Connection ErrorBad RequestSession 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.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
You're exaggerating about the clunky controls, the old ball, and the compass issue, my friend. I'm not against reasonable progress; I'm against anything that could lead humanity to the brink of disaster... ;)
Yesterday, Pozner interviewed Grechko, and Grechko said that humanity shouldn't lead itself to the brink. :)
And comfort and time-saving make the game more enjoyable and dynamic.
МУДРЫЙ - не обязательно старый, ОПЫТНЫЙ - не обязательно мудрый... обладатель и того и другого всегда должен помнить слова НАПОЛЕОНА БОНАПАРТА: Война состоит из непредусмотренных событий; В каждом большом деле всегда приходится какую-то часть оставить на долю :smile33: СЛУЧАЯ...
Well, judging by the tone of the message, you can see how the person approaches playing Heroes. For them, it's something akin to a single-player game – an adventure, a challenge, entertainment.
But sports aren't an adventure or a challenge. Or rather, they can be, but in general, they aren't. Sports are primarily about competing with others. It's about figuring out who plays better – you or them. A battle for supremacy.
To ensure that this battle yields fair results, sports strive to level the playing field. They create a flat surface, use a round ball, switch goals each half/period/set, alternate home and away games, and impose restrictions on equipment, and so on.
If sports officials thought like Soda players, the football field would be an asymmetrical, uneven terrain with ravines, barbed wire, sudden earthquakes or floods, mines that release tear gas, the ball would be egg-shaped, of varying size and density, and dogs of different sizes, weights, and bite strengths would chase the players. And why not? It's an adventure, a chance to show character, willpower, and ingenuity. And it's all like real life.
But why don't they do it that way? Why have competitions, from ritualistic battles to modern sports, always been conducted under conditions of initial equality (as much as technically possible)?
Because the main goal of a competition is to determine the winner, the strongest, the best. Winners are respected and admired because they have demonstrated their superiority over their rivals.
But how can you talk about superiority if the outcome of the match is determined by N percent of random factors that are independent of the players? Did the person win because they were strong, or because they were given a good advantage?
That's what the collective wisdom aims to reduce in various areas of competition. In particular, in Heroes. This is a natural process, and there's not much point in arguing against it. It can only reverse if the Heroes community begins to degrade intellectually and morally, and loses the desire for personal growth.
In fact, the popularity of Soda here is a good indicator of the level of degradation, both within the community and within individual personalities. In a well-developed community (like the one that formed on Bay), the transition to Team Elimination (TE) happened quickly and almost painlessly. The same happened at the St. Petersburg championships. Because people understood what sports are and what they require.
But in various backwaters with an abundance of stupid, weak people, with low vitality, with petty ambitions, and so on, TE/Variant Team (VT) doesn't take root well, simply because it stirs up this swamp and shows it what the true pulse of life should be.
Nagan likes to fondly remember old Soda players. Forgetting that modern Soda players, with rare exceptions, are a pathetic imitation of the old ones, simply a different psychological type. In many ways, modern VT players resemble the old guard. This is even noticeable in real-life communication.
Very telling in this regard are the rules that people propose for playing for money or to settle disputes. In the past, they would suggest playing TE-8mm6, best of 3 wins. But the latest episodes have revealed a new favorite – the h3dm1 mirror match, and they are even willing to play to just one win.
To be honest, WT is much better than SoD, and it's better by a significant margin. Everything is well-made and thought out; you can just play and enjoy it – everything is quick and high-quality, and there are tons of customization options. However, when it comes to morale, I definitely disagree and believe that the absence of morale in 99% of the games on WT is a mistake. To put it more bluntly, there are no truly neutral monsters on WT. There's just a shapeless, faceless neutral creature with a certain amount of health. Its appearance and special abilities hardly matter to anyone, and it has almost no chance of surviving in an unequal fight. The element of caution and surprise will soon be forgotten. New players in Heroes, attracted to WT, don't even know about the possibility of neutral creatures having morale, and that's a bit sad. Someone might say that morale is just a gamble – it might not trigger for you, and you'll take the creature, but it might trigger for the opponent, and they won't take it. But you can also say that one person will have that trigger, and the other won't. But the game isn't just about one battle with a possible morale trigger; morale, in any case, enhances the game, adding beauty and spectacle, making each battle exciting and unpredictable, and isn't that wonderful? Heroes is already a somewhat biased game; a lot depends on a favorable setup, ambushes, resources, huts, spells in the Guardian Map, secondary skills, and morale doesn't spoil the game in any way against this background; it only makes it even more mysterious and, with renewed vigor, even more beloved.
