|
|
Polaris
Promising
Known Hero
|
posted March 16, 2004 08:10 AM |
|
|
Tiles
I haven't seen any topics about this so I decided to make one.
Should Heroes 5 follow the tile based traditions of not only it's ancestors, but of the majority of TBS games? Or should it branch out into a more fluid non-tile based format? I'm talking about the adventure map, not the battle screen, although the battle screen can also be up for debate.
*Note that by non tile based I do not mean really small tiles like the H4 combat screen; I mean having more distinct coordinates than your mouse can touch without adjusting the camera angle.
As I see it, the advantages to tiles:
-Well established, well understood
-Possibility for "perfecting" your turns and strategies
-Cheaper, quicker development (of the game)
-Don't stray from what has been proven to work
Advantages to non tile based:
-Untapped potential
-More modern, might appeal to a new audience
-More natural looking terrain
I personally would like to see the adventure map go full 3D and lose the tiles. However, I'm divided on the combat screen. On the one hand, it's nice to be able to get "perfect" outcomes, but if the battlefield was full 3D (with height variations and all) it might be more logical to maintain continuity with the adventure map. The "untapped potential" advantage is the thing that attracts me to non tile based. It could be anything. Probably the best thing about it is something that won't become apparent until somebody actually does it. So why shouldn't Heroes 5 be the one to take the risk?
____________
|
|
drlucifer
Adventuring Hero
The Surgeon of Death
|
|
posted March 20, 2004 07:21 PM |
|
|
hmmm... don't know. I for one really, really, like the tiles on the battlefield. It lets me know how far I can move everything so that enemies can't kill me but I can get in the first strike next turn (this goes all the way back to when I first played Heroes II and all attacks were First Strike).
The Adventure Map, on the other hand... you might have something there. The only problem I can think of is that it'll either be a little bit better than what we've got now or a lot worse. It'd be a really big gamble. If there was some way to make it an option in the game itself, that'd be great, but I don't know if I trust a bunch of programmers to make it work.
____________
Doctors are not necessarily your friends.
|
|
ThE_HyDrA
Admirable
Famous Hero
The Leader of all Hydras
|
posted March 21, 2004 06:40 AM |
|
|
Intriguing Topic
I certainly haven't heard this topic mentioned at my time at the Heroes Community, it is a breath of fresh air to actually talk about the layout and the format for constructing maps, divising the adventure map and combat map movement systems.
It is true Ubisoft are making some large scale changes in the field of graphics, and probably gameplay also. I think the 'tile system' of the Heroes Series has gone unnoticed by many of the fans, but when Ubisoft sit down and develop the game, they would have to think about how to set it up.
The coordinate systems for the Heroes series have been noticeable, especially in Heroes II's map editor, where it showed the grid references. Heroes IV's in game references appeared when you held your cursor over an object or spot for a certain amount of time and the coordinates would appear. The only use I found for these coordinates was if you wanted to tell someone through words where an object was, where the grail was buried by typing the coordinates of the spot.
On a design based aspect of these tiles, an object takes up a certain number, maybe 2x3 or 1x4. These help the artists and designers create a global size for the structures. The level 4 structures in Heroes IV were all one size, probably determined by the amount it would occupy on the grids.
Another feature the tiles add is controlling the number of objects in a certain space. I'm sure many of you have noticed that when placing an object such as a tree, it is evident that it 'clicks' into place so you are unable to get it exactly where you would like it. This is the adventure map grid restricting your positioning. It limits how dense your forests can be, though you can make them more sparse if you want.
This provides that feeling of uniform throughout the entire game. I think this is a positive point.
To add to your list, Polaris:
Advantages for Tile Based (Adventure Map):
- Uniformity
- Structured
- Easily distinguishable paths
- Easy to construct maps
- Set positions for objects
Disadvantages for Tile Based (Adventure Map):
- Restrictions
- No freedom of placement
- Objects can look too uniform
- Outlines look rigid
Advantages for Tile Based (Combat Map):
- Chess like strategy
- Easy to determine and dictate movement
- Gives a good indication of destination
- Able to plan and predict paths
Disadvantages for Tile Based (Combat Map):
- Restricted possibilities
- Paths can be pre-determined
- Linear
Reasons for Non-Tile Based (Both):
- Non-conformist
- Freedom of Placement
- Greater variation in landscape
- Deals with 3D better
- No restrictions
I personally would like to see the tiles stay in both senses. On the adventure map they are vital because it is easier to pinpoint a spot and know exactly where you are on the map. It provides more structure, I think a system without grids and tiles would be too free and wouldn't provide that sense of strategy.
