|
| Thread: Why didn't Heroes 4 kick in like a bomb & Wishes for Heroes 5 |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
posted October 02, 2002 07:23 PM |
|
|
But you need the 100% magic immunity. An even more gruesome example is the Stone Gazing of the Medusa. It's a non-damage spell and anything less than 100% immunity here is one dead hero.
I would, however, consider a skill for Mages which Reduces the Magic Resistance/Magic Immunity of enemy heroes when they cast spells on them (but would not work for allied creatures under your control). That would be balanced.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted October 07, 2002 10:59 AM |
|
|
I hadn't thought about the stone gaze, you're probably right. I brought the whole reduce magic resistance thing up to make high level mages still powerful, but along with harder to find good spells creating such a mage would be more challenging. Damn, I wished there were more people with fresh ideas around Heroes V. Respect for The_Hydra who came up with some fresh ones.
This is an idea to give type-specific heroes certain abilities at fixed level up caps. The combat skill tree is removed as previously suggested and the defense/offense of heroes should go up at every level up, as should their magic resistance.
Death hero abilities level ups:
Lvl 1: undead
Lvl 5: skeletal
Lvl 10: minor life ward (25%)
Lvl 15: curse
Lvl 20: fear
Lvl 25: drain life (25%)
Lvl 30: life ward (50%)
Barbarian hero abilities level ups:
Lvl 1: courage (mind-morale affecting spell immunity)
Lvl 5: archery
Lvl 10: first strike
Lvl 15: strikes twice
Lvl 20: negate first strike
Lvl 25: block (50%)
Lvl 30: attack all adjacent enemies (no enemy retal)
Goblin hero abilities level ups:
Lvl 1: logistics (further movement in combat)
Lvl 5: poison resistance (25% chance that poison is dispelled at start of turn)
Lvl 10: agility (first strike when retaliating, retaliates twice)
Lvl 15: jump (ability to leap over small obstacles, not walls)
Lvl 20: siege (double damage to town gates and artificial enemies such as ballistae, golems...)
Lvl 25: stun
Lvl 30: stamina (spell, one time use per combat to increase attack, movement and damage for two turns at the cost of defense and health)
More to come if this idea is appreciated.
____________
~Vegetables don't spam~
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted October 07, 2002 03:43 PM |
|
|
Some of the suggestions I like, but others are perhaps not that suitable to have for the race.
Your suggestions is perhaps better suited for the topic "Heroes specialities according to Heroes race" since this is essentially what you propose here. Crossposting this suggestion there seems a good idea to me.
I see that you choosen to list abilities per alignment, but isn't the actual race of the creature a lot more suitable to use as basis for additional abilities?
For instance a Vampire Death Hero would never become "Skeletal", and should probably never get Life Ward either. But for instance Drain Life and some form of Charm/Hypnotize ability would be expected for the Vampire Hero.
A Minotaur hero could have blocking (with increasing percentage) and a Medusa hero could have stone gaze (with increasing percentage).
Some of the Barbarian skills are already duplicated in skills.
I do believe that Race specialities should be limited to 1 or 2 per race as it would be too much too keep track of otherwise.
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted October 07, 2002 04:48 PM |
|
|
You're right, didn't know the thread was there, sorry. And there has been posted a lot on the topic already. Need to find other unexplored fields for Heroes V. Magic system changes do not seem to be a popular discussion topic, hehe.
____________
~Vegetables don't spam~
|
|
hobgoblin
Known Hero
captain hobgoblin
|
|
posted October 07, 2002 10:14 PM |
|
|
I have not a lot of fresh ideas to bring, and also, I played very a very
little time to h4.
But since I didn't really like it, I have things to say.
First of all, I would like to come back to certain things you said:
1.
'It's a mistake to have published the game without the multiplayer",
Not really. I completely agree with you that the tame is not finished,
it's just like a beta version. But I don'tknow where is the mistake.
What I mean is that, if they haven't published the game with the
multiplayer, it is because they were really late. They had the
choice to do that, or to make people wait 6 months more.
Anyway, I think it will not be the same with H5, because they will
create the tame on the h4 base, it will be easier.
2.
Then, if the combat skill stay the same, I think it's not a good
idea to penalize heroes for wearing some artifacts. A spellcaster hero is
way too vulnerable if he doesn't have the combat skill. If he's penalized for
wearing might artifacts, he's even more vulnerable.
3.