I got it. Wicc, you just don't understand that you can't turn Heroes into a game where an old-school or variant playstyle will work simply because the game is different. Here, much more time is spent on maneuvering around the map than on fighting the opponent. Moreover, many games end only with that (map maneuvering), because opponents give up or bring such a weak army that defeating it is no more difficult than defeating any group of monsters. And if you cut out all the "imbalance," the map maneuvering will turn into, or has already turned into, a boring mess. It's really funny to read that SOD players are just casual players who like to play while drinking beer, while VT players are the elite of Heroes and true sportsmen, since most of them play Jebus until they're blue in the face and snidely laugh at SOD/SM players :D
And if you compare Heroes to a sport, it's not like football, but like poker. Where, as in Heroes, luck plays a big role in a single hand/tournament/game, but over a certain distance, a strong player is always ahead of a weak player. Let's continue the analogy: HL corridor is like a high-stakes cash game, SM is like a simple Sit & Go, and balance on the map is like a super-turbo :).
P.S. I just realized that I have no idea if you play poker and will understand at least half of what I wrote, but I don't want to delete what I wrote.
I do play, of course. Therefore, I am well aware of the pros and cons of this approach.
The fundamental difference between Heroes and poker is that in poker, there is a "distance," both in a single tournament and due to the number and speed of tournaments.
But in Heroes, the "distance" is much more complex; you mainly play with your entire stack – you can't buy your way out of an unfavorable battle with neutrals. And the tournaments are long – they can last for several months.
Therefore, the idea is to find ways to reduce variance within a single game.
In my opinion, the level of variance in a mirror match is normal – it manifests in the selection of heroes, the skill tree of the main hero, and the artifacts in the guild. Due to the balanced skills and the restructuring of the guild, there are rarely any serious imbalances in the "draw," especially if the main hero is chosen at the start and not searched for in the tavern. And the randomness of the map provides the necessary variety in gameplay.
In essence, the popularity of Team Edition here serves as a good litmus test for the level of degradation, both within the community and within individual personalities. In a personally developed community (like the one that existed at Baie), the transition to Team Edition happened quickly and almost painlessly. The same was true for the St. Petersburg championships. Because people understood what sports are and what is needed for them.
Yura, you're trolling shamelessly. At Baie, out of a hundred of the best players, only about fifteen remain as poker players. After the great St. Petersburg tournaments, where hundreds of people played, now fewer than ten people participate, and even then, they don't finish the tournaments. Indeed, Team Edition is a litmus test in this case.
And in various "swamps" with an abundance of stupid, weak people, with low vitality, with petty ambitions, etc., Team Edition/Variant Edition doesn't take root well, simply because it stirs up this swamp, showing it what the true pulse of life should be.
Speak plainly. The Heroes community is small; are you referring to World and Portal? I rarely visit Portal now, but I visit World much more often. And World is definitely not a swamp. If it's not a secret, how did Team Edition take root at Baie? How many games are played there, for example, in a month?
Nagan likes to fondly remember the old Heroes players in various flattering words.
You're right about that. I like to remember the old days. Because I had the chance to meet incredibly wonderful people in the Heroes world, and I could list them for a long time. They brought only positive emotions, both in real life and on the forums.
Forgetting that the modern Heroes players, with rare exceptions, are a pathetic imitation of the old Heroes players, simply a different psychological type.
Why did I come to this forum? Because the people who were on it brought positive emotions with them. The World of 2008-2009 was special. I would like to bring Zhenya, Invis, Loy, and Adelaide back to the forums. They were wonderful people. Now, a different group of people is coming in, I judge by the tribune. But the core, the heart of the forum, is still alive.
The modern Variant Edition players are the most similar to the old guard.
Modern Variant Edition players is a very broad concept. Let's just say, not all of them.
Yura, you're being excessively sarcastic. On Bay, out of a hundred of the best players, only about fifteen poker players remain. After the great St. Petersburg tournaments, where hundreds of people played, now fewer than ten people sign up, and even then, they don't finish the rounds. Indeed, THEY are a good indicator in this case.
You're right about this. I like to reminisce about the old times. Because I had the chance to meet incredibly wonderful people in the Heroes world; I could list them for a long time. They brought only positive emotions, both in real life and on the forums.
