|
|
Gus
Known Hero
Not-So-Bright Crusader
|
posted May 26, 2006 01:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
4. Highly prescripted custom maps with predefined hero, gameplay,... I miss the "Free for all" maps.
maybe you know this already, but when you are at the map selection screen, you can tick a box called "multiplayer maps" or something, which will then show a (very) few MP maps. AI in those maps is supposedly not scripted, and you can choose to be whatever faction you wish to be.
|
|
Silverhawk5504
Hired Hero
The Forsaken One
|
posted May 26, 2006 03:22 PM |
|
|
In that I was not trying to be mean...I tend to use the term "stupid" to emphasize my point ... atleast I don't swear...hahaha.
Neways, I meant that too much is put into creating the latest graphic design and not enough into game substance. In fact, the graphics in this game don't look much better then Warcraft style heroes and cinematics.
There are games out there where the AI is powerful and amzingly smart...in fact too smart (Starcraft for example)... and strategy games are where it is all at (Civ 4).
Not meaning offense, but the focus has to be on the intellectual aspects of the game instead of glamour. Make intricate war strategies, make challenging riddles, have your hero do something unexpected as would happen in real life ... an let you choose how you want the campaign to continue ...
by making it interactive (letting you make key decisions such as if you want to team up with Godrik in the Necromancy mission, or do you want to doublecross him).
Would make the game thrilling and provide hours of campaign diversity.
____________
~Dima
|
|
Betruger
Known Hero
empowered mind
|
posted May 26, 2006 03:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
There are games out there where the AI is powerful and amzingly smart...in fact too smart (Starcraft for example)... and strategy games are where it is all at (Civ 4).
I agree about Civ4, but Starcraft?!?
Dude, seriosusly, Starcraft is a great game to play in multiplayer, and multi only, because there is no AI, almost everything is scripted! (I know because there was a set of tools with which you could write your own scripts for the AI)
Sorry about that off-topic
I agree that on heroes V AI is stupid. It plays the tactical battles out pretty decently but overall it's stupid. It is no problem to win FFA with 3 comps on heroic difficulty.
What bothers me the most is that AI while being poor is also veeery slow. I mean I have 3Ghz proc. and i have to wait at best 8 seconds for AI to complete it's turn. Whereas in mentioned Civ 4 you only wait a second or two for all the AIs to make their moves.
It's really weird.
|
|
Silverhawk5504
Hired Hero
The Forsaken One
|
posted May 26, 2006 04:02 PM |
|
|
Well, in general my point was that in Starcraft, it wasn't that easy to beat the comp...tough difficulties...but multiplayer was ALL that!
I notice about the enemy heroe's moves too...they're rediculously slow. I've got the same processor and it takes atleast 10 sec if not more...especially if there are many opponents.
Quote:
I don't really get the whole AI point... it's pretty decent IMHO. Sure, it makes some pretty strange decisions sometimes like attacking a small stack of Imps when my Pit Lords are about to cast a meteor shower on them or erratically wandering about the adventurre map sometimes but everything considered it's a LOT better than the H4 AI which was basically about evading you as long as possible to postpone it's inevitable defeat (atleast that's what it seemed to me  )
OMG...are you kidding me?! If it were any easier, it'd be sold as a game for 5 year olds...now don't get me wrong, mayeb you like that sort of thing because you can beat it easier and faster and not get upset... but I tend to need more stimulation and challenge.
Attacking imps is the least of it...have you tried castle assault or castle seige ... Inferno campaign mission 3 for example. That was a JOKE!
I attack a stacked castle 27 emerald dragon, 101 silver unicorn ... among other things ... with a puny army and ended up winning on my first try ... It was sad and upsetting.
If you're shying away from challenge, read the rest of the posts on this topic to find out... EVERYONE hates the AI in this new game!!
(BTW, I think the game's pretty good, storyline is good, and i've waited sooo long for a new Heroes game that I'll take anything...as long as its not H4 garbage).
____________
~Dima
|
|
Cabranth
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 26, 2006 05:51 PM |
|
|
Hello.
To Silverhawk5504: I know you weren't trying to be mean, just emphatic. My P.S. was supposed to be half-joking anyway.
Your point about the A.I. is well taken and sound. It is a HUGE minus for playability and needs to be improved.
However...
There are many aspects to this or any game that form the whole. A.I. is one. Graphics is another. The game system(that is, the rules) are another. Add in monsters and factions.
Simply put, there's something for everyone to be disappointed with.
