Posts from SoD и Necromancy.

Guys, don't waste your time on nonsense, focus on Hota, and leave SoD alone. There's no need to change anything. You won't make the game any better by doing it this way!

:smile24: I can understand when very experienced and strong players strive for balance, but what is the point of this balance for the other 95 percent? Imbalance is all you have against the top players! Leave the Necropolis alone! :smile24:

The poll resembles a presidential election. There are no worthy candidates to replace the current ones, so we'll leave it as is :D

Added 31 minutes ago

I'll add some more statistics:
Favorites 9 (all games)
213 games.
Of these, Necromancer was not chosen at the start 357 times, and Necromancer was chosen at the end - 51

Let's try to separate the playoffs
39 games.
Of these, Necromancer was not chosen at the start 66 times, and Necromancer was chosen at the end - 13.

Favorites 10 (all games)
469 games.
Of these, Necromancer was not chosen at the start 770 times, and Necromancer was chosen at the end - 109

Let's try to separate the playoffs
128 games.
Of these, Necromancer was not chosen at the start 196 times, and Necromancer was chosen at the end - 33.

In the end, the numbers don't seem that bad: 14% of games in general and from 17 to 20% in the playoffs. But this statistic takes into account games on all templates, including Jebus, due to the specifics of the game, where it doesn't make much sense to develop Necromancer for other Castles. If we calculate without this template, then Necromancer is chosen much more often.

Any changes must be well-thought-out, not pulled out of thin air.

Changing the percentage of the Necromancy skill is the only adequate way to balance Necromancers (and this change needs to be very carefully thought out and calculated) — and by no means should we completely neuter them, as was proposed by restarting individual heroes or, even worse, by leveling them similarly to Isra and Vidomina. In fact, reducing the Necromancy percentage would allow Isra and Vidomina to be rehabilitated (again, by reducing their percentage gain per level to, roughly, exactly half — to 2.5% instead of 5%). Because otherwise — in the case of the leveling-based scheme proposed by the thread starter applicable to all Necromancers — we would end up with a total of 16 heroes that would be a priori impossible to level properly.

Another thing I’d like to note is that Tant’s value is clearly overestimated and is not supported by objective statistical data (except for Tant as a starting Necromancer hero). In other words. Al Feyn, who beats his chest about the reasoning of his position, didn’t even bother to look at game statistics. And if he did, for some undisclosed reasons he didn’t provide them, yet still set out to try and reform something.
Why was it necessary to create such a poll, which, by his own words, no longer directly relates to the "Pets" tournament? Got nothing better to do? Why are there so "few" answer options in the poll? Where are the options that simultaneously reduce Necromancers — and simultaneous solutions for Conflux, which would become stronger after such a Necromancer nerf, even though it’s already a top-tier town? Where is the nerf for Luna (burn the witch!!!) — an undeniably top hero who, without any army, breaks not just guards but GO-level guards in the first week, regardless of starting town? All questions are rhetorical...

If the thread starter’s goal was to establish the truth, i.e., an objective picture and the opinion of the majority of the community on this issue, then the initial poll should have consisted of only three options:
1. I think Necromancers need to be nerfed.
2. I think Necromancers don’t need to be nerfed.
3. I don’t care, I’m ready to play both ways.

And only after this gathering of public opinion, if the overwhelming majority (at least 75-80%) speaks in favor of such a need in general, then we could jointly look for a solution that would satisfy the majority of players. :smile23:

But the thread starter went a different route (because the goals are different) — discussed with someone in private messages and, based on a small and unrepresentative selection of subjective opinions (and the current poll results already confirm this, indicating a trend line), essentially presented something of his own as a widely overdue and pressing issue. Although, after analyzing the game statistics of the same Al Feyn, this pressing issue bursts like a soap bubble, because, I repeat, with left Tant, out of 190 games, he essentially won, by his own words, only once (and considers this an indicator of the need for change) — actually he won twice and lost twice, but still that’s less than one percent of wins — or maybe even zero (depending on how you count), and against him, left Tant wasn’t played at all: now we’re supposed to make global changes for less than one percent.
All of Al Feyn’s argumentation about Tant boiled down to one game against GUNAR.

Without Tant, the game wasn’t salvageable at all. Shakti came almost straight to me through the Griffin Conservatory and would have killed me. Probably the only hero in the entire game that saved the match — Tant. He pulled out the first final by a hair. And this case certainly stuck in my memory very strongly, and I remembered it first and foremost when I wrote my message.

