Posts from DISCUSSIONS on “Rules for online games in HoMM3 and formulas for calculating player rating.” Auto-translated

I also think that the number of restarts needs to be reduced. Either leave one restart until week 113, or two restarts at week 111, or one restart until week 112. And it is essential to remove restarts based on meeting during the first week.

Let me bring some clarity to what, exactly, we are doing here.

What I am trying to discuss here now is the third edition of the Online Game Rules.

What are these rules? These are the BASIC rules for all games held in our tournaments section.

Why are they needed? They are needed so that tournament organizers don't have to suffer every time and rewrite the rules from scratch in the tournament regulations, but can simply provide a link to these very basic rules and specify ONLY THE DIFFERENCES from them that will apply in their favorite tournament.
We have up to a dozen tournaments running continuously; naturally, it is desirable that the rules in all of them are as correlated as possible.
The main tournament for everyone-everyone-everyone is the seasonal one, which runs constantly. The vast majority of players start with it, so it should be clear that our players are familiar with the seasonal rules to one degree or another. When you start playing in tournaments, it's more convenient to play by the same rules you've grown accustomed to.
Therefore, it has traditionally become the norm that the basic rules are tested in the seasonal tournament.

Now for the specifics.

Restarts. An eternal topic. A new generation of players arrives and it all starts over from zero.
The existing restart system must be viewed as a whole. It is impossible to pluck one single element out; any change will entail others.
Restarts were discussed for several years, and several votes were held. We arrived at a fairly well-thought-out and balanced restart system.
We will not discuss-vote-ban-unban-add-subtract EVERY SEASON.
Each organizer independently decides how the system will work in their tournament and what needs to be added/removed. In particular, in the seasonal tournament, we have a total of 2 days of subjective restarts; I specifically held a vote on this issue.
Therefore, I kindly ask you not to waste your ammunition; at the moment, I will not be changing the restart system in the basic rules. Organizers are not fools; they will decide for themselves what to take.

Redrush. In the basic rules, it is forbidden everywhere. Why?
Most of our tournaments are held with a draw of templates. You choose a template immediately before the game. And you must start playing right away. Therefore, it is highly desirable that the rules be as universal as possible for all templates. On HW, redrush was traditionally forbidden, so the BASIC tournament rules specify a ban for all templates. Over the last few years, there have been a couple of suggestions to abolish this rule, but they found no positive response in the hearts of our players.
In the tournaments I run, templates are usually drawn and redrush is forbidden; I don't want to confuse the players, especially since many beginners play there. However, for example, in Vika's tournament on the Diamond template, it is clearly stated—general HW rules apply with differences: redrush is allowed, time limit, shifted guards, etc.
For the most part, it makes almost no difference whether redrush is allowed or forbidden, and this applies to any (not just hl) templates. The ban or lack of a ban on redrush leaves a mark on the game strategy. Consequently, before the game, you need to consider the risks of a ban/allowance and how to behave so that you aren't rushed, or to successfully attack yourself. In either case, if you think it through properly, you can act in a way that extracts the maximum benefit for yourself.

Crossing through passages. This question was discussed very, very, very thoroughly 2.5 years ago. The current version has worked without problems. It seems someone recently started a wrong interpretation somewhere.

At the very least, I'm not the only one who thought that this refers to a passage on the template scheme, whatever its structure may be.

What is meant by a template scheme? A little picture with circles and lines? The author usually draws these pictures without worrying about the number of passages in the template's text file. And the generator doesn't care at all what is drawn on the scheme.
Our Rules are rules for online games.
We play on generated maps, not on theoretical schemes.
For example, on the schemes of cm's or Jebus in the Useful Info section, all zones are connected by lines symbolizing a single passage. However, the rules mention passages—in the plural—and in games, passages—in the plural—are often generated. It should be clear that if we are talking about the plural, we mean not an abstract scheme-picture, but your specific deal.

It's unclear why I cannot run into a zone whose passage I have broken, even if it's in a different place.

I suggest thinking about this question yourself. There are quite a few reasons; 4 came to mind immediately. Like homework, basically))))

In any case, regarding any issue, at the slightest doubt, contact the judges—preferably not on the forum, but via ICQ/PM, because it often happens that judges don't notice a question on the forum immediately, and other players start answering right away, and not always competently. You might correct it later, but the player has already received the wrong answer and settled on it... And misinformation starts to spread...