P.S. People always think I'm serious when I'm joking.
|
|
Shhejtan
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 26, 2006 06:02 PM |
|
Edited by Shhejtan at 15:02, 27 May 2006.
|
I don't think the AI's the problem
Well, I've been playing since Kings Bounty (and still love that game better than any heroes but Heroes IV), and I am quite dissapointed by Heroes V.
Since I allready identified myself as a Heroes IV fan, many of you might ignore me alltogether (it is a common trait of the Heroes III orthodox lot). I could moan about the lack of caravans and no self propelling units (I have never ever herd anyone give anything even resembling an objective or reasonable explanation for not liking it), and I could moan about the 3d (which looks good, I have to admit, even if it isn't practical). No, the reason that Heroes V are a dissapointment to me is that after playing Heroes IV in multiplayer, both Heroes III and V seem like games for little children. OK, please don't get mad, I can explain and illustrate.
I have played a great Heroes V map called "Subterranean Treasures". It has become my favourite casual and hot seat map in any Heroes game. There are four players with nearly identical portions of land divided by a lake in the middle (usual concept, but superbly done). Try it, I recommend it for getting into the game.
I have played it with academy, sylvan and the necro and defeated the three computers each time, by using the EXACT same strategy. I've rushed the first five dwellings and upgraded the archers, sent my main hero out to conquer (and he/she always whiped the map clean) and casualy build the remaining dewllings for defense, almost never sending another reinforcement. With wizard, I even cast level 3 spells. For Sylvan, I hardly ever cast Any spell. For necro, i chose 85% of my skills at random AND cast almost no spells at all. For necro I even removed everything but the skeleton archers and the un-upgraded ghosts from my army, and sitll whiped two opponents (i send the liches, zombies and the vampires back after I kicked the first oponent). How in hell was I able to do that?
Simple. Heroes III had mass apeal because all strategy needed to play it was in clever placement of your heroes on the world screen. When you move them, how quick you can chain and collect weekly resources, you know, the stuff that appeals to peple with free time on their hands. The combats were, and are, no brainer affairs. You stand back, shoot the opponents off and if anybody comes close, you hit him first with your flyer/walker so he wouldn't retaliate. Three different castles, every single combat the same. Giving Necro 100+ free shooters after every combat + the ability to ressurect his fallen troops - did Nival ever see Heroes III? I don't think so.
Now, when Heroes III came out, I really thought you needed skill and strategy to play it, but after playing Heroes IV player made maps and multiplayer, and really digging into that game, I am painfully aware of how shallow Heroes III were. It never really mattered which castle you played (not that I was aware of it back then, I dodn't have any Heroes IV to compare it to). Most Heroes III skills were an experiment (and more often then not not a succesfull one). Trying to imitate them is not a good thing and i doesn't make the game more diverse (since you're still going to pick the best and evade the chaff). Skills of Heroes IV made the difference between playing various castles.
To conclude - I'm dissapointed not that Heroes V doesn't offer me new things, but that Heroes V doesn't really offer me anything at all. When I play a different castle, I want different strategies, skills that matter, I don't want to walk out of every combat either unscracthed or 100+ archers richer, what's the point of that? I wan't strategy on tha battlefield not on world map, this is "heroes" not "economists". In heroes V (and III) a heroe is just a big buff for your units and you don't really have to use him in combat at all...
(please, don't bash me for being a rude "Heroes IV fanboy", I would really like to see an intelligent, argumented and objective defence of
Heroes III/V for once)
____________
|
|
Wiseman
Known Hero
|
|
posted May 26, 2006 07:38 PM |
|
|
I would like you to elaborate on what exactly makes HIV less an 'economist' game, i.e. what makes combat SO much more tacticaly different for each faction?
____________
Truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.
|
|
Dragoni
Hired Hero
|
posted May 27, 2006 01:23 PM |
|
|
I do like the game but there are dissapointments (there always is and will be...). these are not in order of priority except the first one is the most important.
1. No map editor/no random map editor/too few maps!
-I put these in same category. me and my friends like to explore a new world every time. map editor would ensure there were hundreds of player made maps on the net to download. RMG everytime different (though in H3 random maps were a bit too empty and soulles ). only 6-7? maps with the game doesnt help much. I hope editor will come soon.
2. the maps are quite small.
- really like to explore a lot and not rush in the first weeks.
3. 3D.
- ok it looks cool but it just doesnt belong to this game. makes things not so practical and less user friendly.
