately, I still can't get around to even playing offline.

P.S. I'm not strong in chess, I only know what some pieces look like and how they move

Explain to me how I, a noob, can bring him to his knees, even if I don't just have max cons, but the Dragon Utopia right by my Castle!

Easy. DD in the utopia/air book/hat (if possible) - and the result is only a matter of time; little helps against mobility. I lost against an air book despite my own mega-development, and anyone will lose if they don't have an adequate response

There is also an interesting effect. When everything goes smoothly and external dwellings are nearby, with crypts-gnome huts-Griffin Conservatories-Dragon Utopias lined up in a row along the road, it's easy to fall into euphoria and run aground.

Marmot or medstrax, whichever you prefer to be called: you should play at least a couple of games on the forum, whether online or offline. Otherwise, no one will take you seriously.

Dear Avern, you don't need to take offense, I assure you. Just accept that there are players who know what they're doing, and it's not necessarily only in online games.
And I'm already participating in offline games...

All newcomers come to the forum with a sense of their own unreal coolness. This is natural; everyone comes here to show themselves. For a man, this is a normal phenomenon. And most of them quickly realize that they are playing quite poorly. And at this point, it is important what the person will do. Will they learn, or will they remain in their ivory tower?
But claims to an "authoritative" opinion without confirmation through actual gameplay look ridiculous and certainly do not fit the topic.

Claims of having an "authoritative" opinion without backing them up with actual gameplay seem ridiculous.

+1. You need to play at least 10 online games and provide a report to form any kind of opinion – otherwise, it's all empty talk and a cheap attempt to bluff your way into promoting some unknown super-duper campaign for some obscure purpose. It's nonsense.

That's not "utter nonsense." The campaigns are widely recognized, so there's no need to promote them. And I'm not doing that anyway. The main thing is to be able to complete them, even if it's just one person, in any way, and then we can talk. If I have no doubt that a skilled player can complete them with enough effort, then I have serious doubts about your abilities.

By the way, Loi, have you noticed the trend? Lately, the gameplay on L-maps (and not only) has become more intense. Players are increasingly trying to take objectives in the first week that they traditionally left for the second week. And they are no longer avoiding early contact with the opponent. On the other hand, they are showing more perseverance in difficult situations and often manage to turn the game around from a losing position. The game is becoming more aggressive and competitive.

medstrax, you're doing great! Some people simply can't understand: if a person knows that they can actually do something and aren't suffering from infantilism, they don't need to put on airs or prove anything to anyone. It's a pity that we're being led away from the main point again: the ability to think versus acting "according to a template" with just one's spinal cord. And in chess, if someone kept playing the same old scheme all the time, they would have been kicked out long ago!

It’s a pity that we are being led away from the main thing again: the ability to think versus acting “according to a template” with just one’s spinal cord.

Marmot, could you explain what “the ability to think” means to you? I just don’t understand what you’re getting at. I’ve already written many times about actions according to a template. Those who act according to a template in online mode only win due to the random number generator and against weak opponents. But online masters are thoughtful and unconventional people.

I glanced at the first scenario from “The Return of the Four,” and I felt a sense of melancholy. I didn’t understand what the difficulty was. Everything is elementary and шаблонно: gather knights/marksmen/angels from hidden locations, take 2 artifacts from harmless dragons, gather mana for several damage-dealing spells, pick up a scroll of the same, and jump for the third artifact... What’s there to think about? Everything is simply solved by one hero; the only question is time, and it seemed a waste to me. Maybe there’s something worthwhile in the second or third scenario? What are the names of the maps? I honestly don’t want to watch them all. I didn’t mean to offend anyone

In chess, if someone constantly played using the same worn-out scheme, they would have been kicked out long ago!

As a chess player, I can say that strong chess players have a lot of standards and established schemes. Chess at a high, grandmaster level is about 25-30 moves of theory in all variations, and on the 31st move, it's a draw if both players have played perfectly. But if someone makes a mistake, for example, on the 26th move or earlier, then it's simply about realizing the advantage.

Here is another interesting opinion that emerged during my conversation with Yama-Dharma. :)
At the start of the game, there is no "papa," and the player identifies several candidates for the role of ГГ. After that, they build a chain of heroes that most resembles a living organism—a two-headed snake. Each head is a candidate hero for the "papa" role; the body of the snake consists of dispatcher heroes through whom troops are transferred. One head takes something tasty, while the other only marks an object; the next day, troops are shifted to another front and the heads swap roles. But the process is not static: as the army's strength increases over time, the snake constantly grows, making larger and larger objects accessible. In addition to moving troops, dispatcher heroes pick up weaker objects along the way.
The most valuable asset a "papa" has is movement points, so it is very important to put him on an acceleration run. However, if you have already entered an enemy zone or treasury, acceleration carries risk and should be stopped. In a treasury, the combination of heroes can be figuratively imagined like this: the "papa" is a heavy aircraft carrier; without being distracted by anything unnecessary, he takes only the most important objects: Dragon Utopia, hives, while the "loshki" are like small support ships scurrying around the flagship, picking up whatever is lying around.
These are the images that come to me while playing. :) Maybe I explained it confusingly, but the main point is: the number of combinations in the game is quite large, and there is plenty of room for both logic and Creation. There are examples where players of different styles evaluated the exact same position completely differently.

Marmot, could you explain what "the ability to think" means to you?
...
It's all elementary and шаблонно: gather cavalry/archers/angels from hidden locations, take 2 artifacts from harmless dragons, gather mana for several damage-dealing spells, find a scroll for that spell, and jump to the third artifact... What's there to think about? It's all solved by one hero; the only question is time.

The answer is in your own words! Once again: to think outside the box means to act according to the situation each time, to be flexible. As in mathematics, as in programming: the same task can be solved in different ways. Sometimes there are many ways! You can complete the same map in completely different ways (I haven't looked at that campaign yet: I started with "Warlords of the Wasteland," but it requires a lot of time and truly hellish patience).

The main thing is: the number of combinations in the game is quite large, and there is a lot of room for both logic and creativity. There are examples where players with different styles evaluated the same position completely differently.

I completely agree!