Everyone interprets things in their own way. )) Eric, both the old Heroes players from SoD and the TE players from Bay have either left or play less often simply because they've grown up and have more important things to do. Family, responsible work, and many other things, like poker. But! I know for sure that DC_Vasya, even though he's a professional poker player, plays Heroes more often than I do, for example. And Andre also plays SoD every other day, and every day with Joker. He doesn't want to switch to VT only because of his habit of playing SoD and his unwillingness to be beaten on unfamiliar territory. He's simply comfortable, and that's all. He plays for himself. I don't think this is the best approach. VT brings people together and unites them. It's a pity that many strong SoD players have become detached from the group and play for their own enjoyment. If before, they could be persuaded to participate in some tournament, now even that seems too much for them, even though they still play. I also honestly like SoD. But if most people are playing VT, I will play VT too, because I want the game to develop and the community to grow.
On Bay, out of a hundred top players, only about fifteen poker players remained.
There were never a hundred there. There were 3-4 dozen active Heroes players. They changed, of course, but at any given time there were no more than that number.
Then the situation changed, the Heroes segment of Runet united, so the need to sit in isolated corners disappeared. And the Bay players were the first to sense the wind of change and scattered across different sites. Currently, all sites have a very mixed player base.
And specifically in the case of Bay, the fact that its owners (Balamut and Armageda) stepped away from the scene played a role. But if there was a need to develop Bay, someone else would have taken it up. Since there isn't (for the reasons described above), well...
Essentially, it now functions as a backup airfield, half-mothballed. If needed, we'll bring it out of mothballs. It's just that it requires effort, and there's no point; it's easier to use already established platforms like HW, HP, and HWT (heroeswt.net).
For the modern Heroes community, an abundance of different sites is not needed at all; one is enough. Because it's not websites that define the community, but people and ideas. After the great St. Petersburg tournaments, where hundreds of people played — now barely a dozen show up, and they don't even finish the rounds. Indeed, TE is like a litmus test in this case.You're back to demagoguery and misrepresentation... let me remind you that last year, about a dozen people showed up for the qualifiers for SoD(!) in each city. So this is a general Heroes trend. Hundreds of people at club tournaments are the very distant past, when Heroes had just come out and were in fashion.
Moreover, the majority of those who came were TE players who agreed to play on a different version to support the idea. And for the most part, they were also the ones who advanced to the final. If the tournament were held only for true SoD players, it simply wouldn't have taken place due to lack of quorum. Or it would have gathered a blatantly noob lineup.
Speak directly. The Heroes world is small; did you mean World and Portal? I visit Portal very rarely now, but World much more often. Well, World is definitely not a swamp.
Swamp or not a swamp — I apparently define it differently than you do. And it's not even about forum affiliation here. It's about a personal impression of people. I look at a person and I can see if they're in a swamp or not. It's written on their face, in their eyes, in their tone of voice, in their facial expressions and body language. And it can be felt through forum posts too, though worse, but it can be felt.
So the correlation between a "swampy" outlook and preferences for a version of Heroes is very strong. When a lively, energetic player appears with a thinking head, capable hands, a strong voice, and ambitions — they usually don't stay in SoD for long.
Pure SoD communities, in terms of their temperament, relationship dynamics, and the personal development of their members, remind me somewhat of isolated tribes that fell victim to inbreeding — low vitality, weak intellect, low levels of expansion, both personal and collective, strong xenophobic and escapist sentiments, etc. There are, of course, exceptions, but they only highlight the state the rest of the mass is in.
You're right about this. I like to remember the old times. Because I managed to encounter amazingly bright people in the Heroes world; I could list them for a long time. They brought nothing but positive emotions, both in real life and on the forums.
Why did I come to this forum? Because the people who were on it brought positive emotions with them. That World of 2008-2009 was special. I wish we could bring back Zhenya, Inviz, Loy, and Adelaide to the forums. Wonderful people on a human level. Now all sorts of people are showing up, judging by the discussion board. But the core, the heart of the forum, is still alive.
Well, I simply value different things in people. Brightness, positivity, politeness, etc. — I perceive as a nice wrapper. All else being equal, I appreciate it, but nothing more. Because what matters is what's inside — talents, skills, the ability to get things done, the scale of the personality.
Therefore, for example, the boorish and scandalous Alex is much more interesting to me than the aforementioned comrades. He's someone you can learn from.
No game will ever be popular if it isn't spectacular! As the King said, "An airplane will never fly if it isn't beautiful."
To achieve popularity, all great people strive not for balance, but for spectacle! The more chances a weak opponent has to win against a strong one, the more popular the game will be! That's why, with this, only programmers – tormentors of numbers – will remain, but they don't understand that people are emotional and alive, and they need spectacle, not knowledge of mathematics! I mean only morality and luck. This should be and always will be unambiguous! Such games are as beautiful as they are unexpected; if it's frustrating to lose due to morality, it's pleasant to win, which means the game is alive, living with emotions! The fewer of these emotions there are, the faster it will become uninteresting.
