HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

Posts from your questions regarding the game rules (improving the interpretation).

Tournament History
No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
In reply to MerlinTheMagician
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#16
Auto-translated
MerlinTheMagician
It's high time to allow digging for the Grail without restrictions. Cases where it appears on the starting map are rare. And even if you find it, you might lose tempo trying to dig it up. You place it, and an opponent who has already explored the map defeats you...
Yeah. In HotA, you can dig for the Grail, and there are fewer obelisks, and they aren't guarded, but after about a hundred official games (and who knows how many fan-made ones), there haven't been any complaints about it. Although, I think someone did dig it up.

I don't think it will be dug up more often in SoD, скорее, less often. The Anarchy example demonstrates this.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to =Lizard=
User Avatar
Offline scorp
Registered:
Posts: 716
#17
Auto-translated
=Lizard=
It's a bit strange how you're judging, gentlemen. Whether something is a block or not often depends on the army you're facing. For Shaktii with 50 troglodytes, anything is a block, but with 150+ – nothing is a block. So, the long-standing formulation "with losses of more than half the army" is absolutely sufficient.
I think if an experienced player wants to cheat and says it's a block with 150+ troglodytes (maybe he wants to restart), then such players should be punished, and whether you are a strong player or not, those who have played with him will probably say (for example), you can immediately show the save to the opponent or after the game (so as not to waste time, but to check the opponent's honesty or something else)

Added 5 minutes later
was there a vote about the Grail? (I would allow digging with 111 on the CIS server)

and the topic is mainly created to improve the interpretation of the existing rules (but you are suggesting)
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline The_
Registered:
Posts: 1,325
#18
Auto-translated
Surely someone in the know has already noticed the inaccuracy of the wording in the first post, but I still feel obliged to speak up again — it won't hurt.
Under no circumstances should a block be tied to strict quantities or a specific value. However much I'd like to introduce clear specifics, I hardly see a way to do it, and here's why:
- first of all, the strength of a block depends solely on the starting army and starting heroes. For illustration, a block of 50-99 Crossbowmen — it would seem like a wipe and time to bail, but we have Dungeon/Necropolis, 3 stacks, Solmyr and Deemer in the tavern who can pull off some tricks to start with, and a starting +1 speed bonus pendant, and they guard a Sword +5 All for example (worth around just 55 Crossbowmen — this is fair for Jebus Cross; on other templates there will be more, of course). On one hand, this situation is rare; on the other hand, you could slightly reduce the block's strength, and the number of situations where starting army and heroes decide the outcome would increase exponentially.
- second, there's the plain skill of the player — as they say, for one it's a block and a wipe, for another it's a breeze and XP. There are many standard fights where the overall mechanics are quite primitive and skill doesn't matter much; a couple dozen similar fights are enough to make no more mistakes. But there are also plenty of fights where a standard approach won't cut it — there are many examples here, and they are very diverse to describe them all. The main criteria of tricky fights can be: skillful use of terrain, proper unit positioning considering speed, use of war machine units (Ballista, First Aid Tent, Ammo Cart), and a very broad concept — a clear understanding of AI actions, what goes where and why. Taking all the above factors together, the results for two different players can be diametrically opposite (wipe vs. breakthrough).
However, a more precise definition of the block is needed, but I still can't think of how to make it both accurate and not "triple-meaning" at the same time.
Need to brainstorm.
241-568-808
0
⚖️
0
In reply to The_
User Avatar
Offline skd
Registered:
Posts: 1,129
#20
Auto-translated
The_
Taken together, all of the above-mentioned factors can lead to diametrically opposed results for two different players (a stalemate or a breakthrough).
However, a more precise formulation of the block rule is needed, but I can't yet come up with a way to make it both precise and not "ambiguous" at the same time.
I need to think about it.
Therefore, I propose setting a specific value for the block. Restarting due to a block is subjective; it is the player's right to take it, not an obligation.
If there are formal grounds for requesting a restart – for example, 10+ ducks guarding a hive + a resource – this is a value of 10500. Guarding blocks, for example, the passage along the only road on 6lm10a; in my opinion, even if it is possible to bypass it by spending a few turns, this is a block. Further, the following sequence of events may occur:
1) The player scouts the map, finds objects, and decides to continue playing.
2) Saves the game, informs the opponent about the block, and contacts the referee if necessary.
3) Tries to break through and fails – well, keep playing or write "gg".
4) Breaks through the block – through skill, luck, or due to the army; it doesn't matter.

