Posts from Is Heroes 3 a sport, like chess? How does the planning differ?

So, in chess, if I understand you correctly, when playing online, one player can use computer assistance, and if the second player does not use this assistance, then the first player gains an advantage.

This isn't even an advantage; it's an inevitable win against an opponent of any level.

And now, here's the question: are you aware of any cases where someone seriously calls online chess a sport?

I was actually referring to playing in person, not online. Online platforms have anti-computer protection. The system scans each game for the use of computer assistance and identifies it with high accuracy. I don't know how it does it, but it works, and the accuracy is almost 100%. There is no such protection in person, even in serious tournaments.

Are there online tournaments where the rules prohibit the use of computer assistance, and where there are penalties for doing so?

Such actions are prohibited on any online chess platform. The rules provide for a ban as a penalty. However, there is an option to enable "using computer assistance" and play with other players who do the same; some people find this interesting.

Are there any serious online competitions with prize pools comparable to those possible in chess today?

Serious prize money is currently available in show tournaments, such as SpeedChess, where the prizes are in the tens of thousands of dollars (if I'm not mistaken), but this is only for the elite.

Added 1 minute ago

In chess, planning is constantly ongoing, while in Heroes, there is a wait for the opponent's turn.

In chess, as in Heroes, people also think during their opponent's turn! Imagine!!!!

I actually meant playing in person, not online. Online platforms have anti-computer assistance measures. The system scans each game for the use of computer assistance and detects it with high accuracy. I don't know how it does it, but it works, and the accuracy is almost 100%. There is no such protection available in person, even in serious tournaments.

How could someone use assistance in serious tournaments in person? An earpiece transmitter? And no one would notice?
I clearly remember reading about cases of lifetime disqualifications from chess for some unknown players who suddenly started winning left and right, even without clear evidence (and I suspect I read it on Heroes & Villains, or a link I saw here on Heroes & Villains).

I'm glad we've clarified the issue of online chess. In our game, there is currently no online control at all, while in chess, as you wrote, the probability of detection is almost 100%.
To clarify, password-protected saves from the early days proved that they are not a reliable form of protection – first, the disqualification of Dsquared, then the mysterious spectator of Helllight, who told him in advance what he would find on the map, where, and what would be in the utopia. In general, the first "something" that resembled a decent control was the control of text-based templates in HotA 1.5.2, and even then, the task was not set very well, so a good idea was implemented incorrectly. But at least it was the first attempt to actually control something. Before that, there were only illusions of solving the problem.
In chess, I was most impressed by the checkbox – "using computer assistance." I think that in Heroes, a similar checkbox – "playing with a maphack" could save us from some of the problems (except for the most severe cases of inflated ego, and in any case, at most in a "season," not in tournaments).

In chess, I was most pleased with the checkbox - "using computer assistance." I think that in Heroes, a similar checkbox - "playing with a maphack" could save us from some problems (except for the most severe cases of inflated ego, and in any case, only in "seasonal" play, not in tournaments).

Haven't you seen a robot battle?) Whoever has the better program wins, so there's a kind of fan base for that :smile04:
And regarding a button for maphackers, that's still utter madness (who would click that button repeatedly?), although maybe someone will find their calling there :)

If the cheater isn't an idiot, but a qualified chess player using a computer in moderation, nothing can be detected. Of course, a candidate master crushing Carlsens and Kramniks won't fly, but careful adjustment of the result is quite realistic. This way he's one of the favorites, and with a computer, he's guaranteed to take first prize (if playing honestly wouldn't work). Or otherwise he's just filler, but with a computer, he shares 3-9 place and gets some prize money. The main thing is to play practically at your own strength and use the help of an iron friend only at the necessary moments, and no one will prove anything.
That's why now online they mostly play blitz, where a serious deterrent is the time to enter moves into another computer (otherwise the program will catch it) and waiting for the computer's decision.
At the same time, even in over-the-board chess, scandals periodically arise (a sudden increase in playing level, "getting lost" in blitz, at secondary competitions and various "fun games", frequent and short trips to the toilet, moves inexplicable by human logic, gross errors explainable only by a "broken telephone", sharp changes in strength of play, sometimes several times during one game, etc.) But even then, proving the fact of cheating based on such circumstantial evidence is very difficult, and a sensible chess player wouldn't allow such gross blunders in the first place.
Even more so in Heroes; if you can somehow open a save, a clever maphack is unprovable. Not everyone is an idiot to run, like Dsquared, into the darkness for utopoy and save on scouting.

