REWORK for the Academy. Is it needed or not? Auto-translated

My apologies, I was still playing VT as FAVorite. But I missed U2noob too)))

I'm still :cool: .
And I think the others are more or less familiar with VT to one degree or another. You shouldn't be so quick to write everyone off. But that's not the point. As long as you don't understand that SoD is SoD, players simply don't want to touch the classics. There are mods for everything else.

Why does only one thought come to mind, and why isn't there a poll about the lack of morals among neutral factions yet? After all, those who played in WotC experienced this and are now ready to spread it to the masses, i.e., the same **14:1.5**? Coincidence? I don't think so.

Why not make it so that each Greater Magic item has a 100% chance to drop only one of three control spells? That way, everyone would have control spells and be happy.

Why does only one thing come to mind, and why isn't there a poll about the lack of morals among neutral creatures? Those who played in Warlock's Tower experienced this and are now ready to spread the word, i.e., the same 14:1.5? Coincidence? I don't think so.

You twisted it in a cool way; I wouldn't have thought of that:D

Added 15 minutes later
=Lizard=, =Stinger=, Amiloo, BA/IEHOK, Browser, dom2, Dust_HL, FireToSky, Gomunguls, Huanito, iDD, Javdet, Jubi-Juby, Juristis, KobRa_RR, LeBron, LuckyF, Medium_HP, MrP1nchy, Satyr, Ominous1, Piterius, Player_, Redwhait HP, Sanin, Scorpiona, Simon5760, theShevanesian, u2noob, Vatya, zxc

Aiwe, aka.Ward3n, Alexey-omsk, AYMAN, BISHOP, bul, злой_романтик, Dark, Dark30, Dima Surmay, Dirty_Player, Falcone, FAVorite, Grizvald, gseva, HellLighT, Heroes13, Heroin_HP, Iamsamstan, identity, JintoLengley, Joker2k, Kilgor, Lim4, Loinz, Maretti, Master_A, MaxGor, nik312, skd, special_k, Stomper, Stryfe, The_, twaryna,
Wicc, WishmasteR, Yosha

Those highlighted in red are the ones who were active in the Warlock's Tower chat. In my opinion, the picture is very clear. I don't remember you, but let it be. I think it's hard to come up with a more illustrative picture.
And there's no need to force morals and the like. It's not dignified.

I think we should discuss not the fact of the restructuring itself, but its implementation in the game. The mechanism, so to speak.

I think we should discuss not the fact of restructuring, but its implementation in the game. The mechanism itself, so to speak.

Well, the proposed mechanism is to copy the one from Warlords. The only possible difference is that the library in the Tavern should also be restructured; in Warlords, they were too lazy to do it, and it doesn't change, which is awkward.

However, we also need to figure out what to do with the scrolls – with the introduction of restructuring, they become practically useless. In Warlords, they were changed into piles of gold using a script.

The proposed mechanism should be copied from the Warlords expansion. The only possible difference is that the library in the Tavern should also be rebuilt; they were too lazy to do this in Warlords, and it doesn't change there, which is a flaw.

However, we also need to figure out what to do with the scrolls – with the introduction of the rebuilding mechanic, they become practically useless. In Warlords, they were changed into piles of gold using a script.

In general, I understand that we need to copy the Warlords mechanism and test it, and then we'll see.

You could just as easily claim that the commanders used in VOG are awesome, and provide a bunch of "reasons" why they bring balance. In addition to this, you could call those who haven't played VOG noobs. But what's the point? You can add plenty of things for "balance" simply because someone thinks it will be better that way. That is exactly why I didn't like VT, because changes were made just because something seemed a certain way to someone. But VT is VT; the developers have the right to do whatever they want. And SoD is SoD—you just have to accept it and put up with it. :smile51:

I played in the Warlord Tournament. The poll here isn't just about restructuring, but about restructuring for Soda. These are two different things.

LOL, we lived without it (perestroika) for 15 years, and I think we’ll continue to live without it.

Well, what can you say – the arguments presented are so compelling that it’s hard to disagree or refute them.

On the first page, I asked for a detailed description of how this should look, but no one has done it yet, although it would be logical if the topic starter had done it in the first post. And then there are posts like "you just haven't tried it, that's why you're voting against it," but simply explaining it – no, they won't condescend to that. And you have to vote for some specific option, but there are already five options in the thread, and again, the topic starter doesn't explain this in the first post.

I agree with Vik almost on all points, but I voted for it simply because it would be nice if such a checkbox appeared and we could try it out, and then draw conclusions. In the rules, I don't think the mandatory nature of this checkbox should be specified.

A question for those who are against any changes to the gameplay. Recently, a checkbox for controlling neutrals appeared in the HV rules. This is undoubtedly a change to the gameplay, so fundamental that the restructuring feature pales in comparison. But I haven't read a single report or seen a single game where it was used. It's an optional add-on; if you don't want it, you don't enable it, and I haven't seen anyone on the forum complain about its presence. And as far as I can tell, in this sense, the psychological line has already been crossed – gameplay can be changed. I don't understand why, based on the same principle, we can't add a checkbox for the restructuring of heroes.

I'll reiterate the argument in favor – with the redesign, the game becomes more dynamic and interesting.

...adds balance to large maps, gives a chance to win matches based on skill, and speeds up games. :)

Fishers :D Find at least a couple of objective arguments against it, besides comments like: "leave SoD alone," "we've been playing for 15 years," "if you don't like it, play Warlords," "we haven't played since the restructuring and don't even want to try," "the imbalance is perfect," "how will we win against the veterans if they nerf our perks, it won't be interesting." :cool: :D

Rybulary :D Find at least a couple of objective arguments against it, besides the usual jabs like: "leave SoD alone," "we've lived with it for 15 years," "if you don't like it, play Warlock," "you didn't play during the restructuring and don't even want to try," "the imbalance is perfect," "how will we win against the veterans if they nerf our perks, it won't be interesting." :cool: :D

A couple of objective arguments have already been presented, but some supporters of "FOR" have overlooked them, or simply don't want to acknowledge them.