4. Order heroes riding on elephants.
- I will never play this faction because of this. It looks so stupid and clumsy and... Just horrible.
5. Creatures cant move without hero.
- If there is something I miss from H4 its this feature. Its much easier to manage your reinforcements if youre waging war far from home.
|
|
Shhejtan
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2006 01:31 PM |
|
Edited by Shhejtan at 13:38, 27 May 2006.
|
Heroes IV, as opposed to Heroes V, has self propelling creatures, flaggable dwellings and weekly mines (and flagging them acutally means something), a friendlier marketplace (very important), no creature upgrades (no to mention fewer creature dwellings) and daily creature growth. It may seem like not much difference, but it makes a world of difference.
Self propelling creatures - eliminates the need for hero chaining, which saves you a lot of real world time, and some in game resources. Once you build a dwelling, youre free to send your creatures after your hero, and you don't have to calculate the best time to send your "carrier" hero to deploy your new troops (because if you send him/her right away then when you build another dwelling youll need to come back again for those creatures). Heroes 3/5 method is clumsy, time consuming and tiresome, not to mention that it detracts from combat, whis is what heroes are all about (since everything you do ultimately leads to it).
Flaggable objects - another tiresome aspect of the game, especialy in multiplayer, and one of the thing why heroes 3/5 games last longer, without anything acutally happening (unitll you notice that you dont really need about 3/4 of the game opitons for academy, sylavan and necromancers in Heroes V). A lot of my acquaintances bragged about being superior players because they are better at collecting weekly resources (windmills and dwellings), and they were right. In Heroes 3/5, since the weekly resourced don't accumulate (as opposed to the exterior dwellings of Heroes IV) the player who can collect them every time often has a considerable advantage. I heroes IV, you flag them, save money on collector heroes, save a lot of time and engage in more important and heroic things with your heroes.
Friendlier Marketplace - A serious design flaw of Heroes V that leaps to mind (and makes collecting weekly resources a must) is the dependency on most resources except gold, while in Heroes IV gold was the only thing which was hard to get. It would be an OK twist if the marketplace rates were the same as they were in Heroes IV, but since they are not, the "economist" will often have an advantage over a "tactician". Try developing a single sylvan or necro city with only one of each mines. A second city with another marketplace and money buildings helps but not much. You will spend more game time and gold trying to acquire important resources (for sylvan wood and crystal, i think, and for necro stone and something) then on anything else in the game. In Heroes IV "resource dumps" were profitable and a nice way to get the money you were always lagging in, while in Heroes III/V you can't effectively dump your excess gold for the resources you need.
No creature upgrades - means that every creature is useful as it is (and in equilibris it is apsolutely true). In heroes 3/5, upgading creatures (which takes time and much needed resources) is a must, especialy for inferno (which needs most of it's upgrates to even compete, as oposed to 4 other castles which need only archer upgrades). That means that you are stuck with suboptimal cannon fodder and need twice as many turns and twice as many resources (thanks to the silly marketplace getting enough wood and stone is a serious problem) untill you upgrade, and it takes seroius logistical manouvering to get your non-upgraded creatures upgraded because creatures are not self propelling. Not to mention that when non-upgraded creatures try to join your army you either lose them becuse your ranks are full (even thou you have the upgraded version in your army) or you have to send them back to get upgraded. And you have to upgrade all exterior dwelling creatures before they can join your fighting force. Does anyone have any logical and objective argument for all that pro-"economist" bull?
Daily creature growth - speeds up a smart players game because you don't have to wait for the end of the week to collect your reinforcements meaning that even if you lose some troops, you are still capabe of cleaning the map (thanks to self propelling creatures and usefull heroes). It saves valuable real-life time, and keeps your mind busy with tactics instead of manouvering.
If anybody is interested in how combat is emaphasized (spelling?) in heroes IV instad of a no bariner affair in heroes III/IV i can elaborate on that too.
____________
|
|
Gus
Known Hero
Not-So-Bright Crusader
|
|
posted May 27, 2006 02:00 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Daily creature growth - speeds up a smart players game because you don't have to wait for the end of the week to collect your reinforcements meaning that even if you lose some troops, you are still capabe of cleaning the map (thanks to self propelling creatures and usefull heroes). It saves valuable real-life time, and keeps your mind busy with tactics instead of manouvering.
mistake here. Weekly growth actually gives you creatures EARLIER. you get the full package at the beginning of the week instead of having to wait.