That's why now, most people play blitz online, where a serious limiting factor is the time spent entering moves on the other computer (otherwise, the program will detect it) and waiting for the computer to make its move.

The time spent entering moves on the other computer and waiting for the computer to make its move is not wasted at all.
Because the computer responds instantly.
And the move is also entered instantly.
Therefore, blitz doesn't hinder cheaters at all.
I found the only way to save myself - on Lichess, I simply logged out of my account and play as an anonymous Guest. And the world immediately changed - opponents started making mistakes, gaping, just like humans.
The only format is Bullet (in Russian, "Pulya") with 1 minute for the entire game and without increment.
Because in Bullet, half of the moves are pre-moves, otherwise, you won't have time.
The problem has reached a large scale. Yesterday, at the World Rapid Championship, the judges came directly into the hall when the players were already sitting at the tables and searched all the strongest players in the world with detectors.
And they even checked Magnus Carlsen's boots.

I personally don't understand the point of cheats. Okay, I'm a noob in Heroes, but I know a thing or two about chess (1st rank). No matter what game I play, cheats are a sign of disrespect towards myself and my potential in that game. It's like making yourself a lifelong invalid – without "crutches," you'll never be able to achieve results.

In chess, this is especially noticeable, at least for me. And I think the more experience you have in something, the bigger the blow to your self-esteem cheating causes.

And it's not just about self-esteem – isn't it interesting to see how you'll play this particular game? Has your skill improved after N number of games, or not? Playing with cheats is not a good indicator of your current skill.

By the way, about chess: blitz and standard are practically different sports. To put it simply, in blitz, intuition and the ability to quickly assess the position are decisive, while in standard, it's deep strategic planning + calculation of options. Personally, I don't consider blitz to be an indicator of chess skill at all. Blitz is an indicator of blitz skill. For me, chess is about calculating options. The deeper and better you calculate, the better you are as a chess player. That's why I don't like Magnus Carlsen: it's said that his moves in blitz and rapid are stronger than in classical chess. And he himself has said that he simply "feels" what move to make in a position, almost instantly. That is, when he starts calculating options, that is, using his chess talent and skill, his result is worse?

Actually, regarding the difference in planning. My subjective opinion is that in Heroes, the dependence of your actions on the opponent's actions is weaker than in chess. In Heroes, the ability to play out a situation, assess the situation, etc., plays a much bigger role. Your actions don't depend much on whether the opponent's hero moves one square to the right or left. There is, of course, some dependence, but it's weaker. And there's another point: in chess, you have complete information, that is, there is a POTENTIAL opportunity to calculate all possible options and prepare something in response. In Heroes, you don't know, for example, how many movement points the opponent's main hero has, whether he has a red orb/sphere of vulnerability, etc. That is, we are dealing with incomplete information.

BUT! As for the tactical phase, i.e., "final battles" and other battles between heroes, the dependence of your actions on the opponent's actions is much stronger and much closer to chess.

And yes, let's not forget that there is no randomness in chess, but there is in Heroes, even if it's reduced to a minimum on templates like a mirror match. Therefore, it's impossible to calculate everything. I once thought about this. You can, for example, greatly improve your arithmetic skill and accurately calculate how much damage you will take in return. Or just use a calculator. But things like morale, luck, and other probabilistic things cannot be calculated.

Added 29 minutes ago

yes, I have a rank in Heroes

I'm still waiting for the Overlord to be present throughout the game; this could make it more like chess.

More like Dota or other RTS. :D

I personally don't understand the point of cheats at all.

the point is in trolling.

some people sit down to show how good they are, while others sit down to "troll the hardcore players."

the point is to troll

some people sit down to show what they're capable of, while others sit down to "troll the hardcore players."

And where should the hardcore players be upset if the success of their opponents is explained not by skill, but by cheating? For example, the same maphack greatly increases the chances of even a novice against a world champion, because it allows you to assess not only the explored area, but also the entire map.

So, where should the hardcore players get upset if the success of their opponents is explained not by skill, but by cheating?

Yes, right there.
You spent a ton of your time, and they made fun of you. What was the point?
And even though such a "victory" has no competitive value, it's still unpleasant.