|
| Thread: Overall Ideas for HOMM VI | |
|
Lesij
Famous Hero
|
posted February 22, 2008 08:47 AM |
|
|
Overall Ideas for HOMM VI
I think this topic is needed, so everyone could write their suggestions in the one topic only and there would be no need to search them in the whole HC XD
Personally, I would like to see melee/caster division again and exp. earning with the creatures...
I think that caster could use magic and melee could use shatters.
What's more, the heroes/troop power growing should be more dependable on action he/she/it performs...
If the caster uses all his mana- then his mana cap and spellpower increases if he prefers melee, his offence and defence grows up making his creatures stronger...
To get rid of imbalances which were common in H4- caster heroes would have low life and could be easily killed when circled by powerfull unites...
Melee heroes would have to behave like a creature and get into the battle to deal some damage...
Ranged heroes would be less durable than melee ones but a bit more than casters and their damage wouldn't be so marvellous...
Also, each hero should have his specific weapon/wand/staff which shows his class and preferable weapon to use (artifacts). Anyway, this game is called heroes of might and magic, no creatures of might and magic and now creatutres can act without hero and he cannot -_-
What's more, hero of each race should have his own special and creatures should have their own.
For example- creatures are Lycanthropes and have Lycanthropy ofc. Hero is barbarian and have blood rage. By pairing those two you get Lycanthropoes with bloodrage. And they are from the one castle...
If you take Barbarian and give him Hellsih creatures (whose special would be for example gating) you get hellish creatures with bloodrage and no morale penalty for them if they are led by this hero.
That special ability of hero and special ability of creatures from his castle should match themselves perfectly, but shouldn't be usable only by specific hero-army.
They could be used by hero of one kind and creatures of another but with less efficent effect...
____________
|
|
Andrelvis
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 05:31 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Personally, I would like to see melee/caster division again and exp. earning with the creatures...
I think that caster could use magic and melee could use shatters.
The problem is that there are somewhat hybrid classes, like Knights, which would be strange to not be able to learn any magic at all.
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 05:39 PM |
|
|
If you are suggesting bringing back heroes to combat, i strongly oppose it.
Heroes are still most important part in game, they don't need to be in every single aspect of it to prove it.
____________
|
|
Lesij
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 06:07 PM |
|
|
@Yasmiel: Not proving... But it seems strange for me all the time...
A heroe is someone with extra powers but not immortal or someone who cannot exisst without any creatures...
@Andrelvis: They would have shatters. And the hero himself could be slyer...
If you need magic so badly- you could take Cleric...
____________
|
|
Andrelvis
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 06:22 PM |
|
|
|
I have recently got Heroes 4, and I say I would like to have fighting heroes back. What screwed them in IV is that the interface was horrendous, and thus battles were uninspiring.
|
|
Lesij
Famous Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 06:41 PM |
|
Edited by Lesij at 18:44, 22 Feb 2008.
|
Maybe you're right (I didn't play H IV), but what was the main problem everyone complained on- that some heroes become overpowered and can smash great armies just by themselves being unkillable...
About other ideas I reminded myself:
Running away shouldn't look like it does now. That is not only my opinion that there should be some turns to kill creatures by enemy hero depending on their initiative.
The fastes creature from heroes army would disappear first and become safe and the res would dissappear depending on their sequence on the init bar. One turn- one creature dissapears.
What do you think about it?
EDIT: Oh and another issue: I think that is unfair that running heroes do not receive their expirience...
They killed some creatures and they diserve it in my opinion...
What's more- slaining the half of the army by the enemy is a good punishment. I think that we shouldn't rehire heroes... They should just appear in the garrison or if it is full- visiting the castle...
____________
|
|
Orodruin
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 06:41 PM |
|
|
|
having the heroe fight in the battle field is a complex thing to decide, but i don't agree with the facts that creatures can roam and fight for themselves without heroes, for in history all armies had a commander to lead them to strategy of war and conquest, without him or her, units behave with disorder (but defendig a castle is another matter, cause they are not marching to a crusade or invasion, they're just defendig themselves so it's acceptable to have creatures defending a castle alone).
|
|
Sargeras
Known Hero
the Fallen
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 06:45 PM |
|
|
...i would like to see special spells that only heroes of particular faction could learn...
