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
A chess timer with a time-stopping function during battles – perhaps this is the best control method.
If it's a timer, it should only be used to track time during battles; otherwise, I already know how 100 golems can be defeated by ballistas in the first week, and that battle will only last about 5 minutes! Do you play at a fast pace? Do you want to be able to do everything? Then spend your time on that instead of wasting other people's time:smile10: After all, you can choose not to kill them on level 114, but instead defeat them twice as quickly on level 116, but no, you need a fast pace! Well, then pay for it with your time...
I'll try to express my opinion as a viewer on some key issues.
Someone here has repeatedly stated that "if the timer is reduced, players will start thinking through their moves during battles," but this would be an oxymoron (as Indra pointed out). Let me explain: the tactical battle map covers almost the entire screen, and there is no way to think through and calculate your movements. More precisely, there is one way: if you keep all of this in your head and calculate it there, but there's a paradox: a person capable of doing this would not be slow-witted. However, if a person still believes otherwise, they are clearly not a high-level player.
It's a bit funny to read the argument that I do other things during my opponent's turn. Let's be clear: if the opponent takes 15 minutes per turn, it's boring to just sit and stare at the monitor, so you can do other things. So, what prevents you from doing these things if the turns last 10 minutes? In my opinion, and according to the logic of these people, there is only one benefit, as you will still be able to do your other tasks, and the game will end a couple of hours earlier, allowing you to dedicate yourself fully to them!
I haven't spent hours in Versus Tower (VT), and I can't objectively comment on this topic. However, I have often found myself in situations, or seen situations on streams, where I have to play with a poor setup, and everything needs to be overcome with a small number of starting army units, using archers supported by melee units. This requires a lot of time and effort to move, shoot, breed, and kill, which, of course, will cost a lot on the timer.
At the same time, there is an antagonism to this, which could previously be seen on Tvarina's streams: a standard situation, 1 attacking stack versus 3 stacks of mobs, resulted in a half-hour micro-battle in an attempt to move 1 stack away from the other 2 in order to strike from the flank, and then, in his turn, immediately finish them off. Although, in theory, this should be a 30-second battle, where the attacking stack moves for 2 turns, attacks, retreats, waits, and finishes off. This undoubtedly indicated a lack of experience, but fortunately, such a situation is no longer observed as often due to the increased level of play in Tvarina's games. That is, the situation described in the second paragraph, and the opinions expressed in support of it, again indicate a low level of player.
Let's also look at the streams of players from sk2tv, as I unfortunately only have the opportunity to watch them, although I would like to watch Scorpion live =). If you're playing, let me know ;)
Please don't take this as criticism directed at anyone.
Let's go back to Tvarina:
During a battle, he can alt-tab to the chat and read opinions during a difficult situation, and I don't consider this a drawback, as he is seriously promoting Heroes. If there were no stream, there would be no chat, and there would be nowhere to alt-tab to.
However, when such a player, who has won a tournament for beginners with incredible skill and creativity, constantly refers to the Heroes database during battles, looking at how much damage Fire Wall does, or how much damage Ice Bolt will do, or checking his knowledge of the Resurrection skill, it's not good. It's even worse when he opens a calculator and calculates the damage there. For example, I remember a very amusing case with minotaurs, and it was done according to a very strange scheme: we see a stack of 18 minotaurs, let's say the damage to them is 600, so the calculations went like this: 18 * 50 - 600, and then everything was divided by 50.
It should be noted that Tvarina plays quite briskly without aiming for unnecessary delays. This was just a clear example, in which someone may have seen themselves.
Amilu was also mentioned, and an example was given with demonology. I have watched and continue to watch Amilu's streams, and I can honestly say that Amilu has problems with the timer when playing with absolutely any Castle. It's even hard to say what is the main problem: poor time management (which hopefully will be resolved with the new HD mod version) or poor chain building, when all the time is spent not on battles and thinking through tactics, but on choosing a hero from three or four who should stand on this cell, moving them one cell at a time, and then thinking about the significantly changed situation, and then, oh no, I forgot the troops again, I didn't cast the spell, I didn't prepare the artifacts, 5-4-3-2-1, oh damn, I forgot to build in the Castle.
