Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Heroes 5 - Temple of Ashan > Thread: Building Costs – To balance, or not to balance?
Thread: Building Costs – To balance, or not to balance? This thread is 2 pages long: 1 2 · NEXT»
alcibiades
alcibiades


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
posted March 09, 2007 12:43 PM bonus applied.
Edited by alcibiades at 12:45, 09 Mar 2007.

Building Costs – To balance, or not to balance?

In the endless search for balancing the game, many people have complained that some building costs seem rather unbalanced, or at least balanced in a unfavourable way. The most commonly cited example is the Thane Dwelling, which with it’s starting cost of 20 Crystal is abnormally expensive – especially since the Fire Dragon Dwelling also needs Crystal, albeit only 10 (this is in fact exactly the same problem as the Cyclops Cave and Behemoth Lair problem in Heroes 3). Another example is the abnormal Mercury cost of the total Necropolis building tree (97!).

Many players think that this needs to be fixed, but before one starts to tamper with the building costs, one should consider the more theoretical aspects of this – should building costs be balanced between the towns on its own, or is total building cost a mean of overall balancing of the factions?

Here, I want to share some of my thoughts on this, but would very much like to hear other’s opinion on this, especially some of the more experienced gamers in this community (none mentioned, none forgotten).


Building Costs as a mean of balancing

There are several examples of how Nival have used the building costs of balancing the factions. The Necropolis obviously is supposed to be limited in its building options – so that the player will have to choose only some of the units – to counter the fact that the player in the old version would amass enormous amounts of Skeletons. The Academy was also previously hampered by a huge gold burden; this is to some extent lessened with the modification of the level 7 dwelling costs, but not completely gone.

The reasoning for using building costs as a mean of balancing is probably pretty simple. Resource requirement should limit boundless Necropolis growth, and high gold requirements should limit Haven Training capability. The large gold requirements for Academy was probably supposed to balance the fact that Academy supposedly has the strongest army (!) when you look at weekly Powergrowth.

There are several problems with using costs as a means of balancing. My primary concern is that it has a varying effect depending on the map’s resourcefulness – thus, very resource demanding factions will be very hard to play on resource scarce maps, whereas the difference in resource rich maps will be only minor. This will throw the game off balance, because depending on how the factions are balanced, the resource demanding factions will either be underdogs in scarce maps or overpowered in rich maps.

Another thing one should take into account is that the new Necromancy skill, introduced with 2.1 and 1.5, means that Necromancers no longer rely solely on Skeletons in their army, but will raise creatures of all levels – and in much fewer numbers than previously. This means that Necropolis should have easier access to all their dwellings, and not be blocked by extreme resource demands in Mercury, Wood and Ore. Likewise, Training has been changed (and hopefully will be changed even more). This approaches a balancing of the factions not based on the resources, but will therefore also require that the resources are rebalanced.

Completely balanced resource demands?

The question is then, how should the Building Costs be balanced? Here, I present a completely balanced cost scheme, where every faction uses the same total amount of resources. This should not be understood as every faction uses the same amount of wood, the same amount of ore, etc., because each faction will have its focus on two or three resources, but that the overall cost calculated as:
              Total Cost = Gold/500 + (Wood + Ore)/2 + (Crystal + Gems + Mercury + Sulphur)
is constant.

I’m not sure this is the right approach, but this is just one possibility, and I would like to hear your feedback to this. The tables below show the current building costs and the suggested new ones, and I would like to know what the experienced players feel about the current building costs and maybe the new ones.

More systematic Dwelling Costs

There are some discrepancies in the current dwelling costs that doesn’t make much sense logically, and there is furthermore a wide disproportionality between dwelling costs of same level dwellings between factions. I will explain these here, and how I tried to eliminate these to some extent.

Precious Resource systematics
There is in Heroes (particularly in Heroes 3) a history that special creatures tied up to one specific Precious Resource. This is most pronounced for level 7 creatures (Titan = Gems, Black Dragon = Sulphur, etc.), because these creatures actually have the resource in their recruitment cost, but also goes for other creature dwellings (Unicorn = Gems, Cyclops = Crystal, Ogre Mages = Gems, Wyverns = Mercury, etc.).

