Connection ErrorBad RequestSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Maybe I'm missing something... The average game time is about 5-6 hours, and situations with long battles in the Fortress Battle occur at most once every 10 games (although I personally encountered it only a couple of times). The time saved by introducing this thing is about half an hour. As a result, we have an implementation of some idea for the sake of saving half an hour out of 50-60 hours. Does it make sense? I understand some Starcraft players who are used to clicking quickly and have 200-300 people cursing on their stream, but are there really that many people who deliberately drag out the time in the Fortress Battle?
There are templates, like Hypercube, for example, where battles between opponents begin from the first days. On such templates, a timer is simply necessary, especially if the game is played in blitz mode. And even on regular templates, it is unlikely to interfere. I even tried to implement a timer specifically for the Hexagonmirror template on the Workshop and achieved a certain result. I think that for Baratortcha, the implementation of this feature is not very difficult.
...And since we're looking for analogies with a chess timer, it should take into account the time for a unit to move (60 moves = a limit of 1 minute, for example). That's all. And it would also be possible to add a difficulty coefficient for the battle depending on the ratio of forces and the total amount of HP in the battle...
For now, only this kind of judgment seems like a fair mechanism.
Sanin
...Let's implement such a timer system in all battles, not just in battles with an opponent.
And the response was:
baratorch
Well, and no religious beliefs prevent me from implementing an increase in the timer by one action for a squad in battle.
But there was also this:
KobRa_RR
By the way, you can also introduce a time limit for battles between players - for example, 60-90 minutes for battles between opponents per game.
This would look like this: a special timer is activated for battles between people, it will tick on the right, in a color different from green, for example, blue. When your unit moves in battle, the timer stops - now it's the opponent's turn.
Why do this? It's no secret that many people like to play battles to the very end, rethinking everything 10 times, so let them pay for it with their time. Time is a person's main resource, often more important than money.
At the same time, let's try to defeat the collective mind, so that the player thinks on their own, and not together with the whole chat or programs, because the game is 1v1, not "all for one".
And the response to this was:
Wicc
I don't remember battles with each other ever taking an excessive amount of time. The main time is spent clearing the map, and a long battle is usually just the final one. So let them think as much as they want in it, the time should be reduced by playing against the map.
And even this was also said:
Dirty_Player
If there is a time limit in a battle between players, it can lead to absurdity, by deliberately attacking a weak opponent and wasting the opponent's time by running around the battlefield.
But it is alarming how, under the guise of intolerance or even contempt, it is presented:
Juristis
Sometimes it seems that Heroes is played not by intellectuals, but by mentally retarded people.
or like this:
HellLighT
...it's just annoying to watch some of the final battles...
I'm ready to strangle the players... And I'm not talking, I'm trying to reason with them, and it's better to be a complete alcoholic than a stupid upstart.
Such metaphors, such things. It's sad.
The game is competitive, and in all competitive games in tournaments, there is a time limit, although there are strategically more complex games. If you like to think for half an hour, play fun games, if you want to participate in tournaments, be kind enough to move the gears faster, as I already said - time is another resource in the game, and your excessive "thinking" sometimes does not serve you very well.
Well, you (and other players who move relatively quickly, who are annoyed by slow and inexperienced players) are only looking at one resource from which the greatest profit will be extracted by you. But there are others, let me tell you.
• Look how many games Mishuta has played on Jebusiks, and they don't seem to have any particular problems with the timer, just like Sanin with Redwait. And you can just play skirmishes.
• The recipe from shameonyou (gee, alin) was also suggested.
• Even if they have a lot of time for games, nothing prevents you from playing less.
• There is a very useful checkbox for accepting a turn. In addition, it would successfully combat those who fall asleep and those who like to go to the bathroom.
• A huge resource is hidden in restarts, including restarts after a meeting.
• Play in blitz tournaments, of which there is only one here.
• It would be very effective to allow slow players into tournaments, for example, only after passing a test "kill 100 zombies in 100 seconds" or not allow them at all - there is no point in dealing with them (ask Dёrtikak).
In the end, where is the statistics of the expected time savings (it's interesting why the problem appeared after 15 years of Heroes' existence)?
I'll tell you a secret that there will be no expected savings in the end. Time will still be stretched. But the fact is that players who move their fingers faster will have more chances to win in world cyber championships with a prize fund of $5-7 thousand. Doters and Starcrafters will be envious.
=Lizard=
As a result, we have, first of all, not a saving of 30 minutes (although this is also a plus), but an increase in professionalism in conducting battles.
But will there be hatred towards Heroes, which will turn from a game for pleasure into an exhausting grind?
Here is where the real plus of the timer is, and it is tangible in battles, when the opponent attacks you and cannot kill you, either because they miscalculated their strength or for some other reason. And still, in the end, there is confusion - why should I quickly move the horses to please the attacker so that they can kill me faster (this does not apply to FB).
There are patterns, such as a hypercube, where battles between opponents begin from the first days. On such patterns, a timer is simply necessary, especially if the game is played in blitz mode. And even on ordinary patterns, it is unlikely to interfere.
I even tried to implement a timer specifically for the Hexagonmirror pattern on VT and achieved a certain result. I think that implementing this feature will not be very difficult for Baratorch.
