HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

Posts from Анализ игры Oelm-KillerVampire

Tournament Committee
No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
In reply to Wicc
User Avatar
Offline Hermit
Registered:
Posts: 3,465
#108
Auto-translated
Wicc
In this case, there was a public appeal from the Community Volunteers (CV) to the Arbitration Committee (AK) with such a request.
As I understand it, it should be directly in the thread about controversial situations. That's probably where you should post it.
Всё не так плохо как Вы думаете. Всё намного хуже!
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Hermit
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,556
#109
Auto-translated
I'll be a bit of a nag here; I was told that playing this way is perfectly acceptable.
/attachments/19846/>

However, I would still like to see a screenshot from other games where something similar is done. Since this isn't considered an argument (at least by Volk and Vikom).

By the way, taking a Scholar in a party with Gosh – well, that’s just awful. When I played Heroes 4 during its first week, I didn't bother much about Scholars either; I always took them and also used Papa – it was kind of like a lottery. And Gosh is strong even if you don't quickly level up Necromancy. Let's say he won't take Utopia on the second map, but he definitely will on the third. Skeletons can even come from a Transformer. At a certain level of play, there may not be any prejudice against Scholars.

Also, regarding going for Inferno as a secondary town, under certain circumstances, I have seen people play like that more than once (without getting into details), but I completely failed to understand what direct benefits this secondary town brought to the opponent. It's nothing more than a rather dubious episode in itself.
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Hermit
Registered:
Posts: 3,465
#110
Auto-translated
Yes, I sometimes took scholars as my main hero... Though very rarely... Once, in a game against Oelm, Kiryushka learned necromancy. :) And I know that others sometimes take scholars too; for example, Erdema Tazar once learned the skill "Keen Eye."
Всё не так плохо как Вы думаете. Всё намного хуже!
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Hermit
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,556
#111
Auto-translated
By the way, here's another detail that I didn't notice yesterday. On turn 214, after taking the Grove, Inham doesn't run to the Naga Bank, where it's actually easier to level up and defend against attacks, but instead runs straight into the darkness towards the Conflux. And if he's going to level up, it would be logical for him to go to the Naga Bank first, and then to the Grove.
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Oelm
User Avatar
Offline PReDS
Registered:
Posts: 1,494
#112
Auto-translated
Oelm
By the way, here's another detail I didn't notice yesterday. On turn 214, after taking the Grove, Inham doesn't run to the Nagabank, where, by the way, it's easier to level up and defend against attacks, but runs straight into the darkness towards the Conflux. And if he's going to level up, it would be logical to go to the Nagabank first, and then to the Grove.
Judging by the rough sketches and the time it takes for the Elves, if Inham doesn't have tactics or artifacts that give +3 speed, or Knowledge of the Earth with advanced earth magic, then this won't be leveling up, but rather a very painful experience for the Marksmen, and maybe even the Liches will suffer. I don't know about the Grove, but I doubt he would go to the Nagabank unless he really needs the money.
1
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#113
Auto-translated
Sending a promising noob on week 5 with part of the army to a corner for leveling up isn't a negative move. Because the main hero doesn't lose momentum from this, and continues to conquer territory. The location for leveling up can be chosen randomly; experience is available in all unexplored areas. I don't feel like searching for screenshots; just believe that this is done quite often. However, sending the main hero on week 1 or 2 to various questionable locations can be a negative move. Especially if there might be an opponent there, especially if the phase of restarting after encountering the opponent hasn't passed yet, and especially if there's still something to do in the explored territory. You still haven't tried to solve the problem, and that's a shame. Because it clearly demonstrates the principle of analyzing such situations. Let's take an exaggerated example: consider the situation of capturing a "schoolboy" with armor. Suppose there are 100 players in total, and 10 of them are cheaters. That is, a random player, without any other information about him, is honest with a probability of 90%. Let's assume that the probability of an honest player capturing this "schoolboy" is 20% (there are fools). And for a cheater, it's 90% (not 100%, because there are smart ones). I'm taking these numbers out of thin air; they can be refined later, but the principle is what matters. That is, if a player captures the "schoolboy," the probability that he is honest is (90*0.2) / (10*0.9 + 90*0.2) = ~67%. That is, one episode is not enough to draw a sufficient conclusion, but based on a sufficient number of episodes, the estimated probability can be brought to extreme values. At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish between suspicious and obvious moments. For example, if the probabilities are distributed as 90/10 + 99/1, then this factor practically does not affect the final assessment; it can't even be called suspicious, and it can be safely ignored. Something like 50/50 + 95/5 in a single case gives too small an increase in probability to be taken seriously. In a superposition of such episodes, some noticeable probability may accumulate, but again, it will not be enough to reach extreme values. That is, in order for a set of such episodes to gain weight, there must be a very large number of them; one game is not enough. However, the aforementioned 20/80 + 90/10 has a decent weight in itself and allows it to attract attention. And a combination of 3-4 such episodes gathers a critical mass, sufficient to make an accusation and even pass a verdict. In essence, this is the core of my claims: the arguments you provide for the first game have too low a percentage to make an accusation, and they don't add up to the necessary weight. You need to see several such polished games that deviate from the theory of probability and the skill of the person in other components. In the second game, however, everything is much more serious; the probabilities of an honest player and a cheater making such decisions are at different ends of the probability scale, so the critical mass is accumulated rapidly.
1
⚖️
0
In reply to PReDS
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,556
#114
Auto-translated
No, look closer.
1. Grand Orc horde (78)
2. 14 gr. horses and 3 dragons + single units easily kill the Grand Orcs + there's magic. Considering that the blue player is saving up for Archons, taking this Naga Shrine (maxed out, by the way) is the perfect move. And the fact that the opponent knows how to counter ranged units, he has proven it in the game many times before. Sorry, but please stop writing nonsense.

