Posts from DISCUSSIONS on “Rules for online games in HoMM3 and formulas for calculating player rating.”
Кто к нам с пером придёт, тот от пера и погибнет!:smile51:
Therefore, I propose to test some of the changes during the winter season and hold a vote in February.
Mandatory restarts:
- if the starting hero is above level 1;
- if no roads lead from the starting castle;
- if ГО generated right next to the starting castle (such that it is impossible to leave the starting castle or enter it without a battle with ГО).
Restart upon encounter...
If red captures blue's city or mine, guarded by 1 gnoll, then this falls under "any battle between players." But it is not a battle between heroes.
I also took into account the question in AK from bRitvo4kA.
Restart upon the first encounter by 115-116-117 inclusive for fast-medium-slow roads respectively.
An encounter is considered direct contact between players, i.e., any battle between them (a battle between any heroes, a battle with the garrison of an opponent's castle or mine).
If an encounter occurs within the specified timeframe, either opponent has the right to request a restart.
If both players agree to continue the game, the game continues. Subsequent encounters occurring within the specified timeframes are not grounds for a restart
Subjective restarts...
The "sum of 3 days" proposal seems interesting to many. But many also disagree.
Here is what they write (without specifying authors):
I like the new wording of restarts, but I would like a total of 3(111+111+111 or 112+111 or 113)
Ah, and for 3 days in total for rests
FOR: Wording of rests as a sum of 3
introduce experimentally for the winter season - 3 days in total (and no rests for one road to ГО, blocks...
for players being able to take either 111 and 113; or 111, 111, 111, 111; or 111, 112, 111, meaning any options, but so that the sum is the same 111 and 113.
I am for 111+112
3 days in total
I think it should be left as is. Or replaced equivalently with 4 days in total.
in theory, you could do 111 and 112
Yes, THREE days in total for rests for each, and no blocks, roads to ГО or other things.
Subjective restarts:
each player has the right to take a restart/restarts, meaning starting a new game with map regeneration. One may take either 3 restarts on the first day of the game (111+111+111), or 2 restarts on the first and second day (111+112 or 112+111), or one restart on the third day (113).
Restarts for one road to ГО and a strong block...
Opinions:
for a restart for one road and a strong block.
tech-rest with 1 road to ГО and for a strong block.
Regarding one road — it must be emphasized that we are talking about one road from the castle.
I've already said more than once regarding one road to ГО, definitely a mandatory rest.
for 1 road to ГО - should be
In my understanding, a strong block is such a block that either cannot be broken through, or breaking through it results in the loss of at least 1/3 of the attacker's Army.
I believe that the breakability of a block should be determined on an individual basis. If opponents do not agree on this issue, the tournament leader or AK decides
completely agree with one of the above opinions that a rest for a block should only be given after exhausting available restarts for 111 or 113 (112).
A block is the guarding of something with more than 6000 value.
And generally, have there ever been disputes about this block?
Of course, we are talking about a strong block; it has happened many times that guards of strong objects block the only passage (road), for example, guards of Dragon Utopia, Hive, etc. In such cases, imho, it should be a mandatory rest.
As for blocks, here perhaps one really needs to resort to the help of judges if both opponents cannot agree.
it is also important who encountered this block — necros, for example, die instantly; for swamp, it's the loss of a couple of snakes and something from infantry
Since subjective restarts are linked to these, we also introduce them experimentally for one season:
Restart for one road to ГО. Taken up to 115 inclusive.
If subjective restarts remain, and one road to ГО is discovered on a day when a restart can no longer be taken, a subjective restart is spent.
If subjective restarts are exhausted, and a player discovers that the only road from the starting castle leads to ГО, he has the right to request an additional restart.
Restart for a strong block, if the block cannot be bypassed and the block cuts off the castle from the main part of the respawn, leaving no possibility for development up to the block. Taken up to 112 inclusive.
The strength of the block is first evaluated by the player reporting the block, then by his opponent, and in case of a dispute between players — the leader/judge/AK.
If subjective restarts remain, a subjective restart is spent at the player's choice (i.e., on 112 one can take a remaining 111 restart).
If subjective restarts are exhausted, the player has the right to request an additional restart.[/B]
Restart for ГО via roadless terrain...
Few spoke out:
for a restart if ГО is via roadless terrain.
restart for ГО via roadless terrain, for.
Against a restart for ГО via roadless terrain. I believe that this adds variety to the game on sm-ke.
for ГО via roadless terrain it can be written like this: if one of the players wishes, in this case, a tech rest.
Rests, I think, should not be given for roadless ГО!!