To aliment your debate on magic resistance :
I don't see solutions for my problem, but my problem is:
magic resistance is a lucky skill. Players prepare strategy with their spells,
then, one of them spell does not work because of magic resistance, so the
strategy is broken. And the one who has the magic resistance did not use a
strategy or anything to break this of his opponent, he just had luck.
I find it's not a good system. Even if a part of luck is good, it's too
important.
4.
To give my point of view, I don't really like the system of fighting
heroes. It may be because I'm conditionned by the preceeding Heroes games.
But, it makes big single guys who defeat an army only by themself, and I
find it bad. I've not played warcraft 3 but I believe it's the same,
maybe worse. Heroes rush... what easy and poor way to win a map...
And for heroes, it makes the campain awfully boring.
5.
The sounds are not very good, I know what I say.
For the music, I like, but, is it me or I hear quite always the same music?
And for the battlefield, the sound of creatures hitting are good, but,
first we don't here the creautres moving, or very low, and there are a lot
of awfull sounds wasting the battle atmospheer:
The bad moral for example, or a lot of spells, like confusion, bloodlust...
Sometimes, when the battle go fast, I have the impression to hear a toilet
flush, it's not really nice.
6.
To finish quickly, but I would have a lot to say about it:
There are many things I don't like with creatures:
Too few levels, I think the same system, but with 5 levels would be better.
Toomuch difference between different levels:
now, if I'm right, there is no l2 creatures as good as a l3 one,
the same for l1 and l2, and l3 and l4. It's not an enormous problem but...
There are way too few l1 creatures:
I say l1, but it's true also for l2,a and maybe l3.
It's totally disproportionned:
15 crossbowmen per week, and 4 thunderbirds!
6 nomads per week and 6 ogres!
...
It's so bad, even if my numbers above are wrong, which is very possible,
it's really too bad.
And the last point, I already cryed along about it on HC, but the threads
are way way back, so I say it again:
I dislike the creatures of H4. A lot of nice ones are gone and some really
ugly ones have come. I won't make a list, but it would be really nice to
have back creatures like dendroids or ??? goblins  , just for example.
____________
Take me down to a pardise city where the girls are green and the grass is pretty
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted October 08, 2002 09:11 AM |
|
|
Quote:
'It's a mistake to have published the game without the multiplayer",
Not really. I completely agree with you that the tame is not finished,
it's just like a beta version. But I don'tknow where is the mistake.
What I mean is that, if they haven't published the game with the
multiplayer, it is because they were really late. They had the
choice to do that, or to make people wait 6 months more.
Anyway, I think it will not be the same with H5, because they will
create the tame on the h4 base, it will be easier.
Now that the multiplayer patch has come out, my opinion on this has softened a little. But the true challenge of heroes 4 (as it was in 3) is not beating the AI, but fighting other players online or through LAN with multiplayer facilities. It adds so much to the game and keeps the spirit alive  Turn based strategy games are in my opinion multiplayer games (even against AI you kinda play against 'thinking' opponents), that's why I think that a heroes release without multiplayer is incomplete and therefor a mistake by 3DO.
Quote:
2.
Then, if the combat skill stay the same, I think it's not a good
idea to penalize heroes for wearing some artifacts. A spellcaster hero is
way too vulnerable if he doesn't have the combat skill. If he's penalized for
wearing might artifacts, he's even more vulnerable.
Some artifacts do penalize movement or spellcasting cost. I'm thinking about a chain mail as one. I just believe that a mage carrying heavy armor needs to be penalized in some way for wanting/having the best of two sides. Magic and might. Since these penalties apply to all heroes wielding the artifacts I don't consider them injust. Besides, they're not that severe aren't they?
Quote:
3.
To aliment your debate on magic resistance :
I don't see solutions for my problem, but my problem is:
magic resistance is a lucky skill. Players prepare strategy with their spells,
then, one of them spell does not work because of magic resistance, so the
strategy is broken. And the one who has the magic resistance did not use a
strategy or anything to break this of his opponent, he just had luck.
I find it's not a good system. Even if a part of luck is good, it's too
important.
I have nothing to add here. This is exacly my point. Perhaps hero spellcasters should be given a skill that pierces enemy magic resistance, that could solve things perhaps.
Quote:
4.
To give my point of view, I don't really like the system of fighting
heroes. It may be because I'm conditionned by the preceeding Heroes games.
