|
|
kiryu133
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Highly illogical
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:26 PM |
|
|
a bunch of different sizes: you could have 1-by-2 hexes for long or slightly larger creatures. you could have 7 hexes for very big, 2-by-3 for very large long creatures and, depending on battlefields size, everything from 7 hexes large to to hundreds. only your imagination is the limit.
____________
It is with a heavy heart that I must announce that the cis are at it again.
|
|
jadw8888
Hired Hero
Avenger Ultimate
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:28 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Elvin said:
And that is why squares annoy me. With hexes 1 movement is always 1 tile, no need for fraction shenanigans. No forced 2x2 sizes either.
It's just cumbersome and artificial.
Again, how do you reconcile hexes with big creatures?
Easy - only takes 2 units to protect shooters in the corner. Otherwise, put 3 units in front of shooters. It's difficult for enemy units to flank from behind without going through your melee units first. In H3 and H4, all units take up one tile on the battlefield and it worked just fine. Also, battlefields were bigger.
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:28 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Again, how do you reconcile hexes with big creatures?
You give them a 'large' attribute and have them be as big as the rest of the models.
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:30 PM |
|
|
jadw8888 said:
In H3 and H4, all units take up one tile on the battlefield and it worked just fine.
Creatures like the manticore and unicorn took two.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:38 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 13:38, 17 Sep 2015.
|
|
kiryu133
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Highly illogical
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:43 PM |
|
|
If you only want 2 sizes, sure. I'd rather have a bunch of them. like long and massive creatures.
____________
It is with a heavy heart that I must announce that the cis are at it again.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:45 PM |
|
|
|
Storm-Giant
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
On the Other Side!
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:47 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Elvin said:
And that is why squares annoy me. With hexes 1 movement is always 1 tile, no need for fraction shenanigans. No forced 2x2 sizes either.
It's just cumbersome and artificial.
Again, how do you reconcile hexes with big creatures?
H1-3 handled it pretty well with 1x1, 2x1 creatures I reckon.
Then again, do we really need big creature sizes?
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:48 PM |
|
|
|
ThatRedSarah
Famous Hero
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:52 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
The only feasible way of implementing big creatures on hexes that I can see is if small creatures are 3x3 and big creatures 5x5.
I like that idea. Maybe add just 1 tile option too for tiny creatures... might bring some nice tactical things with it...
Also what do you think about this?
|
|
EnergyZ
Legendary Hero
President of MM Wiki
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:52 PM |
|
Edited by EnergyZ at 13:54, 17 Sep 2015.
|
I thought we already had positional strategy, like protecting shooters by placing units around it or placing a very defensive unit to protect the town's gates.
ThatRedSarah said:
Town's gates need to be expanded for that.
|
|
ThatRedSarah
Famous Hero
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:58 PM |
|
|
EnergyZ said:
Town's gates need to be expanded for that.
What do you mean? That requires gates to be 2 hexes wide. I think they are 2 squares wide in the new games already, so i dont think it would be a problem. Or did i miss something?
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 01:59 PM |
|
|
ThatRedSarah said:
I like that idea. Maybe add just 1 tile option too for tiny creatures... might bring some nice tactical things with it...
Sure, was thinking something similar along those lines. The thing is asymmetrical units will have problems with turn rates and other stuff, hence why I don't like the idea. We can always go the easy way as Avirosb mentioned where you just have all creature the same in size but with a "big creature" attribute, but I'm not really a fan of that. With flanking and all, too much AoW3 copy for my taste.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
EnergyZ
Legendary Hero
President of MM Wiki
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 02:00 PM |
|
|
What do you mean? That requires gates to be 2 hexes wide. I think they are 2 squares wide in the new games already, so i dont think it would be a problem. Or did i miss something?
Yes, but these are hexes and these ones only appeared up to H3, whose gates had only one hex grid (hence why large creatures occupied two horizontal rather than vertical hexes).
All I am saying when starting to change some major mechanics to take other things in consideration. Otherwise units may not leave the castle through the gate.
|
|
3lion
Known Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 02:07 PM |
|
Edited by 3lion at 14:09, 17 Sep 2015.
|
ThatRedSarah said:
Also what do you think about this?
And how units are supposed to move straight forward?
Like this?
For big creatures even worse lol
|
|
frostymuaddib
Promising
Supreme Hero
育碧是白痴
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 02:17 PM |
|
|
HI-III did a good job with hexes.
____________
"Occam's shuriken: when the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas." -- Dr. Gordon Freeman (Freeman's Mind)
"lol" -- VERRIKER VON ERWINSSEN
|
|
ThatRedSarah
Famous Hero
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 02:18 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Sure, was thinking something similar along those lines. The thing is asymmetrical units will have problems with turn rates and other stuff
Turn rates? You mean if they have to rotate themselves to face up or down? I would just get rid of that and use the H3 mechanics without any rotation problems.
And about flanking.. well i would remove the concept entirely from the game... i dont think it brings anything cool to the table. Units just end up dancing around each other for better hits which doesnt really make sense. At least the defender should always turn to face the attacker if it is the only stack in contact with it. If you want to get some flanking bonus you should always need to tie down the enemy unit with some other unit before trying to sneak up on it.
Then again, i havent played the beta so i dont know how it really works, but this is the impression i have gotten :/
What are your opinions about the whole flanking mechanic? Cool or not?
|
|
3lion
Known Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 02:24 PM |
|
|
Storm-Giant said:
Then again, do we really need big creature sizes?
What kind of question is that? Of course we do! Especially with extended obstacles and flanking systems. Big creatures help you block passage to certain units. Also you may place small units in certain position to block a passage for big creatures in order to kill them one by one.
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 02:25 PM |
|
Edited by Avirosb at 14:26, 17 Sep 2015.
|
TBH tho, the sizes never made much sense.
A centaur used to take up more space than a giant on the battlefield.
|
|
ThatRedSarah
Famous Hero
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 17, 2015 02:26 PM |
|
|
3lion said:
And how units are supposed to move straight forward?
***
For big creatures even worse lol
Small creatures move forwards like you illustrated. For large units it would be in exactly the same way as the small ones. There is no need to perform any bigger movements as you did with the blue line.
Better yet, we could just use the H3 hex grid and have 1 and 2 tile units (and 2D graphic  ).
|
|
|
|
This MEGA THREAD is pages long: 
