Auto-translated
I hope you understand that you are in the minority.
For example, I was talking about the need for a shorter timer back when the standard timer was increased by 1-2 minutes each year. At its peak, games were played with 10 minutes per turn on Jeb and XL+U, with the timer stopping during combat. Then, the trend started to reverse. The community realized that dragging things out with two or three delays wasn't what Heroes needed; the optimal way to play is to finish a game in one session, even if it comes at the expense of game quality. My current opinion is slightly ahead of the trend; I believe that a game should be completed in an evening, in 3-5 hours.
Or, for example, when mirror matches were introduced, they didn't really catch on and were only played in specialized tournaments or in the semifinals and finals. The arguments were along the lines of "too much stress," saying that it's okay for important games against equally skilled opponents, but it's psychologically difficult for casual games, as you have to concentrate too much on the game; it's better to play something more arcade-like. Now, I see a lot of fun games being played in mirror matches, with players taking turns choosing the faction, etc. The community has realized that playing based on skill is more interesting than playing based on luck. My current opinion is also slightly ahead of the trend; I believe that the basic set of templates should consist exclusively of mirror matches, with everything else being optional and based on mutual agreement.
Or, if we go back even further, we can remember the time when 100% of games on HotA were played on 2sm4d(3), and people avoided XL+U like the plague.
The mechanism here is that the Heroes community is renewed by about 50% every 2-3 years, so it's pointless to argue with adherents of other views; it's better to wait for them to die out naturally. Newcomers, due to their less ideological conditioning, are more receptive to reasonable ideas, so when promoting new ideas, it's better to focus on their reasonableness rather than on political agitation, arguments, etc.
Of course, there were also dead-end ideas that I eventually abandoned myself. For example, the concept of HotA: "shake up the gameplay as much as you want, as long as it's balanced and diverse." Currently, I'm more inclined towards the concept of HotS: "don't shake up the gameplay, preserve as much continuity with SoD as possible; create balance and variety by adding functionality, not by changing it."
Or, for example, the concept: "XL+U are the best templates, a papal game is only possible on them." Now, I'm more inclined towards the concept: "spectacle and a short game duration are primary in a template; everything else is secondary."