But, it makes big single guys who defeat an army only by themself, and I
find it bad. I've not played warcraft 3 but I believe it's the same,
maybe worse. Heroes rush... what easy and poor way to win a map...
And for heroes, it makes the campain awfully boring.
I totally disagree with you on this. I think it's a fantastic new idea to allow heroes to actively take part in combat. Skills and several other issues need to be more balanced out or fixed, but once the system is tuned, it will offer us so much more than the previous heroes versions. At first I didn't like it that much either, being somewhat nostalgic sometimes. But I gave it some time and I've come to like it as one of the best improvements in Heroes 4. Give it some time, I'm sure you will love it after a while.
Quote:
5.
The sounds are not very good, I know what I say.
For the music, I like, but, is it me or I hear quite always the same music?
And for the battlefield, the sound of creatures hitting are good, but,
first we don't here the creautres moving, or very low, and there are a lot
of awfull sounds wasting the battle atmospheer:
The bad moral for example, or a lot of spells, like confusion, bloodlust...
Sometimes, when the battle go fast, I have the impression to hear a toilet
flush, it's not really nice.
Well, on the sound fx thing I fully agree. As for the music thing, isn't the music score in most strategy games rather limited? I believe heroes IV may have more pieces of music than the general strategy game, not sure though.
Quote:
6.
To finish quickly, but I would have a lot to say about it:
There are many things I don't like with creatures:
Too few levels, I think the same system, but with 5 levels would be better.
Toomuch difference between different levels:
now, if I'm right, there is no l2 creatures as good as a l3 one,
the same for l1 and l2, and l3 and l4. It's not an enormous problem but...
Interesting, and I've been thinking along the same lines. They could add level 5 creatures and make the differences in stats between the different levels smaller. I don't think that would hurt the game. It could probably be an improvement.
Quote:
There are way too few l1 creatures:
I say l1, but it's true also for l2,a and maybe l3.
It's totally disproportionned:
15 crossbowmen per week, and 4 thunderbirds!
6 nomads per week and 6 ogres!
...
It's so bad, even if my numbers above are wrong, which is very possible,
it's really too bad.
I'm not sure how to reply on this. You can't compare a fully built barbarian town with another one. They have a substantial creature growth bonus to cover up the lack for magic in this town. I'm not sure about the figures you mentioned, but it would surprise me if there were 6 nomads and 6 ogres per week. Even if it is so, then I would still pick the cyclops which has a lower growth but is way more powerful. This big number of weekly ogres is probably a way to improve their value. Again I'm not certain, but in my opinion the overall creature growth in the game is quite balanced.
Quote:
And the last point, I already cryed along about it on HC, but the threads
are way way back, so I say it again:
I dislike the creatures of H4. A lot of nice ones are gone and some really
ugly ones have come. I won't make a list, but it would be really nice to
have back creatures like dendroids or ??? goblins , just for example.
Too true, too true. I miss many of the heroes 3 creatures. Goblins and dendroids are certainly among them. Wyvern and Lich are two others I miss, just to name some.
Don't give up playing hobgoblin. The ways of heroes have changed a lot. But heroes 4 is not a bad game. I'm sure the fifth will bring us back our goblins, dendroids, wyverns, dread knights, lich... along with lots of other changes for the good.
In all of the heroes series, besides combat, building and hero development, exploration and map structures/events have strengthened my passion for the game. Heroes 4 includes lots of new or improved map structures (and also some nice map trigger events) such as the new quest huts, bridges, ... I think that exploration MUST be an important part of heroes 5, that's why I came up with a number of new map based features.
Map based changes
Apart from the map-based spells tab, heroes should have a map-based actions tab including the following:
- Dig for treasure (requires a whole day)
- Fortify (requires a whole day): Until movement, the fortified units are guarded by a 1 hex pallisade. (like in a town without moat)
- Set up camp (requires a whole day): If not attacked after the turn ends, units have double movement points the next day. Twice the normal amount of hero spellpoints are restored.
- Build road (requires a whole day): Must be performed on a clean spot with a maximum of two adjacent pieces of road. A dirt road of 1 hex is created atthe spot as a result.
- Demolish road (requires a whole day): Must be performed on a road hex. Any type of underlying road is destroyed.
- Guard (requires a whole day): At the end of your turn, this army will automatically attack any enemy force that is trying to pass. (if movement is sufficient)
New map structures and terrain types
- Watchtower: When flagged the watchtower permanently clears the surrounding fog of war. When units are garrisoned here, they're protected by walls and can make use of three archery towers.
