Posts from One for all, and all for one!

Phoenix-Positive E}I{I: L0L-W0W=0-2 ; L0L-W0W=0-2

10/07/2012 Scorpiona (red, random Swamp of Wistaria, Vocal) lost to Tiamath (blue, random, Rampart, Melody?) 8MM6a 122

Confirm. Thx for game.

regarding this point, there are other inconveniences that I mentioned above. There were complaints about the tables, and they were necessary because no one had created such a table (or rather, taking into account all the nuances of this tournament) anywhere else. I warned everyone in advance about the complexity of the tournament, as I took on the innovation and did my best. Unfortunately, I don't see a better alternative. Half of the games have already been played, and judging by the fact that no one has played against the wrong player, we can conclude that the players understood who was playing against whom, except for Sev7nsan. Therefore, there is no need to invent stories about that. I hope we can end this here.

so that my voice isn't taken away, as is customary in Russia, I will express my opinion) I simply understood who I was playing against. The results of how others played according to the table are not obvious; personally, I didn't delve into them. It is possible that I simply didn't pay attention to them. But it seems to me that the point of the tables is to make the material more visual, and here the situation is a little different.

09/24/2012 evil romantic (blue, Rampart, Ufretin, Kirr) lose R55Max (red, Castle, Valya, Adel) anarchy, 117
Something like that)) not quite Ufretin and definitely not Kirr)), but that's not the point. A couple of mistakes in the early game, then an attempt to outmaneuver the mages, the mouse faltered, and... it could have continued, as there were 3 hidden units, albeit behind very strong guards (cyclops and mages). Moreover, there were piles of 3 resources there, so the guard was quite strong), but luckily my guys won 2 of their games (kudos to them), and whether it's 3-0 or 2-1 doesn't matter much, I preferred to concede and start the second round, where the result already has tournament significance (IMO, for the future, it's still necessary to count the points scored by the team. Because, for example, my first game with Valenka is devoid of any motivation - we are losing 0-2, what's the point of spending a lot of time if 3-0 or 2-1 don't play any role for the overall score).

Phoenix-Three Bogatyrs: WLL-LWW=1-2 ; W0W-L0L=2-0

07.10.2012 Scorpiona ( blue, random Swamp Korbac ) def VanjaM ( red, random, Swamp Gervulf Brokhild) Jebus Cross 124

On the first, it took out the nix and wyverns, built a Castle with hydras.
On the second, it consumed 2 Griffin Conservatories + 3 + 4 and a Dragon Utopia mini gave a Helm +6 all, Speed Boots. Aimed for the second Dragon Utopia before moving into the treasure zone, but the opponent, upon reaching the center, couldn't overcome it.

Thanks for the game.

Phoenix-Three Bogatyrs: WLL-LWW=1-2 ; W0W-L0L=2-0

07.10.2012 Scorpiona ( blue, random same as Kobak Swamp ) def VanjaM ( red, random, Gervulf Brohild Swamp) Jeb 124

On the first [week] I cleared the external dwelling of vivs and vaseks, placed a Castle with hydras.
on the second I ate 2 cons+3+4 and the mini Dragon Utopia gave me a +6 all helmet, speed same-//spozhki. Aimed for the second Dragon Utopia before exiting to the treasure zone, but the opponent, having made it to the center, couldn't handle it.

Thanks for the game.
Yeah, 2 duck external dwellings, 3 small Hives, on 123 after ГО from 27 there are 17 ducks left and I was taken out at the next guard :( Thanks for the game!

Due to an irresponsible attitude towards the Tournament and the team (although there may be valid reasons for this), I have to replace the second player on my team.
I ask the organizers to consider the candidacy of the player ~no1_knows_me~ to replace the player Marduk in the team "Ogurtsy".

I told you to create a clear table, not something that I can't understand. Make two tables: one for individual results and one for team results, so everyone can see who won against whom and who did a great job. This accumulation of team scores only spoils the overall picture. I don't think this is a problem, right?

