Posts from Team MIRROR

I think the idea behind the tournament formula is either not fully thought out or simply unsuccessful.

As a result, two unbalanced scenarios emerged for the two rounds.
In both, the outcome was practically predetermined from the start.
And, roughly speaking, it came down to which of the clearly losing players could drag out the game longer than in the first match.
As a result, neither the first nor the second pair, in my opinion, derived any real interest from the game.
At least, I can say for myself that this is 100% true.
Everything was decided not in the game itself, but around it. In my opinion.

P.S. If you're going to refine this formula, I think
that the rematch should be played by the same players as in the first round.
Even if the map is partially or completely revealed.
I think this would increase the chances of the weaker side.
They wouldn't rush into a clearly disadvantageous direction.
Starting heroes are certainly important, but the overall situation is ten times more important, as you can almost always find a hero with a similar skillset.
I don't think there are any overpowered heroes that immediately decide the game just because they exist.

I think the idea behind the tournament formula is either not fully thought out or simply unsuccessful.

Actually, yes, there is this nuance: the player who holds out longer (in the case where both teams draw and one of the players is essentially already losing) while defending, no matter how, gets 2 points, and the other side gets 1 point. Perhaps it would have been better to either declare a draw when each team has 1 winner, or come up with something completely new: for example, record the time it takes to capture the opponent's main Castle. That is, for example, if the red player captures the blue player's Castle at 1-4-5, but doesn't kill the main hero, then both players must record/remember this time, and if the red player actually wins, this time should be used to compare and determine the winner (specifically, to award the 2nd point), i.e., the time of capturing the opponent's Castle. And if, somehow, the blue player turns the game in his favor, then in the event of his victory, the time of capturing the red player's Castle should be recorded in the same way. And whoever captures the opponent's Castle faster wins (in the case of a draw).

I think the tournament formula is either not well thought out or simply unsuccessful.

As a result, two unbalanced scenarios emerged for the two rounds.
In both, the outcome was practically predetermined from the start.
And it essentially came down to how the player who was clearly going to lose could prolong the game compared to the first game.
As a result, neither the first nor the second pair, in my opinion, derived any enjoyment from the game.
At least, I can say for myself that this is 100% true.
Everything was decided not in the game itself, but rather around it. In my opinion.

P.S. If this formula is to be refined,
then I believe
that the reverse pair should be played by the same players as in the first round.
Even if the map is partially or completely revealed.
I think this would increase the chances for the weaker side.
It wouldn't force them to go into a clearly disadvantageous direction.
Starting heroes are certainly important, but the overall situation is ten times more important. Because you can almost always find a hero with a similar setup.
I don't think there are any overwhelmingly overpowered heroes that immediately decide the game just because they exist.

>No one prevents you from taking a weak castle first in a pair to win the second game faster with a strong one.

In general, this is a phrase that is detached from reality and does not relate to the actual situation.
We don't choose castles, what nonsense is that?!
You choose a color, and then you get a map.
And then what? You can't change it. Where is it written that the pair chooses a castle??

B) After receiving the map from the judge, the “red” team chooses which color the team captain will play.

Perhaps I didn't clearly state this rule. I had the idea that the "red" team chooses the color (and, consequently, the starting Castle associated with that color when the map was created) when creating the game, i.e., knowing what the pairing and bonus will be.

why not just admit it? "I wanted one thing, but I wrote something else."
Because "maybe I didn't express myself clearly, etc."
implies that all the other participants in the process are fools and didn't understand anything.
Specifically, Kill, I, Algizvit, Bolivar, and everyone who created the first two rounds
acted within the framework of what was expressed.

I'm not going to prove anything to anyone.
I just don't like two-faced people.

You can't fool people; they vote with their participation or non-participation.
In this case, the latter seems to be the case.

The topic is closed on my part.

Kirill, if it's not too much trouble, when you're editing the table, please include how many points each player received for each match. This will allow people to check (in the format 3-0, 2-1, 1-2) whether the results have been entered correctly.