- Mercenary camp: When an army is attacked at this spot, the mercenaries offer to join both forces. The highest bidder receives aid in combat by the mercenaries. Charm and Diplomacy work to an armies' advantage and the defender also gains a slight 'discount'.
- ... (town) ruins: These are towns with very limited building options. Never above level 2 creature builders. No City Hall, Citadel, above level 1 Mageguild, ... Troops can be stationed here and a breached wall and partially filled moat along with one archery platform provide some sort of defense.
- Port: Armies embarking or disembarking ships at this spot lose 50% of their maximum movement, not all of it.
- Fortune teller's house: Gives detailed information about opponents for a price. If the opponent's strength/map domination is much greater than yours, your troops will suffer a morale penalty until the next combat. If you're doing better than an opponent, your troop's morale will rise accordingly.
- Phantom gateway: Guarded by hundreds of ghosts, the phantom gateway transports an army (after the ghosts have been defeated) to a random unexplored free map location. If the whole map has been explored already, the portal fails. At end of turn, the army is teleported back to the phantom gateway. After one use, the gateway is dead.
- Dragon fountain: At the beginning of each month, several dragons (black/bone/feary) gather here to protect the fountain. Upon defeating the dragons, 'Dragon Strength' is cast upon all the heroes in the army. The effect lasts until the end of the next battle.
- Toll bridge: Crossing a river, a toll bridge asks gold in return for passage. The bigger the army, the more gold will be required to pass.
- Tarpit (terrain type): Severe movement penalty on map. Large portions of the combat field are covered with tar, having the same effect on creatures as the Quicksand spell.
- Ice cavern (subterranean terrain type): Snow movement penalty applies, all units receive 10% less fire damage in combat, but 10% more cold.
- Plains of despair (terrain type): No movement penalty, but combatting units have -2 to their moraleand luck.
- Field of honour (terrain type): No movement penalty, and during combat all untits receive a +2 morale bonus.
- Lava stream (terrain type): No movement penalty. At the beginning of each combat round 1-3 fireballs are cast on random spots on the combat field.
- Mana dome (terrain type - hill): No movement penalty. Spells cost 1 spellpoint less to play (no less than one) and spells are cast at +20% efficiency.
That's all for now, I'm sure you guys can come up with even better ideas. But I really think some of the above ideas deserve a chance in heroes V.
____________
~Vegetables don't spam~
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted October 08, 2002 10:51 AM |
|
Edited By: Djive on 8 Oct 2002
|
1. The previous AIs in H2 and H3 were not better than the H4 AI. You could beat them overall easily on any difficulty. The maps that could offer a challenge is those with a special victory condition, sometimes the AI is good in attempting to fulfill these.
2. Keep the penalties the same regardless of the hero that uses the artifacts. As N. says only the cheaper artifacts have penalties.
3. Luck chance and so on. They are as I see it necessary in the game. There's not much difference to me in 50% magic resistance or a creature dealing 1-3 damage. If you deal 1 damage at the wrong time then you may have lost the combat, if you deal 3 you may have crippled your opponents and will win easily. Both Morale and Luck are Might skills that are luck based, and they can have a lot more effect than a single spell. Usually, a mage can be almost certain of having the spell work as desired by targeting a creature instead of a hero. If a hero is targetted then the spell should have a chance of failure. Magic resistance may be lucky but a lot of other things are also and I wouldn't want to remove the element of luck. Overall my opinion on an Order Mage being 100% sure of Hypnotizing an enemy Barbarian Hero is that this is totally unfair! The enemy didn't deployed luck. In almost every case the enemy deployed hard-earned promotions to give the Hero Magic Resistance.
If you fear Magic Resistance, then cast spells on your own units or units that can be assumed not to have any Magic Resistance. If you cast a spell on the enemy Hero, then you SHOULD be taking a risk.
|
|
DonGio
Promising
Famous Hero
of Clear Water Mountain Clan
|
|
posted October 09, 2002 12:58 PM |
|
|
I agree with Djive on the Magic Res thing. It's madness wanting to remove this skill. It's about the only defense might heroes have against powerful spellcasters. Without it, noone in their right mind would ever develop a might hero. And it's just luck. Pshh. When levelling up, the player had to choose Magic Res, and discard other skills, and in my view that is just as much of a tactic as whipping together some cowardly spells. Besides, Magic Res only affects the hero, not his/her army.