D
We play on generated maps, not on theoretical schemes.
For example, in the schemes of CMs or Jebus in the Useful Info section, all zones are connected by lines, symbolizing a single passage. However, the rules state about passages - in the plural, and in the games, passages are often generated - in the plural. It seems that it should be clear that if we are talking about the plural, it means not an abstract scheme-picture, but your specific map.

Okay... Correct me if I'm wrong. So, if 3 passages from the starting zone to the treasury were generated on the same Jebus map, then by breaking through the guard on one of them, I cannot bypass the shifted guard on another?

@misplaced guards: Its not allways as simple as it sounds. Sometimes there is only 1 or 2 hex between each passage. All it takes to call it a diffrent passage is an obstacle of of hex. I saw a top player on twitch the other day run past misplaced guards 3 hex from where he beat some other guard.

check the scenario info, the author of the template himself wrote "NO DD FLY!" in a panic. What surprises you?

Well, let the ban remain in place. To be honest, I've never received DD/Fly on Panic mode. My complaint is about the balance.

2Chingis: It’s better not to write anything at all than to write SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IMHO.

as an idea - 1 restart within three days

Almost the same as 113 in total - that's bad! For 111, you can quite reasonably assess the situation based on the principle - if good heroes are drawn, then everything else will fall into place. This is true in a sufficient number of cases for practical use. 111 for the seasonal game will also eliminate the shameful practice of peeking at your neighbor - aha, a good hero appeared, more scouts - the doctor said to restart, restart.

Doesn't the word "specific" sufficiently inform that the rule applies to a specific - one passage, and not to all possible passages between adjacent territories.

It turns out that this is the case - that's why this question is constantly raised. Specific - can mean (specific multiple) or (specific between 2 zones). A couple of clarifying words would be enough.

Okay... Correct me if I'm wrong. So, if 3 paths are generated from the starting zone to the treasury on the same Jebus map, and I break through the guard on one of them, does that mean I can't bypass the shifted guard on another?

I'm repeating this again. That's exactly it. You understood correctly. You can't bypass it.

We have a rule that requires breaking through the shifted guard of each path you take. And by "path," we mean the paths on the map we're playing on, not what's shown in the diagram of the template. This applies not only to Jebus. You shouldn't do this on CM maps either. The generator doesn't place guards randomly. Breaking through the guard is the price you pay for the bonus it protects. In general, the guards should always be positioned so that they cannot be bypassed. But sometimes the generator doesn't manage to do this. That's why there are rules about shifted guards to correct such cases.
This applies to all templates except those with camps. In those, you can usually (sometimes with exceptions) walk past the shifted guards of the paths. This is explained by the fact that you can't stop a camp; it runs everywhere it can get through. Therefore, we can do the same.

We discussed this exact question about Jebus some time ago. I can't quickly find the link right now; I don't remember which thread it was in. Kostya, do you remember, by any chance? It was a big and well-reasoned discussion. Many arguments were presented. It would take too long to retell. Search for it yourself. We came to a clear conclusion then: no, you can't go to the center on Jebus through a specific path, bypassing the shifted guard, without breaking through any guards on that path, even if you've broken through a guard on another path.
I'll try to find something over the weekend; I don't have time for it during the week.

In general, I want to add screenshots and illustrations to the end of the rules for various points, so that players can easily navigate them.

Specific - can mean (specific, multiple) or (specific, between 2 zones). A couple of clarifying words would be enough.

Yes, I already realized that I need to add a couple of clarifying words.

According to the rules, a technical forfeit is the outcome, but why have such rules when even in Pit for LM, a player wouldn't respond. In reality, it's impossible to outline every possible scenario in the rules. Therefore, I would suggest that players use common sense where possible and try not to violate the rules intentionally. If you encounter a misunderstanding or inflexibility from your opponent, contact the Arbitration Committee (AK). They are reasonable people and won't issue technical forfeits without justification; they will assess the severity of the violation.

It turns out that there's a reason this question keeps coming up. "Defined" can mean (a defined multiple) or (defined between two zones). A couple of clarifying words would be enough.