There's also Srazu =), and his very long games. Here, I think that the timer is not to blame, but the same experience. Crazy, having an advantage, considers it insufficient or not an advantage at all (due to a lack of experience) and goes into deep macro management in order to bring the advantage to dominance.
P.S.
I perfectly remember the tournaments of 10 years ago, organized by Dilvish and others (from the Orcs). They played for 4 minutes without any HD mods, on the same 6LM10, 8HM8, and so on, and it was fine.
Message from Dirty_Player: In your posts, for some reason, the chess timer and chess are treated as one and the same. But in essence, a chess timer is simply a type of time control that began to be used in chess.
Because you were the one who started the comparison with them; I suggest isolating analogies with chess entirely.
Message from R55Max We play with different castles, heroes, armies, different opponents, we have a ton of all sorts of external influences, and on top of that, we can't see the board at all! Imagine a large board covered by a veil of darkness, different numbers of pieces (heroes), and they move haphazardly! What does a chess timer have to do with this???
//
Perhaps without realizing it yourself, you are now presenting the biggest advantage of a chess timer for Heroes. Precisely the uncertainty and constantly opening perspectives are the main pluses in favor of a chess timer. Imagine a situation where you make a move that you planned during your opponent's turn, enter an unexplored zone, and there are 2 Griffin Conservatories! You need to urgently change your plan and take them as quickly as possible... This is exactly where time accumulated earlier will come in handy for making a thoughtful and balanced decision.In this situation, you have actually misinterpreted the phrase I uttered. I am not against having to strain yourself and act somehow in emergency situations. The thing is, such situations will be different for everyone, and their number will also vary. The variance can be huge. So, with an equal amount of time, there may be a completely unequal number of such situations, and given equal player skill as well as equal move speed, one of them will have to spend their time more and more often.
Put simply, all other things being equal, the cost per turn will be higher for the player who was dealt more difficult-to-solve problems by the generator. The same applies to battles. In them, the person with tougher guards or a weaker army will spend more time; again, a slight disadvantage from neutral morale for the player pushed into a more difficult situation by the generator further complicates the position and the time spent per turn.From this, it becomes simply obvious that a chess timer provides an ideal balance to players only in mirror matches. and conversely, in SoD, it pushes those who are in a more difficult situation regarding map actions and battles with neutrals (which take longer) into even tighter constraints.
Message from R55Max You're writing to me "e2-e4 second," but where do you see e2-e4? In Heroes, moves are not identical; decisions are made based on constantly changing events depending on how much of the map is revealed.
//
Once again, spot on! But again, an argument in favor of a chess timer. By "e2-e4," I meant a simple move. For example: scout heroes quickly gathered resources, the main hero traveled along the road, nothing was explored, a building was constructed in the castle. The turn took 1 minute. Such moves happen. In the case of using a chess timer, the player will have an incentive to finish the turn sooner and save time in the piggy bank, which will be needed whenOnce again, a misinterpretation of my expression on your part. Such moves happen, but they look different. This move is not just a move, but a response that the player arrived at by performing a sum of different actions. Even if they were simple, their number will vary. Take an example: someone got an easy Pandora's box for money or experience, after which they can spread out faster or break through neutrals more easily and quickly, while another has to take a couple of gnome dens and fight neutrals to catch up in experience; the time costs can be completely different.
Players are initially in different positions. Not only because of different castles, but also because of different layouts, etc. And the same amount of time is given by the regulations. Therefore, it is quite fair that a chess timer will monitor this even more carefully!
It's unfair, and I'll explain why below.
Now for the summary. Pluses of a chess timer: 1. Use accumulated time to make complex decisions 2. Stimulates the player to finish the turn faster to accumulate time, rather than just staring at the monitor waiting for the time to expire 3. In case of total depletion of the timer reserve, the player returns to the familiar SoD-timer or accumulates a reserve.
1. The wording is good, but there is another side: if I can save on easy turns for difficult ones, then in the event that difficult ones come immediately (for example, blocks), I will have to lose it. One might say "well, you'll make it up later." But what if the game unfolds such that one person has to constantly work their fingers to the bone, barely making it into the basic, say, 400 sec and more often losing the starting reserve, while another is dealt simple guards, a convenient layout, and increases their reserve in simple battles. It turns out to be somewhat unfair. Then comes the "meat cutting" phase, the game enters the contact stage, time is needed for cutting, for evaluating one's own and others' actions, and the opponent has twice as much of it in the most important part of the game due to an initial generation that didn't favor one of the players!