Quote:
If anybody is interested in how combat is emaphasized (spelling?) in heroes IV instad of a no bariner affair in heroes III/IV i can elaborate on that too.
please do =)
|
|
Shhejtan
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2006 02:48 PM |
|
Edited by Shhejtan at 15:07, 27 May 2006.
|
As for combat being different for different factions in Heroes IV, and combat being the same thing for most factions in Heroes III/V, the reasons are spells and creatures, more particularly - creature abilities. Also, luck (part of tactics skill) actually makes a difference in Heroes IV. Possibly the most important feature is the simultaneous retaliation, which makes you actually think while you're fighting. Oh, and let's not forget the line of sight!
Spells
It seems to me that there are about 20 or so spells in Heroes V, and there is quite a handfull of them in Heroes IV (even thought some overlap). More important, playing one faction means that you will need more then 6 levels to get to the good spells of another faction, while in Heroes V (and especially 3) it is not the case. Not to mention that even if some spells make others redundant, any faction has more then one focus of spells (for example Chaos has confusion and buffing which are superb with right strategies - try a hasted hydra with cats reflexes).
Having to calculate the best strategies for your spells (and choosing the best creatures for your favourite strategies) makes combat more then "I shoot at them while they are coming at me and hit them with groundpounders when they are in range" doctirne that heroes III have established. Which brings us to simultaneous retaliation.
Simultaneous retaliation
Being able to pick off enemy archers witouth losses if you have good initiative makes the combat far too easy. For Necromancer it makes combat tedious since his archers can take ou anything after about two weeks (at most) of game time. The heroes III/V system makes calculating moves on the grid with groundpounders a must, while in heroes IV the strategy was in making sure you choose which creature to attack with and making sure it survives the close encounter. I'm not sure most people noticed, but sim. ret. works both ways, and you often want your creatures to be attacked! It makes first strike, no retaliation and always retaliate powerfull tools. Withouth it high initiative = auto win most of the time.
Line of sight
As with simultaneous retaliation - it works both way and makes sure that archers don't rule the battlefield. Use your own troops to keep your hero/shooters alive and try to disrupt his to get in good shots. After figuring it out, being able to shoot anyting anywhere makes combat so easy that it seems pointless. The formations made sense in Heroes IV, but in Heroes V the only thing tactics are good for is taking out your excess troops (a bit of a paradox there isn't it?)
Which brings us to creatures.
Creatures
Having a choice few interesting creatures works wonders for strategic gameplay as opposed to having a lot of uninteresting creatures. The abilities of Heroes III/V creatures leave so much to be desired (c'mon, if archers are the be-all end-all of strategy). There is no broken ability in Heroes IV (except maby that the undead knights can cast terror multiple times), but every single one can and must be used to your advantage and combined with skills/spells of your heroes. In Heroes V, archers are broken. In Heroes IV you'll almost never summon creatures to fight for you but to use their special abilities (for example the water elemental's quicksand). Every spell cast changes the battle in so many ways, not to mention how having two heroes in your army opens up possibilities for complex strategies. In Heroes V you don't really need spells or abilities (if you have archers and initiative) except haste and slow. If you have to think your battles out with a faction od Heroes V (like inferno) it means it has been badly thought out or made less powerfull intentionaly - try playing a hot-seat game with yourself, you'll see. Heroes IV creatures speak for themselves and give each faction it's own strategies to pursue, whether you confuse/terror them with chaos, keep them away while you clone yourself silly with order, make your own one-sided non-simultaneus retaliation mod with nature, outlast and owerman them with life, keep coming at them whatever they do with death or simply outgunn them whith might (and those are only the obvious ones). And one last thing.
Luck
A random chance for double damage is not somethin you can count with. That's not how you win games. Having the bast damage reduction is something the enemy has to deal with and is a viable stategy. Luck has never been as important as in Heroes IV.
There, thats not really elaborate enough, but I have to go 
____________
|
|
Shhejtan
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2006 02:55 PM |
|
Edited by Shhejtan at 15:04, 27 May 2006.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Daily creature growth - speeds up a smart players game because you don't have to wait for the end of the week to collect your reinforcements meaning that even if you lose some troops, you are still capabe of cleaning the map (thanks to self propelling creatures and usefull heroes). It saves valuable real-life time, and keeps your mind busy with tactics instead of manouvering.
mistake here. Weekly growth actually gives you creatures EARLIER. you get the full package at the beginning of the week instead of having to wait.
