Skip to content

Posts from TOURNAMENT TROUBLES! Auto-translated

5.0 (2 ratings)
In reply to IronAxe
User Avatar
#183
Auto-translated
IronAxe;98200
See, there are so many nuances. No matter how insignificant they may seem, they exist. Or maybe Ataman doesn't share this point of view at all, and in his tournament, THESE NUANCES are prohibited?? Or are they simply NOT YET REFLECTED in this particular rule??
There is only one nuance – what is the true motivation behind your actions? Everything else is just a way to achieve a goal, and there are indeed many of them, but there is no need to pay attention to them in advance. You can always distinguish one from the other based on the facts. Don't overcomplicate things.
Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
#184
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;98205
There's only one nuance: what is the true motivation behind your actions? Everything else is just a means to an end, and there are indeed many of them, but there's no need to pay attention to them in advance. You can always distinguish one from the other based on the outcome. Don't overcomplicate things.
You're trying to simplify things so much that everything becomes incredibly complicated in the end :p
How will you determine what the TRUE MOTIVATION is behind my actions if I have a reasonable explanation for the RETREAT, which results in the weakening of a mixed army?! Aha, we won't pay attention to anything in advance, but you know what they say :) After the fire, and then... the pump :p
Distinguishing based on the outcome? That's no longer a rule. That's already bias from the organizer towards each player. Because they might consider a reasonable explanation for one player's retreat to be UNREASONABLE, while for another player, it might be REASONABLE. And stop telling me - Don't overcomplicate things :) I'm showing with examples what kind of complication can occur with your interpretation of the rules :p
User Avatar
#185
Auto-translated
It is possible to simply prevent the destruction of that neutral unit that was used for escaping (if this unit contained a preserved stack that we did not destroy, and it disappeared after the escape procedure). In other words, you decide for yourself – is it more important to escape and reveal the neutral unit, or to lose a hero/city, but then be able to eliminate that neutral unit if it guards a strategic object...

This can be easily verified – if in the description, the player reports that they escaped, indicating where exactly, then in the final save, you can see these neutral units, and by performing simple calculations to count the remaining units, you can confirm that everything happened as described... :) But this is such a rare case that I doubt we will ever see it happen...
Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
#186
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;98245
You can simply prohibit destroying the neutral unit that was used to escape (if that unit had a valuable stack that wasn't destroyed and disappeared after the escape procedure). That is, it's up to you to decide whether it's more important to escape and reveal the neutral unit, or to lose the hero/city, but then be able to destroy that neutral unit if it guards a strategic location...
Yes, it's possible, I'm not arguing. But I'm emphasizing that if there's a prohibition in the rules, then the exceptional cases that allow you to use this prohibition MUST BE REFLECTED IN THE RULES. And that's not the case with you.
Therefore, I believe that Ataman's rules regarding the weakening of troops are reflected more accurately.
AmberSoler;98245

It's easy to check - if the player reports in the description that they escaped, indicating where exactly, then you can see these neutral units in the final save, and by performing simple calculations to count the remaining units, you can confirm that everything happened as described... :) But this is such a rare case that I doubt we'll ever see it happen...
I understand that it's easy to check. It's just that many people don't know about the possibility of using the prohibition in exceptional situations. As soon as you clarified the rule on the Blitz, one of the players immediately used it, so why don't you include this clarification in your official rules?
User Avatar
#187
Auto-translated
Yes, regarding the first post. In my personal opinion, it should remain on the first page. Why read it every time you want to see the general opinion? If needed, you can easily switch to the first page, even if the thread has 30 pages. They are right there, at the bottom.
Просто еще один
In reply to IronAxe
User Avatar
#188
Auto-translated
IronAxe;98334
As soon as you provided a clarification on a rule during the Blitz, one of the players immediately used it, so why aren't you adding this clarification to your official rules?
The use of this rule in the Blitz by "one of the players" was solely due to necessity and not in violation of the rules... And this is quite clearly visible in the description of their Walkthrough... However, to avoid similar precedents in the future, I consider your demand to reflect all these points in the rules to be entirely justified. Only, definitely, all of this will have to be organized into a separate thread... When the opportunity arises...

By the way, the next stage of the Blitz will be consciously devoid of all rules and prohibitions... Solely for variety in the approach to solving the task. Absolutely EVERYTHING will be allowed, so keep practicing... :) I will consider the absence of your personal final save as a sign of disrespect... :D
Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
#189
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;98342
By the way, the next stage of the Blitz will deliberately be without any rules or restrictions... purely for the sake of diversifying the approach to solving the task. Absolutely EVERYTHING will be allowed, so practice... :) I will consider the absence of your personal final save as a sign of disrespect... :D
It would be better to release the creation already, rather than make me nervous like this. :smile10:
In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
#190
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;98342
But, to avoid similar precedents in the future, I think your requirement to reflect all these points in the rules is quite justified. However, all of this will definitely have to be formatted in a separate topic... When the opportunity arises...
That's what I was aiming for – if the rules become more comprehensive, it will be good for everyone. Let's hope that's the case.
AmberSoler;98342

By the way, the next stage of the Blitz will deliberately be without any rules or restrictions... Exclusively for the sake of diversifying the approach to solving the problem. Absolutely EVERYTHING will be allowed, so practice... :)
Well, that's interesting. But there should be one restriction – using cheat codes is not allowed :p Many people want to learn about the bugs, naturally, so that they don't accidentally use them later, as the organizers don't want to list them (maybe that's right, maybe not). Therefore, such a tournament will be useful. And I think it will be interesting. Let's call it a blitz tournament for the title of Super-Bug-Finder :)
AmberSoler;98342

