Posts from [МАТЧ] AlexTheGreat vs Gomunguls

Besides Vika, there are also Horn, the most honest Bayazet, a gloomy romantic, Dubrovin Pasha, and a whole bunch of other people living in St. Petersburg. But I don't know who lives in Volzhsky besides VLK. So, either a stream with a delay is needed, or passwords should be set for the broadcast.
You can set up a couple of computers facing each other not only in a club but also in any other convenient place, for example, in Minsk-2014.

I was talking about those who are well-known and fully trusted. I don't want to say anything bad about the people you mentioned, but they are not suitable as guarantors for most people.
And, it seems, Vitaly wasn't planning to go to Minsk. And it will hardly be possible to play a full series of games with broadcasts there.

Minsk would be the most optimal option. Everyone plays in the tournament, and at the same time, a show match is played with a live broadcast on a large monitor. I think this option would be perfect for us.

Can you tell me the amount Alex is willing to play for?

I think this is a matter of negotiation.

Can't Alex name the minimum amount? It would be useful to know it.

We need commentators for the streams.

I'm in ;)

How to organize protection against cheating?

Here's an idea:

If the streams are through TeamViewer, the players only give the number to the streamers. If it's through Twitch, 2 new channels are created, the names of which are not disclosed anywhere, only the streamers know about them. The streamers also create a new channel on Twitch, the name of which no one knows. They stream the game and save the VOD. After the game, the VOD is published. In this case, you only have to trust the streamers, but no seconds are needed.

topic - pre-New Year's Eve humor :smile13:

after reading the thread - I still don't understand what match they're talking about (and why the "audience" suffered; there wasn't even a dialogue:smile50:)

P.S. play with TAGs, not ATG, that way you'll have more EV :D :D :D

I'm a little surprised by the public's reaction. This isn't a joke or idol worship, and it's not even an attempt to scam anyone. Quite the opposite, actually. Right now, Heroes is at roughly the same level as chess was in the mid-19th century: there were many tournaments, many good players, but there wasn't a clear hierarchy among them. The strength of the players was assessed by the chess Community more or less subjectively – based on tournament results, the quality of their play, and chess articles. The similarity between chess and Heroes is that it's difficult to assess a player's strength remotely. In tournaments, not all the strongest players participate, and even if they do, they either compete in a round-robin format or play against each other in just 1-2 games (in a knockout tournament), which aren't always indicative of their true strength. All of this led to a lot of boasting and attempts to build up one's reputation not so much through tournament results, but through words, articles, and interviews (sounds familiar, right?). Therefore, by the 1960s, the idea emerged to determine a champion through a match between the strongest players – playing a long series of 1-on-1 games to minimize the element of chance. This tradition proved to be so successful that it has been maintained for the past 150 years with only minor interruptions. Currently, in Heroes, Alex is unofficially considered the best player – based on his overall results, the quality of his play, and other factors. In my opinion, this is quite justified. And that's why matches like this are needed – to prevent idol worship and to give players who feel they have the strength to challenge the current champion a chance to take the title in a direct confrontation. Now, regarding the money: it's logical that the current champion doesn't have any sporting ambitions for the match, as he has already proven everything to everyone. Therefore, the only motivation for him to play could be financial, and for this, the opponent must provide a prize fund for the tournament – either himself or through sponsors. This was the position held by all world chess champions until the creation of FIDE. If you want the champion to risk his title, you have to risk money. Since Gomunguls doesn't have the financial means to provide a suitable prize fund for the champion, I suggest either sponsoring the match or backing a challenger. If this idea works out, we can hold similar matches regularly in the future – this will benefit both the Heroes Community and the players' skills.

Good topic.

The topic of seconds needs to be developed. If a substantial amount is collected, doping control should be introduced, in case someone gains an advantage in the timer by using stimulants or is ready to play for 12 hours straight on caffeine without losing any concentration. Naturally, during all this, the match turns into a huge argument, during which the seconds resort to personal attacks, and a 3-round fight is organized in Minsk. And then the players help the seconds in their preparation – Alex makes Cobra run around the stadium, and Gomunguls treats Vlk for his hangover, at the very least.

