"only XL-2" — Tournament History online

No ratings yet — be the first to rate!

Single choice Public votes Closed 2015-02-14

This poll is closed.

Standard script

52.9% 55 votes

Random

47.1% 49 votes

Tournament Ended

Overview Participants Reports

First
Previous
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Next
Last

Announcement

Scorpiona

1/24/2015 6:17 PM UTC

Auto-translated

"only XL-2"

Greetings to all fans of "XL" templates! This tournament is just for you:smile20:

I. Rules and Templates.

1. The rules are standard. The tournament will be held using the SoD 3.2 (4.0) + HD-mod version of the game.
2. XL templates: 8mm6a, 8хм12а, 6LM10a, 8xm8a, Spider.
3. Template selection is standard; Red starts first, with Blue making the final choice.
4. Castle selection is done by poll in a standard manner; Blue starts first. After restart, the color does not change (by mutual agreement, Random can be chosen, with resource selection and color swap).
5. Total number of restarts (113), i.e., 111+111+111, 111+112, 113
6. Time limit per turn with chess timer - 21:00+08:00+01:15
7. Roads are medium and fast
8. The time for one game is 2 weeks

II. Regulations

Stage 1 – Group Stage

16 groups of 6 players each. Two players from each group advance to the next stage, based on the highest score.
In case of equal scores, places are determined according to additional criteria (in order of priority):
1. Berger coefficient.
2. Head-to-head result.
3. Points scored in a game "weigh" more than technical defeats.
4. If it is impossible to determine who advances to the playoffs based on previous criteria, players will be offered a scheme for tiebreaker games. At this time, it is impossible to foresee all possible combinations of results. Therefore, the final scheme will be developed based on the situation that arises in the groups at the end of the stage.

Round 1: February 14 - February 27
Round 2: February 28 - March 13
Deadline for 2 games: March 15
Round 3: March 14 - March 27
Round 4: March 28 - April 10
Deadline for 4 games: April 12
Round 5: April 11 - April 24
Deadline for 5 games: April 26
RESERVE, voting for the playoff bracket: April 25 - April 28
Playoff draw: April 27 - April 28
Vacation: April 29 - May 8, CIS-2015

Attention!!! Failure to play the required number of games (report the played games) by the deadline results in disqualification, except for vacation or valid reasons, provided that you inform the organizers about the reason in advance.

In the group stage, each player can take a two-week break; notify the tournament organizers in advance (before the start of the round), with the obligation to play the games before the next deadline.

Victory – 3 points; defeat – 0; draw – 1 point (counted at Stage 211+ at the discretion of the organizers)

Players who have already advanced to the playoffs should send me two answers to the question in ICQ:
1. Template selection
a) Template selection is done in a standard manner.
b) Random template selection (specify preferences: coin toss once for template selection or every time after restart).
1. Castle Selection
a) Castle selection is done in a standard manner.
b) Castles are selected randomly, with color change after restart.
P.S. Please do not just write "1a 2b," but provide a complete answer. All voting results will be posted on the forum..

Stage 2 – Olympic Tournament

32 players, random distribution, 1st place and 2nd from the groups.
Changes to the rules based on the voting results:Random castle selection, with bonus selection and color swap.

Round 1 1/16 May 9 - May 22
Round 2 1/8 May 23 - June 5
Round 3 1/4 June 6 - June 19
Round 4 1/2 June 20 - July 3
Round 5 FINAL up to 2 wins July 4 - July 31; August 14

III. Organizational Issues

1. The tournament starts on February 13, 2015 (processing of the poll for castle selection, determination of the final regulations of the tournament, draw of groups)
2. The tournament is official
3. The tournament is held according to Rules for organizing, conducting, and participating in online HOMM3 tournaments
4. Tournament host, organizational issues – Scorpiona (ICQ 469326983), Nitro (ICQ 627769385) – organizational issues.
5. Tournament judge – Dirty_Player (ICQ 408722873)
6. Organizers reserve the right to refuse participation in the tournament to a user without publicly explaining the reasons.
7. The winner of the tournament will receive a medal under their avatar.
The winner of the previous tournament "only XL" AlexTheGreat[/B]

In reply to Lider1

rebellious

1/26/2015 8:22 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Since there's a split in opinions regarding the choice of starting towns – fixed or random – the most optimal solution would be to implement both schemes for selecting castles. With the option to choose the scheme after each restart. This way, the interests of the "losing" side will be taken into account, rather than being completely disregarded ("the winner" of the vote shouldn't get everything). And it would also make the game more diverse.

Summer 2013

In reply to rebellious

Scorpiona

1/27/2015 8:02 AM UTC

Auto-translated

rebellious

Since there is a split in opinions regarding the choice of Castles – either a fixed order or random – the most optimal solution would be to implement both Castle selection schemes. With the option to choose the scheme after each restart. This way, the interests of the "losing" side will be taken into account, and they won't be completely disregarded ("the winner" in the vote shouldn't get everything). And it will also be more diverse.

Yes, I agree.

Most likely, it will be like this:
red chooses the template (the player marked in blue in the table starts eliminating templates, the last choice is for red)
blue chooses the method for selecting the starting Castle: random (the color changes upon restart, the first generation is based on the color in the table) or standard fixed order (the player marked in blue in the table starts eliminating templates first, chooses a Castle from the three remaining, then the second player chooses a Castle from the two remaining and announces the color they want to play as).

