Posts from TOURNAMENT TROUBLES!

to IronAxe
You are very difficult to understand:
first, you claim that based on the battle description (requested from the player), you can determine who played fairly and who used a program.

Now you claim that this cannot be proven:

It will be impossible to distinguish the result of the battle and how it was achieved. So what do you say to that? Why should some be considered cheaters and others not? Either you need to sacrifice speed by refusing to participate in certain battles.

Just be honest and say that you don't have the tools and don't know how to use them, so you're trying to lump everyone together, but it won't work anyway. People will use it to save time, and you can't do anything about it.

This is irrelevant (whether there is a program or not/whether they know how to use it or not). IMHO, all programs are available on the internet, and learning how to use them is not a problem.
And we will do it because there are many of us, and that's why we are raising this issue...

But if we explain to EVERYONE how to do it correctly, without violating the rules of the game itself, then only then will everyone be on EQUAL footing in tournaments!!!

However, encouraging people to play with cheats is NOT CORRECT, and I hope we will fix this soon...

Let me briefly digress from the topic of past tournaments and talk about the future, specifically the fifth stage. Currently, patch 1.5 has been released, featuring a very important function: "battle recording." This means there will be no more questions like "who, how, and with what?" You can always ask for the battle log to be provided (although the number of saves will increase, but this is a small price to pay). This feature doesn't take up too much space (although I haven't recorded any particularly long battles yet, I just haven't gotten to that point).
So, if patch 2.2 with similar functions doesn't come out, the tournament for the fifth installment will be held on the original version.

to IronAxe
You're very hard to understand:
first you claim that based on the description of the battle (requested from the player), you can determine who played fairly and who used a program. Now you claim that this cannot be proven:

Yeah :) If you wanted to understand me, you would have understood a long time ago. I didn't say what you wrote here. Once again, can we try again? I claim that it is IMPOSSIBLE to determine who used ArtMoney and who didn't. However, it is possible to determine from the description who used ArtMoney on a battle that is OBVIOUSLY UNBEATABLE. How would you describe a battle if it cannot be won? And if a person used ArtMoney on a battle that is OBVIOUSLY WINNABLE, but long, what difference does it make how they won it? With their hands, feet, ArtMoney, an automation tool, or something else??? Moreover, you won't be able to determine if they used ArtMoney or not, because according to their description, the battle WILL be won. The main thing is that the person planned the battle in their head, then ran 100 rounds, realized that the battle could be won, but it would take 10,000 rounds. And only after that, they decide to save time on the battle and not strain their computer by running it all night :) by using an automation tool and save themselves from having to play 10,000 rounds manually. What's the problem with you, defenders of fairness?? ArtMoney is practically the same as an automation tool if the player doesn't abuse it on unbeatable battles. Plus, in winnable battles, you need to take into account the consumption of mana and arrows in the battle. That is, you can't use ArtMoney if you don't have enough mana and arrows to finish the battle. You can only use it when you have looped the battle and you are no longer losing resources or they are infinite, and your units are not taking damage, but the enemy is taking damage, even if it's small. You also need to take into account the morale drop (extra turn in battle) for the enemy; it shouldn't happen, otherwise the conditions may not be met and your unit may get hit.
For example: a ballista battle in the third stage. To use an automation tool, you need to have neutral morale. However, you can win the battle manually if you have increased morale. Accordingly, the automation tool vbn does not work with increased morale, but ArtMoney would work. And the result would be the same as if you used the automation tool.

To Kyle: So that you don't suffer, I'll tell you the truth :) in this stage of the tournament, I used the vbn automation tool. That's why, in addition to the sniper, I also had a goblin in my army during the attack. Although, frankly, you can not believe me, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to check the use of ArtMoney in this battle!!! I could have used ArtMoney even with a goblin in my army.

And if I had done that, would I be a CHEATER??? And the others with the automation tool wouldn't be? :) Especially considering that I raised the issue about the ballista :) So, it turns out that the one who is an honest player and tries to explain everything to others ends up being guilty and even a cheater :) They were right on the portal when they said, if you can do it, just do it and play quietly :)

To Qwerty: It's not a fact that if you redesign the map so much that it no longer resembles a game of Heroes, you won't need an automation tool there either :) But your ideas have merit - good luck to you in creating stupid maps :) I like VDV_forever's maps. I agree with Fireball on this.

