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.
The subject of the dispute... But what exactly is the dispute?
I'm explaining (for the nth time) that the way the pairings were conducted did not correspond to what was written in the rules! If you read the rules and try to follow the sequence of rounds, you won't be able to do it if you assign 0.5 points - THIS NEEDS TO BE WRITTEN IN THE RULES so that it can be tracked. But again, the rules for the Swiss system state that draws (even temporary ones) are undesirable. Assigning an incorrect number of points affects the pairings themselves, as groups are formed with other players, including players with "incorrect scores" due to unfinished games. To put it simply: if you're going to play the way you're judging, add a point about 0.5 points; if you're not adding it, follow what the link in your rules says and don't invent anything yourself.
A postponed game gave them the opportunity to play, and both players, with results corresponding to their real skill level, end up in the next round.
Imagine this situation: 8 players, 5 strong and 3 weak (the number of weak and strong players is not important; it's just that the percentage difference will be there). The first three won, and in the 4th pair, there are 2 strong players. If they play on time, one of them will definitely end up in a group with the strong players and has a good chance of losing (draws are not that common in Heroes), so after 2 rounds, he will have 1 point. If the strong players "agree" (delay) and the organizer assigns them 0.5 points "as a favor," then during the pairings, one of them will have a 50% chance of ending up in the weak group without losing ANYTHING (there will even be a chance for the winner of the postponed pair to play against a weak player, although according to the system, the winner should have played against the strong group) and will play with motivation, while the player who ends up against a strong player will experience a demotivating factor; therefore, the pairings themselves have already affected the motivation of both players (this should be avoided), giving a chance to get a "free" opponent. But if the 4th pair played immediately without any factors, no pairings would have mattered because all the strong players in the 2nd round would meet each other and fight in a difficult battle. The point is that one of the pair of strong players will get a 2nd "free" point, even though this shouldn't be the case according to the system itself, because if he won, he would have been paired with the strong group.
Added 2 minutes ago
Even if you think he's wrong about something, and if you're smarter, then act like a smarter person, and don't stoop to his level and troll.
People should be encouraged for their efforts, and as they grow, higher demands should be placed on them, but not all at once!
I will definitely keep this in mind for the future, but for now, this is what we have. Yes, by the way, I didn't have enough intelligence to write about the system itself; is it better to troll the person instead? In fact, it is this link that is confusing, because the tournament is not being held according to it; that's all.
P.S. I'm closing the topic of conversation; I hope Gaudin has the strength not to resort to personal attacks. I had the strength not to respond to your jibes.
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...
You would be better off playing as heroes with such dedication – as you write here – instead of wasting time on nonsense; everything has already been invented for you a long time ago.
R55Max
Auto-translated
P.S. In my Fortress army, I had 50+ golems, 5 angels, 180+ gremlins, and a few gargoyles.
I think I might have overestimated the number of Grand Mages.
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...
RomarioGrom
Auto-translated
6.04.2012 RomarioGrom (blue, Strong, Gundula, Gundula) def Ihtiandr(red, Swamp, Andra, Vistan) Speed 1 (l-u) 137 on the 1st killed Dungeon and got stuck; there was a block but the computer broke through it by the end of the week :D Mikhs at home in secondary, birds everywhere are citadels. On the 2nd finished off computers and cleared respawns mikhs in sacks. On the 3rd in the center took all air, then a couple of Dragon Utopia and КЗ; thought about taking the 3rd Dragon Utopia and visiting, but saw Vistan speeding up near ГО, ТП Dimension Door ГГ Thanks for the game and gumre:)
Andrey, be honest, do you get moral satisfaction from your long posts and various discussions?) Or maybe even physical satisfaction?)
I'll answer honestly. I don't get any satisfaction from it :D It's very tiring to write so much, but discussing the rules and their details requires considering many things. Describing the system and all its nuances, even in the approved version, presents a very long text.
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...