P.S.
I'm too lazy to look for screenshots, just believe that this is done quite often.
No screenshots are needed, but saves would be very helpful. You yourself write that it happens often, which means it's not a difficult task. Especially with disproportionate armies. The main thing is when there is a clearly preferable direction specifically for leveling up (with Pandora and entering the Treasury).

Added after 23 minutes
Let's assume that the probability of an honest player taking this "noob" is 20% (there are idiots). And for a cheater, it's 90% (not 100% because there are smart ones). I took the numbers out of thin air, they can be clarified later, the principle is what matters here.

That is, if a player took the "noob," then the probability that he is honest is (90*0.2) / (10*0.9 + 90*0.2) = ~67%.

I'm not good at math. But according to your calculations, it turns out that every third person who takes "noobs" is a cheater, and that's already paranoid.

For me, the decisive factor is the moments when a person chooses a questionable decision, but if he hadn't made it, he would have had a much better chance of winning the game. This includes choosing the Treasury and, in general, areas to clear. Also, it's telling that Valeska stands in a position where she could be hit by a spell on day 215 (not 214), especially with artifacts removed. And also, Inham's move on day 215, which would at least be a significant loss of tempo if no resources were found, because he still arrives in an area where he could have arrived three days earlier. And along the way, he only leveled up on a tree. Isn't that a paradox? In total, I didn't notice any moments in the game where he made a mistake, went to the wrong place, or lost time.

Let's say, if you think that the player in the KV game knows that he needs to level up in the corner Treasuries, then he ignores them again on day 141+, goes to the sandy center (which I blocked with rocks, he already knew), and builds a chain there, and then goes to another corner Treasury, but with snow, again losing 2 days. But there, again, a utopia is found (with a Dragon Dragon). The same goes for the Cyclops Shrine on day 215. If he hadn't found it, then again, there could have been a chance to lose the game. By the way, the central Treasuries were not explored at all. He immediately went to level up in the corners. Is this also common in games?