On the combat map, losing the tiles would be a large blow for tactical combat. The movement system depends on the grid greatly, so removing it would cause Ubisoft to devise a new movement system, which would be difficult without reverting to the grid system. Also, it would lose that chess-like feel of Heroes I - III, and especially King's Bounty if you've played that. (It is like chess with obstacles and creatures). Either way, ridding the game of the tiles would be detrimental to the game.
A large positive (even though it is outweighed by the negatives) would be dropping the square coastline that was evident in the earlier Heroes games and to some extent in Heroes IV. I think you mentioned this in your post and you do have a point about that.
Although, the tiles are quite small, and if you selevt the smallest in Heroes IV, the square look doesn't feature when drawing the coastline.
Thanks to Polaris for creating this topic, I know it wouldn't be at the forefront of everyone's mind when they think about Heroes V. 
____________
"Dragons may breathe fire, but Hydras have many heads." - The Creed of Hydras
"As the Dragon drew its breath, the Hydra pounced, swiftly but powerfully, and the Dragon was defeated.”
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted March 30, 2004 08:53 PM |
|
|
I don’t think players do realize how crucial this exact issue is for the whole game. It is so important, that imo, it is decisive whether or not you’ll like the combat system overall, or the adventure map itself. Even though, some might disagree with me here, I think that the combat map in homm4 can hardly be named “tile-based”. It has that isometric view, whatever, but if you look on the ground you’ll notice that there aren’t any structural fields that will help you plan your strategy in any way. Sure, there are those tiny little squares, but if the ranges of movement were smoothed a little, you’d get a perfectly non-tile based combat map. Now, how many of you actually find any help while planning the strategy from those little squares? There, you see that heroes4 was a break-through in the use of non-tile maps. But alas, look at the result: it made the whole combat system imho (along with the heroes thing) suck! You cannot plan movement, line-of-sight, positioning units etc.
Now, let me go through the arguments Hydra mentioned about tile/non-tile based maps and comment on some:
Disadvantages for Tile Based (Adventure Map):
- Restrictions
- No freedom of placement
OK, makes some sense. But why would it be so important for me whether to put the building a millimeter left or right? If you are a sick perfectionist, you might care about this. Otherwise, this reason is completely meaningless.
- Objects can look too uniform
- Outlines look rigid
Well not really. Remember the buildings from homm4 and you’ll see that they are all very diverse. You can make your object any shape you want (not necessarily a square one) up to 3x3 maximum size (personal matter here; I hated those castle-sized buildings).
And about the outlines looking rigid. This was not the case in homm4, not even in previous games. Some of the tiles that are free for movement, had some part form a neighboring object, and at the same time, some of the tiles that belonged to an object, i.e. were restricted for movement, were not fully covered with the “substance of the object”.
Disadvantages for Tile Based (Combat Map):
- Restricted possibilities
I think this is many times outweighed by all the other advantages (planning of strategy and gameplay).
- Paths can be pre-determined
Is this a good point or a bad point? If I understood correctly, you put the same thing in the advantages section. Probably this is a subjective evaluation, but my subjectiveness tells me this is a huge advantage, not disadvantage. After all this is a strategy-game, not a real life simulation.
- Linear
Sorry. I don’t understand what this means.
Reasons for Non-Tile Based (Both):
- Non-conformist
- Freedom of Placement
- Greater variation in landscape
- No restrictions
I explained these previously.
- Deals with 3D better
Now, this is a core reason. Why would a game developer limit the potentials of 3D technology, and make it an “old-fashioned” chess-like board?
I predict they’ll remove the tile based maps. Not a grave decision though, if they don’t repeat the mistake form homm4. Somehow, a way must be found.
Priorities:
- determine the radius of enemy creatures, so that you can stand right behind their area of attack.
- determine the range of enemy shooters, for the same reason as above.
- determine the line-of-sight of enemy shooters, so that you can hide behind obstacle/other creature.
- be able to “count” where to move, so that the next turn you can get the enemy shooter.
Solution:
Each creature should have a precisely defined shadow circle that represents it. When you move the cursor in your own creature’s radius, the circle also moves with it. When you enter some enemy creature’s radius with the cursor, the circle of your creature turns red (for e.g.), and a transparent enemy creature radius shows up until you exit the “enemy area”. This way you can position your creature just out of reach of the enemy, but the closest possible without being attacked.
Of course there’s the problem when the two armies clash, of too many useless radiuses overlapping on the field. For this purpose, there can be an on/off switch for the radius show-up.
To ward off against enemy shooters, there can be a tiny icon next to your cursor, that will show whole/broken arrow while you move the cursor within your creature’s own radius.
For the third problem, each time the cursor is set behind an obstacle, out of reach form the enemy shooter’s line-of-sight, the enemy line-of-sight border should appear next to the obstacle, so that you can precisely navigate your cursor.