МУДРЫЙ - не обязательно старый, ОПЫТНЫЙ - не обязательно мудрый... обладатель и того и другого всегда должен помнить слова НАПОЛЕОНА БОНАПАРТА: Война состоит из непредусмотренных событий; В каждом большом деле всегда приходится какую-то часть оставить на долю :smile33: СЛУЧАЯ...
No game will ever be popular if it isn't spectacular! It's not for nothing that the King said: "An airplane will never fly if it isn't beautiful."
To achieve popularity, all great people strive not for balance, but for spectacle! The more chances a weak opponent has to win against a strong one, the more popular the game will be! That's why, with this random turn-based system, only programmers – tormentors of numbers – will remain, but they don't understand that people are emotional and alive, and they need spectacle, not knowledge of mathematics! I mean only morale and luck. This should be and always will be unambiguous! Such games are as beautiful as they are unexpected; if it's frustrating to lose due to morale, it's pleasant to win, which means the game is alive, it lives with emotions! The fewer of them there are, the faster it will become uninteresting.
You are right about the spectacle; it is important. But a strong influence of factors that do not depend on the player harms the spectacle.
Take an exaggerated example – if, in football, after each half, one goal is decided by a coin toss, the chances of a weak team winning will increase significantly, and the spectacle will plummet.
From personal experience, I can say that the most spectacular way to play Heroes is with random turn-based (600+300 control). Because the game is fast, full of events, and often with sharp plot twists.
And there, by the way, a weak player really has more chances to win than with classic control. But not because of external randomness, but simply because an experienced player has more opportunities to make mistakes, trying to force the situation.
This kind of spectacle and this kind of randomness is quite fair.
No game will ever be popular if it isn't spectacular! As King said, "An airplane will never fly if it isn't beautiful."
To achieve popularity, all great people strive not for balance, but for spectacle! The more chances a weak opponent has to win against a strong one, the more popular the game will be! That's why, with this WТ, only programmers – tormentors of numbers – will remain, but they don't understand that people are emotional and alive, and they need spectacle, not mathematical knowledge! I mean only morale and luck. This should be and always will be unambiguous! Such games are as beautiful as they are unexpected; if it's frustrating to lose due to morale, it's pleasant to win, which means the game is alive, living with emotions! The fewer of these emotions there are, the faster it will become uninteresting.
I'm afraid I won't be able to explain to someone who hasn't played in club tournaments how frustrating it is to lose on morale to neutrals in such a tournament after playing for 5-6 hours. Some people even quit Heroes after that, but the main thing is that it is precisely because of this factor that it is not possible to create that interesting and exciting game that you are talking about. That is, the game turns into a race to avoid losing on morale. But it should not be like that. In Heroes, I value strategy the most. The ability to think outside the box, tactical tricks, and so on. These concepts should be defining. And I think that Vic is trying to convey this by drawing parallels with Starcraft. After all, Heroes is a strategy game. You have to use your head. Emotions can be left for single-player, but in tournaments, there should be something more. Spectacle lies in the fact that viewers should be overwhelmed with delight at the fact that the player weaves such intricate patterns, which are initially incomprehensible, but in the end, the design is revealed, and it becomes clear that this is a high level of thinking. And it is this that captivates, and not morale with neutrals. It's silly to argue that Heroes can be grinded and only programmers will remain, or something like that. You can perfect the battles, but the development from 111 is different for everyone.
No matter how much you listen to Wicca, it's always the same dull rant about how VT is SUPER and the best in everything! Good grief, how many people point out the obvious flaws of VT! Most SOD players clearly understand the flaws of SOD as well, and besides, baratorch is working on a program for SOD, but who is working on VT? In my opinion, I also see both pros and cons, and NumOne explained them perfectly. Only stubborn people don't understand that uniting fans of the two main directions, VT and SOD, requires something in common, taking into account both groups of fans. But there's no need to shout that VT is cool. You need to clearly understand that everyone is different and has completely opposite views, ideas, life priorities, temperament, character, appearance, thoughts, and skin color, etc. You need to approach this professionally, not from your own point of view.
