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

8+6+1 M
16+8+1 L
30+9+1 XL and Jebus (or 40/45+8+1)

Perhaps 30+9+1 will work for XL if you consider not the fastest players :D, I already wrote my opinion about L, and M, in my opinion, was created for blitz; most people play it with this goal in mind, so the recommended timer should be 8+4+1, and if you want to play macro on M or don't want to strain yourself, you can always agree on any other timer.

twaryna, don't clutch your face and address me formally)
I tried to simulate a battle-heavy game. Even if most battles are over within a minute, which is far from guaranteed for Inferno, Necropolis, Barbarians, Fortress, and Conflux — the rest have to be sacrificed.
Yes, I've played several dozen times with a short timer — there was 30-50 minutes left, but — only because
1) with a one-minute timer, I initially set myself up for blitz battles, often lost single stacks on quick combat (let's leave aside discussing whether that's advisable), didn't engage battles with hordes of dwarves on day 11, and
2) I play almost exclusively with easy factions that can take out pedestrian units with shooters like in Half-Life, i.e., with closed eyes.
So far, only emotions have been offered against my calculations. I exaggerated the number of battles a bit for effect; maybe no one ever fights that many? By the way, 10% of games is not "never"; it should be taken into account. Even if only in 1% of games you have to crawl out on your teeth — a one-minute timer will kill that possibility, and in difficult situations, even experienced players will have to automatically concede. Is that good?
I'm for pace, but not at the cost of monotony and lack of choice. IMO, an x+x+1.5 minute timer would suit beginners too, who also need to play and to delight the observing top players.

And for all this, they apparently don't have enough time. People, this is an online game! A semblance of e-sports. Want to spend 10 minutes thinking about which hex is better to hit a neutral from — go ahead. But pay for it with your own time, not just others'. And if you don't want to pay — play against the computer! You see, it'll be inconvenient to kill zombies with harpies. And you won't be able to break through a horde of golems with a ballista anymore. Oh, what tactical tricks we're missing out on! How the game is becoming impoverished...

I don't think an extra 30 seconds will make players exploit battle time for cunning deliberation.. especially since timing battles with a stopwatch contradicts comfortable gameplay. Answer this — do you see the 2-turn reachability of 7 enemy stacks at once, or do you count it by hexes? And if the former — did you know how from the very first battle, or did you first count by cells in the hundreds?
If we decide now to abandon complex battles, then next comes a move toward mandatory quick combat, I fear.
I'll repeat, the griffin harpies + zombies scenario is only 1% of games, and I just now specifically counted — it takes 8 minutes, and that's with favorable terrain. Think about it, what difference does a 1, 1.5, or 2 minute timer make — it'll all go down the drain anyway.

I suppose I agree more with the beast here. Time is needed?! The initial (General) time needs to be increased, but not the battle time! One minute is enough for that, and on Jebus Cross you can even play something like 30-10-0

Since the current discussion is close to a brainstorming session (I hope so), and if:

... games with an N+6+1 timer are the most spectacular, in my opinion.

then the following is proposed for discussion:
Let's temporarily fix the parameters of Turn=6 and Battle=1, and adjust the parameter N (Start) depending on the map size (not the template).

P.S. I would like to note that having separate timer parameters for each template is nonsense and complicates things, because the timer is, by its nature, a meta-template characteristic of the game.

then the following is proposed for discussion:
For now, let's fix the parameters of Turn=6 and Battle=1, and adjust the parameter N (Start) depending on the map size (not the template).

This is a good idea.

Also, I would like to note that CIS-2010 was played entirely with a timer of 4000+400 (including XL+U), which is approximately equivalent to 60+6+1 (and in reality even less), and there were no complaints about the timer. And the gameplay there was similar to that of Tears of Death (TE-light).

Yes, it looks good at first glance. Total:
M 10
L 30
XL, Jebus 60
+6+1?

P.S. 10 for M doesn't really matter anymore, it's just to make the number round for aesthetic purposes. :)
Well, as someone who has played Jebus 4000+400, I understand that I'm not the only one who will surpass this, especially considering this timer (I'm not even going to play on it), but the idea of fixing +6+1 actually looks pretty good.

Yes, it looks decent at first glance. In total:
M 8/10
L 30/40
XL 60/80
+6+1 ?

P.S. 10 for M doesn't really matter anymore, it's just to make the number round for aesthetic reasons.