(pssst! you get the first weekly package in heroes IV as well  , don't tell anyone)
I'm aware of that, but what do you do when you lose your newly acquired horned deamons on blood maidens (the harpy clone)? You wait for the end of the week while you are considerably weaker in the remaining fights untill then. Unless you have very good early shooters you are quite hampered. Same thing after every major battle. Rebuilding armies is a slow affair unless you wait for the end of the week to to fight. What's more important, you can wait for troops to build up in Heroes IV and build them every week if you want to (and you get a weekly package when you build dwellings as well), while in Heroes V you are forced to wait for the end of the week.
____________
|
|
Hrushov17
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2006 03:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
In that I was not trying to be mean...I tend to use the term "stupid" to emphasize my point ... atleast I don't swear...hahaha.
Neways, I meant that too much is put into creating the latest graphic design and not enough into game substance. In fact, the graphics in this game don't look much better then Warcraft style heroes and cinematics.
There are games out there where the AI is powerful and amzingly smart...in fact too smart (Starcraft for example)... and strategy games are where it is all at (Civ 4).
Not meaning offense, but the focus has to be on the intellectual aspects of the game instead of glamour. Make intricate war strategies, make challenging riddles, have your hero do something unexpected as would happen in real life ... an let you choose how you want the campaign to continue ...
by making it interactive (letting you make key decisions such as if you want to team up with Godrik in the Necromancy mission, or do you want to doublecross him).
Would make the game thrilling and provide hours of campaign diversity.
sorry for off topic
starcraft...come on I can easily beat 3 AIs when they are teamed up against me u just need to know how they play
Same thing in Heroes AI plays almost always teh same and uses the saem strategies, when I was playing compain I often had a smaller army but I ended up winning and having like a half of my army still alive, while our hero lvls were abt the same and his army was like 1.5 times bigger, AI's thinking in heroes 5 is simular to heroes 3 and 4 it's a bit better but still not as ahrd (even though my friend is whinning how AI keeps on kicking his ass on free for all maps lol) so i guess it depends on how good u are at this game too, (most of u are prob better than me O.o grr)
|
|
law558
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2006 04:35 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Simultaneous retaliation
Being able to pick off enemy archers witouth losses if you have good initiative makes the combat far too easy. For Necromancer it makes combat tedious since his archers can take ou anything after about two weeks (at most) of game time. The heroes III/V system makes calculating moves on the grid with groundpounders a must, while in heroes IV the strategy was in making sure you choose which creature to attack with and making sure it survives the close encounter. I'm not sure most people noticed, but sim. ret. works both ways, and you often want your creatures to be attacked! It makes first strike, no retaliation and always retaliate powerfull tools. Withouth it high initiative = auto win most of the time.
Line of sight
As with simultaneous retaliation - it works both way and makes sure that archers don't rule the battlefield. Use your own troops to keep your hero/shooters alive and try to disrupt his to get in good shots. After figuring it out, being able to shoot anyting anywhere makes combat so easy that it seems pointless. The formations made sense in Heroes IV, but in Heroes V the only thing tactics are good for is taking out your excess troops (a bit of a paradox there isn't it?)
Which brings us to creatures.
I really miss Simultaneous retaliation and line of sight from h4. They made it more real for me. In heroes 3/5 Archers can shoot arrows, and they'll somehow miss everything that's betwwen them and the target.
And without SR the fastest almost always win.
|
|
Shhejtan
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2006 06:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Heroes 3/5 was a lot more about army combat then heroes 4. Heroes 4 was a very tactical game in many respects.
O' realy? How come heroes die in the first few turns of multiplayer? How come no hero can withstand one or two good kicks from creatures? Combat is for begginers, you sepend your levels on something that can hardly ever be comparable to the level of damage that creatures do. So you've got an unkillable hero? Who cares, it cna do nothing about my phoenixes...
Quote:
The towns are all pretty much balanced, while retaining individuality (especially true of heroes 5 over 3 - initiative has changed combat completely). You can say they're similar, but I don't see how anything then a cursory playing of the game can prove that. Sylvan, for instance, tends to fall back on its ranged attackers, and trys to protect them, where Infernal uses ranged as support, and charges forward.