07.04.2012 Nolife (red, Stronghold, Terek, Tyraxsor) def d-neez (blue, Fortress, Styg, Bronhild) Kite (l - u) 127 111 In the tavern Tyraxsor and Dessa, then Gherulf arrived with a ballista. Scouted 2 external dwellings of goblins and a Dwarf Cottage. The respawn was big, but I only had enough gold for 3 heroes. Ended up with 15 orcs at the start. 112 Spotted an external dwelling of orcs and captured my native village. 113 Starting to have problems with stone, fighting off resources. 114 Capture the external dwelling of orcs and buy a 5th hero with the growth from the village. 115 Building up the castle in the main, gathering resources. 116 I decide I won't be able to gather enough gold for behemoths, and try to go for cyclopes, building ogres. I spread out all my heroes, breaking chains, hoping to find crystals, stone, and gold. (Cyclopes cost 20 20 3500) 117 Use a scout hero to capture crystals, also find some gold. I have to trade for stone at the market in the village, gave 20 sulfur for 4 stone.:( In the main, levels 1-6 are built in the castle, 3k gold for buying out. 121 Picking up everything I didn't pick up before. Assembling an army from the village and 3 external dwellings. I have 2 Dwarf Cottages and 2 leveled heroes, building chains to take them. 122 Buy all the orcs and some goblins in the main, combine the army and take positions with everyone. 123 Take the 2 Dwarf Cottages (20 and 15), buy out everything except the ogres. 124 Break through to the Inferno secondary, Terek lvl 5, runs to the main through the stat boosters for the ogres. I see 2 medusa dwellings, Tyraxsor prepares to take them. 125 Capture the Inferno secondary, take the medusa dwellings (both minimum size), gather resources. 126 From the Inferno zone I break through to the grass, send a scout hero there. From the other side, I breach a path into the treasury. Terek buys out 12 ogres and goes to level up, capturing the stat boosters. Tyraxsor enters the treasury and sets up camp for the night near the teleporter, which, as it turned out, was our ГО. I skip a turn, and the opponent's main comes out of the teleporter (he, as it later turned out, had already broken through his side and had seen me). How lucky I was that I didn't have enough heroes and didn't spread out my main:cool: . Anyway, he decides to attack me. A first blood battle occurs. I have the expert tactic skill and I cram myself into a corner with the cyclopes and orcs:) . Tyraxsor has 40/20 mana, but no spellbook:( I have more shooters, while the opponent has more meat, and he has to run towards me under a hail of axes and rocks. When he got close, we were roughly equal in meat, but he couldn't reach my archers. In the end, I had 40 orcs and 5 rocs left, the opponent runs away. 127 Terek with 12 ogres captures the coliseum. With Dessa, who was scouting the treasury, I run into the teleporter, and there's an immediate lookout, I see a swamp village and my native secondary, which I capture on Dessa's last turn. I trade resources and start killing the opponent's scout heroes. I also jump into the teleporter with Tyraxsor and capture the swamp village, killing another scout hero along the way. I build GM1 there and camp for the night. I skip a turn and receive a message on ICQ about a surrender. Thanks for the game!
Overall, the coefficients do not reflect the actual balance of power and are essentially a "coin toss." Ideally, an additional game should be played for the prize-winning places.
In my opinion, this is a very sensible idea. Perhaps we should add a super final to the Swiss system tournament? In the "Speed and Fury" tournament, there are VERY many technical results, and it is necessary to admit that the tournament table does not fully adequately reflect the real skill of the players. Perhaps, indeed, we should hold a super final between the participants of the tournament who took 1st and 2nd place?
Super final to two wins. The rules - 1 game per week. True, it will no longer be quite "Speed...", but the winner will prove that he has "guts" (I apologize to the ladies). And he won not thanks to some coefficients, but won in an open battle against an equal opponent :) So to speak, in an adult way :) Of course, with the MUTUAL consent of both participants in the super final. I think such a victory will be MUCH MORE significant than a victory based on coefficients :)
What do you say, comrades? First of all, the opinion of the players who have every chance of taking 1st and 2nd place is taken into account. The final decision will be made after the completion of the 6th round, after the prize-winners of the tournament are determined.