In Heroes 5, the resource demands for dwellings have been much more scattered and random. Here are some top examples:
- Angels cost Crystal to recruit, but dwelling costs Gems (!?).
- Devils cost Sulphur to recruit, but dwelling costs more Mercury than Sulphur.
- Black Dragons cost Sulphur, but dwelling costs equal amounts of Crystal and Sulphur.
- Rakshasa dwelling costs both Gems, Crystal, and Sulphur, instead of focusing on one or two resources. Same goes for Dendroid dwelling.
In my suggestion, I have tried to systemize this. Specifically, all level 7 dwellings cost the resource that relates to their recruitment (and which is also provided by the Resource Silo!). Other dwellings are modified to focus only on one or two resources for each creature, to give some sort of systematics. Exception is Spellcasting creatures, that generally draws on a wider range of resources (commonly all four).

In-level balancing
There is with the current system a huge difference between the building costs of some creatures of the same level – especially pronounced at level 7. Here are some examples:
- Giant dwelling costs 12.000 Gold, 10 Wood, 10 Ore and 5 (!) Gems.
- Shadow Dragon dwelling costs 12.000 Gold, 10 Ore, 15 Crystal and 15 Sulphur.
- Bone Dragon dwellings costs 8.000 Gold, 20 Wood, 20 Ore and 20 (!) Mercury.
The new building costs attempt to even out these differences a bit.











Explanatory notes for pictures
Charts show cost by version 2.1 on left and suggested new costs on right. Boxes with gray fill marks resource requirements that are high for that particular level, and will thus be taxing for faction.

Numbers in bottom rows are (top) total Gold, Wood, Ore and Precious resources, and below, Total Cost calculated as SUM(Gold/500;(Wood+Ore)/2;Crystal;Gems;Mercury;Sulphur), and besides this, Gold equivalent, Wood and Ore equivalent, and Precious Resource equivalent.

Chart in bottom compares total faction costs with 2.1 costs (top) with suggested new costs (bottom). Numbers highlighted in red are especially taxing for faction, and are selected by Gold > 75000; Wood or Ore > 100 and Precious Resource > 50.

____________
What will happen now?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted March 09, 2007 01:18 PM

Dragon vault, obviously. The most ridiculous price in the game, counting all the pre-requisites.

Thanes dwelling - ridiculous

Shadow dragons - perhaps 10/10 instead of 15/15 for the dwelling?

Colossi dwelling - too cheap. 5 gems only?? Compare that to the price of dwellings mentioned above! Why we need only 15 gems to get an upgraded level7 creature that's among the best ones (titan ofc) and 20 gems for a NONUPGRADED level 6 Thane? For me it's plain stupid. Ah yes, raksasha dwelling could use a slight reduce in resources' cost at the same time.

Inferno resource costs are wicked, too. A slight reduce on the wood need for cerberi' cages would certainly be a good idea. Also, nightmares' dwelling upgrade has moved from cheap to extremely expensive, duh. Why?

Haven: Too much wood & ore for the basic structures (Archer tower&upg, barracks & upg, griffin tower). On some maps it kinda blocks the town development for good.

Sylvan - Same as dungeon, green dragons' dwelling could use a bit less resources. Also, the wood requirements are still too high IMO. Since you need the master hunters, and their upgraded dwelling takes a sh*tload of wood, you may find yourself stuck later on..




 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TowerLord
TowerLord


Promising
Supreme Hero
Hero of Good, Slayer of Evil
posted March 09, 2007 01:45 PM

I think every faction has its peaks in costs... And they are related to the faction itself.

The Dwarfs have huge costs ... but things should be that way ... Those Thane's would be totally overpowered if you get them in big numbers and also have the resources to cast the rune of Battle Rage on them over and over again! They are simply too powerfull , and it would be a total carnage. They would act like some teleporting armageddons... I think it is the huge speed that makes them overpowered with rune of battle rage , because you can reach your opponent in one round , so they don't need rune of charge first! Just Imagine how would some paladins with hydra-like attack would be, or with double attack, and you'll understand  why Thane are so expensive
On the other hand the Fire Dragons are slow so they wont reach so fast.