In other words. We have a conditionally one-shot lineup in favor of the opponent. We get an antidote to this one-shot lineup in the form of a strong Necromancer. The only antidote, according to Al Feyn. And we’re not happy with this very antidote — we urgently ban Tant, down with him, let one-shot lineups not be salvageable at all anymore... Did I translate that correctly into Russian? :smile22:

Again — well, you have a small sample size, so take a dataset from someone like FireToSky. And see if your position holds up or not. But no... (because there’s no such goal...) :smile06:

Thanks to Nodl for the statistics from previous Pets tournaments. Here we can actually discuss based on data. It’s obvious that Necromancers are decisive. In the finals — even more so (and finals are already a level of serious play).
korovka1987, 20% in the playoffs is quite a lot — because from the data set, as you yourself noted, you can remove Jebus Cross, and that 20% could turn into something significantly larger, and here you also need to consider that there are lineups where the player simply didn’t get a Necromancer in the tavern/prison in the first week of the game.
In other words, the imbalanced nature of Necromancy itself becomes obvious. And this imbalance is extreme. And the extremity of this imbalance can be calculated, although to do that you’d have to stop blathering and work with a large data set. And based on objective data, propose specific mathematically grounded solutions. :smile14:

Actually, based on Al Feyn’s posts, I increasingly get the impression that he has a huge amount of free time and simply has no one to talk to, but he still wants to be "socially significant" in his own eyes. As one autistic boy in our rehabilitation program used to say several times a day: "I wish people would love and respect me..." :smile15:

I consider the poll in the form proposed by the thread starter to be completely absurd, so I didn’t click on it. :smile16:

Merlin provided a very detailed and well-written explanation about Necromancy. +++ Here's some statistics regarding SM-Masters: On a template that isn't particularly Necromancy-focused, 250 games have been played so far. Necromancer was chosen as the starting faction in 37 of those games. Other factions used Necromancer as a secondary faction 80 times out of (250*2-37) 463 – that's 17.3%. I also didn't vote because I think the poll needs options that are described in the message above. In the last Only XL, 269 games were played. Necromancer was chosen as the starting faction in 50 of those games. Other factions used Necromancer as a secondary faction 98 times out of (269*2-50) 488 – that's 20%. (In the group stage, 63 out of 360 – that's 17.5%. In the playoffs, 35 out of 128 – that's 27.3%)

Merlin, I understand that you were offended by the joke about blue decks, and that's what triggered all of this. You can be sure that I will take this nuance of your emotional makeup into account in the future. But since there is a direct lie (possibly made by mistake) about me personally, I will respond to it.

Al Feyn... decided to try to reform something

However, regarding Necropolis and balance in general, this simply wasn't the case. And I repeated this several times. Almost the first thing I said about the reality of changes in gameplay was that nothing would be done based on my (or a few people's) ideas about balance. But you stubbornly ignore these words, even though I have already pointed them out to you, and now the final result has emerged, which confirms that everything turned out as expected.

Why was it necessary to create such a poll... essentially presenting something personal as a common, long-standing concern?