2.It stimulates both players, but all other things being equal (skill, thinking speed), the ability to accumulate will differ! It depends on the map and starting castles, on computers.
3. That's why this timer is needed.
I don't see a single minus. Therefore, I position the chess timer as a mandatory innovation.
They are plenty, which is why it's not needed in SoD.
Pluses of the SoD timer:
1. All turns for map actions are limited by a single and unchanging limit. This keeps players in equal conditions throughout the game (it does not give an advantage or worsen the position of players relative to each other if the generator put one of them in a position with difficult-to-solve (time-consuming) tasks and the other in the opposite).
2.The limit for tournament play is set based on how much is necessary in the most complex stages of the game, i.e., a limit within which almost all possible even most complex moves should fundamentally be made.
3. Players always know their time for each turn exactly. The advantage here might seem abstract at first glance, but it actually exists, as there is absolutely no need to think about time—specifically its accumulation—freeing one from this function. I want to say that regardless of what anyone says, by getting rid of one function, you perform others with higher quality. It's just mathematics (you can take a computer as an example: the more processes are executed, the harder it has it). In VT players often try to accumulate it, but in the end, it wasn't even necessary, because either the game ended or there became very much of it; I personally observed in some games when VT players, trying to save time (accumulate), passed the turn, forgetting to perform something with the army (artifacts), etc.
Time in battle is a contradictory issue and everyone has the right to hold their own usual position. Personally, I believe this: For every action performed in the game, one must pay with time. An example with demonology was brought up here. I believe it is fair that a player who receives troops out of thin air pays for this with THEIR OWN time, and not our collective time (their turn + my waiting).
I believe that one should play qualitatively first and foremost and perform as many actions as necessary, and no one should pay for anything that is permitted by the rules. Demons are not from thin air. You need to kill just as many creatures in terms of HP to get demons (without a ring).
And you take this fact into account when choosing a castle, and that's it. There is no need to refer to specific cases of guards. Guards are completely random. One will get zombies, on which he will only lose time killing them with harpies, while the opponent will get not golems, but evil eyes, on which he will lose the same grands. Which do you think is better? Some might even be dealt several Griffin Conservatories near the castle, and another only blocks. No timer will save you here. Therefore, there's no need to reason about guards.
And you take into account the fact that for Inferno you demon-cut, and so as not to wait for a demon-slaughter, write "Inferno" in SoD. Regarding the game itself, I am satisfied with the variance of SoD, which is why I play it. This is exclusively about the chess timer, which specifically affects the points written above. Regarding it, the generator adds even more imba. I wrote the minuses of the chess timer and the pluses of the SoD timer specifically for the SoD version as well.
P.S. I am for speeding up the game in Heroes, against slowplay, but not at the expense of replacing the SoD timer with a chess one!
In my view, there is a way out; I believe that for this it is simply necessary to create blitz tournaments with a lower time limit in the SoD timer and that's all. HL templates for 6 min, others for 4x, and I assure you, the time will be reduced significantly, and players won't relax. Moreover, there will be no loss of community, as if you want to play, play; if not, don't. The same can be said about standard tournaments with more time per turn. No one forces you to play if you don't have time for marathons.
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...
The analogy with chess actually supports the idea of solid time controls: just like blitz, it doesn't replace classical chess – it exists alongside it, and may even be useful, interesting, and spectacular (it fits into the TV format – where would we be without it?), but classical chess, with its multi-hour games, is still thriving – where is your blitz now?:rolleyes:.
I didn't see you at the last World Championship final in Tretyakovka. You certainly remember what time control was used 20 years ago at the World Championship? And what time control is used now? And with what time control was the fate of the title decided? We also didn't meet at the "Kremlin Stars" tournament. And you certainly remember what time control was used there? Well, if you remember all this, then your post is rather misleading:)). R55Max
But you should take into account the fact that people are rooting for Inferno, and to avoid waiting for the Inferno meta, just write "Inferno" in the SOD (Start of Day).
I recommend rereading the rules of the open tournament for men. All-random.
I read the discussion. Here are the thoughts that came to mind:
1) There are arguments, and there are non-arguments. The presence of the latter in a text casts doubt on either the author's intellectual abilities or their intentions, even if arguments are also present.