No offense, but you're the slowest "walker" I've ever seen.

As always, I had a good laugh. Is 60+6+1 not enough? Haha. Should I think with my… well, if you can only think with that for such a time limit, then even 120+20+5 won’t help.

Just my opinion, of course.

I'd also like to note that SNG-2010 was played entirely with a 4000+400 timer (including XL+U), which is roughly equivalent to 60+6+1 (and in reality, even less), and there were no complaints about the timer. And the gameplay there was similar to Shades of Darkness (TE-light).

During the Double Elimination Chamber tournament (with mages), I received a lot of complaints from top players about the 4000+400 timer, saying that I was some kind of weirdo and didn't understand anything.

Chingiz is such a Chingiz :fp:

What the discussion lacks is well-reasoned opinions from top-tier players. For me, the first truly relevant point was made by Maretti, specifically regarding the battle timer, because Maretti genuinely knows how to micro-manage at a top level and does so quickly. This person has the right to voice their opinion and expect that their opinion will be heard by everyone. Because they have the skill. And for some reason, this voice wasn't heard. The second candidate among the speakers who could be considered a top-tier player is Tvaryna. He insists on a battle timer of 1, but at the same time, you can often hear his own emotional outbursts on his stream about "medusa dens, which he constantly has problems with," or "archers who don't like him," or even just losing. So, yes, the idea of setting a fixed minimum battle timer of 1 and increasing the first two numbers is, in principle, a good one, but it comes from a player who himself micro-manages with errors that his "dad chat" makes fun of. Perhaps the problem isn't the timer. Perhaps Tvaryna is closest to the truth. I'm not saying the opposite. I'm just pointing out that we're paying less attention to those who micro-manage truly well. Vik has a tendency to want to lower the timer. He doesn't play much himself; he just believes that it would be more entertaining. He also doesn't base his opinion on the views of top-tier players. The example of Stinger and Forrest's gameplay was presented from the perspective of a viewer, not from the perspective of the players. Where is the simple statement from Stinger (who has already proven his skill in map maneuvering) or from Forrest (in the Wargame community, I'm not mistaken in saying that he is also a top-tier player) in the style of: "This timer is great, I felt comfortable playing with it"? And once again, I'll say that Kostya and Dirty made a good attempt (in the context in which he joined the discussion), and again – because the person speaks not only based on his personal experience but also relies on the tournament experience of other players, including top-tier players, which he witnessed. Without relying on the experience of top-tier players, we can write as many pages as we want. The more people chime in, the more we'll write. Before you write, at least read what those who definitely play better than you have written (if you doubt someone – okay, don't take them into account, but at least listen to those who definitely play better than you) and think about why they are writing it.

For now, let's fix the parameters: Turn = 6 and Battle = 1, and adjust the parameter N (Start) depending on the map size (not the template).

It will be bad. Compare the tempo of CM and Diamond or Jeb-L.

P.S. I'll immediately note that having separate timer parameters for each template is nonsense and complicates things, because the timer is, by its nature, a meta-characteristic of the game.

Yes, yes, and yes. But it will be bad.

with a timer of 60.6.1, few people will play Jebus.

http://heroeswt.net/forum//topic/744/

10+6+0

The numerous flaws only added color to the gameplay.

How can one not remember that a true Buddha accepts everything and turns it to his advantage.

It will be bad. Compare the tempo of SM and Diamond or Jebus-L

Actually, I'm not sure, you just have to try it, like 60+6+1 for Jebus... And try it primarily the way you and I, the middle-tier players — not the top players, but not complete noobs either — would. That's the majority (that's how it is now, that's how it will always be). To be more specific — test certain timers on the next "Novice" tournament, for example...

Another aspect — the timer must be "resistant to skill variation":

a) It must be such that it doesn't scare off newcomers with excessively high initial timer requirements. Therefore, the 8+4+1 timer for M cannot be universal; let it remain a purely blitz timer. Besides, the player should have time to "space out" at the start of the game, during the scatter, while making the initial plan, and to decide whether to play or not. This "initial spacing-out time" is a constant value and practically does not depend on the map size. Therefore, for M I would propose 12, i.e., 12+6+1.

b) It must be such that the top players can display their top-tier skill and salvage a bad draw — including through time management. Stall the opponent, if you will). This is likely where the upper limit of the Start parameter lies — what it is, I don't know for sure...