The problem is that I didn't come up with or suggest these ideas. I posted the most interesting ideas from the discussion thread, which were originally conceived and proposed in the thread by someone else. Oops. That means it definitely isn't "my own" idea (I am sure of this because I know perfectly well that I didn't have these ideas in mind before I read them, and anyone can scroll through the discussion thread and check when and by whom they were written). Regarding my motivation, I have already said everything clearly. Those who wanted to understand did so. My task is to run the tournament. Resolving any issues is not part of my job description. I am forwarding the Necropolis issue and this poll back to the community. I cannot resolve it, and I wasn't going to take on everything myself. I gathered information from those who could provide it. I collected enough for myself and closed the topic. I created the poll exactly as it is - based on suggestions from the Favorite Factions Discussion thread. Did I worry about the answers with the aim of changing the rules? Well, yes. But do you know why? Because I really wasn't planning to change the rules. You invented this yourself out of nowhere. I researched the question, as neutrally as possible. It may not be perfect (because I still have my own opinions), but the main goal was precisely that. And what happens next – whether or not to make changes – initially depended on the results of the research. The results of this poll serve one purpose: to give an answer to opponents of Necropolis among the tournament participants, explaining why I will not include any Necropolis-related proposals in the tournament (because the obviousness and simplicity of the situation are illusory). And two: they are a starting point for further discussions on this topic, which can be used as a basis to improve things in the future if this topic is important. Is the poll wrong? Create a better one. Good luck. This is no longer my task as the tournament organizer. I volunteered to run my favorite tournament in SoD when all deadlines had passed and there were zero candidates. Of course, I am doing everything the way I think is right. Perhaps I am doing something wrong. But could you be more specific - what exactly? The only real problem, so far voiced and confirmed by facts, is that I keep the discussions open and don't dismiss ideas without thinking about them and discussing them - and where there are discussions, there are different points of view, and where there are different points of view, there are emotions, and some people end up with negative feelings after the discussion. That's the problem - the discussions leave a bad taste in people's mouths. Seriously? Someone's resentment is a problem? And is it really my fault that someone has negative feelings? Because some people do have negative feelings, while others don't feel any negativity from these same discussions. Maybe the problem lies in the person who feels resentful? Then try to deal with your own resentment independently, okay? You are adults, aren't you? If you have any real complaints against me, please contact me and we can discuss them. But just blindly hating because of your own resentment? Can't we do without that? :smile35: And finally. Am I lacking communication and looking for love and respect here? Merlin, look at my behavior. Something doesn't add up. I seem to be the least like someone who needs love and respect. :smile32: You will have to search hard to find someone whom I was too shy to tell what I think of them directly. By the way, if you don't drink alcohol and don't cheat in blue deck matches, I also apologize for the poor joke about you. Oh. And if the pendulum inside your head swings in the opposite direction and you get the idea that I am a hater, you can try to verify this by searching for cases when I simply hated someone or responded with hate to hate directed at me. Compare it with others. And once again discover that something doesn't quite fit. p.s. The thorough analysis of statistics from all my games, even though I mainly play HotA, was also amusing. A deep dive into the essence of the question. :smile20: p.p.s. In conclusion. For the esteemed public, I answered the blatant lies made against me. Simply because I can. Merlin, perhaps I should refrain from philosophical conversations with you indefinitely. And I won't troll you anymore; there are only advantages, after all. I hope that you too will somehow manage to refrain from new attacks on me, as I will no longer be able to respond. (This does not apply to communication regarding the tournament - I already wrote to you about this ).

I agree with Merlin! Indeed, reducing Necromancy is the simplest solution, without adding "workarounds" in the form of bans on individual heroes and simultaneously rehabilitating Izru and Vidomina. As a reminder, in HotA, Necromancy was reduced to 5%–10%–15%. IMO, the "golden mean" is 10%–15%–20% – it allows you to start criting, but without making it overpowered in the late game. If, in addition to this, the Amplifier is unbanned, then the problem of Necromancy for other factions is solved, and Necropolis retains its unique feature.

Recently, I was informed that there are a lot of people and a fairly large community playing the classic SoD without many of the restrictions that exist on HeroesWorld, and that's probably why Vog is in demand:
People love SoD precisely for its features/bugs, the imbalanced nature of their favorite heroes, and so on and so forth. When you strive to balance and equalize everything, it's no longer the same game. That's why chess will never be as spectacular as one might wish, and it's hard to attract someone not interested in it as a spectator. I still dislike that Isra and Vidomina are overpowered through the roof thanks to the rules.
Yes, Necromancers need balancing, but I would prefer that this be done not by banning heroes and their skills (at the very least, nerf necromancy), but rather by coming up with anti-imba mechanics for other towns. That would be more interesting. Heroes 3 will never become a cybersport discipline, so maybe we shouldn't kill it trying to turn it into something soulless but suitable for everyone. We already have enough semi-finished products in our lives.

It's been discussed here countless times – everything they write is correct. Kirill is absolutely right, and Sergey is also right. SOD is SOD – it is what it is. Yes, you can – carefully, gently, lovingly – "kiss" Necropolis, but do it CAREFULLY, not in a way that leads to banning, cutting, or prohibiting, as Caliban correctly wrote, and I also messaged Alfein in private. What then? Will logistics, Luna, Alamar, Jedite, and Solmir join them? If you change even one thing, you can pull on a thread that you won't be able to untangle...
Regarding the topic, all the changes are currently impossible. Programmatically, it's impossible to implement them in a day or by December 5-6-7. And talking about it is just empty words. It's best to leave things as they are, and if there's such a question, move the topic to another thread and discuss it by answering questions and engaging in a discussion with the "daddies" who know what they're talking about, and not just posting. Well, like me, haha.

I'm certainly no expert and I don't play very well, but honestly, this is starting to look like some kind of joke.
Why stop there, let's just play by WCL rules - no necro, flux, fly, dd, implo, db, logistic.
Now that would be true heroes

Added after 2 minutes

I was recently informed that there are a lot of people and a fairly large community playing classic SoD without many of the restrictions found in ХВ, and perhaps that is why Vog is in demand:
SoD is loved specifically for its features/bugs, the overpowered nature of favorite heroes, and so on and so forth.

Excuse me, but what is the skill level of this community?