With this arrangement, there shouldn't be any "disadvantaged" players:rolleyes:

469326983

In reply to rebellious

Roger-ua

1/27/2015 8:16 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Please register me for the tournament.

Весна 2013.

In reply to Scorpiona

Aiwe

1/27/2015 11:58 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Scorpiona

Yes, I agree.

Most likely, it will be like this:
red chooses the template (the player marked in blue in the table starts crossing out the template, the last choice is for red)
blue chooses the method for selecting the starting castle: random (the color changes upon restart, the first generation is based on the color in the table) or standard cross (the player marked in blue in the table starts crossing out first, chooses a castle from the three remaining, then the second player chooses a castle from the two remaining and announces the color they want to play with).

With this arrangement, no one should feel "disadvantaged":rolleyes:

With this arrangement, it is not beneficial for blue to choose random.

As an alternative, blue can choose either cross or random+color (without changing).

http://heroes3.tv/aiwe

In reply to Aiwe

Medium_HP

1/27/2015 4:33 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Aiwe

In this scenario, it's not beneficial for Blue to choose random.

As an alternative, Blue can choose either a fixed faction or random + color (without changing).

This gives Blue an uncompensated advantage, meaning they choose the faction, and Red gets nothing.

I propose the following:
1. First, Red decides if they want to play random. If so, Blue chooses the template, and the color changes during restarts.
2. If Red doesn't want to play random, Blue decides – now either they choose random (then Red chooses the template), or the standard option with fixed factions and races is played.

Thus, a player who doesn't want to but is forced to play with random factions receives compensation in the form of the right to choose the template.

I also suggest specifying in the rules whether it's possible to choose a bonus when playing random. There's not much difference; I've encountered both options. The specification is simply needed to reduce the amount of negotiation before the game.

P.S. I thought about it a bit :D. It turns out to be almost random by default, meaning fixed factions are only played with the agreement of both players. This isn't very good; perhaps we should think about it some more.

P.P.S. I think I've got it. Just remove the second point; then, if Red doesn't choose random, Blue (based on the rule that players can change conditions by agreement) can offer Red the right to choose the template in exchange for playing random.

Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс

In reply to Medium_HP

KobRa_RR

1/27/2015 4:52 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Another option: if before the game, there are players who prefer random choices or selecting factions, then everything is clear, and nothing needs to be invented. They play for the faction they voted for. But if there are different preferences, you can flip a coin to decide between a predetermined faction or a random one.

In reply to KobRa_RR

Medium_HP

1/27/2015 4:59 PM UTC

Auto-translated

KobRa_RR

Here's another option: if before the game, you encounter players who enjoy random choices or selecting factions, then everything is clear, and there's no need to come up with anything. They play for the faction they voted for. But if there are different preferences, you can flip a coin, and that way, decide between a predetermined faction or a random one.

Coin flipping is for losers. We shouldn't leave the decision of such an important matter to chance.

Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс

In reply to Scorpiona

GrommiTs

1/27/2015 5:08 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Please register me for the tournament.

In reply to Scorpiona

HellLighT

1/27/2015 5:26 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Please register me for the tournament. P.S. Regarding the entry fee, I will refrain from paying until the number of participants reaches at least 7 people.

In reply to KobRa_RR

bubuch

1/27/2015 5:27 PM UTC

Auto-translated

And why even have this randomness at all? What’s the fun in playing with something you don’t like?

In reply to HellLighT

KobRa_RR

1/27/2015 5:31 PM UTC

Auto-translated

HellLighT

P.s. regarding the contribution, I'll refrain until the number of participants reaches at least 7 people.

+1) )

In reply to bubuch

Scorpiona

1/27/2015 5:34 PM UTC

Auto-translated

bubuch

Why even have this randomness? What’s the fun in playing something you don’t like?

And yet, 50% of players enjoy this game:p

Initially, the rules were supposed to include randomness, but they decided to find out what other players think, and as we can see, opinions are divided equally...
Therefore, I don’t see anything wrong with incorporating these 50% into the game as a 50/50 chance.
Red gets an advantage on HL templates, and that’s undeniable, and redraws are also allowed. So, blue is given the right to choose these 50/50 options based on what they are comfortable playing. In groups, the color alternates so that everyone is on equal footing!!!!

Aiwe

With this setup, it’s not beneficial for blue to choose random.

As an alternative, blue can choose either a specific Castle or random + color (without switching).

Why isn’t it beneficial? They have the blue color, and with a restart, there’s a chance to get red:)

Medium_HP

I suggest the following option.

NOT accepted, “Option” doesn’t fit into the “available” description of the rules :smile04: I think you’re confused yourself))

KobRa_RR

Another option: if there are fans of random or choosing Castles before the game, then everything is clear, there’s no need to come up with anything, they play with what they voted for, but if there are different tastes, then you can flip a coin and thus decide between a specific Castle or random.

A coin flip is also not an option. :smile11:

469326983

In reply to Scorpiona

Dirty_Player

1/27/2015 5:38 PM UTC

Auto-translated

In my opinion, the decision should be made based on the majority vote, even if it's by a single vote.

In reply to Dirty_Player

Niemand

1/27/2015 5:46 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Let's settle on one option, with the caveat that it's the "default" choice.

In reply to Dirty_Player

Sanin

1/27/2015 6:23 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

In my opinion, the decision should be based on the majority of votes, even if the difference is only one vote.

In that case, only the votes of the tournament participants should be taken into account, and the final result should be calculated only after the final list of participants has been approved.

ICQ 423164784