An important point here is that a restart due to a block is taken on the day the block is discovered and before an attempt to break through it. For reference on the value of objects, a link can be added in the rules topic.

I believe this is the most logical approach, as there will be formal grounds for requesting a restart, and the player will have the opportunity to decide for himself – based on his experience and the game situation – whether he can break through the block or not.

UTC+03:00, icq 593626431
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Juristis
Registered:
Posts: 1,423
#21
Auto-translated
Oh, there's even a discussion here! We need to think about the wording; none of the options listed above are suitable. Besides assessing the strength of a block, there's another, more important issue: assessing the possibility of developing without breaking the block. This also needs to be addressed.
And the Grail should definitely be allowed; this ban only clutters the rules.
heroes3.tv/juristis
ICQ - 488-784-621, skype - juristis18

Весна 2014.
0
⚖️
0
Offline Joker2k
Registered:
Posts: 388
#22
Auto-translated
- There should be no restarts per map, period. Starting with 10k gold + 3 days of restarts – what kind of map is that?
- Allow the Grail on all map templates without a Game Over condition; possibly with a restriction on placing it in a Conflux and/or Tower.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to skd
User Avatar
Offline The_
Registered:
Posts: 1,325
#23
Auto-translated
skd
Actually, that's why I suggest setting a specific value for a restart due to a block. Restarting due to a block is subjective; it's the player's right to take it, not an obligation.
If there are formal grounds for requesting a restart – for example, 10+ units guarding a Hive + a resource – that's a value of 10500. Blocking, for example, the only path on the map (6lm10a), in my opinion, even if it can be bypassed by spending a few turns, is a block. Here's a possible scenario:
1) The player scouts the map, finds objects, and decides to continue playing.
2) Saves the game, informs the opponent about the block, and contacts the referee if necessary.
3) Tries to break the block and fails – well, keep playing or type "gg."
4) Breaks the block – through skill, luck, or by using troops; it doesn't matter.

The important point here is that a restart due to a block is requested on the day the block is discovered and before attempting to break it. For reference on the value of objects, a link can be added to the rules topic.

I believe this is the most logical approach because there will be formal grounds for requesting a restart, and the player will have the opportunity to decide for themselves – based on their experience and the game situation – whether they can break the block or not.

I repeat, the idea of a precise number is difficult to implement, whether it's tied to value or the number of creatures of a certain level.
Immediately, a number of contradictions arise:
1. For example, 7 Sultans, in terms of value, are equal to 80 Golems or a hundred Boars or 100 Gnomes, etc. There is already a clear opportunity for abuse.
2. "Save the game, inform the opponent about the block, and contact the referee if necessary. Try to break the block and fail – well, keep playing or type "gg."" – these points are generally not feasible in practice. Let's say there's a block of something worth 50-99, guarded by an Imp and a Tier 1 artifact, which could be a quest item or just an artifact. In the first case, the value will be 99, and in the second, 50. You attack the guards, see their value is 99, exit the game, and claim a block. The opponent or referee checks – yes, there is indeed a block. But if there were only 50, you break it and continue playing peacefully. Something like that.
3. And simply, as I already wrote, one player might be able to do it, while another might not, + morale must also be taken into account. And if morale is cyclical for neutrals (i.e., when loading a save, if a neutral's morale was high in the first round, it will be high again when replaying the battle), then morale is random for the player's army. So, when replaying the battle, morale can be completely different, as can luck. And so, one player relies on morale or luck and wins the battle without losses, while another player in the same battle doesn't get good morale and loses. Who is right? Or, let's say player A loses 50%+ of their army when breaking the block, while player B loses 30% of their army in the same battle. Is it still a block?
And there are many other nuances. The idea may be workable, but it clearly needs a lot more work.

