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.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from DISCUSSIONS on “Rules for online games in HoMM3 and formulas for calculating player rating.”Auto-translated
Pavel, the Grail seems to be located in the 4 cells at the intersection of the diagonals, so finding it on the third attempt isn't luck, but rather the opposite – it's skill. And there's no question of looking at the map.
I admit, I'm not familiar with the technique of finding the Grail, but I might change my opinion after learning about it.
At the same time, if players have mastered this technique and are allowed to place the Grail, won't the game simply come down to who can place the Grail faster?
and also some other techniques like how to dig up the Grail on level 111, etc. I put the treasure on level 131 for the Grail in Flax under GM5, and that's it, that's the whole game.
And so, will a hero with 5 5 5 5 skills, but with all the magic, make a big difference? This will rather be an alternative strategy, because you need to find the place with the Grail (which, by the way, may be in a treasure :confused:), then get it and return to the main map. One searches, the other harasses. Besides, the Grail is not a synonym for winning.
I think we should allow it. If reports like this start appearing: "On turn 115, I found the Grail, placed it in the Conflux, and on turn 117, I used God's Gift to get Armageddon's Blade and the Golden Griffon," then we can revert the change.
I think it should be allowed. If reports like this start appearing: "On day 115, I found the Grail, placed it in the Conflux, and on day 117, I used the Dungeon Door, Armageddon, and Grand Grail." then we can revert the change.
That's exactly the scenario that worries me the most:eek: and it's not a given that such reports will appear during the season (the calm before the storm), but then they will start pouring in:D. I agree that finding it on day 111 or in the first week is rare, but we can try it as an experiment. The main thing is to avoid a flood of complaints and appeals to the administration later.
Kluka (color, Castle, hero) loses to Player (color, Inferno, Marius) 112 Opened one obelisk on the map with the puzzle, lava landscape. No more restarts were available, so he surrendered.
Today, the game saw an increase on the second day in the form of 5 unique units. I was playing as Tower, and my opponent was playing as Rampart... :) Never said that they couldn't be used, like you have to auto-recruit. Is that true? Maybe we should add it to the rules?
Never was wrong; they can be used. The debate about banning "Monster Week" has been going on for a long time, with a frequency of about once a year, and always ends with the decision not to introduce a ban. According to the rules, I recommend consulting with the judges; the probability of getting the right answer is significantly higher.
About Mullich and Necromancers I thought about it for a long time and studied the proposals. Thank you, To Kluka, for the idea.
Instead of these old points: 5.10.1. If Sir Mullich reaches level 3, he must be dismissed on the same day. 5.10.2. Izra and Vidomina are prohibited from maxing out the "spellcasting" skill to the "expert" level. Otherwise, this hero must be dismissed within four days of obtaining expert spellcasting (example: on day 124, Vidomina maxed out "spellcasting" to the "expert" level, so, at the latest, on day 127, she must be dismissed). If, when leveling up, the only skill offered to Izra or Vidomina is expert spellcasting, then it can be taken, and the hero does not necessarily have to be dismissed. 5.10.3. If Sir Mullich above level 3, or a necromancy specialist (Izra, Vidomina) with an expert "spellcasting" skill is released from prison, then these heroes must be dismissed within four days of being released from prison. During these four days, these heroes are allowed to participate in battles. If a Sir Mullich above level 3, as well as Izra or Vidomina with expert spellcasting, is bought in the tavern, then they must be dismissed within 4 days of purchase. In the event that Sir Mullich above level 3, as well as Izra or Vidomina with expert spellcasting, appear in the tavern after escaping, they cannot be bought.
I propose the following:
5.10. Restrictions on heroes. 5.10.1. Sir Mullich level 3 or higher cannot attack heroes, cities, mines with a garrison, and neutral monsters. 5.10.2. Izra and Vidomina are allowed to max out the "spellcasting" skill to the "expert" level only with the last skill offered. In this case, there are no restrictions on further use. 5.10.3. Izra and Vidomina, who obtained the expert spellcasting skill in a way other than that specified in paragraph 5.10.2, cannot attack heroes, cities, mines with a garrison, and neutral monsters.
In theory, the restrictions remain almost the same, but the rule has been significantly simplified and has become more logical and understandable. The "what ifs" have been removed. Again, it will be more difficult to get tech wins for free.
Previously, if I remember correctly, according to the Chaos rules, if you cleared the guard in one place, you could pass through another place, since, logically, one of the zone guards had already been cleared.
According to our rules, in the CM, you need to clear the guard of each passage.pHOMM
Question: "passage guard" and "scattered along the road"... We need to state clearly: if you want to pass through a given passage to another zone for the first time, any guard of that passage is destroyed, at your choice.
Yes, thank you, I also had that thought, but I didn't implement it.
Regarding double guards for teleporters and the metro, there is a complete agreement. I will add a clarification to avoid any questions.pHOMM
Zone treasure guards should not be considered passage guards...
It seems there were usually no problems with this. Or should we clarify it?
In summary:
5.6. Transitions between zones. 5.6.1. It is forbidden to enter a neighboring zone through a passage for the first time without eliminating the guard standing on the passage, including a shifted one. If there are several guards on the passage, it is enough to destroy any of them. Zone treasure guards are not considered passage guards. (???? is this necessary????) 5.6.2. When passing through a Teleport or a Gate to the Underworld, it is enough to eliminate the guard at the entrance. 5.6.3. In the absence of a passage guard, including a shifted one, it is allowed to freely move from one spawn point to another. 5.6.4. It is allowed to enter neighboring territories using Angel Wings, Dimension Door, and Flight spells, without destroying the guard. 5.6.5. It is allowed to pass by passage guards without destroying them if the player has seen the opponent destroy one of the guards of that passage.