I told you to create a clear table, not something that I couldn't understand. Make two tables: one for individual results and one for team results, so everyone can see who won against whom and who did a great job. This accumulation of team scores only spoils the overall picture. I don't think this is a problem, right?

+1...everything brilliant is simple...the table is really confusing...

I told you to create a clear table, not something that I couldn't understand. Make two tables: one for individual results and one for team results, so everyone can see who won against whom and who did a great job. This accumulation of the team score only spoils the overall picture. I don't think this is a problem, right?

+1 Definitely!

Due to an irresponsible attitude towards the Tournament and the team (although there may be valid reasons for this), I need to replace the second player on my team.
I ask the organizers to consider the candidacy of player ~no1_knows_me~ to replace player Marduk on the "Ogurtsy" team.

What kind of player is he? Where is he from? Let him contact me tomorrow on ICQ.

I told you to make a clear table, not something that I can't understand.

Previous post:

I don't understand the table at all!

You need to decide...

Make two tables: an individual one + a team one, so that everyone understands who won against whom and who is doing a great job. This accumulation of the team score only spoils the overall picture. I think this is not a problem, right?

You are right here, it's not difficult! But it's about something else. When the topic of tables came up, Dirty first wrote that the only optimal option would be to make 3 individual tables + 1 team table, and I also thought so, but I considered it too much, so I made a team table (without individual players). Instead of suggesting adding a table for players to it, someone wanted to put all the information in one table. I didn't explain in advance that it would be more complicated, as I thought they would figure it out, and it's not really difficult for me, and it's even more convenient to navigate in a slightly more complex, but informative one, and I made the first version. Then Scorpion and you started coming up with "upgrades to my first version," which, in my opinion, were even worse (IMHO). Then, I came up with the one that exists now - complex (again, depending on who you ask), but informative. For me, the table is simple, as I have always used them and observed them throughout my life for various reasons. When you couldn't make anything decent yourself, and the current one doesn't suit you (or rather, it's difficult to understand and navigate), you are now asking to return everything back, i.e., to simplify the readability of the information by dividing one into several tables. Doesn't it seem like all this is like the whims of little children?

Ideally, since you didn't really know what you wanted from the beginning and disrupted it with your ill-conceived ideas (and I took them for granted), it would be better to leave everything as it is, so that in the future you would make more selective suggestions. But still, I will make 2 tables: a team one, like I did at the very beginning + a separate one for players

(IMHO, in the future, it is still necessary to count the points scored by the team. Because, for example, my first game with Valenok is devoid of any motivation - we are losing 0-2, what's the point of spending a lot of time if the pro on 90 3-0 or 2-1 doesn't play any role)

:smile42: Here, a very big misconception arises in the early stages of the group competition for many.
Firstly, you immediately give away 10%, which already makes the team weaker. There are now questions about Aripotre, I am waiting for his answer to the question asked in another topic. If it turns out that he played against shamysa in violation of the rules, I will naturally put them in, thereby your loss played a role. Furthermore, hypothetically, you, believing that the game with Valenok doesn't matter, will give him a victory, and it will turn out that your team has 2 victories given away + those losses, which may not be enough in case of a tie in points due to your inability to motivate yourself in a small, but still meaningful match.

Secondly, in all team tournaments, there can absolutely be such "unmotivating games." If you play 6 matches, then with a score of 3-0 not in your favor, morale already drops, and motivation too, because in any case, you can't hope for a victory, and it's difficult to win 3 games in a row. I'm not even talking about the fact that with a score of 4-0, 2 games will be useless.

