Posts from TOURNAMENT TROUBLES! Auto-translated

I disagree... why cram everything into one place? In six months, it will be a complete mess, and for every informative post, there will be ten with stupid questions. I don't see the point.

1) A newbie comes along and looks at the rules topic. (Why would they need to read 10 pages of arguments if they only need the rules?)

2) They don't understand something, and they ask in the topic: "Who wants to play in offline tournaments." They get a detailed explanation there....

3) the newbie becomes experienced and starts to come up with their own ideas... for these purposes, the "TOURNAMENT MATTERS" topic is best.

I think you’ll agree with me that it isn't immediately obvious what the topic “Who wants to play in offline Tournaments” is for – namely, asking questions about the rules. I am not a newbie, but I admit that before your words, I wouldn’t have thought to go and look at this topic in order to discuss the rules… The title just doesn’t seem related to that… To be honest, I haven’t even gone there myself – I understood that there would be nothing new for me there.

1.7. Miscellaneous:
If you have any questions regarding participation in offline tournaments, please ask them in the following topic: Who wants to participate in offline tournaments?

If you have suggestions related to organizing tournaments or proposals for changing the rules of offline tournaments, please write them in the following topic: TOURNAMENT CONCERNS!

If everything is in one topic, it will be more convenient - and reasonable moderation of this topic will prevent it from turning into a mess.

And if you think that three topics filled with similar questions are better than one, then I don’t quite understand why? In all three topics, different people will ask the same questions, often repeating them and starting with the words: "I don't know where to ask – so I'll ask here"... IMHO, the simpler, the better…

Because there isn't a single thread where all these questions are gathered – they are scattered across different forum topics, and it's unlikely anyone will search for them. It's much easier to just ask again... :)

Okay, you’ve convinced me. We won’t go into detailed explanations of every rule point once and for all… We’ll answer questions about Multidefeat, navigation bonuses, how to properly dig up the Grail, etc., several times. Because there isn’t a single topic where all these questions are gathered – they are scattered across different forum threads, and it’s unlikely that anyone will search for them; it’s much easier to just ask again… :)

Kyle will be forwarding questions back and forth, sorting them into these three topics.

I have a suggestion regarding this topic: why mercury? Why not the total amount of resources? What is the justification for this? I think this is especially relevant in the first part of Heroes, where there is no way to exchange all of this. Therefore, we should either calculate it based on gold (which is separate), or based on the sum of resources without gold, or introduce a conversion coefficient to translate gold and resources into specific units.

Why not give ratings for unofficial tournaments?

Because there are many tournaments, and you can't participate in all of them... I try not to participate in unofficial tournaments!

In this case, the rights of a player competing for a rating will be infringed. After all, while completing a campaign, they cannot know how many final submissions will be received and whether a quorum will be reached. If no rating points are awarded for unofficial tournaments, I can say for myself that I am unlikely to participate.
If the rating is awarded in an unofficial tournament when a quorum is reached, I might still take the risk of playing. If the quorum is determined by the number of registered participants, I will definitely know whether or not to play in this tournament. That's the situation.

Interesting scenario... :) I'm definitely in favor of a quorum, but not exactly as you describe it. Let the difference between the official and unofficial tournaments be that – official versus unofficial. I'm generally in favor of rating points in an unofficial tournament, but only according to the quorum rules. And if only one person submits a save, they know they might lose... There should definitely be a difference.

I agree with this. In other words, there is a certain intrigue and logical reasoning on the part of the player regarding their ranking strategy when they choose which of the simultaneously running tournaments to participate in (it's always better to participate in both, but what if real-time play isn't available?). For example, an official tournament might be focused on gaining experience, while someone might enjoy collecting skeletons and participate in an unofficial tournament with that goal. The player knows they perform worse in experience-based tournaments, but they are guaranteed to get a ranking there, although it might not be very high. In an unofficial tournament focused on skeletons, they hope to get a higher ranking, but they don't know if there will be enough participants. And if they go there (and there aren't enough participants) and don't play in the official tournament, they'll end up with nothing. So, this should improve the quality of organization for unofficial tournaments. If the organizers want to ensure that unofficial tournaments always have enough participants, the organizer of the unofficial tournament should strive to find a more interesting map for the game. I like that! ;)