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 Time is money, or are you going to waste it?Auto-translated
The whole point is that the gameplay hasn't changed, the game itself has. And now the question is who wants to play this kind of game, and who doesn't. I, for example, have absolutely no desire to. This is essentially the core of the topic, to find out what people want, and to persuade the undecided to join our side, haha.
"Это нам идеально подходит!" [Новосибирск, 2013] "Красавчик! Если только не читер.." [Киев, 2014] "Это Вам не шутки - нажрался Dust в маршрутке" [Новокузнецк, 2015] Сам ты фиш (с) :D
The quality of the game is good, but 10 minutes per turn is too much. The increasing turn time personally killed my desire to play Heroes in tournaments. In the streams I watched, I saw not skill but people being slow. Sometimes they take 4 minutes, and the remaining 6 minutes they sit and come up with plans for the next day; the turn ends, and they calmly chat in ICQ, VK, etc. It seems that many people have extra time not for skill but for entertainment during the game, to watch a movie, hang out on VK, and so on.
Мой ник Heroes, и никто не вынесет меня Скажу я вам, мои друзья. Я некромант, я маг великий, и армия моя Непобедимая, огромная!
Why is this poll necessary? Dirty_Player has been inactive online for almost a year, and even before that, he wasn't considered a hardcore player.
So what? I'll be active again in a month. Therefore, the fact that I haven't played for a year doesn't mean anything. That's why this topic is being raised. With the current state of affairs, I don't even want to play in tournaments, imagining how drawn-out it could become. Oelm
Now, everyone should understand that a chess timer and a replayable quick battle are needed in SOD, and only after that does it make sense to return to this topic.
Yes, I agree. A chess timer is needed. And a quick battle is also very much needed. R55Max
And considering that one player got tough units, and the army was weakened (for example, grand units or marksmen were killed on the first day due to morale), the chess timer will decrease at an exponential rate, becoming increasingly unfair just because the battles are longer, even if they are passable.
Especially for R55Max. I'm writing in a different color because you wrote so much, but you don't understand what a chess timer is. A chess timer is when you make your first move, e2-e4, in one second, and you spend an HOUR on sacrificing a queen. Don't be an idiot!!! The time in battle is NOT relevant here!!!! How can I get this across to you? The idea in Heroes is the same. Save time on simple moves and spend the accumulated time on making serious decisions. Just as you were slow on the zombies, you will continue to be slow. The time in battle is a separate issue!!!! Is that clearer? KobRa_RR
Many people find it convenient to do their own things (family, work, playing, etc.) during their opponent's turn; many find it inconvenient.
Tema, I respect you, but personally, I wouldn't want someone to waste our shared time on solving their own problems during the game. Especially when some people don't make their move and do their own things. KobRa_RR
So, there's a chess timer; agree on it. In the end, there's Alessandro with 600+300; join forces and play.
No problem. This isn't about a specific game. I can always find someone to play a casual game with. There's already a whole queue of people who have signed up to play with me after the new year. This is about tournaments, where we can't choose our own rules and opponent. Oelm
But who forces you? You can play 1 game a week without much harm to everything else.
I have a certain time limit that I can spend on Heroes, and I don't want to spend it on 1 game in 3 sessions. I'd rather play 3 games in 1 session. If I sign up for a tournament, and another one opens, I'll have to skip it. I think I'm not the only one. LeBron
The whole point is that the level of play hasn't changed; the game itself has changed. And the question now is who wants to play this game, and who doesn't. I, for example, have absolutely no desire. This is essentially what the topic is about: to find out what everyone wants, and to persuade the undecided to join our side.
Exactly.
Regarding a blitz tournament with 4-minute games. There are already plans for this, and there is already an organizer. But everything has its time. If you want to help with the organization, write to me on ICQ.
Especially for R55Max. I'm writing in a different color because you wrote so much, but you don't understand what a chess timer is. A chess timer is when you make your first move, e2-e4, in one second, and you spend an HOUR on sacrificing your queen. Don't be an idiot!!! Time in battle has NOTHING to do with it!!!! How can I get this across to you? The idea in Heroes is the same. Save time on simple moves and spend the accumulated time on making serious decisions. Just as you messed up on the zombies, you will continue to mess up. Time in battle is a separate issue!!!! Is that clearer?
Write specifically for me why it's not relevant. After all, Max is right in some ways. For example, when playing Inferno, I watched a lot of Steam Amilu's games. He had trouble with the timer in the late game because of summoning, while his opponent didn't, even though he was doing everything as quickly as possible. Or here's another example: different factions have different starting conditions; with one, you quickly kill the neutrals, while with another, you spend a long time dealing with them. And you can give many such examples. Therefore, the conclusion is that the chess timer is unfair.
Ideally, it would be like this: a replayable campaign, and the battle time would start, say, after 1 minute of the battle. If this is not feasible, then the battle should be without a timer.
