Forum — Tournament Committee

RAPER

7/18/2010 7:19 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Vitalik has proven that he can play well. Why not let him prove it in a match!!!

Seriously, that's a good suggestion...
It seems that whoever shouts the loudest doesn't actually perform well in the game...

играю на уровне AI !!:smile32: ;)

In reply to RAPER

Wlk777

7/18/2010 7:33 PM UTC

Auto-translated

RAPER

seriously, a good suggestion...
it's just that whoever shouts the loudest hasn't really shown anything...

And before Vitalik received the World Champion title, there was no doubt about his high skill. I think Britva will also demonstrate the same skill both online and in the club, which will again not convince his accusers of anything - they will start making excuses like "he cheats selectively, etc."

Всем удачи ! И Морали !

In reply to Wlk777

SEM_56

7/18/2010 8:16 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Wlk777

I think Britva will demonstrate the exact same skill, both online and in the club, which will again fail to convince his accusers – excuses like "he cheats selectively, etc." will begin.

Only after seeing the game in person will I admit I was wrong...
But for now, I stand by my categorical opinion!
During the game, each player is guided by a standard set of moves, a prioritized order, and the capture of specific objects!

In the discussion about Britva's Barbarian game, I still didn't receive a sensible answer to a simple question...
He circled with 3 heroes near the outpost for 3 days and only opened it at the end of the 3rd turn. A very interesting and logical move)))

Ушел с героев, пока пряники)

In reply to SEM_56

Oelm

7/19/2010 12:18 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Regarding skill: I understand when Alex writes that Britva, Dubrovin, or I, for example, don't know how to play Heroes. But imho, most of the players who "evaluated" Andrey's skill actually play worse than him, and I wouldn't rule out significantly worse. I have no intention of idealizing his game; in general, I'd like to avoid evaluating skill as it is a thankless task. Two examples (though of course for many this isn't an indicator at all). In an old balanced game with me, both played for quite a while practically with an open map, exchanged Castles, then there were long maneuvers; I'll say that he created quite a few problems for me. I lost the game due to my own mistake, but nevertheless. The last game on VT without anything, Andrey was streaming, taking the utopia on 126 as Barbarians. I understand that these are not deciding arguments, of course, but in my opinion, even this would be an achievement for many.

2Wic: your argumentation at this moment is simple and depressing simultaneously. I am right because I am right. It's useless to prove anything here, and I have no desire to do so on the forum.

In a conversation and discussion of one save from Britva's game with his Barbarians, I still haven't received a proper answer to a simple question...
For 3 days he circled with 3 heroes near the lookout and only at the end of the 3rd turn opened it. A very interesting and logical move)))

Look Rom, why not just post the saves? Theoretically, such a situation is entirely possible.

Regarding quoting myself:
1. I apologized to Valenok.
2. Such a stream of nonsense started in the thread that I decided "not to keep my mouth shut," thinking it would be better and more honest. Along the way, I had to reconsider many of my views on some Heroes players, the situation with Vitalik, and there was other stuff too. The reason:

But the accusation looked weak, or rather, there wasn't one at all. No one accused anyone in the course of the process, didn't you notice, gentlemen?

Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.

In reply to Oelm

Catch

7/19/2010 4:12 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Oelm

But in my opinion, most of the players who "evaluated" Andrey's skill actually play worse than him, and I'm not even excluding those who play significantly worse.

I don't idealize my own level of play. In online games, I consider myself a below-average player. But in offline games, I'm slightly above average. And it's precisely the offline experience that allows me to assess a map and the level of play. Moreover, I theoretically know how to play. Therefore, judging by the save files of that game, I saw that his level of play is not much better than mine. And it certainly doesn't reach the level of top players like Alex.

Школа начального мастерства по Вторым Героям.

http://offtop.ru/heroes2school/

In reply to Oelm

Wicc

7/19/2010 5:43 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Oelm

2Wic: your arguments at the moment are simple and depressing at the same time. I am right because I am right.

If only...

I actually have a habit of arguing my point of view, albeit with varying degrees of detail. And if I throw mud, it's as a seasoning, not the main course.

Reread my posts above on the topic at your leisure:
/topic/at/387278/
/topic/at/387419/
and indicate (or write) even one argument from the defense that is close in quality.

But don't start throwing comments like "there's nonsense written there" again; coming from you, it sounds like yapping.
For a normal discussion, you will need to form a coherent position in detail.

In reply to Wicc

PReDS

7/19/2010 7:26 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Wicc

If only...

I actually have a habit of arguing my point of view, albeit with varying degrees of detail. And if I do throw mud, it’s as seasoning, not the main course.

Reread my posts above on this topic at your leisure:
/topic/at/387278/
/topic/at/387419/
and point out (or write) even one argument from the defense that is comparable in quality.

But don't start throwing around comments like "there's nonsense written there" again; coming from you, it sounds like yapping.
For a normal discussion, you need to form a coherent position in detail.