Added 2 minutes ago
- There should be no restarts due to blocks, at all. Start with 10k gold + 3 days of restarts – what block?
In three out of three attempts, my exit from the castle was blocked by an impenetrable guard. In the fourth attempt, the situation didn't change – should I type "gg" and thank my opponent for the game?
That's absurd. A restart due to a block should be allowed; it's like losing a rook at the beginning of a chess game – well, too bad, play on.
241-568-808
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Joker2k
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,032
#24
Auto-translated
MerlinTheMagician
It's high time to allow digging for the Grail without any restrictions.
Joker2k
- There shouldn't be restarts per block, at all. Starting with 10k gold + 3 days of restarts - what kind of block is that?
I like these suggestions!
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline KobRa_RR
Registered:
Posts: 3,259
#25
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
I like these suggestions!

But I don't. In the same random game, where castles and heroes are chosen randomly, you can end up in a really bad situation without additional restarts.


0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#26
Auto-translated
As practice shows, the frequency of ending up in a difficult situation weakly depends on the number of restarts; it depends more on the strategy of using those restarts. For example, in two blitz tournaments by Alessandro and in my Blitz-Jebus, there was only one restart on turn 111, and we didn't end up in a difficult situation very often. We simply played based on what was generated, unless there was an obvious block. And getting two blocks in a row is a rather rare occurrence. On a random map, you can add +1 day of restarts.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Juristis
Registered:
Posts: 1,423
#27
Auto-translated
Canceling the replay for a specific map is also a perfectly valid option, by the way.
heroes3.tv/juristis
ICQ - 488-784-621, skype - juristis18

Весна 2014.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Nitro
Registered:
Posts: 1,019
#28
Auto-translated
I also believe that subjective restarts are needed so that players can get a fair game, rather than relying on luck and then complaining to tech support about glitches.
ICQ 627769385
0
⚖️
0
In reply to skd
User Avatar
Offline scorp
Registered:
Posts: 716
#29
Auto-translated
The_
Someone in the thread has probably already noticed the inaccuracy in the wording of the first post...
However, a more precise wording for the block is needed, but I can't figure out how to make it both precise and not "ambiguous" at the same time.
I need to think about it.
like a great Russian writer pondering while writing?! ... too bad he didn't burn it in the end :D
skd
That's why I suggest setting a specific value for the restart due to the block. Restart due to a block is subjective; it's the player's right to take it, not an obligation.
If there are formal grounds for taking a restart – for example, 10+ units guarding a lair + a resource – that's a value of 10500. The guard blocks, for example, the only path on 6lm10a, in my opinion, even if it can be bypassed by spending a few turns, that's a block. Further, the following scenario may develop:
1) The player scouts the map, finds objects, and decides to continue playing.
2) Saves, informs the opponent about the block, and contacts the judge if necessary.
3) Tries to break through and fails – well, keep playing or write "gg."
4) Breaks through the block – through skill, luck, or with the help of troops, it doesn't matter.

The important point here is that the restart due to the block is taken on the day the block is discovered and before attempting to break through it. For reference, a link to the value of objects can be added in the rules section.

I think this is the most logical approach because there will be formal grounds for taking a restart, and the player will have the opportunity to decide for himself – based on his experience and the game situation – whether he can break through the block or not.
regarding the value – I doubt that even 20% of players would want to see values in the rules (conduct a mini-poll in ICQ or create a voting option); you could go even further and describe each unit, its quantity, against which faction, against which hero – are we striving for thousands of pages?!
Yes, I don't even think it's worth writing this down, or as an option, include the word "may" in the interpretation, meaning the player "may" take a restart, not a "mandatory" restart.
No, this is not a block if it's for judging; it's more about a bad situation.
*when there's a block, not when it can be bypassed.
2) Yes, if it's not a block for the opponent, inform the judge; if the judge says to continue, there should be a load with the same time and a repeat of the turn, meaning there should be a battle since you attacked (you can't not attack on this turn); the opponent should get a turn to check that you didn't attack (probably, or just trust?) – this is all by default/although it can be written somewhere, but definitely not in the rules.
3) yes
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline злой_романтик
Registered:
Posts: 3,223
#30
Auto-translated
For a complete removal of the ban on the block and for unbanning Graal.
296524052
Весна 2012.
0
⚖️
0