I will consider the absence of your personal final save as a sign of disrespect... :D
:) No, if I can, I will definitely participate, and if I can't, it definitely won't be because of that :) To show respect for you and your tournament, it will be enough for me to participate in FizMig ;)
In reply to IronAxe
User Avatar
#191
Auto-translated
IronAxe;98390
But there should be one restriction – using cheat codes is not allowed :p
That goes without saying...
Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
#192
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;98190
Of course, the rules of the tournament are up to its organizers. But ideally, the rules should be uniform within the portal, adopted and approved by some conditionally named "coordinating council," and all newly created tournaments should adhere to them by default unless otherwise specified. Read their description once, ask a question if something is unclear (they aren't asked that often, actually), get a comprehensive answer, and don't return to this topic again... It's not difficult for any player and much easier than creating chaos in every tournament thread... I will take care of it when I have time...
Well, comrades... you disappoint me... look at post #101 from 06/04/07
In it, I wrote that this topic already exists and asked everyone to familiarize themselves with it and offer criticism if they wish... and it is called: Rules for Offline Tournaments + FAQ

Dear Ataman, when writing the rules, you were based precisely on this topic.

Therefore, take another look at it; perhaps after reading it, you will have some comments and suggestions...

Sincerely.

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров
In reply to Kyle
User Avatar
#193
Auto-translated
Kyle;98523
I wrote in it that this topic already exists... and asked all of you to familiarize yourselves with it and, if you wish, to criticize it...
1. Not a list of rules, but a detailed, step-by-step explanation of each specific word in the rules... I have to explain many times in various discussions throughout the forum what exactly is meant by a particular word, and there is no single topic that can be referenced and where answers to most questions would be collected... This is what we are talking about...

2. Well, the topic you mentioned is closed for discussion, which means it is not suitable for use in the above-mentioned capacity.

In my opinion, the ideal option is a topic dedicated to the rules, with the first post reflecting these very rules - the ones that are currently in effect. And below - a short lecture on each point. And even lower - discussions, debates, explanations... Over time, we will sort out all the bottlenecks and controversial points, and the rules will take on their final form.
Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
#194
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;98524
1. Not a list of rules, but a detailed, step-by-step explanation of each specific word in the rules... I have to explain in various discussions throughout the forum what exactly is meant by a particular word, and there is no single topic that I can refer to and where answers to most questions would be collected... This is what we are talking about...
2. Well, the topic you mentioned is closed for discussion, which means it is not suitable for use in the manner described above.
In my opinion, the ideal option is a topic dedicated to the rules, with the first post reflecting these very rules - the ones that are currently in effect. And below - a short lecture on each point. And even lower - discussions, debates, explanations... Over time, we will sort out all the bottlenecks and controversial points, and the rules will take on their final form.
That's right. I support AmberSoler. It seems to me that we simply need to open the topic that Kyle links to and improve it, taking into account all the discussions that have already taken place, and place the posts from other topics in it, in which some points have already been discussed. Specifically, move these posts from tournament topics and tournament-related issues to Kyle's topic, and then correct them to remove the unnecessary stuff.
User Avatar
#195
Auto-translated
to AmberSoler and IronAxe: this topic already exists... and it's called TOURNAMENT MATTERS! :p
As you may have already noticed, the discussion about tournament rules... and not only rules... takes place in it.
And all the points that are discussed here are displayed in the topic: Offline Tournament Rules + FAQ

I don't think it's necessary to create more topics...

Sincerely.
In reply to Kyle
User Avatar
#196
Auto-translated
Kyle;98540
to AmberSoler and IronAxe: this topic already exists... and it's called TOURNAMENTS! :p
As you may have already noticed, it's where the discussion about tournament rules takes place... and not just the rules...
and all the points discussed here are displayed in the topic: Offline Tournament Rules + FAQ
I don't think it's necessary to create more topics...
Sincerely.
How much clearer can I explain than AmberSoler did? At the moment, you have identified at least three topics:
1. Who wants to play in offline tournaments
2. Tournaments
3. And directly your topic with the rules
------------------------------------------------
And you are being suggested to combine these three topics into one, so as not to create a bunch of topics. In tournaments, you can provide a link to this one topic. There, you can immediately read everything. Current rules, clarifications, changes, and at the end of the topic, you can ask any unclear questions yourself. If an organizer receives a question about the rules in his tournament topic, he will immediately move it to your combined topic and direct the questioners to that topic. This will be much more convenient than it is now.
In reply to IronAxe
User Avatar
#197
Auto-translated
IronAxe;98544
It’s hard to explain it more clearly than AmberSoler did. Currently, you have identified at least three topics:
1. Who wants to play in offline Tournaments.
2. Tournament-related issues.
3. And directly, your topic with the rules.
------------------------------------------------
And you are being suggested to combine these three topics into one, so as not to create a bunch of topics. In the Tournaments section, provide a link to this one topic. There, you can immediately read everything. Current rules, clarifications, changes, and at the end of the topic, you can ask your own unclear questions. If an organizer receives a question about the rules in his tournament topic, he immediately moves it to your combined topic and directs the questioners to that topic. This will be much more convenient than it is now.
I disagree... why put everything in one pile? In half a year, even the devil himself won't be able to figure it out... and for one informative post, there will be ten with stupid questions... I don't see the point... Here's how I see the situation:
1) A newbie comes and looks at the rules topic. (Why should he look at 10 pages of arguments if he only needs the rules?)
2) He doesn't understand something, and he asks in the "Who wants to play in offline Tournaments" topic.
They explain everything to him in detail there...
3) The newbie becomes experienced and starts to come up with his own ideas. For these purposes, the "TOURNAMENT-RELATED ISSUES" topic is best suited!

Sincerely.

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров