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 6 - The New Beginning > Thread: ~ Heroes 6 - Discussion thread ~
Thread: ~ Heroes 6 - Discussion thread ~ This Super Thread is 525 pages long: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 ... 70 140 210 280 350 420 490 525 · «PREV / NEXT»
MrDragon
MrDragon


Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
posted October 20, 2010 02:10 PM
Edited by MrDragon at 14:27, 20 Oct 2010.

Quote:
It could be annoying if some army gets too slow because of some of its creatures, but it's up to the devs to find the balance between the strategically sensible march of the armies and the fun of the players. It's not necessary to have the HoMM IV situation with the Ballista. I can't find anything wrong with the HoMM III scenario with large but relatively slow armies or small but fast. Both are risky to certain extent and the player should be the one to decide which is more acceptable for him. This allows different logistic styles for different players and different situation and I don't think they should rob us of this variety.

Interesting but I'd like to point out a flaw in your argument.

Quote:
it's up to the devs to find the balance between the strategically sensible march of the armies and the fun of the players

So they have to balance fun vs realism?
I thought their job was to produce a product which would make them filthy rich...... I mean to produce a game which would be fun to play.
Sacrificing (even just a small quantity of) fun for realism is something I quite simply cannot agree with.
They should optimize it to be enjoyable, including in multiplayer.

Edit: Just to make it clear, I was not being sarcastic when I said your comment was interesting.
It does add a strategical element when players can specialize in speed (though Logistics already covers that more or less.) but I don't think it warrants a convoluted game mechanic that will have probably have a negative impact on multiplayer.

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
posted October 20, 2010 02:25 PM

I didn't say that the game should become less fun just to be more realistic, but that these two could be combined without one of them suffering because of the other. This isn't about realism as much as it is about variety. I for example love to outplay the others on the adventure map, I've even won some games where the opponent had so many powerful artifacts that he would've crushed my army in 1-2 rounds if the big battle between the main armies was to take place (and I suppose you know that the artifact hunt is more or less gambling, especially on random maps). Now when we have a legitimate town conversion option, the logistics will play even more important role. I (and other people too, I suppose) can give some suggestions how this could be implemented, but until they're sticking to the concept of the hero defining how the army will move, there is no point.

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


Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
posted October 20, 2010 02:44 PM

I guess more or less, this argument boils down to whether you care about realism in your game or not.
To me it's nothing immersion breaking, and thus I do not appreciate the whole unit-map-movement thing, all I want is to explore the map and get into awesome HoMM combat with my hero and my army.
Managing my town, resources, hero development, army composition, map exploration and enemy assets (heroes, towns, garrisons, mines etc)  will probably provide me with enough tactical elements to satisfy me in HoMMVI.
Not to mention the wealth of strategy combat can provide, but that isn't what we were discussing here.

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
posted October 20, 2010 03:48 PM

Quote:
I guess more or less, this argument boils down to whether you care about realism in your game or not.
No, it boils down to how much variety you have in the game. Realism comes second.

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


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted October 20, 2010 04:21 PM

Quote:
I'm fine with reality taking a hit if it's for the good of gameplay.


I've not stated what I would like to see; and that's, things remain the same as in H5. It makes great sense to have the nitty-gritty of real movement in a strategic warfare game like TW but not in this one. I far more prefer having the Hero stats dictate movement. Even though I did not like the two a day limits at first I now think it was a good move. Keeps me from spending a lot of gold trying to find a defeated hero still equipped with a lot of artefacts I can always fire-up H3 if I get hungry

I saw a related post with a good idea about water and movement but was surprised at the lack of interest. Since we can make a map with 'oceans' but the game only has the one bland skill in
navigation and the Sextant of the Sea Elves, I'd rather have some changes here.

Make a great day
____________
"Do your own research"

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


Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
posted October 20, 2010 04:45 PM
Edited by MrDragon at 16:48, 20 Oct 2010.

