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 DISCUSSIONS on “Rules for online games in HoMM3 and formulas for calculating player rating.”Auto-translated
It seems to me that with a 6+1 timer on the same XL+U, we will lose quality gameplay in the late game, since in any case this timer will run out quickly as soon as DD/TP appears, and 6 minutes per turn is personally too little for me. For other templates, including Jebus Cross, this is normal.
Added after 23 minutes Oldboy
Before you write, at least familiarize yourselves with what those who definitely play better than you have written before you (if you doubt someone, okay, don't consider them, but at least listen to those who definitely play better than you), think about why they write it.
Maretti usually has an hour of time left on his timer, at any stage of the game, I've seen it many times on stream. He uses a chess timer because it encourages his opponents to move faster, especially in battles. Also, I suspect he hasn't played much with the timers suggested above, and since he has been playing SoD for 10 years, it's clear he's just used to unlimited time in battles.
I am 100% sure that neither the top players nor the regular players have a unified opinion. The only thing that will help achieve it is discussion, tests, and after that — a vote, and then — introduction into the rules.
For other templates, including Jebus Cross, this is normal.
It depends. On Jebus Cross, playing with 8+ heroes from the first days is realistic, and if you don't limit yourself to easy fights — you'll go bankrupt. Am I the only one who actually checks battle times (there hasn't been a single objective statement on this matter)? Here's a very average fight with a stack of dwarves -- http://zoog2.narod.ru/misc/996.GM1. It took 02:15 - _without morale_, with minimal positioning (not entirely successful due to rushing - which would have led to extra losses if not for Tazar). And this would be considered a difficult fight that needs to be paid for with a timer??
Added after 8 minutes By the way, on Jebus Cross, you can easily avoid fighting on the first day, bypassing crypts, just collecting gold — which will lead to reduced opportunities: under-leveled scouts and main hero, uncollected resources — still not ideal, imo. And the mini-timer will push you toward such a strategy.
Depends. On Jebus, a game with 8+ heroes starting from day one is realistic, and if you don't limit yourself to trivial fights – you'll go bankrupt. Am I the only one who actually checks fight times (there hasn't been a single objective statement on this matter)? Here's a very average fight against a stack of dwarves -- http://zoog2.narod.ru/misc/996.GM1. It took 02:15 - _without moral_, with minimal splitting (not fully successful due to rushing - which would have led to extra losses if not for Tazar). And this is supposed to be considered a difficult fight that you need to pay for with the timer??
On Jebus, you'll be given 60 minutes; with an average game lasting 2 weeks, that's an extra 4-5 (60/14) minutes per turn, so 60+6+1 equivalent to 10+1, i.e., essentially the classic Jebus timer. And yes, a fight against dwarves, zombies, and other nonsense with almost no army – those are difficult fights. Instead of dwarves, for example, there could have been Marksmen – would you have fought then?
60+6+1 is equivalent to 10+1, i.e., consider it a classic Jebus Cross timer
absolutely not, let's not forget about the fights. With 114, 10 minutes will be spent on the map, and only due to the ten to fifteen minutes saved in the first few days can we barely make ends meet.
And yes, fighting dwarves, zombies, and other nonsense with almost no army — those are difficult fights
Seriously?)) And the men thought it was experience. The army is more than serious for week 1, day 1, as evidenced by the 4 stacks of neutrals. With a split, you could have taken out even twice as many — but no, the timer, you see. And what does the tray of Grand Archers have to do with it? That's no longer a week 1, day 1 fight; you might as well have mentioned Snipers..
Absolutely not, let's not forget about the battles. From level 114, it will take 10 minutes to complete a map, and only by saving ten to fifteen minutes in the early days can you somehow manage.
Seriously?)) And the guys thought this was an expansion. The army is more than serious for level 11, as evidenced by the 4 stacks of neutral creatures. With a split, it could have easily defeated twice as many – but no, there's a timer. And what does the archer guild have to do with it? That's not a battle from the beginning of level 11; you might as well mention snipers.
I compared it to Marksmen because the generator considers them to be roughly the same units. So, if you don't want to spend a minute of the timer on experience + what comes after it, then attack when the army is stronger, just as you would with Marksmen. And in general, what's with the habit of confidently writing things when you haven't even tried it yourself? Play the game first, and then express your opinion, armchair analyst.
So, 35 dwarves is equal to 8 snipers, right? With horses, it won't be much faster, if at all. And what exactly are you accusing me of? What did I do to offend the master?
Inspired by the matches between Tvaryna-Yurist, Ya-Mishutka, Psih-Togansh.... The proposal is simple: a "clean draw" is not an option when the opponent is significantly stronger. Therefore, the proposal is straightforward.
If the loser of the last Front Battle (FB) does not participate in the next FB within a week, the match will be decided by the organizers.
In theory, you can run around indefinitely, but in my opinion, it's absurd to run with 1 Angel against 30 Greys...
The game has a win condition: capture all enemy castles and kill all enemy heroes. If you can't do that, you don't win; what awards could there possibly be? In chess, for example, you can lose a position but win on time or force your opponent to make a mistake under time pressure. As long as you haven't surrendered, you haven't lost.
The game has a win condition: capture all enemy castles and kill all heroes. If you can't do that, you don't win; what kind of awards are we talking about? In chess, for example, you can lose a position but win on time or force your opponent to make a mistake in a time crunch. As long as you haven't surrendered, you haven't lost.
My game with Mishutka was just for fun... I have 1 angel but 4k mana, full control, and my opponent has an evil army but no control or logistics. Everything was destroyed. I offered a draw under the same rules, to which the opponent replied quite logically:
]v[uLLIyTа (20:14:39 25/11/2013) I would have stayed in the castle and tried to catch up on the next turn. And we would have been running around like that until I caught you somewhere. But what you were doing was just nonsense... sorry, I didn't sign up for this kind of crap.
and he's essentially right, except that even if he had cornered me, he wouldn't have been able to catch me. Tvaryna-Yurist has long become a meme...
Isn't it absurd to demand victory in a situation where you can't achieve it?
So, you think that having one angel with control, against an opponent without one, but with 40 archers, it's fair to demand a draw? Well, I don't know, maybe I'm just not understanding something in this life...
So, you think that having one angel with control, against an opponent without one, but with 40 archers, justifies demanding a draw? Well, I don't know, maybe I'm just not understanding something in this life...
Accumulating troops is just one aspect of the game; why should it be considered the most important? If you can't find control or level up a hero with a logistics skill, that's your problem. In chess, you can have fewer pieces but create a perpetual check. And no one would think to demand a victory just because they have more pieces on the board.
Aiwe