The start was normal... but after a couple of turns, the opponent refused to play, saying there was a block on the road... I decided to check and didn't see any block there, just a group of water elementals...
Thanks for the time!
Стримы и обучение тут:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWlnXU5R5RLCMuWzIpBc65Q
How many water elementals were there? If there were 30+ and they also had Guard Shield, then it really does seem like a roadblock...
An interesting idea arose – to add a rule regarding blocks: in case of a controversial situation (when players cannot agree on the block's effectiveness), the opponent of the player with the disputed block must attempt to break it (either by attacking the block directly or by describing a tactic for breaking it with acceptable losses; in the worst case, simply send a save file showing the block being broken on the first attempt). Then, with a clear conscience, the winner of the game can be determined.
Vitaly (Gomunguls), you did everything correctly, namely:
If a player doesn't break the block and demands a restart due to the block, then:
1. The opponent tries to break the block themselves. If they fail (also on the first attempt, then restart)!!!!
2. The opponent tries to break the block. If they succeed, then it's a loss...
Confirmation with a screenshot, everything was done technically and professionally...
Vitaly, as always, you're great!)))
rebellious, currently, will not provide updates for this game; I request that the seasonal ranking leader (Pit for LM) credit Gomunguls' report.
purely hypothetically, Horde 50-99
let Gomunguls show off again and defeat as many water elementals as possible with the same army. Good luck!
purely hypothetically, Horde 50-99
let Gomunguls try again and destroy as many water elementals as possible with the same army. good luck!
Pasha, are you still going to keep writing the word "censorship"? When will you start assigning points? Otherwise, the forum is turning into a verbal garbage dump. Or should we call moderators from other sections? :confused:
Kostya, the moderators (according to them) can't assign points right now. So, no one can catch up to me, and there's no need to bother asking for the permanent ban to be lifted. We've reached communism :D
Kostya, why don't you sign up to be a moderator and try assigning points? :)
Where do you see a garbage dump? Everything is being cleaned up and corrected promptly, and punishment will definitely come.
Today, a new version of the scripts responsible for the automated violation system was uploaded to the HeroesWorld server. Please check its functionality.
Therefore, I ask you to refresh your memory of the Portal Rules and avoid including
direct and indirect insults to users (25 points),
profane and offensive language in your nicknames, avatars, messages, and signatures (10 points),
trolling, i.e., provocations (5 points), etc.
Also, any user, if they see that the forum is turning into a verbal garbage dump, can report the violation to the moderators by clicking on the "brick" under the author's avatar – a message will immediately be sent to their email. There is no longer any need to call moderators from other sections.
Registering two accounts with one user is prohibited on the forum (50 violation points). However, if this is not done with dishonest intentions but out of ignorance (for example, they forgot their password...), there is a solution.
To avoid further questions from users, I am informing everyone that the players Imb and Tovariщ are now united and indivisible (Denis forgot his password when moving and registered again). The same applies to %username% and Vortex123.
Fortunately, our forum allows us to merge user accounts, so the duplicate accounts you described have been merged in favor of Tovariщ and Vortex123, respectively.
An interesting idea came to mind - to add a clause to the rules regarding blocks - in case of a controversial situation (when players disagree on whether a block can be broken) the opponent of the player who has the disputed block is obliged to break it (in front of the opponent in the game or describe the breaking tactic with acceptable losses, as a last resort simply send a save from the FIRST attempt of breaking the block) and then with a clear conscience you can determine the winner of the match =)
And what if the opponent started developing incorrectly, and therefore cannot break this block with acceptable losses by week 113?.. ) Is only the current breakability of the block considered? (I mean, is a group of goblins and wolves actually a viable tactic for Citadel in the first 2 weeks?.. *scratcheshead*) And are acceptable losses 1/3 of the army as Pasha wrote?
And what if the opponent started developing incorrectly, so by week 1 day 3 cannot break through this block with acceptable losses?.. ) Is only the current breakability of the block considered? (I mean this: is the gr gbls and wolves tactic really a viable Citadel tactic in the first 2 weeks?..*scratchinghead*) And are acceptable losses 1/3 of the army as Pasha wrote?
I have not yet arrived at a clear understanding of the block criterion by which one can restart.
My current thoughts on the possibility of such a restart.
1st option: a block that is unbreakable under any circumstances on the turn for which a block-related restart can be taken.
2nd option: a block that is breakable, but the Army that remains gains nothing from it (since there are no prospects of recapturing anything using the remnants of the Army, reaching another respawn, or rebuilding).
3rd option: only the 1st Option.
4th option: something else entirely.