For example, all the considerations regarding fairness laid out in this topic are non-arguments.
Because there is and can be no fairness in the gameplay of Heroes; balance here is achieved differently — not by adjusting elements to each other, but on the contrary, by randomization, by the presence of an excess of everything. This allows more skilled players, who can see and account for more factors than their opponents, to win games and tournaments. This is how relative fairness of results is achieved with completely unfair gameplay.
And, by the way, the timer contributes very little here; typical draft irregularities are much more significant. For example, for Dungeon, you could easily trade half an hour from the timer for such an average irregularity as a single Griffin Conservatory under Castle and still come out ahead. And there are even bigger irregularities...
2) More generally — for games like chess, ГО, Heroes, etc., time limits stem from organizational considerations, not from game logic.
So, for example, an extra 100 seconds per turn (the ВТ timer) increases a game lasting a month by 1.5-2 hours. This is critical for club tournaments, so at CIS championships I always categorically insisted on a +400 limit, not +500. How this affects the gameplay — the players figure out for themselves.
Online tournaments are less sensitive because a fairly large amount of time is allotted for a game, which over time allowed increasing the standard control from 4 minutes to 8-10 in SoD and from 1800+300 to 4000+500 in TE/ВТ.
But there is a downside here — with a large time control, a game is difficult to play in one sitting; you have to play with adjournment, in 2-3 sessions. This all seriously affects the enjoyment of the game. And while a tournament game can be played with adjournment, for a fun game it's tedious.
This, by the way, is one of the reasons for the dominance of Jebus Cross in fun games — with a control of 4000+500, you can comfortably play for about 8-10 days an evening; more is harder. That's exactly how long a typical Jebus Cross game lasts. But on XL+U it averages 3 weeks, with games of 5-6 weeks being common.
3) For an objective view of the situation, it's often enough to look at it from the outside, through the eyes of a person without any habits or ambitions regarding the issue at hand.
So, for example, if you imagine the development of some new turn-based game, then regarding time control, the developers' first reaction to a proposal to differentiate the timer would inevitably be: "Well, what for?" And I'm not sure I could convincingly justify why...
Another option — try to imagine that Heroes was originally made with a chess clock and time in battles. What would the reaction of current players be to a proposal to make the timer like it is now in SoD? Probably a perplexed finger twirling at the temple... "kid, what's wrong with you?"
It's another matter who needs this objective view... as they say, "if the laws of physics were infringing on someone's political interests, they'd have been fixed by now" — a non-trivial factor.
4) People generally like to argue about tastes.
Therefore, it's naive to assume that some Oelm there will understand everything, repent, and publicly admit that it's time to stop stalling. There's a chance, but it's quite small, and it's for the case of one person, not a trend.
The thing is, by arguing about tastes, a person boosts their self-esteem, operates in a friend-or-foe coordinate system, and fills their life with socially active actions.
I encounter this at work quite often too. Although you'd think it's not a hobby like Heroes, but a quite pragmatic field, yet...
Debates usually stop when external pressure arises. For example, management's demand to submit the final project by tomorrow. Or a client's demand to show them a beta version, otherwise they'll turn to other developers. In such situations, people immediately start demonstrating expert skill in finding compromise, become interested in other people's points of view, begin to be guided not by the like/dislike criterion, but by the works/doesn't work criterion, etc.
This is also noticeable among Heroes players. So, for example, 4 years ago, when a patron from Yekaterinburg appeared on the horizon, wanting to sponsor a big club championship, the sluggish debates of SoD vs TE entered an acute phase, forced the development of TE-light, and formed that version of compromise rules that was ultimately implemented in Kyiv-2010.
And if, for example, Heroes were taken to WCG and a requirement like "game duration no more than 5 hours" were set, then the entire active Heroes elite would start playing blitz without any problem.
P.S. Can't read the "arguments" about Inferno with a straight face :)
I've watched Amilu's streams many times, and I can honestly say that Amilu has problems with time management when playing with absolutely any Castle. It's even hard to say what the main problem is: poor time management (which hopefully will be resolved with the new HD mod), or poor chain building, where all the time is spent not on battles and thinking about tactics, but on choosing a hero from three or four who should stand on this cell, moving them one by one to the next cell, and then thinking about the significantly changed situation, and then "oh no, I forgot the troops again, I didn't upgrade again, I didn't prepare the artifacts, again 5-4-3-2-1, oh damn, I forgot to build in the Castle."
