Posts from REWORK for the Academy. Is it needed or not?

But when you lose games after a bunch of attempts, 5-6 Grand Masters, and you don't find any Pandor or Scrolls for control, that's a problem:(

The argument is understandable; the strength of this concept simply depends on the game concept to which it is applied. For example, for Warlords, restructuring is an integral attribute because the concept of Warlords is "we manipulate the gameplay as much as we want, reducing the number of initially hopeless situations for one of the players." But for SoD, the concept is "this is classic, only bug fixes and technical improvements are allowed."

If you allow the possibility of changes like restructuring, then what's wrong with the rest? For example, 3 stacks at the start. Or neutral morale. Or dispersion across cons and relics. All of this affects the outcome of the game no less than the lack of control, which is only felt in the 4th week. Almost all games where "I cleared my part of the map, but didn't find any control" are those that lasted until the 2nd month. And most games end earlier.

In half a year, we'll vote again - "3 stacks at the start, are they needed or not?", "Neutral morale - is it needed or not?" and there will be angry posts about how much you hate losing to angels hiding in a corner due to morale in the first round.

Then why did you vote for that :confused:

I believe that this will be better for the game and for the players in terms of balance. Because I played with the GM overhaul back in the day and saw only positive aspects in it, which reduce the factor of randomness and smooth it out. And it even affects such an important factor for heroes as the duration of the game.
And why couldn't you express your opinion?

I believe this would be better for the game and for the players in terms of balance. Because I played with the GM overhaul back in the day, and I only saw positive aspects in it, which reduce the factor of randomness and smooth it out. And it even affects such an important factor for heroes as the duration of the game.
And what's wrong with expressing your opinion?

Yes, your opinion is clear, but why vote if others will have to play with the result?

I understand your opinion, why vote if others will be playing later?

My kids will still be playing ;)
I don't see any reasons that would prevent me from voting.

VIK's favorite pastime is to think and decide for other people what is "tolerable and suitable for them, and what is not." A normal way is to put up a poll, which I did.

I'm not suggesting removing the poll, I'm just advocating for the option that I personally consider to be the best.

An awesome holiday: one TP is stuck in a scroll under a castle, behind some pigs, and the other gets nothing in the form of a walk on water....

Yes. Today you got beaten, tomorrow you'll get beaten, but in the long run, the more skilled players will be in the lead. This is the essence of SoD.

Well, my kids will still be able to play ;)
I don't see any reasons why I shouldn't be allowed to vote.

The main reason is that you're voting for something you're not going to participate in. It's one thing when just one person like you votes, but it's another when there are more of them. What's the point of the poll then, if some vote and others play!?

Yes, the main reason is that you vote for something you're not going to participate in. It's one thing when one person like you votes, but when there are more such people. What's the point of a poll then, if some vote and others play!?

On HeroesWorld, it has historically been the case that many people vote. If the opinion of a specific category of players is critical, you can filter the voters yourself.

For what it's worth, I don't play either, but I voted.

There have already been several proposals for restructuring. Which one are we actually voting for?

Historically, many people vote on Hv. If the opinion of a specific category of players is critical, you can filter the voters yourself.

It's okay like that.

What are these polls for? We need it, and that’s it!!! How many times do we have to repeat ourselves? The game on Hot Lava maps simply becomes unplayable when you can’t find any control for an entire month and run around like a blind kitten all over the map! Just add a checkbox, and that’s it! What’s so complicated about that? A principle??? Not to use features from the garbage version???
Well, then let’s all just play Jebus maps – it’s all about skill, right? ;)

There have already been several restructuring options proposed. Which one are we actually voting for?

In the first stage of voting, we determine whether restructuring is needed at all. After that, we will choose a more suitable restructuring model.

Yes. Today you lost, tomorrow you will lose again, but over the long run, more skilled players will be in the plus. This is the essence of SoD.

In Heroes, you can't gain an advantage over the long term.
It's funny that some people think that if they vote, they will immediately get a rework. As if there is someone willing to do this work for someone and is just waiting for the go-ahead. In reality, everyone who wants to votes, and the topic is just for chatting. But you can notice that the pool of those who voted "for" is more skilled than those who voted "against" - except for Bishop and Maretti, who play their own Heroes, where there are no uncontrolled units, the rest are average-level players, no more.

In Heroes, you can't close the distance.
It's funny that some people think that the way they vote will immediately get them the rework implemented. As if there's someone ready to do that work for someone else and is just waiting for the go-ahead. In reality, anyone and everyone votes, and this thread is just for chit-chat. But it can be noted that the pool of those who voted "for" is more skilled than those "against" - except for Bishop and Maretti, who plays his own version of Heroes, where there are no Dragon Utopias without control, the rest are average-level players, nothing more.