Quote:
Quote:
I guess more or less, this argument boils down to whether you care about realism in your game or not.
No, it boils down to how much variety you have in the game. Realism comes second.

Provided this actually adds a dynamic to the game that the skill logistics doesn't already cover, logistics however is a choice that does not negatively impact your unit selection.

Also fun comes first, deep gameplay second and good balance third.
At least I'd say that's how it should be.
Realism is ok, to a certain degree but I say it's much and much lower in the proverbial list of priorities.

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
posted October 20, 2010 05:00 PM

You are reading my posts funnily. I repeat - the fun doesn't necessarily have to suffer, this is your assumption and the assumption of other people that are against keeping the movement penalty determined by the creatures. You can still have slower and faster armies, but the variety will be greater.
Also I'm not rating the realism second in general, but second in the context of my previous post. You are misinterpreting it.

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


Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
posted October 20, 2010 05:21 PM
Edited by MrDragon at 17:23, 20 Oct 2010.

Quote:
You are reading my posts funnily. I repeat - the fun doesn't necessarily have to suffer, this is your assumption and the assumption of other people that are against keeping the movement penalty determined by the creatures. You can still have slower and faster armies, but the variety will be greater.
Also I'm not rating the realism second in general, but second in the context of my previous post. You are misinterpreting it.

I doesn't have to suffer, it it most likely will, it's going to be hard to implement in a balanced and fun way (particularly the combination of balance and fun which tends to screw things up.), implementing this system correctly will most likely be hard, cost a lot of time and money and provide highly limited benefit to gameplay, particularly when the scenario's in question where it would be relevant are already provided by the logistics skill and movement enhancing artifacts. (which may or may not spawn favourably on the map or appear in arti merchants, which does kind of suck, but that goes for all arties.)

Admittedly I did misinterpret it, on purpose even, only to accentuate that whilst I think realism in many ways can be an asset, it is something that in my opinion is quite low as a priority.

I'll also admit, that was a bit of a ****-move, I do that every now and then, calling me out on it will usually make me own up.
Hang around the internet long enough, and some trolling rubs off on you.
Edit: forgot to apologize, kinda implied in the previous statement, but it should be said for the record anyway.
So I apologize for misinterpreting your statement, on purpose.

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
posted October 20, 2010 11:34 PM
Edited by Zenofex at 23:35, 20 Oct 2010.

Quote:
I doesn't have to suffer, it it most likely will, it's going to be hard to implement in a balanced and fun way (particularly the combination of balance and fun which tends to screw things up.), implementing this system correctly will most likely be hard, cost a lot of time and money and provide highly limited benefit to gameplay

What reasons do we have to believe that this will be too complicated, expensive and time-consuming? It is a simple feature from HoMM III & IV, which needs to be "upgraded" to provide greater strategical depth and entertainment at the same time.
Logistics is a secondary skill. It may be picked or it may not be picked. Nobody should be forced to choose it. The movement penalty imposed by the creatures however is a static determinant (which could be a subject of modification later in the game, via purchasable items for instance) and can be used when you are planning the strategical behaviour of your faction. There's quite a difference.

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


Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
posted October 21, 2010 10:39 AM

Quote:
What reasons do we have to believe that this will be too complicated, expensive and time-consuming? It is a simple feature from HoMM III & IV, which needs to be "upgraded" to provide greater strategical depth and entertainment at the same time.
Logistics is a secondary skill. It may be picked or it may not be picked. Nobody should be forced to choose it. The movement penalty imposed by the creatures however is a static determinant (which could be a subject of modification later in the game, via purchasable items for instance) and can be used when you are planning the strategical behaviour of your faction. There's quite a difference.

The reason we have is HoMM4, which caused a lot of complaints and reduced the game's pacing compared to it's previous entries.
In HoMM3 it was barely noticeable and thus did not really enrich gameplay at all, the people that did notice exploited a loophole in the mechanics to not have to deal with it, that should indicate enough.
Now here you also say you should not be forced to pick logistics, true, but you aren't forced to pick it at all anyway.
Imposing army composition based movement penalties however is a forced and as you indicated, static aspect, you don't get a choice in the matter, you cannot use your entire faction's array of units and expect to still have competitive map movement.
This restricts your unit selection in combat based on an out of combat mechanic that has already been present in the game in the form of a skill.