Thanks, you made me laugh! :D :D :D
I almost cried :D :D
2R55Max
This is written about you, haven't tried it, but I condemn it
Play 10-15 games in War of the Throne, as close as possible to the SoD rules (not to promote War of the Throne, God forbid), but just to assess the timer. From the outside, it looks like you're afraid of the unknown, but in reality, it's not that scary.
Сейчас балуюсь этим https://vcmi.eu/download/ За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того
Sorry, correction. 4 minutes are still needed in large tournaments, even in male templates. But! A player attacks neutral creatures. Opens the spellbook. Sees that he doesn't have enough mana for any spell. And then, during the same battle, he opens the spellbook 3 more times. Apparently, a battle timer is still needed.
I've been holding back from posting in this thread to avoid getting involved in pointless arguments, but I'll share my thoughts in a concise manner.
1. I'm perfectly happy with the current time limit on templates. However, I voted for the option "No, but autobattle and/or a chess timer would solve this issue." 2. I believe you're not approaching the problem in the right way. Reducing the game time is certainly necessary, but it can only be done effectively by introducing a replayable quick mode and a chess timer (a very interesting and sensible idea to have the timer in battle start after 1 minute). 3. In my opinion, the impact of the current time limit on the overall game time is being overestimated. An extra 2 minutes on the timer is only 2 hours of total game time over 30 game days, considering both players (2+2 minutes). This is assuming that no more battles are fought than would be possible with a different timer. However, it's not sensible to reduce the number of battles per day because of the timer; this is a simplification and a degradation of the game. And if a player simply wastes those extra 2 minutes without improving their gameplay on the map (no extra battles), then in real time, it doesn't have such a significant impact. 4. Naturally, a more experienced player will spend significantly less time on their turn, both in battles and when making decisions on the map. But this is all balanced by experience, and there's nothing wrong with that.
P.S. Calling other players "slowpokes" is, to put it mildly, not very polite. Please watch your language, fellow Heroes players. ;)
When some guy named Vic participated in tournaments with SOD players, he often tried to force them to use the TE version. In principle, nothing prevents me from doing the same if the lobby pushes its idea about a limit, the format of which I consider unsuitable. In general, it's clear that the discussion was skimmed through, because I expressed my position quite separately. Ultimately, the changes in the SOD version affect me little. Regarding the boss-subordinate relationship, it still makes sense to negotiate with the reasonable part of the community, and only then put pressure when sensible ideas are exhausted.
ps. calling other players "slowpokes" is, to put it mildly, not polite; please watch your language, fellow Heroes players.
This thought and term is constantly expressed throughout the entire topic about all players who believe that the current time limit is quite adequate. Lider1
twaryna hasn't "hit" them yet. On the gold mines :D
If Twaryna ends up on the gold mines, I wouldn't envy those gold mines :D
Good job! Thanks for starting this thread. I've wanted to write something similar for a long time, but I don't have the same influence or deep understanding of the issue.
I think Rmax also has a lot of valid points.
______________ No, the time limit needs to be reduced ______________
I read all the messages and didn't get tired of it :), if you're interested in reading, the size doesn't really matter. Wicc, in my opinion, said something very reasonable:
If we all had a common goal - for example, getting Heroes (as a promotional discipline) into the next WCG, which will again be held in China, then we would come to a consensus faster: in the form of a platform, rules, and a time control.
Since the WCG is planned in China, I think Heroes has a good chance of getting there.
Let's set this as our goal! We need to decide on the rules, platform, and time control. _____
Due to the specifics of WCG, 4 competition days: the time per turn should be within 2-4 minutes, because, in my opinion, the whole game should fit into 2-2.5 hours maximum. 2 minutes is quite achievable. Plus, I think 2-minute matches could breathe new life into Heroes, in the form of drive, hardcore, extreme, emotions, and so on, which, in my opinion, could make the game even more interesting.
For the sake of an official world championship, can't we make sacrifices in the form of one common platform, one set of common rules, 2-4 minutes per turn (possibly with a chess timer), and 2-2.5 hours per game? [I think the longer the total game duration, the less chance Heroes has].