If the streams are through TeamViewer, then the players only give the number to the streamers. If it's through Twitch, then 2 new channels are created, the names of which are not disclosed anywhere; only the streamers know them. The streamers also create a new channel on Twitch, the name of which no one knows. They stream the game and save the VOD. After the game, the VOD is published. In this scenario, you have to trust only the streamers, but no seconds are needed.

For a small percentage, the streamer leaks the necessary information to the player and also makes a very good bet/wager through a third party on a totalizer, which is naturally organized for this match of the century.

Good topic.

In my opinion, there's nothing worthwhile in it. The only option is Minsk 2014; otherwise, there will be too much hassle with everything. And then, someone will always have complaints, leading to a lot of arguments before and after the match.

To all those mentioning Minsk, I would like to remind you that:

1) Gomunculus will not be going to Minsk.

2) Alex will have plenty to do there besides the match. For example, he can play in the CIS Championship.

I don't think anyone would question Vitale regarding rule violations, as his games are almost 100% covered by streams. Unfortunately, I haven't seen Alex's games on streams ;( maybe it's because he doesn't play very often anymore... I didn't quite understand the point of this topic, what does Alex think about the game?! As for the streams, just choose impartial referees, honest people who will watch the game without spoiling anything and ensure that the rules are followed during each player's stream, regardless of who they support.

The analogy to chess is undoubtedly correct. In general, a series of games featuring the strongest players, driven by motivation and a competitive spirit, is incredibly interesting in any sport. But! Not when players have to be forced to participate.
I imagine a situation where two players are selected from the CIS and China (for example), the strongest at the moment (chosen based on certain criteria), actively playing, interested, and eager to win, wanting to show that they are the best of the best. That would truly be a spectacle and a thrilling competition. Money is needed here simply as a kind of incentive for the players to approach the matches with maximum focus. Nothing more. The most important thing is the desire to play, the desire to prove oneself.
In the Alex vs. Goomunguls match, this is definitely not the case. The question is specifically framed as "if there's money, there will be a game." In other words, "let's gather contributions, maybe I'll come and play, maybe not (I'm so fickle)."
This is nonsense. And besides, the match was prompted by some old grievances... Therefore, the atmosphere will not be entirely sporting. Hence, the question arises about the guarantee of fair play. Alex's reputation didn't come out of nowhere. Victory is the most important thing for him! ;)

I wouldn't entirely agree. I've heard that Alex always plays to win and is very focused, of course, it's a shame that he doesn't have a purely competitive interest, but when you've won as much as he has, you'll understand. But I also want to point out that, as I understand it, he doesn't charge for the games, but rather puts his own money on the line.
Personally, I would enjoy watching such a match, even without observers or referees, but if there are any, that would be even better.

Money in Heroes only increases the level of distrust between players and provides an extra incentive to rage quit after another disconnection.

Actually, the question here is specifically framed in terms of "if there's money, there will be a game." The idea is, let's collect contributions from everyone, and maybe I'll join you, just maybe. Or maybe not (I'm so fickle). That's nonsense.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I think Gomunguls win this battle! GL&HF

But! Not when players have to be forced to play.

And who is being forced to play here? Homunculus agrees to play under the specified conditions. Alex also agrees to play under the specified conditions, with the exception of the prize pool.

The question here is specifically framed as "there will be money, there will be a game."

Well, yes. Is that abnormal?

The person has won everything possible online, has long been playing only live and only for money, so why would he play for free just because someone issued a challenge?

In his place, I would do the same. And you would do the same. And Defiant would do the same. This is not showing off or selfishness, but simply common sense.

Moreover, Alex is not demanding any special conditions or bonuses for himself; he agrees to play under equal conditions with his opponent. In chess, champions have long had contractual advantages over contenders – travel allowances for the match, retaining the title in case of a draw, and other minor things. The first match for the world chess championship, where the opponents were on equal terms, took place only in 2006.

The analogy with chess is undoubtedly correct. In general, a series of games between the strongest players with motivation and stakes is very interesting in any sport.

That's the whole point. The rest are technical difficulties, in my opinion, that can be overcome.