This is just a suggestion. It can be tested in the "Speed and Fury" tournament :) I ask you not to immediately get into a state of exaltation, but simply calmly express your opinion. But not in the spirit of: "What nonsense?", but calmly say that this is not in the rules of the current tournament and therefore I refuse :)
6.04.2012 RomarioGrom (blue, Stronghold, Gundula, Gundula) def Ihtiandr (red, Fortress, Andra, Wystan) Speed 1 (l-u) 137 on week 1 killed Dungeon and got stuck with a block but the computer broke through it at the end of the week:D at home mages in secondary, birds everywhere, Citadel week 2 finished off the computers and cleared respawns mages in Garrisons week 3 took all the air in the center, then a couple of Dragon Utopias and КЗ thought about taking a 3rd Dragon Utopia and going to visit but saw Wystan on a speed boost near ГО, TP DD ГГ Thank you for the game and good manners:)
Confirmed. In the respawns not a single Dragon Fly Hive, 1 conservatory, turned out to be minimal) ГО - Sultan Efreets =/ Neither Earth nor Air ever got, hoarded resources for 3 weeks to break through. In the end speed boosted at ГО on 137 and Roma accepted me. Thanks for the game!
Hmm? And I set such additional parameters after consulting with Dogbas, whom I trust more.
It seems you've been banned from Google, since you can't even figure out what a Swiss system is and how it works... Although, if you want to keep pushing this, you can keep pushing it... half the country is like that now... I see such specialists almost every day at work... Gaudin
We're waiting for a Swiss system tournament from LSM. By the way, I'm out.
Don't get upset in advance. If LSM decides to hold such a tournament, it won't restrict access to it due to personal dislike or anything else. Gaudin
By the way, LSM, also known as Corsar, also known as Kyrre. I told you in ICQ right away that I appreciate your tactful behavior in not bringing the discussion to the forum. And we discussed it in ICQ for TWO days. And the conclusion was only one. If you saw a violation, you should have immediately stopped the game and contacted the judges. A similar situation occurred in the novice match between Dimast and ariputra. Everything was resolved by replaying the match. You didn't do that. And I explained this in ICQ for TWO days. By the way,
Because these consultations ALREADY took place. Dirty_Player is aware of the situation regarding you. You can contact him. You just didn't have the courage back then. And you contacted him under the nickname Kyrre. And I don't know if Dirty_Player can handle more than an hour of conversation with you. :)
OMG. Well, since you're so smart and right, with your red Furstenko diploma, why are you bringing up that situation and mentioning me?
And to put that topic to rest once and for all, I'll answer you here, but I won't touch on it again. First: since you talked to me in ICQ, it was more like a favor, but whatever, maybe that's just your communication style. You can get away with it once. Second: yes, we talked, we discussed it. We went in circles, and you dismissed absolutely any arguments and didn't say anything clear, except that you made that decision and it won't be reconsidered, no matter what. Let's not go back to that. It's over. Now I definitely know how to act in certain situations, and I also have a good memory for cheaters. For the future, it would be good to include in the regulations what to do in certain situations so that this doesn't happen again. Because there wasn't anything about "If you see a violation, you should immediately stop the game and contact the judges" in the regulations of your tournament at that time, and the judges mentioned in the regulations were not online. Third: please be quiet about contacting anyone and lacking the courage. I decide for myself who to contact, how, and whether it's worth it, and there can be as many reasons as you want why I contacted someone and then changed my mind about discussing the situation. Fourth: there was no formal offer to replay the game. Rather, such an outcome was mentioned, but first, I refused it myself, and second, no official offer was ever made. Fifth: for the particularly gifted, who graduated from university with a red diploma, I'll explain that ICQ was created a long time ago, the nickname Corsar was created a long time ago, and it's generally from a portal, and the nickname LSM is new. I'm not even going to mention that all these nicknames are not clones, but aliases from different resources, and why you brought them up here is completely unclear. And I've been registered on TOHE and played there under the nickname vugluscrx2 for a long time, when you and most of the players of HW, HP, VT, and other resources didn't even know what online Heroes was. And I also have an old registration on BAE, on HL, on VT, and it just so happens that the aliases don't always and everywhere match. Facepalm. Should I tell them to you so that next time you don't forget to list them? And if I contact someone with a question, I try to make sure that the person understands who they are talking to, and I'm not going to change ICQ, nicknames on resources, or anything else just to match the aliases. Gaudin
Sorry for being so frank. :) But you and R55 are alike. With your, I apologize, pedantry. Guys, you're taking the game too seriously. I personally play to have fun, not to waste nerves and energy on meticulous calculations and arguments. You won't find a perfect system. And, most importantly, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DISSATISFIED PEOPLE, NO MATTER WHAT.