Anyway, I wish they (developers) would dare take a step back and put less emphasis on graphics (which looks more crappy when they put emphasis on it than when they don't), and more on playability, AI, strategic options and, last, but not least, atmosphere.
If it doesn't look too revulsive, I'll buy HOMMV too, but if it turns out to be as incredibly crappy as HOMMIV, I will forswear my HOMM fealty and go play DOOMIV or something.
Develop well
DonGio
____________
There are 10 types of people: Those who read binary, and those who don't.
|
|
hobgoblin
Known Hero
captain hobgoblin
|
|
posted October 09, 2002 07:04 PM |
|
|
Ok, my examples on creatures growth were bad, I shouldn't have taken examples with stronghold creatures, but I continue to think that there are too few l1 creatures. I think their growth should reach the 30 per week, for most of them, I really find that you can't restart an armee of l1 when they have been much killed in a battle.
For the fighting heroes, you may be right Nidhgrin, I must confess that I have more played campaigns than other maps, and I don't change my point of view for the campaigns, it makes it borring, except for the first map.
I should try to play again, but... There are factors that prevent me from it.
I tried to think about fresh ideas.
Here are some of them:
Map structures:
I would like something where you are not obliged to fight creatures in it.
I thought about a camp, when you arrive in it, there is an armee, but if you pay them, you can stay there, and they will help you if you're attacked there. But if one day you don't have enough money to pay them, they fight you.
Other strange ideas:
when a creautres flee when you attack them, some of them could arrive some days later in a castle recruitement.
So, if they are of your alignement, you'll hesitate to fight them, because they could arrive in your castle recruitement, and if they're form an oppisite alignement, you'll want to fight them.
And last, I sometimes would like an historic of our parties.
There could be one generated, just remaining some important events, like, hero recruitement, caste lost or taken...
It could create something like that:
(imagine that my name in the party is hobgoblin):
day 2 hobgoblin recruits Crag-Hack,
day 3: hobgoblin recruits Sandro
Day 22: Sandro is defeated by Jenova
Day 27: Crag-Hack takes the castle White-Moon
...
____________
Take me down to a pardise city where the girls are green and the grass is pretty
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted October 09, 2002 08:29 PM |
|
|
Map based changes
I assume that "Hero" actually is intended to be "army".
- Dig for treasure is Ok.
- Fortify. It's not a bad idea. Ideally I would prefer that the creatures end their turn in a garrison for this protection. And garrison would then include any adventure object where you could place troops. When it comes to Fortify, I would like some spells to give this also. Say a defensive spell that lasts until the units move, meaning if you are attacked you start the combat with he spell precast on your units. It would be nice to have some spells that can be cast before combat and then you attack with bonuses to your stats. You could have similar mundane skills which would cost movement points.
- Set-up camp. The movement bonus the next day is much too big. I'd say that troops that have spent a day or more in a garrisson would be at least as rested, and these do not receive a movement bonus. Perhaps the bonus should extend to such units also, but it needs to be limit to +5 Movement or similar.
- Build road
- Demolish road
=> I'm not sure about theses. I've proposed similar things myself, but overall I wonder if this form of construction/destruction should be part of heroes.
- Guard
=> They actually already do this to some extent. If you come too close the units auto-attacks. It's noticeable for Stealth heroes or if you attack the AI and they have more than one units just outside a town.
New map structures and terrain types
- Watchtower: This I believe is a good idea. I'd want these flaggable and garrisson is also nice to have in it to protect it.
- Mercenary camp: Normally, you don't have combats at the precise spot where a map location is. This would see very little use. Mercenary troops or heroes which can be hired for a limited amount of time sounds like a good idea, though.
- ... (town) ruins: These towns would need some additional thing which defines them. Svetac had a "mining town" suggestion which could be used.
- Port: Armies embarking or disembarking ships at this spot lose 50% of their maximum movement, not all of it.
=> This sounds like an idea for a town upgrade to me. I'd also like the ships to be embarked and disemarked inside town, through a new menu. Placing the boats outside seems to be wrought with programming problems. (if you are a bit unlucky half of the boats cannot be used as intended.)
- Phantom gateway:
=> I think this one should be doable by the existing scripts. It's fairly specialized so tailored scripts sounds the ay to go for this one.
- Dragon fountain:
Ok idea.
- Toll bridge: Crossing a river, a toll bridge asks gold in return for passage. The bigger the army, the more gold will be required to pass.
