HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

Posts from Forum

Tournament Committee
1.0 (1 rating)
Offline Iamsamstan
Registered:
Posts: 1,771
#7141
Auto-translated
For example, I don't like the name of this template; "imbalance" would be more fitting. Otherwise, it's a perfectly playable template, just like SMK, but TDD, forget about it).
435-191-039
Discord Iamsamstan#6087
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Aiwe
Registered:
Posts: 1,330
#7142
Auto-translated
TDD is quite specific; even with an equal start, it can be very monotonous. On the other hand, there was no other way to achieve the main goal – demonizing. The template performed well in the tournament, but no matter what you do with it, it won't become a "favorite." In principle, all templates are a matter of personal preference; however, when it comes to balance, the more template-based the game is, the more the difference in skill becomes apparent. Nowadays, everyone watches streams, and even a beginner, after playing for six months, has a sufficient level to easily execute a strategy on a small or balanced map and win due to a better strategy from a more "skilled" player. In terms of imbalance in starting positions, balance is the worst of all templates. In M200, for example, the game is at least faster and more fun, so I, for one, won't play balance if there are alternatives. Although, to each their own... Speaking of playing for 2-3 months on HotA, I don't even remember when my game ended later than turn 211 after the restructuring. Over the year, there were only a couple of games that ended on turns 211-217, and 95% ended before turn 211. This is, of course, longer than a Jeb or skirmish, but saying that HotA is about enjoying games that last 2-3 months is not correct.
http://heroes3.tv/aiwe
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline =Lizard=
Registered:
Posts: 3,825
#7143
Auto-translated
I want to raise the issue of the relevance of the red-rush rule. In my opinion, this rule made sense when the choice of castles was determined by drawing lots. Now, in almost all tournaments and fan events, players use auctions, as this is both more balanced and more interesting. So, if we are auctioning for the red color, what is the point of this rule now? After all, we strive to have as few rules as possible. I believe it would be appropriate to abolish this rule altogether on all templates if the choice of castles is determined by auctions. If you don't want to be subject to a red-rush, bid more for the red color; it's clear.
http://ru.twitch.tv/lizard_wt
0
⚖️
0
In reply to =Lizard=
User Avatar
Offline Nitro
Registered:
Posts: 1,019
#7144
Auto-translated
=Lizard=
I want to raise the issue of the relevance of the red-rush rule. In my opinion, this rule made sense when the choice of castles was determined by drawing lots. Now, in almost all tournaments and fan games, players use auctions, as this is both more balanced and more interesting. So: if we are bidding for the red color, what is the point of this rule now? After all, we strive to have as few rules as possible. I believe it would be appropriate to abolish this rule altogether on all templates if the choice of castles is determined by auctions. If you don't want to be subject to a red-rush, bid more for the red color; it's clear.
I like it.
ICQ 627769385
0
⚖️
0
In reply to =Lizard=
User Avatar
Offline Javdet
Registered:
Posts: 3,093
#7145
Auto-translated
=Lizard=
I want to raise the issue of the relevance of the red-rush rule. In my opinion, this rule made sense when the choice of castles was determined by drawing lots. Now, in almost all tournaments and fan games, players use auctions, as this is both more balanced and more interesting. So: since we are bidding for the red color, what is the point of this rule now? After all, we strive to have as few rules as possible. I believe it would be advisable to abolish this rule altogether on all templates if the choice of castles is determined by auctions. If you don't want to be subject to a red-rush, bid more for the red color; it's clear.
+++++
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Javdet
Offline Medium_HP
Registered:
Posts: 756
#7146
Auto-translated
Let's consider the scenario. If the opponent gets a quick path to you through a secondary route, then the ability to kill him with a red rush on turn 121 might be worth paying 10k for. If there's no quick path and getting to the opponent's base is difficult, then there's no point in paying, as a red rush is no longer effective on turn 141. Thus, the trade for the possibility of a red rush turns into a pure guessing game with no relation to skill.
Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Medium_HP
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#7147
Auto-translated
On the Sanctuary map, you can leave it as is, as it's rarely played anyway. But on Diamond, Mini-Nost, and Jebb, it's better to remove it.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline =Lizard=
Registered:
Posts: 3,825
#7148
Auto-translated
Focus on Jebus first. The ability to red-rush would save some matches, as there would be at least a theoretical chance to compete with "hit-and-run tactics against the Hive." (whispering) That's how we played in Warlords of the North.
http://ru.twitch.tv/lizard_wt
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,032
#7149
Auto-translated
I’ve been saying for a long time that red rush is completely unnecessary, neither in regular games nor, especially, in trading games.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline KobRa_RR
Registered:
Posts: 3,259
#7150
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
I've been saying for a long time that a rush strategy isn't needed at all, neither in regular games nor, especially, in tournaments.