Necros used to have huge troops even without the dragons , so the
they thought that if they want full lineup , they should spend aloot ! But now things have changed for new necro... but the costs haven't . Probably they should have too.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TheDeath
TheDeath


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
posted March 09, 2007 02:04 PM

Quote:
Completely balanced resource demands?

The question is then, how should the Building Costs be balanced? Here, I present a completely balanced cost scheme, where every faction uses the same total amount of resources. This should not be understood as every faction uses the same amount of wood, the same amount of ore, etc., because each faction will have its focus on two or three resources, but that the overall cost calculated as:
             Total Cost = Gold/500 + (Wood + Ore)/2 + (Crystal + Gems + Mercury + Sulphur)
is constant.

I’m not sure this is the right approach, but this is just one possibility, and I would like to hear your feedback to this. The tables below show the current building costs and the suggested new ones, and I would like to know what the experienced players feel about the current building costs and maybe the new ones.
that's exactly how I think the balance should be tweaked, and NOT by how Nival feel about a certain faction. There should not be a "weak" element to compensate for an overpowered element. Both should be average elements, in my opinion. That's how a good balance should look

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
alcibiades
alcibiades


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
posted March 09, 2007 02:05 PM

Quote:
Colossi dwelling - too cheap. 5 gems only?? Compare that to the price of dwellings mentioned above! Why we need only 15 gems to get an upgraded level7 creature that's among the best ones (titan ofc) and 20 gems for a NONUPGRADED level 6 Thane? For me it's plain stupid. Ah yes, raksasha dwelling could use a slight reduce in resources' cost at the same time.


Yes, I suggest 10 Gems for Colossi, which is cheap, but fair since Colossi are not that good, and then another 20 for upgrade, which is fair, because Titan is a huge leap forward. And yes, cut the Thane dwelling back to 10 / 5 + 5, which is much more reasonable than 20 + 10.

Quote:
Inferno resource costs are wicked, too. A slight reduce on the wood need for cerberi' cages would certainly be a good idea. Also, nightmares' dwelling upgrade has moved from cheap to extremely expensive, duh. Why?


I'm not sure that I understand the thing with the Nightmares - are you referring to to changes done between 1.0 and 2.1? And yes, 25 Wood for Cerberi seems over the top.

Quote:
Haven: Too much wood & ore for the basic structures (Archer tower&upg, barracks & upg, griffin tower). On some maps it kinda blocks the town development for good.


The Haven resources are a bit tricky, because the thing with Haven is they use A LOT of Wood and Ore but only little of the Precious Resources. I have tried, however, to even it out, by spreading Ore to Wood and Ore, so that Haven doesn't need 60 Ore for dwellings level 2-4, but only 45.

Quote:
Sylvan - Same as dungeon, green dragons' dwelling could use a bit less resources. Also, the wood requirements are still too high IMO. Since you need the master hunters, and their upgraded dwelling takes a sh*tload of wood, you may find yourself stuck later on.


Sylvan obviously needs a lot of Wood, which will always be their weeknes resource wise. I tried to lessen it by reducing Wood requirements for upgrade of level 2 and 3 (whoever can afford 15 Wood to upgrade Blade Dancers?), but 15 Wood for first Hunter dwelling will still be taxing. However, Wood requirements beyond Hunters are limited, with exception of Dendroids that obviously are very expensive in Wood. I suppose one could change Dendroid dwelling to 15/15 Wood or 15/10 + some more precious resources, and maybe also swap Hunter dwelling from 15/10 to 10/15 to emphasize the luxury of upgrading, if one wanted to help Sylvan out further.
____________
What will happen now?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Elvin
Elvin


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
posted March 09, 2007 02:15 PM
Edited by Elvin at 14:43, 09 Mar 2007.

If Nival tried to use resource costs in balance they did a really lousy job both in theoretical and practical sense. First of all in 1.3 they increased the resource costs so that all faction are in a tight spot early? Any reason? If you find a decent one let me know...Reducing the gold for tier 7 was a necessity that didn't need to be compensated with insane resource costs. I can easily tell you some thinking behind it but it's crappy anyway.

Mercury costs for necropolis and especially the dragon dwelling and its horde. Yes necromancy is powerful and undead transformer could make necropolis too strong. But quantities also need quality and all upgrades require mercury. WIth the dragon tombstone AND the transformer they could get many dragons. Instead they get none because it's not worth it unless in too large maps. If you find the mercury you won't find the ore...

