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

1. Game balance. A 100% chance of control on XL maps will simply kill fast games on those templates. Will this bring balance? Who the hell knows. After all, balance depends not only on control, but also on the treasures in the zones. One player gets Dragon Fly Hives and cons, another gets obelisks and "besyaten" (Cyclops Stockpiles).

2. Won't we create new problems and new imbalances with a rebuildable Mage Guild? Now we run into the logistics problem. One player gets Logistics, the other doesn't. If in one scenario we had a chance to get Logistics along with control, now what do we do?

3. Stronger players vote for the Mage Guild rebuild. But look at the average time when these stronger players' games end. Yes, perhaps it's an indicator of skill to drag out games and win in the late game even with a weak start. But in reality, we're not leaving any alternatives for play.

4. Well, expect tournament rounds to be dragged out across all tournaments due to late save deadlines, a-la 2xx and 3xx, because they didn't manage to finish in time.

Haven't visited this thread for a long time, read through it, nothing has changed.

Players who played in WT are still talking about the incompetence of those who didn't play in WT.
No one ever answered my question at /post/815534/, and I believe these will be exactly the same balance issues.
The disrespect for others' opinions among some comrades is simply at the highest level, like I'm the daddy and you're not much of a player.
I won't write anything more in this thread

I haven't visited this thread in a while, and I've read it – nothing has changed.

Yura, I respect you.

But let's not have you tell me what to do; I really don't like that.

Oh, you scared me; oh, I'm so afraid. I've always said, and I'm saying now, that if the forum doesn't need what I'm doing, I'll gladly step down. I think any moderator could say the same. What we do doesn't give us any privileges, but it does create a lot of hassle.

You'll keep arguing with DaU that your thread about experience isn't trolling.

Also, you shouldn't be lecturing us about forum rules (which you probably haven't even read), because if you strictly followed them, you would have already accumulated enough violation points for a permanent ban.

P.S. If at least 2-3 people write in the forum or on ICQ that one of these topics is useful and needed, I will immediately restore it.

And a decent portion of those who voted against simply don't want to lose their extra chance to take down someone like Stinger, getting a head start in controlling the map for a couple of weeks earlier in the first Utopia-Tower.

Yeah. Poker is so popular because every novice or average player who sits down at a table with a player like Negreanu hopes to beat him. Not to play better (that's impossible), but to win.

Debatable statement. At least regarding mirror matches — that's a rather specific game where you know exactly what your opponent has and how it's positioned.

And reducing everything to saying that serious play is only possible in them is incorrect. Nor can it be said that mirror matches absolutely identify the strongest player; there is also an element of luck involved — at the very least, guessing which treasure zone to start from.

Playing with different setups has its own appeal, but that doesn't mean it should only be funka on prooshka and that you can't strive to add some balance that doesn't spoil the game.

Otherwise, why aren't the rules defined as playing with a maximum of 2 heroes and a 2-minute turn? Then beginners would have even more chances to beat a "conditional Stinger" and, by your logic, it would add popularity.