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.
Oelm (red, tower, Nela, Nela) loses to Van (blue, rampart, Kirra, Kirra), 141 2cm4d3
On turn 137, he positions himself opposite the Dragon Utopia. Kirra, who is close by, has been in play for 8 hours. Instead of taking the scouted Utopia, he attacks with a Red Dragon. I suggest Van decide how to proceed (auto, draw, tech loss), and he proposes a draw. The next day, I learn from him that he wants to achieve a tech loss. Therefore, I concede the victory, as I no longer intend to play against him.
I attack with a Red Dragon instead of taking the scouted Utopia... I find out from him that he wants to achieve Tech-Lizard, because of this, I concede the victory, as I no longer intend to play with him.
As far as I know, you were playing for money. And therefore, it's foolish to expect fair play. As Vysotsky sang, "Be a gentleman if you're lucky, but if you're not, there are no gentlemen." Goal: to win by any means.
Example: A long time ago, I played a series of chess games with a classmate until a certain number of wins were reached. My opponent's skill level was slightly higher than mine. We played 15 minutes per game. In one of the games, my opponent forgot to press the clock after making his move. I pretended to be thinking. When the clock started ticking down, he noticed and pressed it. As a result, I won the game with approximately equal chances, as my opponent's time ran out. P.S. He won the series.:)
Oelm (red, Tower, Nela, Nela) loses to Van (blue, Rampart, Kirra, Kirra), 141 2cm4d3
On turn 137, he positioned himself opposite the Dragon Utopia. Kirra, who is on the blue side, is not far away. After 8 hours of play, he attacks with a Red Dragon instead of taking the scouted Utopia. I suggest Van decide how to proceed (auto, draw, tech loss), and he proposes a draw. The next day, I learn from him that he wants to aim for a tech loss, so I concede the victory because I don't want to play with him anymore.
The result is 2-1.
Pasha, so the final score is 2:1 in your favor? That is, you won all the money?
I have a request: it would be great to add a move visibility function; for example, while holding down a certain key, you click on an area of the map in the main window and can see how many moves are spent to reach it. And for complete comfort, a calculation of the so-called double trajectory: suppose we need to take a chest and then take some external dwelling by turning away from the chest. We can reach it via a straight trajectory, but not with the chest already taken, yet we're left to guess. So, while holding the key, the moves spent to the chest should be visible, and then if you, for example, right-click on the external dwelling, some trajectory indicator would show whether there are enough moves or not. Something like that, generally.
And let's also add functions from a program by a person well known to us, who made it for offline tournaments, where you can see which skill trees the hero will get! After all, getting something like Keen Sight is just too much! This way there will always be Earth Magic, Logistics, Offense, Defense, and so on.
Why not.
I am against this. Because it's not true to the game. Vika's heresy regarding progressive "new ideas" in WT shouldn't be shoved into SoD. Especially when one person will have a truly "clean" SoD, maybe with Lighter for example, and another has HD. They both connect; one plays "the old-fashioned way," while the second essentially has a tool for cheating.
And all this in an attempt to "make it more convenient" and "not fall behind." This isn't some joke, guys—no matter how much you knead it, it won't get any bigger. Let SoD be SoD, and pervert things however you want with WT. Not just with tax and experience, but with commanders too. Why not? It's absolute papacy.
Added after 8 minutes By the way, trace the evolution of TE. At first, there were also many buttons and extensive functionality there. Level two dwellings, witch huts, doors in water, and other options were configured manually.
Democracy reached a point where people with such a set of options couldn't agree on how to play together. Every second person had "their own correct" set of options they wanted to play with. And then in WT, by a decisive move, all these many options were simply hard-coded into the game!
Why repeat the path of TE? Something that has already been done? SoD is SoD because it is conservative and quite self-sufficient. And it doesn't need any of this.
Сейчас балуюсь этим https://vcmi.eu/download/ За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того
Why repeat the path of THE? What's the point of going over something that's already been done? That's why SoD is SoD – it's conservative and quite self-sufficient. And it doesn't need all this.
+1, don't touch it. It's already starting to level up to 2, then 3 stacks, the papal movement cost sensor... what are you guys doing? Who's going to think in Heroes, the AI too? :confused: Nonsense:D
Roads are the first step towards incorporating War of the Chosen (WotC) elements. However, it's not accurate to say that this is purely a WotC-specific change, as it's just a specific case of Combined Operations Doctrine (COD). Similar changes can be applied to level 2 and 3 stacks.
By the way, observe the evolution of the TE. Initially, it also had many buttons and extensive functionality. The same level 2 dwellings, witch huts, underwater doors, and other options were configured manually.
It reached a point where people with such a set of options couldn't agree with each other on how to play. Everyone had their own "correct" set of options, and they wanted to play with it. And already in WT, a firm decision was made to simply integrate all these numerous options into the game!
Did you come up with this yourself, or did someone suggest it? :)
The options that were integrated into the game were those on which all players had reached an agreement. And even then, not all of them.
And where there were disagreements, those were left as optional.
In my opinion, half of the current WT settings could be safely removed, integrating a specific version into the game, and no one would notice the difference.
The main thing is that there should still be the possibility to play with the original SOD. Having three stacks at the start completely ruins the game on L-shaped maps.
The main thing is that there should still be the possibility to play the original SOD. Having three stacks at the start completely ruins the game on L-shaped maps.
It seemed to me that the game on L-shaped maps is ruined precisely because some players have 3 stacks, while others have only 1.
It seemed to me that playing on L-shaped maps kills the game because some players have 3 stacks, while others have only 1.
Playing with the same army for 10 games in a row? On an L-shaped map, I'd get sick of it. Not to mention that Tyraxor can easily defeat a Barbarian Stronghold with strategically placed units. In SoD, there's a choice: Gurnisson, Crag, Tyras, Gundula; I remember reading Paladin's reports on the portal about the Barbarian Stronghold with interest. Different builds and tactics, but what about in HotA? I, for example, don't remember any interesting descriptions. Tyras-wolf-console ambush - hives - a couple of utopias on the 2nd level - GG.
First of all, please don't tell me what to do here :smile22:. It's not like you created this mod and are speaking on behalf of the developers. When I want to write something and WHERE to write it, I won't ask you.
Secondly, I'm saying what this could lead to. I'm not talking about that time when Vika found a bug with angels. His views on SoD are a whole other story. I'm talking about the fact that having starting paths, level 2 from the start, and 3 stacks is an unhealthy trend with a catch. Having TE-WT units moving along a path that has already been traversed and is another branch of development is completely different, it's more like a hero-based game.
Where did you even see SoD vs WT? I didn't write anything like that. SoD is SoD. WT is WT. That's exactly why you shouldn't compare and mix them! If you don't understand that.
rebellious
Disagreements regarding starting settings are the responsibility of the organizers.
But how will you track these settings in fun games? When someone like you sets them up? The same 3 stacks, level 2, medium paths. How do you check that?
Like it just happened randomly? Lol.
Сейчас балуюсь этим https://vcmi.eu/download/ За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того
Oelm