And we will do it, because there are many of us, and that's why we are raising this issue...

No, you won't do anything. This is not a case where quantity turns into quality :)

And it is not correct to encourage people to play with cheats, and I hope we will fix this soon...

I suggest that people not be idiots and be on equal footing in the tournament with anyone. Fix it!!! :)

Now your position is clear! And you're wrong to say that nothing will work out for us. You yourself said that Qwerty's ideas have merit... so, there's no need to completely rework the map; it would have been enough to simply remove that event (500 items), and no automation would have been needed in this tournament (for fair players).

Added 37 minutes later
Dear tournament organizers! Since you considered my suggestion regarding some adjustments to the participation rules, I have come up with a couple more.
1) Since the question is often asked by newcomers, "Can I still sign up?" or "Sign me up if I made it in time," and so that veterans don't delay, "I'll finish the game and then sign up!" Let's set a limited registration period!
For example, from May 1, 2007, to May 30, 2007 (the second to last day of the month).
2) Regarding sending results:
Why not set a deadline for sending the save file, for example, until May 31, 2007, at 23:00 Moscow time, and WITHOUT taking into account different time zones! After all, the tournament lasts for a whole month, and there would be no unfairness here. Instead, it would significantly reduce violations and misunderstandings.

Dear tournament organizers! I have a few more suggestions regarding some adjustments to the participation rules.
1) Since the question is often asked by newcomers, "Can I still register?" or "Register me if I made it in time."
And so that veterans don't delay... "I'll finish the game, then I'll register!" Let's set a limited registration period!
For example, from 05/01/07 to 05/30/07 (the second to last day of the month).
2) Regarding sending results:
Why not set a deadline for sending the save file, for example, until 05/31/07, 23:00 Moscow time, and WITHOUT taking into account different time zones! After all, the tournament lasts for a whole month, and there will be no unfairness here. But it will significantly reduce violations and misunderstandings.

1. We can register newcomers and answer them; it's not difficult. If you look closely at the applications, you'll see that "veterans" are among the first to register. And one day won't make a difference...

2. What misunderstandings are you talking about? If someone sent a save file on the 3rd, it's clear, but if it's at 2 a.m. Moscow time, it's obvious that they didn't have time to read/learn anything new about the tournament...

So, IMHO, such adjustments are not needed...

What misunderstandings are you referring to? I think such things happen, but only the organizers and those directly involved know about them. The 3rd is too blatant, and 2 hours after midnight really don't make much difference (it's just a violation of the rules). But something in between... like the 1st in the afternoon, there's probably something like that....

P.S. My job is to suggest, and yours is to... :smile27:

Yes, and speaking of the fifth stage, what version should it be played on? Ideally, it should be played with the expansion pack, as that is the latest version. But the way patches are released can change everything drastically. We need to start thinking about this now. Otherwise, they might release patch 2.2 or 1.6 on May 30th, and no one will have time to download it.

Now your position is clear!
And regarding the fact that nothing will work out for us – you are wrong! You yourself said that Qwerty's ideas have merit... so, there is no need to completely rework the map; it would have been enough to simply remove this event (500 units), and in this tournament, no automatons would be needed (for fair players).

Well, on this map, I agree. But when Qwerty suggests his idea of distorting maps, and you support it, you are referring to versions 1, 2, and 3 of Heroes. I'll see what you say about the 4th game :) There, fast units and flying units can be defeated by a single fairy or harpy, considering the selection of the battlefield and conducting the battle on morale using save/load, as in the 4th game, you can save even during a battle!! And regarding what you wrote:
-----------------------
And regarding the fact that nothing will work out for us – you are wrong!
-----------------------
If there are no long battles on the map as you expect, then, of course, neither an automaton nor art will be needed :) But it is extremely difficult to create such a map, especially in Heroes 4. But if you manage to do it, then by all means, I am not against it. I will play in tournaments based on the rules, the proposed map, and the basic logic that determines what is cheating and what is not.

Added after 9 minutes

Okay.
IronAxe, wouldn't you like to challenge Lord-Aries to an online match in the third Heroes game, best of three?