Sylvan still needs too much wood. The bladedancers cannot be upgraded early just as the hunters. And they remain with 10hp and 2 def for longer than I'd like. IF you upg them you won't build mystic pond nor the treants that require much wood. So you are blackmailed into building master hunters or treants which is outrageous. The dragon resources are fine, it's the hunters that create problems.

Academy is overpriced even now but a few minor tweaks would make things fine. Why on earth do rakshasas cost that much? Or mages 10(!) sulfur? Maybe it's a compensation for the cheap colossi but it hurts in earlygame plus colossi are NOT that great. It is one of the most resource intensive factions yet it NEEDS mage guilds and mini arties to survive. Otherwise the units even with good ratings are weak in the hands of a wizard. If you wish to be competitive you MUST use MMR or a variation...

The last thing that is really bugging me is the dwarves. Thanes...maybe I can accept but 10 merc+5 gems? Because they are powerful? Or even remotely useful? The only good out of them is the berserkers that need 5 merc+5gems more and that's out of the question with the runepriest and thane dwellings. And to be effective you should build thanes first so the priests are skipped...If not then the brawlers for sure. Jeez, they aren't imba to warrant something like that.

About inferno Doomforge knows more about me! But it wasn't hard to notice that it is hurt. Hell chargers must be skipped for fear of not building pit fiends(since they require succubi that require sulfur). But to creep you either use familiars(and lose a part) or upg cerberi that require sulfur too! Not too sensible...


Edit:
The rebalanced costs seem certainly better but I cannot check them right now.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
PhoenixReborn
PhoenixReborn


Promising
Legendary Hero
Unicorn
posted March 09, 2007 03:04 PM

Resource costs can be modded right?  How about it Alci, make a mod with these changes and we can all test it out.  I'm willing.  Hmm maybe that was starting resources that could be modded.
____________
Bask in the light of my glorious shining unicorn.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TowerLord
TowerLord


Promising
Supreme Hero
Hero of Good, Slayer of Evil
posted March 09, 2007 03:10 PM

I can't say I agree with you ... You are saying that every faction has its econmic problems, with big resource costs but at the same time, you want rebalancing  . What do you want free buildings ?! The system is not so flawed as you make it appear , just that its not meant for players to have acces to all the creatures in a town very easy ! sometimes you must skip some and build others, that's the nice part about the town point system ... more chances to adjust to what the map has to offer.

I must say , looking at the numbers , the Thanes seem really expensive, but in game , I found myself having excess of gems and shortage of wood / ore , so I built them instead of priests ! I think the game is not meant to be played with all 7 creatures ... and the map is too small for the full lineup!

For me only the necro drags are overpriced !

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Elvin
Elvin


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
posted March 09, 2007 03:16 PM

I don't care to have all the units but having some tier 6 built in week 3 means the game progresses slower or that some lucky guy who finds the resources will build them in week 2 and gain an advantage. Neither is appealing...
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TowerLord
TowerLord


Promising
Supreme Hero
Hero of Good, Slayer of Evil
posted March 09, 2007 03:31 PM

Quote:
I don't care to have all the units but having some tier 6 built in week 3 means the game progresses slower or that some lucky guy who finds the resources will build them in week 2 and gain an advantage. Neither is appealing...


Except for the Paladins and the Wraiths, which are important ... and the Shadow Matriarchs which have important spells for granting you some extra turns ( but you don't need all of them) and you can spare some resources by choosing them instead of the dragons for mage guilds... i can't think of any gamebreaking lvl6 . The Treants , Pit Lords and Raska can easily be ignored imho. And you can play without the Thanes too.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TheDeath
TheDeath


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
posted March 09, 2007 03:36 PM

So what if you can easily play without them? Is this balanced that some factions get them easier?

btw: you can't live without the treants

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TowerLord
TowerLord


Promising
Supreme Hero
Hero of Good, Slayer of Evil
posted March 09, 2007 03:42 PM

Quote:
So what if you can easily play without them? Is this balanced that some factions get them easier?

btw: you can't live without the treants


what are you talking about ? I never build them , and I always win with sylvan.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted March 09, 2007 03:57 PM

Yeah, treants are a bit of luxury. Not bad, but a good player can do without them. Do you aim for dragons early instead, TowerLord? Or just use level 1-5 units?