To put it simply: I as a player, don't want the game to penalize me for choosing to bring all seven units my faction presents me with, with my hero, out into battle.
Because, I as a player want to make my own decisions on army composition based on how I use them where they matter, the battle field, I do not want them arbitrarily slowing me down, forcing me to leave some behind and REDUCING my tactical variety in combat, in order to play optimal.

But it's quite clear we're not going to see eye to eye on this, so let's just drop the conversation as a whole now because neither of us is presenting any new material at this point.

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
posted October 21, 2010 11:05 AM
Edited by Zenofex at 11:07, 21 Oct 2010.

Quote:
The reason we have is HoMM4, which caused a lot of complaints and reduced the game's pacing compared to it's previous entries.

If the army movement is part of the complaints against HoMM IV, it is a very small part, so this is no argument. HoMM IV had much greater flaws. I think there is no need to mention again that I don't advocate the replication of the old system 1:1 in the new game.
About the HoMM III situation - you are contradicting yourself. If it's barely notable as you say - why shouldn't we have it again? No one will notice. I for one disagree that it's that insignificant as some people are claiming. The difference between a Necropolis army, which is very dependant on its slow level 1 creature and any other army, consisted of the fastest creatures of the respective faction, is obvious. Many people find one of Necropolis' weaknesses to be the slow speed of its armies on the adventure map - and this is of course compared to the others, nobody is slow by itself.
As for the Logistics skill - I mean that if all the heroes move equally fast on the adventure map in the first place, Logistics will be the only skill to boost their movement, so whoever takes it will be faster than the whoever don't take it. If all the heroes take it, we have again equally fast heroes. If just some heroes have access to the skill, then they will again have to take it if they want to be faster than those who don't have it - i.e. they are forced to choose it if they want faster movement than the opponent, otherwise there's no difference between the armies. If certain heroes are slower than others by default, this is no different from having creatures in the respective faction, which could otherwise slow them down if the speed of all heroes is equal. I hope you get my point.
I still think that hero-determined speed on the adventure map is a needless simplification, but since there is no signal that the devs are considering other options, there is no point in suggesting something else.

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


Legendary Hero
posted October 21, 2010 11:32 AM

Quote:
To put it simply: I as a player, don't want the game to penalize me for choosing to bring all seven units my faction presents me with, with my hero, out into battle.
Because, I as a player want to make my own decisions on army composition based on how I use them where they matter, the battle field, I do not want them arbitrarily slowing me down, forcing me to leave some behind and REDUCING my tactical variety in combat, in order to play optimal.
And I don't want to be mollycoddled by a developer that thinks that I'm too stupid to make exactly that decision. Besides, in H3 you could pretty much guarantee that just about every faction had one slow unit somewhere in its first 3 creatures, which put everyone on a level footing. Besides, it was a case of 'you can have strong, fast or numerous, pick 2', or in some cases, pick but one, and turn the dial to 11.

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


Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
posted October 21, 2010 12:45 PM

I think we can thus all agree, based on the last three posts, that we are not going to see eye to eye on this, and that is fine.
It's all about opinions, life would be pretty boring if we all thought the same and agreed on everything.

Regardless, it was a pleasure debating this and thanks for the mental exercise.

Now with November around the corner, hopefully we'll get a new topic to speculate on within the not to distant future.
I'm hoping they won't JUST reveal the 4th faction but also a feature, even if we have to glean it off a screenshot or two.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
MSG-1-1
MSG-1-1


Known Hero
posted October 21, 2010 04:16 PM

Deep down it comes to the fact that if the creatures dont effect movement --> it simplifies the game. And ofcourse players who enjoy single player and enoying the game for  just playing against cpu want it this way.
But for those who love multi, and want more strategy & depth to the game  I think it would be good in h6.
____________

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


Known Hero
posted October 21, 2010 04:34 PM
Edited by odium at 16:36, 21 Oct 2010.