Vovin's post was right at the beginning of the discussion. You somehow missed it, just like everyone else. So Oelm's behavior is quite adequate: people ignore reasonable arguments said in a calm tone – so we'll beat the drum louder, whoever shouts loudest wins.
Regarding the complete lack of resources for the Hive faction, since everything has long been consumed: you probably confused Valentka with Samurai or yourself. In your case, all resources were likely depleted by the end of week two/beginning of week three. Here, after a more or less clear first week, expansion was very sluggish, which could be easily tracked using the tavern, so it was quite predictable: along the road, everything was eaten up; something might remain in the corners.
And ultimately, hiding in the corners is generally basic strategy when playing control against melee factions.

In reply to Wicc

Oelm

7/19/2010 7:44 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I don't idealize my own level of play.
I'm not planning to get too seriously attached to the level of play. It's a thankless task :) That's why I wrote: imho, Andrey, you aren't weaker than many on ХВ. In offline, the criteria for evaluating play are slightly different. But it is quite possible that some shortcomings can be compensated for by other strengths. And there's no need to immediately jump to maphack. I don't really want to push the discussion on this point; just accept it as my personal opinion.

If only ...
You see, I am absolutely indifferent to how you perceive such posts. But what you wrote really resembles own delusions or nonsense. I have no desire to bang my head against a wall. My subsequent posts following yours contain enough convincing arguments, but if you prefer to simply ignore them, then so be it. Your messages are long enough, but instead of substance, they're just filler.

Yes, this part was funny (quote with correction):

Just imagine - you're playing against a person, he jumps over a cliff onto the road to get to you, then runs through the wilderness into the corner of a resp that you've already scouted, finds nothing there (which will be the case in 90++% of instances), and then goes back (on foot or with DD; they say TP wasn't available there).

Your opinion on such a fellow's skill? Correct - a noob.

Theoretically, one can imagine the justification for a similar maneuver, for example, if the road to the village goes into a corner, and the trek through the wilderness is made toward the center. Like, if I find nothing, then I'll jump into the neighboring zone and search it.

In that version, it would look a bit strange, but overall tolerable; some kind of logic (mixed with intuition) is present here.

But when the trek through the wilderness is made into a corner of the map (!) from which you can't jump anywhere, and then you have to return back to the same lift ... meaning if the opponent is stronger, he'll catch you here, and if weaker, you give him a day or two to get away or build an army.

Some kind of stream of nonsense, sorry.

Completely agree; it feels like we're talking about some other save entirely.

Now specifically, explain to this noob where this came from:?

But when the trek through the wilderness is made into a corner of the map (!) from which you can't jump anywhere, and then you have to return back to the same lift
Well, I somehow managed to jump out of there, and toward the center of the map at that)). And this is by no means an exception; all the argumentation is based on such stale logic.

2PREDS: by the way, I don't consider playing on 147 as hiding in corners.

P.S. Yes, Vik, if a substantive-critical side doesn't appear in your posts, then I will not engage in discussion with you. You can continue to pull the wool over the eyes of the local simpletons, but not me.

Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.

Hermit

7/19/2010 8:08 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I'll risk expressing my opinion. Personally, as I already wrote, I don't know whether Britvotchka cheated during the game or not. But I always thought that the AC would make such a decision, and it's the right one. The move is very suspicious, and I strongly suspect that he cheated, but it's impossible to rule out the possibility that he simply has such a playing style and he really went there without knowing that there was a Utopia and accidentally stumbled upon it. As I see it, when most of the AC members who managed to distance themselves from their hatred of cheaters or those who unfairly accuse strong players also thought about this calmly, they also couldn't give a definitive answer to this question, and many of them thought that he cheated, but for them, making a decision in this case came down not to answering the question of whether he cheated or not, but to answering the question of what is worse: not to give him the "Mark of Shame" (MoS), but he is actually a cheater and will cheat again sometime, or to give him the MoS, but he is not a cheater, and this will effectively end his participation in online games and put an end to his heroic career... Here, probably, as with me, most of the AC members thought that the second option is worse, because if he is a cheater, then something can be done about it - collect some evidence and then give him the MoS with much more confidence, but if he didn't cheat, and they give him the mark... that's really terrible... As they say, let the judge fear the power of his own judgment... it's not a fact that tomorrow someone of us, who is now writing in this topic, votes in this poll, for example, in a hurry, when the timer is already ticking and the main hero hasn't even moved yet, or for some other reason, will make several illogical, rash actions as if he knows the map and finds some good artifact, and they will be discussing not Britvotchka, but him... Honestly, I also had several moments when opponents were surprised how I found them, how I knew they were there... why I attacked a strong guard without checking the number of monsters, etc. Sometimes, I myself was surprised how my opponent found me exactly in the treasure room without scouting, without reconnaissance... In general, the move is very suspicious, but giving the MoS based on just one such move is, in my opinion, too much...