- example: only warlocks can learn Cataclysm 
____________
Now they shall be consumed by the very flame they sought to control...
|
|
Orodruin
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 06:51 PM |
|
|
Quote:
...i would like to see special spells that only heroes of particular faction could learn...
- example: only warlocks can learn Cataclysm
it would be nice if we had a few powerful spells for each race, ie. undead could have a major buiding that would enable high level heroes to learn "mass raise dead" for example, you know, a kind of ultimate and unique spell for each faction could take place.
|
|
Sargeras
Known Hero
the Fallen
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 07:15 PM |
|
|
It will be cool to fight wider variety of creeps aka neutrals on the map and not creatures from your or other factions.
____________
Now they shall be consumed by the very flame they sought to control...
|
|
Orodruin
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 07:33 PM |
|
Edited by Orodruin at 19:35, 22 Feb 2008.
|
Quote:
It will be cool to fight wider variety of creeps aka neutrals on the map and not creatures from your or other factions.
Heroes 5 really needs more neutrals, it's parte of any game's diversity, it makes it more meaningful to play. Look at Warcraft, for example, throngs of them.
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted February 22, 2008 10:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@Yasmiel: Not proving... But it seems strange for me all the time...
A heroe is someone with extra powers but not immortal or someone who cannot exisst without any creatures...
@Andrelvis: They would have shatters. And the hero himself could be slyer...
If you need magic so badly- you could take Cleric...
Again, do not aim at copying our world here. realism should have limits in computer games. Next we would argue how come always one unit dies before next one in stack gets wounded. And similar not realistic traits of the game.
It is gameplay that matters, not realism. I see absolutely no way to balance H4 system. It was a pure hero building game, Hero was more important than whole faction. It was a decent game on its own but not a TBS i would like to play. And certainly not better than standard heroes gameplay.
They should have just made heroes immortal in lore so we would be free to play without limits provided by realism and questioning related to it. It worked in Warhammer, it would work in its copy too 
Even tho some ideas look good on paper, they are impossible to implement. Putting heroes back in tactical combat would be the final nail in heroes coffin.
____________
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted February 23, 2008 12:30 PM |
|
Edited by Moonlith at 12:32, 23 Feb 2008.
|
Quote:
Quote:
...i would like to see special spells that only heroes of particular faction could learn...
- example: only warlocks can learn Cataclysm
it would be nice if we had a few powerful spells for each race, ie. undead could have a major buiding that would enable high level heroes to learn "mass raise dead" for example, you know, a kind of ultimate and unique spell for each faction could take place.
Don't think so. In the example you name, that spell would be too powerfull and your entire strategy would be based around obtaining that spell and spamming it during the whole combat. Overpowered elements are NEVER good in any games.
@Lesij: I frankly think the whole "shatter" magic skills were poor concepts. Resistance is one thing, but entire skills focussing to counter a single magic school is just bad.
____________
|
|
Sargeras
Known Hero
the Fallen
|
|
posted February 23, 2008 01:24 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
...i would like to see special spells that only heroes of particular faction could learn...
- example: only warlocks can learn Cataclysm
it would be nice if we had a few powerful spells for each race, ie. undead could have a major buiding that would enable high level heroes to learn "mass raise dead" for example, you know, a kind of ultimate and unique spell for each faction could take place.
Don't think so. In the example you name, that spell would be too powerfull and your entire strategy would be based around obtaining that spell and spamming it during the whole combat. Overpowered elements are NEVER good in any games.
@Lesij: I frankly think the whole "shatter" magic skills were poor concepts. Resistance is one thing, but entire skills focussing to counter a single magic school is just bad.
NO they wouldn't be overpowered if properly applyed to the game and btw every faction has a "best strategy" that's better  than everyother u choose
____________
Now they shall be consumed by the very flame they sought to control...
|
|
|
|