P.S. Even though I don't "like" Wargames, I'm willing to switch to it without any problems if Heroes gets into the WCG on that platform.
The setups in Heroes provide much greater variance.R55Max
Simply put, all other things being equal, the player whose generator has handed out more difficult problems will have higher turn costs.
Well, of course, a lot depends on the generator. The generator can deal such a hand that no time limit will change anything.Wicc
And, by the way, the timer doesn't contribute that much here; the typical unevenness of the deal is much higher. So, for example, for Dungeon, you can easily trade half an hour off the timer for such an average unevenness as a single Griffin Conservatory under the Castle and still come out ahead. And there are even bigger unevennesses...
R55Max
This turn is not just a turn, but the response the player arrived at after making a sum of different actions.
I might agree with you, but in Heroes you can never know 100% where your actions will lead. Something tasty might unexpectedly appear, or your opponent might force you to change your plans. R55Max
1. The wording is good, but there is another side: if on easy turns I can save time for hard ones, then if hard turns come immediately (e.g., blocks), I'll have to lose it. You could say, 'well, you'll make up for it later.' But what if the game plays out so that one player constantly has to work hard, barely managing within, say, the basic 400 seconds and often losing their starting reserve, while the other gets dealt simple guards, a convenient layout, and increases their reserve on easy battles. That seems somewhat unfair.
A strange argument about fairness. As if the generator is always fair. If one player gets a convenient layout and another has to overcome difficulties, they won't have it easy with any timer. However, with a chess timer, it will be easier for them to deal with difficulties, because they might have to skip some turn and save time for solving other tasks. While the player with the easy layout, it makes no difference to them. R55Max
2.It stimulates both players, but the amount accumulated, all other things being equal (skill, speed of thinking), will turn out differently! It depends on the map, starting towns, and computers.
Let it be different; at least each player will have a time bonus. R55Max
Advantages of the SoD timer: 1. All actions on the map are limited by a single and unchanging limit. This keeps players on equal footing throughout the entire game (does not give an advantage and does not worsen the position of players relative to each other, if the generator puts one of them in a position with difficult (time-consuming) tasks, and the other in the opposite position.
Oh, sure, it doesn't worsen their position. Of course. A difficult turn comes up, they don't finish in time, and their position worsens. But before that, they might have finished all their turns in half the time. R55Max
2.The limit for tournament play is set based on how much is needed in the most difficult stages of the game, i.e., a limit within which almost all possible turns, even the most complex ones, should be feasible.
And therein lies the biggest disadvantage. If a game has a turn that requires 10 minutes, it means we play with a 10-minute limit... It would be much better to play with a 6-minute turn, but always have about 10 minutes in reserve for a difficult turn. R55Max
In WT, players often try to save it up, and in the end, it wasn't even necessary, because either the game ended, or they had so much of it that I personally observed in some games where WT players, trying to save time (accumulate it), passed the turn, forgetting to do something with their army (artifacts), etc.
Well, that's actually the goal! So that players try to finish their turn faster, instead of staring blankly at the monitor while they have a free 2-3 minutes left. R55Max
I believe that you should first and foremost play well and take as many actions as needed, and no one should have to pay for anything that is allowed by the rules.
Well, with that logic, you should play unlimited. R55Max
demons don't come from thin air. You need to kill as many creatures by HP to get demons (without the ring).
Right. Not from thin air. 10 dwarves or 20 gnolls, which can't be used for anything else except feeding, become part of the main stack that accumulates. That junk meat from secondary towns is almost useless, but extra demons will certainly not be useless, neither in a Dragon Utopia nor in a Griffin Conservatory.
And simply put:Wicc
Another option - try to imagine that Heroes was originally made with a chess timer and time in battles. What would the reaction of current players be to the proposal to make the timer like it is now in SoD? Probably a bewildered finger twirling at the temple... "boy, what's wrong with you?"
+1 Wicc
And if, for example, Heroes were taken to WCG and a requirement was set like "game duration no more than 5 hours", then all the active Heroes elite would start blitzing without any problem.
+2 Lider1
There's this Pole, Wojrad I think. Go play against him on unlimited. You'll have time to rethink many things in life.
It's precisely because of such individuals that one has to admit that time should pass in battle and for every action/inaction, the player should pay with their time.
RomarioGrom