Всё не так плохо как Вы думаете. Всё намного хуже!

Javdet

7/19/2010 8:38 AM UTC

Auto-translated

They're pushing the AK issue again, lol)))))
It's a normal and correct decision. If I were voting, I would definitely vote against it, because the situation smells bad, but there isn't enough evidence, and if there was even 1% doubt against 99% that he's not guilty, that 1% would be decisive. I don't know what really happened, but I think the guys from AK voted that way for exactly that reason.

Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.

In reply to Hermit

Oelm

7/19/2010 8:41 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Basically, Vic, at least four people acknowledge that the move on turn 147 is perfectly acceptable: PREDS, Aldegir, me, and Andrei himself. As I see it, you have three options:

1. Decide that we all conspired.
2. Dig in your heels – ignore it.
3. Acknowledge that it’s quite possible to have a different way of thinking about the game than you do.
4. Something else, preferably not something ridiculous.

Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.

In reply to PReDS

Wicc

7/19/2010 9:00 AM UTC

Auto-translated

PReDS

Vovin's post at the very beginning of the discussion.

Yeah, I found it. He's reasoning too subtly; the logic is understandable, but I wouldn't vouch for the claim that everyone would reason the same way in that situation. In other words, depending on the skill of both players and their opinion of each other's skill, all sorts of different game decisions can be made.

Regarding the purely negative value of the move, since everything has long been taken:

Even if not everything has been taken, the move doesn't stop being highly negative. Going into the opponent's territory is done either to kill him or to mess with him. Running around in a corner on rough terrain doesn't achieve either, but instead either gives the opponent time to consolidate (if the army is divided or elsewhere), or gives him the opportunity to catch your main hero in that corner. Plus, in 90+% of cases, there's nothing valuable there (for that stage of the game) even if not everything has been taken yet.

Hiding in corners with control can be done if the opponent hasn't already explored that corner. And cleaning up the opponent's corners only makes sense if there are no more free corners left. Here, there were at least half the map of resource nodes unexplored, and that's where he should have run to gather resources if that was his goal, and not to a corner that is at least revealed, and at most, looted, and with a high probability, a dead end.

So, there are two positive moves here: either go clean up the other resource nodes, or jump to the opponent and start taking castles, hit-and-run, try to catch a weak hero or a fast-moving unit, in general, interfere with his life/look for control, and turn the game into a running endgame, where you can exploit the speed advantage to find some opportunities. Everything else is negative to some extent.

For a player with such statistics as Britva, these are quite obvious considerations. Neither he nor his advocates have offered anything else. Essentially, the defense's argument boils down to "what if there's something there?". This argument might work for a beginner, but it doesn't suit Britva. Considering such accompanying factors as the break, the open editor (according to Navukh), similar precedents in the past, psychological mistakes during the defense, and the negative overall image and reputation, leads to a logical conclusion.

In reply to Oelm

Captain

7/19/2010 9:02 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Oelm

Basically, Vik, at least four people acknowledge that move 147 was perfectly acceptable: PREDS, Aldegir, myself, and Andrey himself. As I see it, you have three options:

1. Decide that we all conspired.
2. Admit to stubbornness and ignore it.
3. Acknowledge that it's quite possible that there's a different way of thinking in the game than yours.
4. Something else, preferably something sensible.

5. This group of four doesn't have a sufficient level of skill to judge.
I think the 5th point is the most appropriate answer to your question, Oelm :)

And Vik, Stinger, and my opinions suggest that there was some cheating going on. Just compare the names, as they say ;)

I agree with Vik here; it seems like people didn't really look at the save files.

By the way, Oelm, did you look at the logs of Britva that were posted? I doubt it... otherwise, you would have noticed his communication style - for example, look at his correspondence with Lebron and Alone for August 2008. In short, he's arrogant and has a strong desire to win at any cost. He was the same with me, saying that I play too well and that he could "tweak" things. What do you say to my screenshot of Britva's computer, where the map editor folder is open?

Дипломатия - искусство говорить собаке "хорошая собачка" до тех пор пока не найдешь подходящую палку.

In reply to Oelm

Wicc

7/19/2010 9:05 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Oelm

Basically, Vic, at least 4 people acknowledge that the move on 147 is quite acceptable: PREDS, Aldegir, me, and Andrei himself. As I see it, you have three options:

1. Decide that we all conspired.
2. Admit to stubbornness - ignore it.
3. Acknowledge that it's quite possible to have a different way of thinking than yours.
4. Something else, if possible, that isn't completely absurd.

Preds' position isn't entirely clear to me, but he often makes valid points, and it's hard to suspect him of stupidity or bias, so I'm willing to discuss it constructively with him.

With you, unfortunately, a constructive dialogue is not possible at the moment. The reasons, I think, are clear.

And even more so with Britva; the reasons are even clearer.

I didn't understand about Aldegir; maybe I missed some of his posts or have already forgotten them.