Good idea.
- Tarpit (terrain type): Severe movement penalty on map. Large portions of the combat field are covered with tar, having the same effect on creatures as the Quicksand spell.
Not sure about this one. Quicksand makes creatures awfully slow. Swamp terrain is bad enough.
Some more specialized terrain types would be nice. Myself I would like to see a "creature generator" terrain, which increases the growth rate of neutral stacks with 100% or so, and which also randomly creates new neutral stacks in the area.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
Grythandril
Famous Hero
who is a Chaotic Wizard
|
|
posted October 29, 2002 10:47 AM |
|
|
I would like the cut scenes in Heroes V to be like the Shadow of Death clips.
Heroes II had nice cut scenes with a some animations on it.
Heroes III was better especially at the beginning and at the end. Very nice.
AB was just as good.
Shadow of Death was even better, in fact it was the best and it made me feel as though i was part of the game
Heroes IV cut scenes simply SUCKED. It is the worst one i have seen. It is the major let part for me is watching these blurry and vague artworks for each cut scene.
If Heroes V is been created then i pray they put the quality of the cutscenes that they put in Shadow of Death.
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
|
posted December 15, 2002 06:44 PM |
|
|
Friday, I played a short game of heroes IV again, after a couple of weeks of not playing. It was a barbarian town I started with and it was a lot of fun playing. The heroes in combat, the potions, ... yeah really really cool. There were a number of things that bothered me however, and they're all related to one single thing: speed. If they would increase the pace of the game, back to the level of heroes 3, then I believe the game would indeed kick in like a bomb!
These were the things that slow the game down most.
- One hero available for recruition per tavern each week.
- Creatures have movement, chaining has become impossible.
- Early level ups are almost useless until something reaches atleast master or grandmaster.
So taking everything back into account, I'd like to see the following changes in heroes V.
- Hero specialties!!!!!
- Lower experience caps, more level ups!
- More heroes recruitable from tavern, one every 4 days for example. Why do we need this limitation in the early game?
- More creature types, better/new organization of towns according to mythical background. Remove some creatures (ballista °yuck!), add several from heroes 3 (wyvern for example).
- More buildings in towns, harder to build mageguilds, more town unique special structures.
- Different layout of towns, add more character, make them more distinct.
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted December 15, 2002 10:11 PM |
|
|
Quote:
These were the things that slow the game down most.
- One hero available for recruition per tavern each week.
- Creatures have movement, chaining has become impossible.
- Early level ups are almost useless until something reaches atleast master or grandmaster.
On 1. Isn't it better that you start with more than one town if you want to get more heroes? This should be handled by gamer's requests to map-makers rather than changing the game IMO.
On 2. Chaining gone is also a good thing. On the creatures they have always had movement, but it would be good if you required every wandering army to have 1 hero.
On 3. I protest! Early level-ups are not useless!
Quote:
So taking everything back into account, I'd like to see the following changes in heroes V.
- Hero specialties!!!!!
- Lower experience caps, more level ups!
- More heroes recruitable from tavern, one every 4 days for example. Why do we need this limitation in the early game?
- More creature types, better/new organization of towns according to mythical background. Remove some creatures (ballista °yuck!), add several from heroes 3 (wyvern for example).
- More buildings in towns, harder to build mageguilds, more town unique special structures.
- Different layout of towns, add more character, make them more distinct.
On 1. Great.
On 2. Lower experience caps on higher levels. It's not all that necessary to change much before level 15.
On 3. No. If the Map maker wants you to have more heroes then Map-maker will give you an additional town. I would consider an option for the Map maker to set how many days you need to wait between recruitments. (But a fixed lower setting is not an improvement IMO.)
On 4. On creature types I think they could return to the natural terrain, and place creatures that live in the same place in the same towns.
On 5. & 6. Great.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
Shani
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted January 13, 2003 07:01 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Your suggestions is perhaps better suited for the topic "Heroes specialities according to Heroes race" since this is essentially what you propose here....quote]
I rather like the idea of heroes being unique to the extent of their race.
Also, I do so miss the upgrades. Well, with some creatures it improves them. I remember in HOMM3, I never upgraded the Walking Dead to Zombies. I rather find them useless because their so damn slow! Some creatures arn't worth the extra gold to upgrade, but nonetheless, I do miss the feature.
____________
**************
No man can be your hero, because in the end your alone on the stage. Be your own hero and never depend on anyone.
|
| |
|
|