I apologize. No offense. In the end, "This is the internet, kid - you can get told off here!" (c). :smile32:
Don't get discouraged in advance. If LSM decides to organize such a tournament, they won't restrict access to it based on personal dislike or anything else.
In the case of a tie in points in a Swiss-system tournament, the following are used in descending order: 1. Head-to-head result 2. Buchholz score (the scores of opponents are summed with weighted coefficients: 1 for a win, 1 for a draw, 1 for a loss) 3. Sonneborn-Berger score (the scores of opponents are summed with weights: 2 for a win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss) "Wikipedia" is incorrect in this case. An important difference in the program: Berger distinguishes between a technical win and a regular win, which is why it was chosen. In general, the coefficients do not reflect the real balance of power and are essentially a "coin flip." Ideally, an additional game should be played for the prize-winning places.
That's not true.
In Swiss-system tournaments, especially with a large number of participants, it is not uncommon for the winner and prize-winners to not play against each other at all, so the Buchholz score was chosen as the main criterion for Swiss-system tournaments. Previously, the progress coefficient was used as the next indicator after Buchholz, but now the average rating of opponents is mainly calculated. There is no head-to-head criterion in a Swiss-system tournament. The introduction of the head-to-head criterion and the Sonneborn-Berger score is already an initiative of individual people. The Sonneborn-Berger score is mainly used in round-robin tournaments (the scores of opponents are summed with weights: 1 for a win, 0.5 for a draw, 0 for a loss). In round-robin tournaments, the first criterion is the head-to-head result, followed by Berger. Buchholz is meaningless because it is the same for everyone.
P.S. There are many resources on the internet, besides Wikipedia, where you can find the rules of the Swiss-system tournament.
I'm writing from my phone, so I can't check the tables, and I'm trying to remember the tournament situation from memory, so I might be wrong. I've always been in favor of playing the final in several games, so I agree to play my last round not in one match, but in a series of matches to 3 wins, but with two small, but as I think, fair amendments: 1. If in the final I come up against a player I've already played against in the tournament, the series starts with a score of 1-0 in favor of my opponent (like in a double elimination). If I come up against an opponent I haven't played against, I'm ready to play to 3 full wins from both sides (if I remember correctly, VanjaM has this chance, I don't remember about Romario). 2. If you really want to get rid of random coefficients, then in case of a tie in points, if these opponents have not met before, let them compete in a head-to-head match, and not by coefficient.
If someone doesn't agree, no problem, we'll play 1 game and go home.
I would like to know who has what chances of reaching the final at the moment?
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...
I have always been in favor of a final match consisting of several games, so I agree to hold my last round not in one match, but in a series of matches to 3 wins, but with two small, but as I think, fair amendments:
It's very nice to read such lines. Words of a true fighter :) The amendments are absolutely fair in my opinion.
I would like to know who has the best chances of reaching the final at the moment?
It is still too early to say. In my opinion, there are many contenders for the final at this stage :)
R55Max
