Posts from Discussion of the rules for the "only XL-4" tournament. Auto-translated

Perhaps something needs to be changed in the tournament scheme to add interest and dynamism.
Or maybe nothing should be changed at all, and we should play according to established rules.
However, the idea of having a different selection of templates for the game is worth exploring.
Competition on XL-sized maps attracts players with the opportunity to experiment with the map and the variety of possible developments and strategies. And the well-known and declared XL templates for the tournament – 8mm6a, 8xm12a, 6LM10a, 8xm8a, Spider – are quite well-tested and do not present any particular problems for players when choosing directions.
To make this more challenging and demonstrate skill in orientation, the following options are offered, which are reflected in the corresponding poll:
- when playing without a template list:
1. Play with the rmg.txt file containing all signed but only regulated (the name of the template will be visible in the starting description of the scenario - see the picture in the red rectangle) templates.



2. The same option, but play with the rmg.txt file containing all unsigned (the template name will NOT be visible in the starting description) templates.
In addition, for greater variability
3. Add one incognita (unknown) template from those that have not been used before in tournaments to this list (and there are some, and they are quite playable).
And accordingly then
- when playing with a template list:
4. Add a sixth template as an equal member of the existing list of regulated ones under the name random XL, which will actually be this new set of templates in the rmg.txt file. This means that six templates participate in the selection – 8mm6a, 8xm12a, 6LM10a, 8xm8a, Spider, random XL.
Options for answers are allowed – yes and no, to smooth out the range of opinions. That is, these are the first eight points in the poll.
And, of course, options for choosing castles are also being discussed.
5. Random pair + trade for castle choice
6. Castle choice by drawing lots
7. Random castle choice with color change after subjective restart
===========
Important!
The vote allows multiple selections.
You need to choose items 1 or 2, 3 or 4, 5 or 6, 7 or 8 - regarding templates.
And items 9 or 10 or 11 - regarding cities.

2. - It's difficult to restart. What is a good setup for one template might be bad for another.

Part 1: I don't understand what skill is particularly demonstrated in orientation. 8x8m is obvious from day one, as is Spider. 8x12m is also obvious from day one due to the weak guard in the starting zone. Should I choose 8mm6a or 6lm10a? It will become clear within 2-3 days based on the presence of 6k guards from the starting zone. What skill in orientation is involved here??? That's why I have a neutral attitude towards it. Part 2: Definitely not. The generator has a tendency to generate some particularly strange templates, for example, with a Grail from a single obelisk (I don't remember what the template is called). To avoid this, it's better not to. And it's not very appealing to play templates that you don't know. Part 3: Trading and only trading. This is the most objective way to determine the strength of the castle and the color on the template. That's why I'm against it.

The question is, what skill is involved in navigating here???

Well, you seem to understand:p
Although a lot depends on the density and size of the zones, and if you add one or two templates, it becomes more difficult.

Part 2: ... The generator has a tendency to throw in some particularly bizarre templates.

There won't be any of those. Only from the existing five + possibly some playable but unused one.

I'm in favor of random castle selection with a paired option + trading.

And I wouldn't mind adding some templates to the list (8mm6a, 8xm12a, 6LM10a, 8xm8a, Spider.) + a random XL template (from the rmg.txt template set file) chosen from five predefined ones.

Among the presented options, I didn't see any increase in interest or excitement. The templates are just a rough draft, and the castles are a random pair plus some haggling. If new (old) hero templates were added to the pool, that would be interesting, yes, but changing them in a way that makes them seemingly incomprehensible is a failure. Everything has been tried and tested 100500 times, and there will be no secret.

In reality, a “secret” template won’t be secret for everyone; those who know will immediately extract the scheme from the .rmg file. This is what happened when Anarchy appeared. And if you present it as a new template, it's unlikely that anyone will play with it without holding a separate tournament and testing it there. The Heroes community is quite conservative in this regard and doesn't like changes. I have experienced this myself. In the First Snow tournament, I added True Random and Kite to the 7 standard templates, and based on the reports in the 4th post of the tournament, we can conclude how popular they were (not at all). Therefore, the idea of introducing new, untested templates into a large tournament seems rather unappealing.