I will combine the sections about the rating into one:
VI. Seasonal Ranked Tournament. 1. Tournament Regulations - here I will record what we have now.
2. Rating Calculation Formulas.
Let R1 and R2 be the initial ratings of the players.
The player rating difference coefficients are calculated as follows:
f1=max(-1, min((R1-R2)/400, 1)); f2=max(-1, min((R2-R1)/400, 1)); where min and max are functions that return the minimum and maximum of two numbers.
Points awarded for a win (WP) and a loss (LP) are calculated as follows:
It should be noted that for HL templates with computer-controlled opponents, it is possible to bypass the shifted guards and move to adjacent respawn points.
It should be clarified that for HL templates with computer-controlled opponents, it is possible to bypass the shifted guards and move to adjacent respawn points.
Rather, it's slightly different. On Mininostalgia with computer opponents (where, due to the proximity, you can ignore the guards of all 3 computers at once), and on all HL maps (except Jebus), regardless of the presence of computer opponents (there are simply so many intersections that it is often impossible to figure out which guard protects which passage).
If it even makes sense to write this in the general rules.
Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс
5.6.1. It is forbidden to enter an adjacent zone for the first timethrough a passage without eliminating the guard stationed at the passage, including a moved guard. If there are several guards at the passage, it is sufficient to destroy any one of them.
This is very poorly worded. 1) What does "for the first time" mean? 2) What does "enter through a passage" mean? How else can you enter an adjacent zone, by going through mountains or something? :) 3) I think the words "including a moved guard" should be removed. If the guard is not "moved," then in 99.9% of cases, there are no questions, since it is impossible to pass without killing it. 4) The point about having to eliminate the guard of each passage if you want to pass through it should be returned/added.
5.6.5. It is allowed to pass by passage guards without destroying them if the player has seen the opponent destroy one of the guards of that passage.
...or pass through that passage.
5.10. Hero restrictions. 5.10.1. Sir Mullich, level 3 or higher, cannot attack heroes, cities, mines with a garrison, or neutral monsters. 5.10.2. Izra and Vidomina are allowed to max out the "spellcasting" skill to the "expert" level only with the last skill offered. In this case, there are no restrictions on further use. 5.10.3. Izra and Vidomina, who have acquired the expert spellcasting skill in a way other than that specified in paragraph 5.10.2, cannot attack heroes, cities, mines with a garrison, or neutral monsters.
I still suggest my version:
5.10. Hero restrictions. Sir Mullich, level 3 or higher, Izra and Vidomina, who have the expert spellcasting skill, - cannot attack heroes, cities, mines with a garrison, or neutral monsters.
Nevermind, it can be used. The debate about banning "Monster Week" has been going on for a long time, with a frequency of about once a year, and always ends with the decision not to introduce a ban.
Are people looking for an easy way out? Simply, on the second week, 5 unique creatures can overcome almost any advantage. I would vote for a ban.
Still, I suggest my version:
Quote: 5.10. Restrictions on heroes. Sir Mullich, level 3 or higher, Izra and Vidomina, with the Expert Spellcasting skill, - cannot attack heroes, cities, mines with a garrison, and neutral monsters.
With the last skill, everything is correct. Because if the game drags on, and Izra/Vidomina is a powerhouse, then after maxing out the hero, they can't fight anymore? :)
Show your true face when losing. Make sure it`s not ugly.
Tomorrow the Winter season starts. Please have everyone review the topic New: Rules for online games in Heroes III and the seasonal Ranked Tournament and report any inaccuracies you find. I tried to determine the opinion of the majority; naturally, not all points may coincide with your expectations. The discussion continues.
To Kluka. I tried to take into account the wishes regarding passing through a passage. It's somewhat clumsy, of course; we can still think about it. Regarding Izra and Vidomina – our 3rd-ranked player (Heroes of Might and Magic) has already responded. The whole fuss was precisely because they didn’t want to fire Izra’s mother at the last skill level. And your translation doesn’t make things much better for those who are struggling.
To Hero of Sword and Magic 3. About monster week. Unicorn week happens significantly less often than their external dwelling on respawn. In the second week, the external dwelling and unicorn week are practically equivalent. And in the third week, the external dwelling gives +8... There is no point in complicating the rules...
Hit&run wrote that a hero cannot cast magic and then run away. Any of the proposed formulations is better than what we had before. Most people tend towards the first option, although we can return to the discussion later. I would like to analyze cases from practice, i.e., understand how the differences in the rule would affect the outcome of the game.
Regarding Graal - I did not change the rule for everyone; I wrote one for adventurers by agreement for the winter season. A report is mandatory!
About Section IV. Differences for the WT version. Do we need such a section? I don't know what to write there; I played very little on WT. Who will take on writing the settings and differences?
The discussion about Section V. Non-standard and controversial situations. Judging has already begun. We will continue.
In Section VI. Seasonal Ranked Tournament, I will finish drafting the regulations for the seasonal tournament; I haven’t had time yet.
5.6.1. To pass into the adjacent zone, it is necessary to eliminate the guards stationed at the passage. If there are several guards at the passage, it is enough to destroy any one of them. If there are several passages between zones, it is necessary to destroy the guards at each one.
- The highlighted fragment can be interpreted as "if there are several passages on the map, then it is necessary to destroy the guards at EACH passage in order to pass through." In my opinion, this sentence is unnecessary and the meaning is clear without it.
I also think these points are unnecessary: 5.14.3. It is allowed to use the bug of viewing the opponent's cities. 5.14.4. It is allowed to break more than once on a Guardian of the City (GO) that contains an upgraded stack.
Пусть мой враг будет силен и страшен. Если я поборю его, то не буду чувствовать стыда.
Дубровин Павел