The question arises only due to a misunderstanding of the semantics of the word defined :) even in its general sense. In this case, the adjective only strengthens the meaning of the word "passage," making it more specific. It's just that there's an attempt to incorrectly broaden (or misunderstand?) the word passage and to attribute the main semantic load of the phrase to the adjective. It would be easier to simply remove the word "defined" from the definition and give a definition of "passage" (a free area of space - from here to there, and no more!) separately for those who are interested.
A "red rush" rule, of course, wouldn't hurt, but only on those maps where it actually has an effect (see, balance, ..., and generally at the discretion of the organizers). This could be relevant on all small maps and apply only to the main city of the blue faction. But how does red know where the opponent's main city is? (ask the opponent?) If we relate the red rush to the starting city, there are cases where it is far from being the main city. And the main city could even be one's own lost city in some cases. And the maximum impact of the red rush can be in the second or third week (although there can also be later cases when opponents have destroyed each other's armies). In the end, yes, the rule is established to build some kind of strategy. And it can be different in different tournaments. We simply choose what suits us best.

rebellious, there is a logical passage that can physically be multiple, a logical multiple passage (each part of which, if not a teleport/portal, can be physically multiple – although I haven't checked). And this is not to mention the possibility of several parallel guards and the subjective desire to interpret the rules in one's favor (a quite real and understandable phenomenon). Even the newest players, and they also need to be considered, have only recently learned about templates and passages.

How can red know where the opponent's main city is?

Perhaps, we should leave it to the players' discretion to define "where the increase can affect the result"? I am sure that in 99.9% of cases, there will be no disagreements.
[off]Although, for the Arbitration Committee, only those 0.1% are important, for which they are contacted, and it is better for them to do it poorly, but reliably.[/off]

rebellious, there is a logical passage, which physically can be multiple, a logical multiple passage (each part of which (if not tp/pw) can be physically multiple (though I haven't checked)) - and that's not even mentioning the possibility of several parallel guards and the subjective desire to interpret the rules in one's favor (a very real and understandable phenomenon). The newest players, who also need to be taken into account, have only recently learned about templates and passages...

Why complicate everything. Your point was clear to me immediately. We are playing on a specific map (not in minds and schematics), where a passage is free space between two obstacles (without any logical musings about template passage patterns). If there is a passage on the map to an adjacent respawn, then there must be a guard somewhere. There will be no problem with that. It is much more difficult to assess the situation (for a newbie as well) with bugged passages (by the way, there is not a word about them in the rules), especially when the adjacent territory has a similar relief (terrain type). Or on the same Balance, situations with bugged passages are very common, as well as the inability to determine where the connections between guarded and unguarded territories lie (and a step left or right can already be considered a violation).

Why complicate things?

You were the first to start using words whose meaning I don't even know.
Furthermore, you only want to work with physical passage, which is permissible on all templates except Jebus. But even for this, you will have to define what a physical passage is - and what a logical one is.

If something can be misunderstood, it will be misunderstood.

A few questions.
2. If both opponents want to start claiming towns FIRST, how do you determine who claims them first?

For such a case, there is a coin flip in WT.

1. I couldn't find anywhere in the rules that opponents are OBLIGED to give each other passwords after the game.
I gave my password, but in return, I received nothing but insults.
How can I make my opponent give me the password to the save files after the game?

Of course, this isn't written anywhere, so you don't have to, as I see it. You can always say that you forgot and deleted the file with the password.

2. If both opponents want to start claiming towns FIRST, how do you determine who claims first?

If the colors are indicated in the draw, then the blue player starts claiming. If the colors are not indicated, then the order of claiming is determined by the draw.

3. Regarding auto-wins. What's the difference between a misclick and another click? In any case, it's a mistake. Why is it considered good sportsmanship to give an auto-win for a mistake?
A mistake is an element of ONLINE play. If you give an auto-win for a mistake, then it's no longer online, but offline :).

Isn't it hard to understand? A misclick is not a gameplay factor, but a random, technical one; it can happen to anyone. For example, I had a situation where the heroes in battle got stuck for a moment, and the grand units rushed to the middle of the field, or a hero from the chain rushed in the other direction due to a misclick. I always give an auto-win in such a situation because it can happen to me too, and I believe that I would also be given an auto-win.

But in chess, if you touch a piece, you have to move it - is that bad sportsmanship?

If the game is played in person, then of course, you touch it, you move it, because there is an opportunity to think about the move. In this case, touching a piece will be a gameplay mistake, not a technical one. But on the internet, misclicks often happen when the mouse slips, and the opponent puts the queen under attack. In such a misclick, I also allow the opponent to make a move.