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.
Didn't know where to post this, so I decided to post it here. I encountered a bug or something else; here's the situation: as a Fire Expert, I couldn't cast Berserk (it wasn't even active – the units weren't highlighted) or Blindness (no anti-magic spells). After racking my brain, I decided to ask if anyone knows or has encountered something similar. The game was long, and there was a bug (hero duplication), and I was kicked out once. Maybe that's relevant too... Anyway, here's the save file; if anyone is interested, they can test it themselves. Thanks in advance!
Roma, this is due to the "Badge of Valor" on Tazar.
Having analyzed the rules translated by Stikki, I would like to propose a couple of points for discussion:
If a zone has multiple guards, and the first player breaks through one of them, and the second player sees this, then he can pass without breaking through the other guards. Otherwise, he must break through one of the remaining guards.
In my opinion, it would be worth adding this to the rules of the Hive (or as a sub-item of clarification). Otherwise, the current practice is as follows: a player who intends to pass by a guard and suspects that the opponent has been there before asks the opponent directly: "Can I pass through here?". The opponent is forced to give important reconnaissance information... there is room for speculation, by the way... But in the quoted interpretation, everything is measurable (verifiable by saves), everything is consistent (everything is fair, and some tactical nuances appear - you break through two guards for experience and passage, leave 10+ snipers behind, keeping in mind that passage here is unlikely)... P.S. Regarding the Global Order, as a semi-joke, are we discussing the application of the quoted rule? :)
Red rush On the first day of the week, red cannot use its bonus against the opponent's troops or colored objects (even if they are not guarded). It is forbidden to block the opponent's path with the new bonus. If a player breaks through the guard on the opponent's zone with a new bonus, he cannot capture the opponent's objects even with only the old army.
In my opinion, this is reasonable, simply in terms of understanding, universally. In other words, don't touch anything of the opponent's on the first day of the bonus, if you have taken an additional bonus, which you have only because you are red and go first. Currently, on the Hive, it is as follows:
5.5. The so-called "red rush" is prohibited, that is, a player playing as red does not have the right to attack on the first day of the week with a bonus purchased on that day:
a) on the blue Castle (even if the Castle is not guarded). b) on the blue heroes or guarded mines, if the presence of the bonus can affect the outcome of the battle or losses in the battle for either player. Additional information >>
I believe that the current interpretation is worse, more vague... I understand that the current wording on the Hive is intended to counter incorrect tactics, such as supporting from below in the metro with a scout... But, in my opinion, I repeat once again, the wording from the "World Championship" is better. Perhaps it is worth taking it. With the only caveat: "the concept of a red rush is not applicable if both heroes are on opposite sides of the underground gate (portal) during the attack"?
Стратегия - искусство возможного.
Первое правило форума : "Хвалу и клевету приемли равнодушно И не оспаривай глупца" (с)
Новичкам: ВНИМАТЕЛЬНО перечитайте ВЕСЬ первый пост по нижеприведенной ссылке и 90% ваших вопросов отпадут( на остальные 10% с удовольствием отвечу): Правила онлайн игр
IMHO — it's worth introducing into the HeroesWorld rules (or as a sub-clause of clarification). Otherwise, the current practice is: a player intending to pass by a guard and assuming the opponent has been there before asks the opponent a direct question — "can I pass here?". The opponent is often forced to provide important reconnaissance information... there's room for speculation, by the way...
Valer, I highly doubt that under the current rules a player is OBLIGED to explain to their opponent DURING THE GAME, BEFORE THE MATCH ENDS, where they have or haven't been, which guard they have or haven't defeated — if someone asked me, I would have said I don't remember ))).
Added after 9 hours 48 minutes Loi
Maybe it's worth adopting it? With the sole caveat — "the concept of redrash is not applicable if both heroes end up on opposite sides of the subterranean gates (portal) during the attack"?
Thanks for the note; looks like I didn't express myself clearly... I meant the following: We take the new wording (from the world championship rules that Stickie translated):
Red rush On the first day of the week, red cannot use its new growth against the opponent's troops or colored objects (even if they are unguarded). Blocking the opponent's path with the new growth is not allowed. If a player breaks through the guard to the opponent's zone with the new growth, they cannot capture the opponent's objects even with only the old army.