No they're not! The Necro is far from balanced, so is the Wizard - the only one who can get some use out of spells. And Inferno is so pitifuly underpowered it's a sin (pun intended). He charges into battle? Would he be charging if he had another shooter before level 5? No he wouldn't, because he wouldn't need to. It's not a choice can make, it's what he is pushed into. And he sucks at it, too, because nothing he has can survive the two turn rush to the enemy side (because he has a great attack, lousy defence and slow troops - and a charger should have the opposite). Aybody with decent shooters (everybody else except maby dungeon) can clean the map without losses, inferno on the other hand loses far too many creatures.
Quote:
If Heroes 5 is like Heroes 3 (which we all agree it is) melee creatures are not the wimps the campaigns make them out to be. Because losing too many creatures is a mortal sin in the damn campaigns, the game turns into a war of attrition using spells and ranged units. Multiplayer, with balanced armies, has ranged units serving more as focused fire, and less as "The be all and end all of your army."
Since when Heroes 3/5 wasn't a war of attrition with archers and spells in multiplayer? I haven't played the campaigns, and the computer's AI isn't all theat bad (it's as smart as one needs to be to play this game except for a few bugs), so why don't I lose any troops when I get two (or even one) upgraded archer by week 2?
____________
|
|
rpgguy
Adventuring Hero
Scholar
|
|
posted May 28, 2006 02:00 AM |
|
Edited by rpgguy at 02:16, 28 May 2006.
|
just wanted to point that the inferno town might have sucky shooters but its gets even with the gating ability of the demons, so instead of shooting on the opposing army you summon large amount of demons that prevent you from loosing forces just like archers would...
and about the whole skill choice on level up issuse:
i already suggested that when you cant upgrade any more skills (becuase you have 6 expert skills) the computer should use the two empty spaces to now give you a 4 ability picks instead of 2 on each level up.
____________
Week Of The Rabbit
Triple Growth For All Creatures
|
|
Blue_Camel
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 28, 2006 08:55 AM |
|
|
my "most dissapointing factors" of h5 (all are very patchable tho)
1. There's only like, 15-20 artifacts , in the whole game. or so it seems. they need to add a _lot_ of artys in the patches. how many did h4 have total i wonder? it was many many times more than that.
2. comes with so few maps/lack of map editor. more so the lack of maps.. as map editor early isn't that good of a thing anyway; it's better to learn the game and then make maps.
3. lack of documentation both in the game and out.. manual tells you nothing, a lot of things in game right-click doesn't tell you enough.
[4. underground just annoys me. it's real pretty but such a pain when your line of sight is blocked by walls/stalagtites half the time and you can't see. i like either no underground, or the open inferno-ish underground where you can actually see where you're going]
i could list MP instability but.. tons of games have that when they come out, so that is nothing new. other than the artifacts which you could maybe consider to be a major thing (just cuz there are SO few of them), the fact that these above are my biggest complaints is a testament to how good h5 is. i know back when h4 and h3 first came out, i had bigger beefs than these.. and 3DO patched a lot slower than ubi and didnt listen much to it's players..
____________
|
|
csarmi
Supreme Hero
gets back
|
|
posted May 28, 2006 06:50 PM |
|
Edited by csarmi at 12:32, 29 May 2006.
|
Quote:
O' realy? How come heroes die in the first few turns of multiplayer? How come no hero can withstand one or two good kicks from creatures? Combat is for begginers, you sepend your levels on something that can hardly ever be comparable to the level of damage that creatures do. So you've got an unkillable hero? Who cares, it cna do nothing about my phoenixes...
They don't. It's the heroes deciding the combat. Creatures are only the weapons, used to kill other heroes.
Quote:
The Necro is far from balanced, so is the Wizard - the only one who can get some use out of spells. And Inferno is so pitifuly underpowered it's a sin (pun intended).
I haven't played a lot but...
Inferno can use gating very effectively to cut down on losses. And about wizard? I must have been a cheater relying on spells for haven and sylvan then...
____________
Yes, I play the game only on the forums.
|
|
Blue_Camel
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 28, 2006 09:37 PM |
|
|
i think Dungeon gets the most use out of their spells.. when you have a Warlock with spell power 15 dishing out 350 damage or somethin like that with his empowered ice bolt.. or Ring of Winter'ing 3 stacks at once (effectively doing 1000 dmg or something crazy like that) don't tell me Dungeon doesn't get use out of their spells.
____________
|
|
Shhejtan
Hired Hero
|
|
posted May 29, 2006 09:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I must have been a cheater relying on spells for haven and sylvan then...
Funny that's exactly how I would feel if I relied on spells for Sylvan or Knight. Sure you can do it, but who needs it? You're strong enough as it is.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