Also, if a person plays without scouting (and the KV player doesn't scout at all), and at the same time doesn't make mistakes on 8m6, then this is much more important for me than taking some pathetic "noob."
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Oelm
User Avatar
Offline PReDS
Registered:
Posts: 1,494
#115
Auto-translated
Oelm
No, look closer.
1. Grand Horde (78)
2. 14 groups of knights and 3 dragons + single units can easily kill the Grand Horde + there's magic available. Considering that the blue faction is gathering money for Archmages, taking this Nagashnik (maximum level) is the best option. And the fact that the opponent knows how to deal with ranged units, he has already proven it in the game multiple times. Sorry, but please don't write nonsense anymore.
...
Please don't try to "heal" me: are you saying that 78 Grand Hordes won't be taken down in one volley by a hero with 6 defense, dealing 120 or 150 damage? Even if SP 9 helps to eliminate 1 stack. Hoping that due to cooldowns, the elves will start to attack in a coordinated manner is foolish.
1
⚖️
0
In reply to PReDS
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,556
#116
Auto-translated
I killed the Grand Lords first, and then wrote the post, unlike you. An army of 3 Necrodrakes, Death Knights, and single Markhovs. Lost 3 single units. Even if the battle is fought differently, it's still ridiculous, and the losses will be quite insignificant. And considering that at this time, the Knight's Vengeance is deliberately heading towards Arham, the money from Nagabank is much more important than some meager army.
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Oelm
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#117
Auto-translated
Oelm
I'm not good at math. But according to your calculations, it turns out that every third person who plays against students is a cheater, and that's already paranoid.
If we assume that the given figures are correct, then it's not paranoia, but an objective reality. The problem is that the figures may not be entirely accurate.

As for mathematics, defining map hacking is essentially a probabilistic task. Because 100% proof is usually not available, one has to make assumptions with varying degrees of probability. Therefore, it is necessary to be able to work with these probabilities, at least on an intuitive level.
For me, the decisive factor is when a person chooses a questionable decision, but if they hadn't made it, they would have had a much better chance of winning the game.
This is essentially what I said above, only in mathematical terms. That is, what you call a questionable decision is interpreted by me as a probability of ~[30-40]/[60-50] for an honest player. And a decision, the rejection of which is fraught with losing the game, is interpreted as ~[80-90]/[20-10] for a cheater.

And our entire dispute boils down to assigning these probabilities. That is, I argue that the probability of an honest person making such decisions is not small at all, but rather quite high.

For example, building a tower in Rampart is objectively a positive move; I indicated the reasons above. Therefore, I estimate the probability that an honest player with the appropriate skills (that is, who understands the probabilities of spellcasting) will build it there at about 70%. Another ~25 percent is left for the option of abandoning the construction in the middle and switching to building a Tavern. And another ~5% for Necropolis (a whim). A cheater, accordingly, chooses Rampart in 100% of cases.

This gives us 86% honesty against the initial 90% (assuming 10% cheaters in the group). Or, for example, 93% honesty against the initial 95% (assuming 5% cheaters). You'll agree, that's too small of an increase; such arguments need to be carefully collected in large numbers, or better yet, ignored altogether to avoid inflating the volume of the case, risking getting bogged down in irrelevant chatter.

The same is true for most of the other arguments - they each add their 1-5%, without creating a critical mass. A student, as you remember, immediately added 23%. It is such episodes that noticeably change the assessment of the situation that should be taken into account in the first place.
1
⚖️
0
In reply to Wicc
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,556
#118
Auto-translated
For example, building a Tower in Rampart is objectively a good move; I explained the reasons above. Therefore, I estimate that the probability of a fair player with the appropriate skills (i.e., someone who understands the probabilities of spell drops) building it there is around 70%. I'll allocate another ~25% to the option of abandoning the construction halfway through and switching to building a Tavern. And another ~5% to Necropolis (a momentary lapse in judgment).