We add a clause (note) — the same one that was on HeroesWorld:
The concept of a red rush is not applicable if both heroes end up on opposite sides of the underground gates (portal) during the attack
So, summing it up — the new version, in full wording: Red rush On the first day of the week, red cannot use its new growth against the opponent's troops or colored objects (even if they are unguarded). Blocking the opponent's path with the new growth is not allowed. If a player breaks through the guard to the opponent's zone with the new growth, they cannot capture the opponent's objects even with only the old army. Note: The concept of a red rush is not applicable if both heroes end up on opposite sides of the underground gates (portal) during the attack.
Стратегия - искусство возможного.
Первое правило форума : "Хвалу и клевету приемли равнодушно И не оспаривай глупца" (с)
Новичкам: ВНИМАТЕЛЬНО перечитайте ВЕСЬ первый пост по нижеприведенной ссылке и 90% ваших вопросов отпадут( на остальные 10% с удовольствием отвечу): Правила онлайн игр
Valer, I seriously doubt that, according to the current rules, a player is OBLIGATED to explain to their opponent DURING the game, BEFORE the game ends, where they were or weren't, which guard they broke through or didn't. If they asked me, I would answer - I don't remember)).
Therefore, it should be supplemented with a clause stating that "situations of memory loss are interpreted in favor of the person asking the question."
So, it should be supplemented with the clause "memory loss situations are interpreted in favor of the questioner."
Yeah. And for club championships, find some "truth serum," or at the very least, it wouldn't hurt to give the particularly forgetful ones a little nudge. But seriously, there's only one option: if you didn't personally clear the guard, you can only proceed if you are ABSOLUTELY sure that your opponent cleared it. Otherwise, you're taking a risk, and in case of a problem, it's a clear tech loss.
Yeah. And for club championships, find some "truth serum," or at least give a little nudge to those who are particularly forgetful. But seriously, there's only one option: if you didn't personally clear the guard, you can only proceed if you're absolutely sure your opponent cleared it. Otherwise, it's at your own risk, and you'll end up with a clean tech loss.
Imagine this: you're walking down the road and see that a guard is standing far off, 3-4 squares away, in the swamp. Running after it will take at least half a day.
And it's clear that the second or third guard was probably on the road, and your opponent cleared them. But it's not 100%, who knows what the generator will do.
That's why I suggest asking your opponent in ambiguous situations.
P.S. I'm fundamentally against tech losses in situations where they can be avoided. This situation falls into that category.
Imagine this: you're walking down the road and see that far off, 3-4 squares away in a swamp, there's a guard. Running after it would take at least half a day.
And imagine I have a main hero rushing in the enemy's zone of invisibility, and I have a plan to gain an advantage through surprise. And am I OBLIGATED to reveal myself? Something doesn't seem right...
Imagine this: you're walking down the road and see that far off, 3-4 tiles away, there's a guard standing in the swamp. Running after it would take at least half a day.
And it's clear that the second or third guard was probably standing on the road, and the opponent broke through them. But it's not 100%, who knows what the map generator will do.
That's why, in questionable situations, it's suggested to ask the opponent.
P.S. I'm fundamentally against using tech units in situations where you can do without them. This situation falls into that category.
The opponent is not obligated to tell you anything!
If you're looking for the truth, observe the passage. When the opponent passes by the guard, it means they broke through it. Or, increase your dark vision skill to expert :)
Why should I tell you something that doesn't concern the opponent??? I didn't influence his moves by breaking through or not breaking through this guard; if you want 100% certainty, break through the passage yourself!!!
Deep Mike - I'm betting 10 candies on him, little squirrel :)
"Это нам идеально подходит!" [Новосибирск, 2013] "Красавчик! Если только не читер.." [Киев, 2014] "Это Вам не шутки - нажрался Dust в маршрутке" [Новокузнецк, 2015] Сам ты фиш (с) :D
due to the nature of the business involving alcohol, it had to be shut down.
"Это нам идеально подходит!" [Новосибирск, 2013] "Красавчик! Если только не читер.." [Киев, 2014] "Это Вам не шутки - нажрался Dust в маршрутке" [Новокузнецк, 2015] Сам ты фиш (с) :D
worse :) in my job, one inappropriate action is worth the salary of an average Russian engineer.
"Это нам идеально подходит!" [Новосибирск, 2013] "Красавчик! Если только не читер.." [Киев, 2014] "Это Вам не шутки - нажрался Dust в маршрутке" [Новокузнецк, 2015] Сам ты фиш (с) :D
Дубровин Павел