Write specifically for me, why is it irrelevant? After all, Max is right in some way.
I'm writing specifically for you. The chess timer CAN STOP in battles. So, it's not quite clear why demon slicing is relevant here, if the time isn't spent on the battle.
You can easily play with a chess timer set to 2 minutes. You can spend 1 minute on the first turn, and 3 minutes on the second. Or you can spend only half a minute and leave time for complex chains.
Kilgore and Max, the problem you're describing is artificial. So what if one player ends the game with 0 seconds on the timer, while the other has 2000 seconds? What difference does it make?
Ideally, it would be like this: a replayable quick battle, and the battle timer would start, say, after 1 minute of the battle. If this isn't feasible, then the battle should be without a timer. __________________
Is it a problem to set an additional timer that is 60 seconds longer?
But what if there are several battles? And what if there are no battles at all during a turn? The ideal timer is a chess timer that pauses during battles.
It's simply a chess timer with a pause during battles – this is a small contribution to saving real time. This is what we're talking about here. First and foremost, it provides an advantage through replayable battles, secondly, through a timer during battles, and a chess timer further fine-tunes everything.
Anyone can get carried away, and frankly, the Nagana-style boosting elicits unpleasant emotions.
2 Oelm You started this topic. I'll be in Moscow from January 4th to 7th; tell me everything you think to my face. I can't stand it when people hide their meanness behind the internet.
A chess timer is a great idea; at the very least, it will stop people from doing all sorts of things during the game. (I admit, this has happened to me more than once, and I repent...) But there's a catch: if you enable a timer in battles, luck becomes a much bigger factor because blocks can vary, and as silly as it sounds, a hundred dwarves can actually be a very strong block in terms of time! (if you don't take into account the amount of units). On the other hand, if you disable the timer in battles, the player will again start to be lazy, think through their moves, do their own things, etc. Therefore, the only thing that can be said about chess timers in SOD is that time will tell. If most players agree to play under these conditions, why not play? In that case, it will only depend on Baratortch. But if only the "old guard" wants to play this way, and ordinary players don't want to... will there be another holy war?! Will people stop playing in tournaments because they can't find a compromise? That would be a little unpleasant, wouldn't it? P.S. To change something, start small – just as the time was gradually increased, let it gradually decrease: first, HL on 8 minutes, then on 6, and then you can think about a chess timer.
"Никто не уходит из героев вечно", - убедился на личном опыте, гоняю в сингле до сих пор :D
To Dirty_Player: If you can't manage to write a response to me in the thread you created, then you don't have to respond; I won't be upset. I wrote much less than you did in your post; most of my post consists of excerpts from other players' texts. Now, I'm telling you, don't be rude to me; I'm not here to argue with you! I'm not being obtuse; I'm expressing my opinion, and just because it doesn't match yours doesn't mean it's wrong. And I'll repeat again: if you don't have the patience, you can keep it to yourself. I can easily read your one long post; it wasn't difficult, and it could even be shortened by half.
Now, answer one specific question for me: where in the thread did it say that we were talking about a chess timer that stops during battles? Even after your response, people were still concerned about this, and if you had bothered to read my message properly, you would have noticed this question in it as well! And the fact that the timer can be stopped doesn't mean that's how people play; most people play with a timer that doesn't stop, so that's what's implied by default!
Chess with a pause during battles is already better than without a pause, but it still doesn't provide an equal time limit for both players. You're telling me that it takes a second to move from e2 to e4, but where do you see e2-e4? In Heroes, players don't move in the same way; they make decisions based on constantly changing events, depending on how much of the map has been revealed. Moreover, your comparison to chess is so incomparable that I won't even mention the fact that in chess, you place a piece and then think, but here, you have to not only place your heroes but also occupy those positions, clear paths, break through blockades, and capture objects, performing many actions. In chess, you think, take a piece, and place it in half a second, performing one action! But here, if you think, it might take you 5 minutes to place your pieces because sometimes you just have to click the mouse 1000 times per turn, and that takes time!
A chess timer (especially one that doesn't stop during battles) gives both players, who are in completely different positions and playing with different factions, an absolutely equal amount of time. The inequality of the positions is a direct result of this.
To Oelm: When one player has 2000 seconds left and the other has 0 at the end, there's no difference if all the turns have been successfully completed. If the game unfolds in such a way that one player needs, for example, 4000 clicks, then the difference in the remaining time at the end of the game will be 2000 seconds.
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...
To Dirty_Player: A chess timer (especially one that doesn't pause during battles) gives both players an absolutely equal amount of time, even though they are in completely different positions and playing with different factions.
Yes.
The inequality in position stems from this.
Why? In battle, yes, but not on a "clean" turn. Think everything through in advance during your opponent's turn. The timer will really start to be felt in the late game, when 70% of the map has been explored and when you can plan your entire turn with 90% certainty.
LeBron