Exactly, exactly, exactly. I would like to hear the author's opinion on the probabilities of spell drops. When playing with 4 heroes up to level 133 (by the way, I think he played like that because he was confident in a quick victory), 5% for Necropolis – here you are completely wrong. Necropolis is available to the blue player starting from level 113. And the Guildhall could have been started much earlier. And then, you could start picking up scrolls. Again, there's a paradox. The person seems to be quite well-oriented in the template. But he starts building the Guildhall after he has already started picking up scrolls in the 4th month. Although, in my opinion, he should have built the Guildhall in Necropolis – it could have been started much earlier, and then he could have started picking up scrolls. Here's another interesting sequence: slow – air elemental – flight (by level 221) – this is also telling. Or, Vic, will you give 3-5% for this?:D
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Oelm
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#119
Auto-translated
Oelm
Although, in my opinion, magic should have been built in the Necropolis – it would have been possible to start much earlier there.
The point isn't when to start building, but when to finish. If you don't have the resources to quickly build the 5th level in a few days, what's the point of starting? You'll just waste resources.

Added after 1 minute
Oelm
Here's another interesting chain: slow - air elemental - flight (by level 221) - also quite telling. Or will Vic give you 3-5% for this?:D
I didn't understand the argument. What's wrong with that again?
1
⚖️
0
In reply to Wicc
User Avatar
Offline Oelm
Registered:
Posts: 2,556
#120
Auto-translated
Argument: on level 113, the necessary scroll for slowing down enemies was found (to defeat the Necropolis hero). Towards the end of the fourth level, two scrolls were found: one with an air elemental and another with flight (for an expert air mage). After that, until level 221, no more scrolls were found, and the stats didn't increase. Neither with luck nor with the "father" skill. It was a perfect match.

I believe this doesn't happen in regular games at all.
Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Oelm
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#121
Auto-translated
Oelm
Argument: on day 113 the needed scroll for Slow (to take the Necropolis) was found. At the end of week 4, two scrolls were found, with Air Elemental and Fly (for Expert Air Magic). That's it. Up to day 221, I think no more scrolls are found — they don't appear. A bullseye.

I believe this simply does not occur in regular games.
// in a pedantic voice //
Specify the alternatives. Not take those scrolls? Take some others? What's the percentage for an honest player to find them?

You see the weakness in your position — you're spreading yourself too thin. A casual viewer will read this discussion, see that a lot of arguments have been refuted, many called into question, many dismissed as uninformative, and so on.

What opinion will they form? Right — that fellow is up to something fishy. Because they won't delve into all the arguments and counterarguments; they won't even remember them. So a general impression will form — the prosecution's position is weak on almost all points. And where it isn't weak, the defense simply hasn't gotten around to showing that weakness.

Court trials last for months or years precisely because people meticulously collect, sort, and analyze all those small percentages. A normal person would get bored just reading the table of contents. And for a professional lawyer to work with this requires excellent memory, pedantry, concentration, and mental endurance.

But that's their profession, for which they are paid large sums — they can put in the work. It's hard to expect this from members of the AK and other HeroesWorld players. They'll most likely skip a significant part of the discussion, focusing their attention either on the most vivid episodes or on those that confirm their personal point of view.

So for your point of view to replace theirs in their minds, you need to emphasize vivid episodes. Not 30++ points at 2-3% each, but 4-5 points that are 20% each. Otherwise, you'll simply be flooded with a breakdown of details, which is essentially what I did here.

Because of the presumption of innocence, such a course of action is a plus for the defense and a minus for the prosecution.
1
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Wlk777
Registered:
Posts: 2,544
#122
Auto-translated
Rules for resolving disputed situations when unfair play is suspected in HOMM3 matches.

(adopted unanimously by the members of the Appeals Committee after discussion)

1. All accusations of unfair play without solid evidence on the HW forum are not allowed and will be removed by moderators. If doubts arise about the opponent's fairness after the game, try to find out the reasons for his actions from him personally. If you find his explanations unsatisfactory, post a report about the win/loss on HW with the save files attached and contact any member of the Appeals Committee. No additional discussions of the match on the forum are allowed until a decision is made by the Appeals Committee.
And what is this Appeals Committee that doesn't follow its own regulations?
Всем удачи ! И Морали !
0
⚖️
0