Thirdly, the groups were distributed by lot, and it was impossible to create 16 absolutely equal groups. After the draw, it always becomes clear (let's take 3 players) who is approximately stronger and who is weaker in confrontation with opponents. Often, two of the three players are either higher in level than their opponents or lower. If we take a confrontation between teams where 2 players out of 3 are clearly leaders over their opponents, then it is much easier for this team to win up to 6 victories than up to 2, because it is enough to win 4 games for a draw, 3 for a tie, and only 2 for a loss (which is very unlikely). According to the rules of this tournament, up to 2 victories, a weaker generated team (which is not their fault) has a greater chance of at least scoring 3 points out of 6 in games with a stronger team, also giving away 3 points, while it is possible to win only 2 times out of 6, but to win, you have to win 4 games! In team competitions, it doesn't matter who won the match with what score, for a victory of 3-0 or 2-1, exactly 3 points are given in each individual specific confrontation of three players on each side!

This proposal changes the rules of this tournament, so it is completely irrelevant in this context.

I've created new tables with 2 blocks for each group: a team table and an individual table. Later, I'll add a column for losses, emblems, and other minor details. In each individual group, each cell corresponds to a game. The large number of red or blue cells is due to the fact that when playing with, for example, the red color, in the next game, its opponent plays with red, so the red colors match for the groups of captains and players from the 3rd tier, and the blue colors match in the group of players from the 2nd tier. THE TABLES WILL NOT BE CHANGED FURTHER! Checking if everything is formatted correctly, please let me know. Added 2 hours 38 minutes ago

1. I have 3 games, and one hasn't been posted yet (cnn.ppl).

Who won? I need a report.

10.10.2012 c0nn3c71nkK.ppL (red, Fortress, Wystan, Wystan) def PlayHeroes_HP (blue, Rampart, Eleshar, Sandro) 121 balance

Well, the map was great, with two hidden strongholds, and we agreed to play until 121. Before we could start, our teammates played and won 2-0, so the opponent conceded.

I was hoping he would reconsider, but it's a shame.

I've created new tables with 2 blocks for each group: a team table and an individual table. I'll add a loss column, emblems, and other minor details later.

Well, that's better now. You can do it whenever you want!
P.S. I think I have 2 games pending, and we haven't played the rematch with Satyr yet.

Three from the Box - Trio of Noobs | First Circle

09.10.2012 Mizrael(red, Fortress, Drakon, Gurnisson) def OUTLAW(blue, Dungeon, Alamar, Nimus) 6lm10a 142 fullWT

The start wasn't bad after all the restarts: Dragon, gnoll external dwelling on the respawn. Built a weave in the Castle, aggressively pumped up the gnolls :) At the beginning of the second, I managed to take a +2 speed cloak from gr.nag; it was bloody, but the cloak was spot on - the Gnolls started simply crushing everything in their path. Dragon didn't get anything useful except water, so I happily switched to Gurni once he got training and scouting. In the end, he got water, logia, armor. КВ dropped from the 4th Dragon Utopia, providing full control. By that time, I already had 15 unlegs with a banana; I decided to take back the Castle, which the opponent had recently taken from the AI, and upgrade the feathered ones there using money looted from the dragons. However, on the turn Gurni was running to take this Castle, scouting spotted the hooves of an Inferno hero's horse in the treasure zone, which I hadn't visited yet, thinking "later, later." I saw Nimus in the tavern and decided to take a few steps to check who exactly was in the treasure zone. It turned out it was indeed the opponent and all his loot; I ignored the Castle, put on handcuffs, combined the loot, and attacked. 26 spells is painful, so I immediately gave antimagic to the angels; I took the counter-attack with a weave pegasus, and in response, dropped a meteor on the gnolls, vasyas, and dwarves. Then came the prayer, and the better-leveled angels and lizards carried the fight. Thanks for the game.

Saharki - Lucky Haven | WW0-LL0=2:0, WL0-LW0=1:1

09.10.2012 theShevanesian (red, swamp, Kirr) def R55Max (blue, tower, Tazar) Jebus 142

Finishing an old game. The starting conditions were decent; I got a hero with 123 stats, wings, good mana, and expert air magic, and immediately grabbed the Pandora's Box artifact with all the magic bonuses. My opponent got a starting town with branching paths in the snow, but still managed to get a hero with good stats and a lot of archers. We played for a while, then decided to finish the game. Thanks for the game!