I'll start with the last point, perhaps. Although overall, this is a collective response.
Any vote framed as "good or bad" already carries a negative aftertaste in the form of a schism of opinions.
About a year from now (after the May holidays), we can expect a push that Logistics heroes also need to be nerfed (like in HotA), they run way too fast, and that's such an imbalance. And don't touch Tazar yet... but if he's on the opponent's side, and with the Red Orb... well, where's the balance then. Although getting "freebies" of +30% survivability or killing power (Crag Hack) is so unbalanced when he's not on my side. And they'll need to be nerfed. There just hasn't been a reason yet. And we'll bring balance to the norm by playing Anarchy in key matches at the May festivals; it's better to play those than to be without a Guild rework.
For those who don't understand, I'll explain. The topic starter advocates for the rework, yet without really motivating their position (see their first post) - we have a very weak thesis at its core, and only then do they engage in polemics (swaying others to their side with unproductive arguments), and do not lead the discussion in a mutually beneficial manner. And this despite the fact that in the recent matches of the finalists of the last offline event (one real, the other "hidden" :)), Anarchy was played :eek:
In short, there's some kind of mess in the topic starter's head. They advocate for one thing but play the complete opposite.
And besides, there's a strange trend. People try to show that they are the strongest in the game, fight for balance to demonstrate their skill, but in the end, they try to fish in troubled waters with Anarchy. They didn't have the spirit for a mirrored game. But then they can always justify themselves: "But we played Anarchy!" :D As if the spirit of SoD has triumphed!

And it's true that no one will bother doing this. And someone was talking about that coveted checkbox. I even know that even if the rework were suddenly made, there would be enough people willing to play with it. After all, that's what happened with Quick Combat. So let the topic starter motivate the programmers and play with whoever they want by their own rules. Only the organizers have the wisdom (non-interference policy) not to make HD+, Quick Combat (reworked, but with the addition of other bugs), and the questionable "chess" timer mandatory - some see the latter as providing more "time savings," though these are fundamentally gameplay matters. Skill players (the more hardcore ones) will proceed from the fact that they are too lazy to deal with "noobs," and will want to find the fastest way to kill them, and the rework will help them more with that. And when playing among themselves, they will somehow avoid mirrored games.
Voting on such issues is akin to voting in political elections with all sorts of manipulations and other "tricks," and it divides the community. Gameplay practice in this particular matter has absolutely no influence on the understanding of the processes. The user-player (and they are the vast majority here) does not fully understand the in-game nuances, knows the theory poorly, while the programmers (there are few of them) - on the contrary, do not see the gameplay inconsistencies. Those who see things from both perspectives, especially without medal ambitions, are even fewer. Their arguments are quite convincing and well-reasoned.
• There is HotA, where this has already been implemented for a long time.
• The game has more disparate things (for heroes - Crag Hack, Tazar, Grindan, Galthran, Logistics specialists; for artifacts - Orb of the Firmament, Cloak of the Undead King, Pendant of Dispassion, Armor of the Damned, Angelic Alliance; for objects - some get Dragon Utopias and Dragon Fly Hives with Preserve, while others get Blockers and don't even have Wood, and let's not even talk about Morale...), and one unfortunate misclick, or a lack of 50 movement points or one second, or a small artifact not equipped by accident, yes, in fact, the entire game is built on these. And in Heroes, any little thing can be fatal, and which cannot be fixed in any way. Because it is a GAME, after all, and not a means of proving that someone is cooler than someone else, especially if it comes down to :smile35: or :smile17: And in such a GAME, every participant should have the opportunity to use luck and beat a conditionally strong player. Ask Maretti what makes him play again and again, despite the abundance of medals.
• Since you want balance in the game, why don't you play mirrored templates. Or what prevents you from generating a map for yourself where there are many towns and dwellings that you control. And why is Diamond not suitable or something similar?
• Finally, what prevents organizing a tournament exactly with such a condition and rules. It's no big deal.

But it can be noted that the pool of those who voted "for" is more skilled than those who are "against" - except for Bishop and Maretti,.

Is that how you want it)? And pay attention to how many people in this pool played WT back in the day; it was simple for them to change SoD to WT then, just as it is now to invent and change everything to suit them better—so play WT and all will be well! Maybe we should hold some Tournaments for WT as an option?!

A pretty promising branch, eh? )Pointy-ends and blunt-ends, who will win...

P.S. Let me add some creativity of my own - how about we make HD++, and there we can put advanced goodies, features that aren't the most universal/haven't yet become standard - throw in the mage war options, battle for neutral opponent, a checkbox for magic rearrangement, etc. That way, the user-friendliness of the HD+ interface will also improve/not worsen (with some margin) - because we must always remember the newbie, who should initially enable HD+ and be able to play right away, by default, without the hassle of having to choose dozens of options.

angry posts about how you're annoyed by losing angels to an external dwelling due to morale in the first round.

All you need is just a checkbox - "angels without morale in external dwelling". Well, and with a choice, of course: choice of week, choice of round, and finally a choice based on HeroesWorld users (I think, those with a registration of over a year, because why not!)