Well, it's definitely needed on M200. It's needed on CM. It's needed on Panic, on Balance...


0
⚖️
0
In reply to KobRa_RR
User Avatar
Offline Aiwe
Registered:
Posts: 1,330
#7151
Auto-translated
KobRa_RR
Well, it's definitely needed on m200. Needed on sm-ka. On Panic, on Balance....

Agreed, on these templates it can decide too much and trading won't solve this problem.

And in general, on any template Red already has the advantage, I don't see anything useful in paying even more for this color.

In a word — I'm for keeping RR as it is.

Regarding competing with Necropolis against Dragon Fly Hives... Have you considered the situation when both have balanced armies and Red wins due to growth?)) Or how is Blue supposed to compete in this case?))) Give 10k for the Red color on Jebus Cross!
http://heroes3.tv/aiwe
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Aiwe
User Avatar
Offline =Lizard=
Registered:
Posts: 3,825
#7152
Auto-translated
Dim, believe me, I've considered and played through all possible and impossible scenarios on all versions. I believe that since there's no red rush on HL+U, there shouldn't be one on Jebus and Diamond either. Regarding M200, SMK, and L-U, these aren't really competitive. Perhaps Panic is okay, but I would also remove the red rush rule specifically for that map.
http://ru.twitch.tv/lizard_wt
0
⚖️
0
In reply to =Lizard=
User Avatar
Offline KobRa_RR
Registered:
Posts: 3,259
#7153
Auto-translated
=Lizard=
Dim, believe me, I've considered and played through all possible and impossible scenarios on all versions. I believe that if there's no rush strategy on HL+, then there shouldn't be one on Jebus and Diamond either.

I agree about Jebus, and I'm 50/50 about Diamond; it's a fairly interactive map, and I think rush strategies should be limited on interactive maps.
=Lizard=

Regarding m200, SMK, and L-U, it's not really competitive.

I used to think so too, until I won a couple of tournaments with it.


0
⚖️
0
In reply to KobRa_RR
User Avatar
Offline Wicc
Registered:
Posts: 5,099
#7154
Auto-translated
The removal of red rush is not needed to balance the game, but to reduce the number of rules and the number of controversial situations.
1
⚖️
0
In reply to Wicc
User Avatar
Offline Aiwe
Registered:
Posts: 1,330
#7155
Auto-translated
Wicc
The removal of the resource rush isn't about balancing the game; it's about reducing the number of rules and the number of controversial situations.

Well, controversial situations only arise due to a lack of knowledge of the rules. And if we follow the logic that if a trade exists, rules aren't needed, we could remove restrictions on certain castles, but would it be interesting to start, for example, as Necropolis every time without any money? I don't think so. I believe we should strive to balance the game for two players, and the lower the trade value, the better. Besides, depending on the situation, the resource rush can give a very large bonus, or it might not give anything at all, meaning the trade will be a gamble.

Added 1 minute later
=Lizard=
Dim, believe me, I've considered and played through all possible and impossible situations on all versions of Jebus. I believe that since there's no resource rush on HL+U, there shouldn't be one on Jebus and Diamond either.

Well, that's certainly a strong argument :D :D

Added 3 minutes later
By the way, I think we could remove the resource rush on Diamond; it's unlikely to significantly affect the game after turn 121, and besides, replenishing mana with blue mana is quite useful.
http://heroes3.tv/aiwe
0
⚖️
0