Professionals, regardless of various factors, play by the same rules and don't think about why it's this way and not that way. If you think not about how to make money in the future, but about how to develop and introduce the game to the masses, you need to generate interest, attract new players, and significantly increase competitiveness, spectacle, and unpredictability. The riskier the game, the more intense and interesting it is, and the more life it has, like poker. It's much harder to calculate than morality in SOD, which is why it's more popular. Why aren't casinos empty? People are addicted to them, and gamblers hang on slot machines and can't let go! Because there's a chance to win! There's also a chance with morality, even if you're slightly inferior in skill! How great it is to win against a strong player if they choke (for example, if they're given more money), for whatever reason, and the result remains! In Formula 1, one car was leading, but when the suspension failed, the champion overtook it, and that victory remained a victory from a sporting perspective. Essentially, it's important that the game lives on and is more spectacular, and it's essential that a weaker player has at least some chance of winning against a stronger player, because strong players grow from the weak, and if they're not given a chance, there won't be any new strong players! That's why the number of strong players in VT has decreased; the old ones remain, but there are few new ones, and they will soon die out, while SOD will continue to develop. By the way, when strong players don't change, interest in playing disappears, so you need to nurture players, not put them in a cage with numbers.
МУДРЫЙ - не обязательно старый, ОПЫТНЫЙ - не обязательно мудрый... обладатель и того и другого всегда должен помнить слова НАПОЛЕОНА БОНАПАРТА: Война состоит из непредусмотренных событий; В каждом большом деле всегда приходится какую-то часть оставить на долю :smile33: СЛУЧАЯ...
It's so nice to win against a strong player if they give up (for example, if they also give you money), why would they forget it, but the result will remain!
Ah, now everything is perfectly clear =) It's pleasant, of course, to win like this – not by honing your skills, but by relying on luck. This is the true face of sandbox games.
There should be a desire to become strong, not to receive a concession in something. You need to lose a lot first to start winning – this is true for both poker and Heroes. Patience and hard work will overcome everything.
No matter how much you listen to Wicc, he's just a dull pressurer.
Repetition is the mother of learning :)
Oh my god, so many people are talking about the obvious drawbacks of SoD! Most SoD players clearly understand the downsides of SoD, and besides, baratorch is working on a program for SoD, but who is working on VT?
So much has already been done for VT that it will take baratorch more than one year to work in order to even catch up.
When asm comes out of his binge, we’ll continue our work. But for now, there is a period of calm. Which is also useful; it allows us to consolidate what we have learned.
If you think not about how to make money later, but about how to develop and introduce the game to the masses, then you need to maintain interest, attract new players, and increase competitiveness, spectacle, and unpredictability by orders of magnitude!
That's all good, but what does this have to do with SoD? It has explored its potential well over 10 years, and nothing will change in the future.
To increase something, you need to change the gameplay, and this is only possible within the paradigm of VT. Because the SoD paradigm is "hands off SoD!" I've been telling you this every day, but it doesn't seem to be getting through to you. I'm starting to doubt your intellectual adequacy.
By the way, when strong players don't change, interest disappears, so you need to nurture players instead of putting them in a cage with numbers.
Strong players are changing. Because old ones retire or lose their edge, and new ones grow up to replace them. Take a look at the history of interportals in recent years; the composition of all teams has been updated by 30-50% per year.
It’s even more unclear why you associate morale with the rate of growth of new players. In chess, there is no morale, but schoolchildren still regularly beat experienced grandmasters.
Added after 5 minutes
Ah, now everything is perfectly clear =) Of course, it's nice to win like that - not by honing skills, but by relying on luck. This is the true face of sandbox games.
Yeah, people play slot machines with roughly the same motivation.
In fact, this is what I was talking about when describing the moral character of true SoD players.
Ah, now everything is perfectly clear =) It's nice, of course, to win like that – not by honing your skills, but by relying on luck. This is the true face of sandbox games.
There should be a desire to become strong, not to receive some kind of concession. You need to lose a lot first to start winning – this is true for both poker and Heroes. Patience and hard work will overcome everything.
Well, of course, it's clear, but read another 200 of my messages. You are obviously very wise, judging by a snippet from a message. I base my statements not only on my own thoughts; that's just the beginning of a dialogue, followed by analysis. I try to put myself in the place of the majority, not my own, and I am not a supporter of a traditional, stagnant society, but only radicals, apparently, are surrounded by a wall of "new traditions" and do not recognize a possible common future.
МУДРЫЙ - не обязательно старый, ОПЫТНЫЙ - не обязательно мудрый... обладатель и того и другого всегда должен помнить слова НАПОЛЕОНА БОНАПАРТА: Война состоит из непредусмотренных событий; В каждом большом деле всегда приходится какую-то часть оставить на долю :smile33: СЛУЧАЯ...
R55Max