And for the last problem, I think a right-click would do the trick. It’ll show you the new radius your creature would have, should you position it in the spot where you right-click.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
Asmodean
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Heroine at the weekend.
|
|
posted April 03, 2004 03:44 AM |
|
|
Another thing to consider if the tile system was lost is the map editor.
How much more difficult would it be to make a map without the tile system to help with issues such as passability and creature placement for mine guards?
I don't see it being any easier, in fact it might be a bit of a nightmare, and could possibly lead to there being no map editor!
Or no random map generator! The thing that was missed sorely in H4! Without some kind of rules based on the tile system how can any random map program cope with all the other variables that would inevitably arise from losing the tile system!
And since the tile system is an integral part of the HOMM series, why would Ubisoft make such a bold move, which may alienate old fans. Sure we might buy H5, only to realise that it's crap. But that would surely be the end of the series as we know it if such a thing were to happen.
____________
To err is human, to arr is pirate.
|
|
Polaris
Promising
Known Hero
|
|
posted April 10, 2004 01:24 AM |
|
|
Sorry to bump such an old topic, but I just thought of a major advantage of removing tiles: scaling. You can make each unique instance of an object a different size if you scrap the tiles. This is something that CANNOT be simulated with tiles. Want to have a map that is "zoomed in" on just a single forest? Scale everything up (would work great for those RPG maps where you don't necessarily have a town). Want to have a Axeoth/Enroth-wide map? Scale everything down (towns and heroes included)! I think that would add a lot of vitality to the game. The perspective and scale of the world could be changed by the mapmaker.
Imagine a map that is just one big town, and you use diplomacy to recruit individuals (not armies) to your cause. Doing with the current engines is awkward to say the least. But if everything was scaled appropriately it could work out. Also, imagine the possibilities for adding "secret" zones that are just barely pathable!
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted April 11, 2004 06:08 PM |
|
|
@ Asmodean
Yes, I agree that it’s fairly easier to have a tile based system, given the difficulties in map-making or random map generating. But it’s also not impossible to do it with a non-tile system. Remember real-strategy games random map generators? Passability can be easily resolved and creature placement also (if each has a range that will not allow anything to pass without fight).
@ Polaris
I don’t agree that different size and form of objects cannot be achieved with the tile-based system. I already explained how. And the thing you’re saying about zooming and perspective; I thing that’s more connected with the 3D engine that will be used, and not the tile/non-tile system.
“Also, imagine the possibilities for adding "secret" zones that are just barely pathable!”
No, no, no. That’s not a charachteristic for heroes games. That would mean the removement of the passability cursor (the little horse), since there isn’t any point in having that, because it will only take few moments to circle with the cursor and find any “secret paths”. That’s not a positive thing, it’s a flaw.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
Polaris
Promising
Known Hero
|
|
posted April 11, 2004 10:35 PM |
|
|
Svarog,
Yes you can graphically scale things in a tile based system, but what you cannot do is you cannot change the pathing of objects when you scale them (at best, it will not be clear what is pathable when you change the size of objects). It's a pointless and confusing endeavour that benefits no one when you try to scale things but still place them on a tiled grid.
Also I don't see how it would be detrimental having the ability to place secret areas. I doubt any competitive multiplayer maps would have them just the same way competitive multiplayer maps don't make use of a lot of other kinds of functionality in the engine. But for special situations the map maker wants, he or she could make a secret area. Are you also against removal of doodads in the scripting of Heroes 4, because this has the same potential for abuse?
I also see possibilities for changing sizes of objects in game. You could have some creatures that have the attribute "tiny" and when you break them from your army they can go through narrow crevaces not passable by a normal sized army. Or you can have a spell that does the same thing. You can also do the reverse (for instance, to help you run away- cast a spell enlarging the opposing army for a day to keep them from following you thru a chokepoint). Or each day a volcano in the center of the map could expand, eating up resources and cities around it. How could you do these things if you stick with tiles?
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted April 13, 2004 02:53 AM |
|
|
Sorry, but I ahve a language handicap, and cant understand what some expressions mean ("pathing of objects", "doodad" whatever).
Nonetheless, i feel that most of your "possibilities" are not suitable for heroes, but for a RP game or real-time strategy. Imo, implementing things like secret areas, army enlargment, volcanoes will totally fundamentally change/spoil the whole concept of heroes, as a thoughtful strategy game.
Moderator's note:This topic has been closed, as it refers to an older version of the game. To discuss Heroes 3, please go to Library Of Enlightenment, to discuss Heroes 4, please go to War Room Of Axeoth, to discuss Heroes 5, go to Temple Of Ashan.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
| |
|
|