Alcibiades: In 1.2 or so, nightmares were possible without much effort, and - since they are quite efficient at creeping - that allowed other heroes to be used instead of deleb. But when they changed the costs to the point of them being outrageous, Deleb become a sad necessity. It saddens me. Why the heck I need one hero not to become thrashed in earlygame? Why I must get her in order to creep in the way I want? Bah. In dungeon, any hero can creep well, defend well and is a class of his own , that's the way it should be in inferno aswell.. >_>



 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TowerLord
TowerLord


Promising
Supreme Hero
Hero of Good, Slayer of Evil
posted March 09, 2007 04:39 PM

i try to do lvl1-5 + dragons with castle , 2nd week , in first town , and same for the second town in 3rd week , and usually succed. but sometimes i get wood shortage at dragons  castle 2nd town

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted March 09, 2007 04:53 PM

So, agressive style, then. Good. Agressive style is always the better one

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
alcibiades
alcibiades


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
posted March 09, 2007 05:51 PM

TowerLord, the reason why I want to address this issue was that a lot of people complain about some Dwellings cost (Thane!), and then I thought it would be a good idea to have a more wholesome analysis of the subject.

I myself have not so much gaming experience with Heroes 5 that I dare say what is right and what is wrong. From a pure theoretical point of view, however, I hate when things are off balance between the factions, because that will make a difference that can be exploited in the game.

And maybe the differences ballances all in the overall picture - I don't quite know. Maybe the Nival developers are wiser than we give them credit for - it just seems for me that ressources are a bad means of balancing, because it will have a varying impact depending on the map (imagine playing Necropolis on a map scare in Mercury? ).

That being said, all building need not be equally accessible. Some units can very well be expensive to delay building them, thus prohibiting the faction for being overly powerful. However, that should not be done in a way to block out certain units. To draw the parallel to Heroes 3 once again, the Stronghold was the prime example: When the Cyclops Cave was more expensive than the Behemoth Lair and demanding the same ressources, you would obviously go for the Behemoths, because a level 7 creature is more useful, after all. This effectively ment that the Cyclops lost importance in the game except as a supportive unit, and that is for me bad game design, because it reduces the game.

However, we all have different things we prefer in the game - some go for one type of play, others for something different. That's why I ask for all the oppinions here.
____________
What will happen now?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
ZombieLord
ZombieLord


Promising
Famous Hero
that wants your brainz...
posted March 10, 2007 11:23 AM
Edited by ZombieLord at 11:26, 10 Mar 2007.

I must say I agree with the current costs (ok, maybe some of them ARE too expensive like the Bone Dragons) because it's more strategic if you choose between Magic Guilds and some dwellings, rather than just build everything like crazy. I mean, why not make free buildings then?

Anyway, I don't get it why people say Academy is expensive. 10 Sulfur for Mages is not that much and the Colossi are extremely cheap. If there exist mini-artifacts that cost resources doesn't mean that the buildings should be cheap. I mean, the mini-artifacts are just a bonus other factions don't have, so unless you have resources in exces you should not rely on mini-artifacts. If you look at the chart Alc created you'll see Academy in fact needs the fewest Precious Resources except for Haven. And Wood and Ore demands are also low. The only problem is the Gold, but what is the overpowered Treasure Cave then for?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted March 10, 2007 12:37 PM

Agree with ZombieLord.. I find Academy quite cheap in fact : O Yeah, mini-arties are a headache, but the dwellings.. except the raksasha one, never had any problems with them even on most sterile maps!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Daystar
Daystar


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Back from the Dead
posted March 10, 2007 03:20 PM

(Mabey this has been brought up, too lazy to read all of it) Doesn't more/less expensive buildings lead to differences in gameplay, thus avoiding stagnation of replaybility?
____________
How exactly is luck a skill?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Sanyu
Sanyu


Known Hero
posted March 12, 2007 04:02 AM

I dont know if I remembered correctly but if i'm not wrong, Fortress requires the least gold to build their capitol, castle and citadel?!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 2 pages long: 1 2 · NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0736 seconds