And why are you advocating for him? He can challenge me himself. But I haven't played online even once. I suggest we resume this discussion after the 5th stage of the Kanighem tournament. Because I am going to attend every stage, and since I am trying to achieve a result (although it doesn't always work out), I don't have much free time for other tournaments and games. But I really want to try online games; they definitely have their own appeal, different from the appeal of offline games :)
There will be no problems with long battles online :) I was already told that I need to download something like Hamachi. And in general, Kolbaser and I agreed that he would train me a couple of times, but it seems that this will only be possible after the Kanighem tournament. Let's wait? And for now – everyone to the Kanighem tournament!! :)
PS. And for now, I am still trying to understand the rules of online tournaments and identify some of the pitfalls and how the rules of online tournaments regulate them. Please provide a link where I can discuss this and ask the questions that interest me.

to IronAxe
Regarding Qwerty's ideas, he did go a bit too far (removing all the "stompers").
When "stompers" are scattered across seven slots, you can't just deal with them using a single butterfly!
And I meant all parts of the heroes. In Heroes 1, 2, 3, and 5, you can avoid using automatons in 99% of cases.
Only Heroes 4 remains, but the rules are more detailed there. By the way, have you ever thought that this is precisely why Heroes 4 isn't as popular, even though it has its own charms.

Yes, by the way, regarding the fifth stage. Indeed, which version should it be played on? In theory, it should be played with the addon, as that is the latest version. But the way patches are released can change everything abruptly. We need to think about this now. Otherwise, they'll release patch 2.2 or 1.6 on May 30. No one will have time to download it.

The main thing is that the organizer has time to download it; others will manage during the Walkthrough. At the moment, only one thing is known about patch 2.2 for the addon — that it will exist, but there are no deadlines or anything more concrete.
Therefore, if the situation does not change by May 30, the tournament will be held on version 1.5. Moreover, I want to set the race as Necromancer, because TE imposes too many variables on the Walkthrough process. And it will be clearly visible to everyone how a person broke through this or that battle. So for now, the "replays" argument outweighs EVERYTHING else.

to IronAxe
Regarding Qwerty's ideas, he did go a bit too far (removing all "grinders").
When "grinders" are spread across seven slots, you can't just deal with them using a single tactic!
And we're talking about all parts of the heroes. In parts 1, 2, 3, and 5, you can avoid using "grinders" in 99% of cases.

We'll see what happens. I'm not against it if "grinders" become completely unnecessary. I'm against situations where some people use them, while others, out of false modesty, don't, and the organizers don't care how long the battle took, because, well, I don't know what to say :) besides what I said before, because they won't be able to determine who used what to complete a realistically passable battle.

Only part 4 remains, but the rules are described in more detail there. By the way, have you thought that this is precisely why part 4 is disliked, even though it has its own advantages.

I don't like it myself :) when the rules allow a select few to quickly complete long, winning battles using cheats, while others are forced to manually grind through such battles for days :) For this tournament, I see that they've taken the rules from the "Beastmaster" mode, where blind camping is prohibited. That's already better :)

I welcome automation, but only when it saves time and nothing more!!! (Hero digger, Ballista killer)

Hello to all automation enthusiasts, but only if they SAVE TIME, and nothing more!!! (Hero digger, Ballista killer)

ArtMoney also ONLY SAVES TIME. It's just a Super Automator because it's professional. Yes, you can use it to complete any battle, but who forces you to cheat?! Play fairly and use anything to save your real time, but DO NOT VIOLATE THE RULES OF THE GAME ITSELF!

I'm still against the "ballista killer" strategy. The program itself might be harmless, but it was only applicable in a specific case, which should be avoided in the future. However, it's great that vbn's efforts will be added to the library! This is part of our forum's history!

I'm still against the "ballista-killing" method. The program itself may be harmless, but it was only used in a specific case, which should be avoided in the future. However, vbn's efforts are good, and it's great that they will be placed in the library! This is part of the history of our forum!

However, I wouldn't advise forgetting about the automation tool. The organizers are not gods and can make mistakes. And a specific case may arise at any moment. And if an infinite number of ballista shots is recognized not as a bug but as a feature, then in this case, no one will raise a fuss, but will calmly use the available automation tool :) possibly even from the library of our forum's history ;)