Special conditions with their own code are made for blitz tournaments. There is only one such tournament here. The mentioned patterns have never been played, at least I have not seen any reports. Therefore, the entire context of this topic is more applicable to blitz. Because, after all, the gameplay is revealed, and not the saving of time.
Either you didn't read the topic properly, or something else, but here they are discussing the timer in battles, and what does the fact that some players constantly play through the season have to do with it?
Wouldn't this lead to resentment towards Heroes, turning the game from a source of enjoyment into an exhausting grind?
And it's with this opinion that I would like to fight; it sounds like "don't touch our sandbox." I understand that many people enjoy tinkering at their own level and moving units around while having a beer (and there's a fan base for that), but I would like something more serious and for people to take it more seriously, at least in tournaments! Otherwise, they will be surprised later why Heroes isn't so popular.
You either didn't read the topic properly, or something else. Here, they are discussing the timer in battles, and what does the fact that some players constantly play through the season have to do with it?
And I want to fight against such opinions; it sounds like "don't touch our sandbox." I understand that many people enjoy tinkering at their own level and moving units around while having a beer (and there's a fun aspect to the game for that), but I would like something more serious and for people to take it more seriously, at least in tournaments! Otherwise, they will be surprised why Heroes isn't more popular.
Heroes isn't popular because it takes up a lot of time, not because someone is tinkering at their own level while having a beer. That's the point.
Heroes aren't popular because they consume a lot of time, not because someone is just casually playing at their own level while drinking beer. Your point is well taken.
The timer in a battle with an opponent will slightly reduce this time consumption. Admiral, that's clear.
What's needed is simultaneous turns, no restarts (especially restarts due to encounters), as short a time control as possible, and match templates that are played for no more than 3 weeks (and on average 2 weeks).
The goal is to have a complete game take no more than 4 hours, so that a guaranteed game can be played in an evening.
We need simultaneous turns, no restarts (especially restarts upon encounter), the shortest possible time control, and contact templates that are played for no more than 3 weeks (and on average 2 weeks).
These are all very cool suggestions, but realistically, at the moment, it would be possible to at least do what this thread was created for. p.s
Benchmark - no more than 4 hours for a full game, so that one is guaranteed to be played in an evening.
Under your description, only Jebus Cross fits at the moment, and you're badmouthing it! That's kind of two-faced! :smile06:
What's needed is simultaneous turns, the elimination of restarts (especially restarts due to encounters), as short a time control as possible, and contact maps that are played for no more than 3 weeks (with an average of 2 weeks).
The goal is to have a complete game take no more than 4 hours, so that a guaranteed game can be played in an evening.
Simultaneous turns and contact maps are mutually exclusive game modes. The only type of map that allows for contact play from the very beginning and partially solves the problem of the first-move advantage is mirrored maps with several small starting positions. And that's where the timer plays a crucial role. On average, it may not significantly reduce the time (due to the size of the map itself, the time is small), but in some cases, it will eliminate excessive delays.
I don't mind a battle timer; I'm just pointing out that it won't solve the designated problem. Although, it probably won't ruin anything either.
Well, saying I "bashed" it is an exaggeration... I only pointed out that "Jebus only" is, imho, the wrong path for Heroes' development; after all, Jebus gameplay is quite specific and creates imbalances in how players perceive Heroes—psychologically, it's difficult to play more classic patterns after it. But the length of a game on Jebus is definitely its merit.
Added after 2 minutes
Simultaneous turns and contact patterns are mutually exclusive game modes.
Not at all. Simultaneous turns on the 1st week + a quick move into the contact zone on the 2nd week = PROFIT!
For example, simultaneous turns would be very appropriate on Jebus Cross. On mirror maps as well (if interplanar teleports are blocked until 121).
Simultaneous move on week 1 + quick entry into the contact zone on week 2 = PROFIT!
That's correct, but this is no longer a contact template. I understand contact templates as those with the possibility of meeting in the early days. A meeting is possible on all playable templates in the second week.
That's correct, but this is no longer a "contact" template. By "contact" templates, I mean those that allow for a meeting in the early days. In the second week, a meeting is possible on all playable templates.
By "contact," I meant a planned meeting in the 2nd week. It's not possible on all templates; often, the 2nd week is also spent on development, and sometimes even the 3rd.
Viewers are asking if the magnificent The will agree to a series with stakes, to prove his words?
And how will my desire or unwillingness to play any series with you for stakes prove or disprove my words? Or, in the event of your victory, will you be awarded medals for all the online tournaments in the last 4 years in which you failed? Once again, the logic of your posts is incomprehensible to me, and something tells me that the problem here is not with commas. dom2
Of course, The Magnificent will shut the mouths of all those who doubt his words, which are as solid as a rock!
What is this about, explain what words are you referring to? Although, as I understand it, this is the same "viewer" who is known for receiving bans from many streamers in chat for his inappropriate behavior, incitement, demoralization of the streamer, and simply blatant nonsense related to the game mechanics.
The timer in a battle against an opponent will slightly reduce this amount. Admiral is clearly right.
So what? They won't become more popular if one party of 5 is reduced by 10%.
Added 6 minutes later By the way, if you're really annoyed by someone playing poorly in a faction battle, you can engage in trash-talking in the chat. That's also part of the game.
<Ivor>