Quote:
Deep down it comes to the fact that if the creatures dont effect movement --> it simplifies the game. And ofcourse players who enjoy single player and enoying the game for  just playing against cpu want it this way.
But for those who love multi, and want more strategy & depth to the game  I think it would be good in h6.


In my opinion is the other way around. People that played multiplayer know that micromanaging something that does not bring much with respect to strategical insight is a game braker. Also when mentioning simplifying you also have to add which aspect of the game. Simplifying micromanagement is a go-go, while simplifying strategical part is not good. Creatures having an impact on hero movement leans much more to micromanagement than to strategy.  

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


Legendary Hero
posted October 21, 2010 09:56 PM

Well whichever way it is, it's just one of those issues on which an agreement is never going to be reached, so let's just drop it eh, and get onto discussing something more important, like whether or not BH has gone bonkers after calling a two-headed hell-hound a Cerberus.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
moljac024
moljac024

Tavern Dweller
posted October 24, 2010 06:36 PM
Edited by moljac024 at 19:12, 24 Oct 2010.

Some suggestions

I have some suggestions:

I think that making every creature capable of attacking city walls doesn't make much sense and could potentially be a game breaker. What about if some creatures had the ability to scale walls? Think about it, the only difference between a flyer and a walker is the ability to bypass castle walls and map obstacles.
It would make perfect sense for the necro tier 7 unit, if it is to be a giant spider, to have this ability. And it would also be 11 on the 1-10 awesome scale Imagine a huge spider scaling the castle walls to wreck havoc on the troops inside...

Or maybe heroes could be able to purchase additional catapults (which don't have to be cheap) - so for instance, if a hero has 3 catapults purchased it doesn't deal 3x more damage but it has to be destroyed 3 times to be taken out of the picture. So, sort of like replacement catapults.

Or maybe heroes could be able to purchase siege towers, which could be very slow but very hard to destroy. And once a siege tower gets to a section of castle wall it could deploy so creatures would be able to scale the wall at that point. Creatures scaling a wall could stop their turn there just like at the moat, and could maybe also have their defences lowered significantly (maybe even lowered speed as well on the next turn upon leaving the tower). The siege tower could be 1x1 square in size and thus, only be capable of scaling the small troops.

Maybe make a battering ram purchasable as well - it could be faster and less sturdy than the siege tower but be capable of ramming down the gate.

Heroes could have slots for 2 siege weapons, so they could bring 2 catapults for 2 shots per round, or a catapult and a siege tower, or two battering rams or any combination....

All this would really change the siege combat but maybe it could be fun.


As for what to do during the opponents turn:

As others have mentioned, some sort of minigames in the tavern sound like a good idea (only be sure to make them playable only while the enemy plays their turn )
What about making the thieves guild accessible only while others play their turn as well? Maybe make some interactive spying or something like that?
____________

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


Famous Hero
posted October 29, 2010 12:04 PM

Are the new skeletons melee or ranged? Dual-wielding spears seems melee but they also carried extra spears that look like ammunition for ranged attack. One more possibility that came into mind is that the skeletons become a no-melee penalty ranged unit like the spearwielder from Homm 5 Fortress but I think this this will make them way overpowered.

Like the new skeleton art ,by the way.
____________

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


Promising
Supreme Hero
Visiting
posted October 29, 2010 02:38 PM

I like the direction necropolis is going, not outright evil, but by no definition good. Send the devs my regards elvin.
____________
So much has changed in my absence.

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


Adventuring Hero
posted October 29, 2010 05:37 PM

I Agree

Love all the new artwork and find it to be more "grown up" then HOMM5


____________
There are three kinds of death in this world.  There's heart death, there's brain death, and there's being off the network.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This Super Thread is 525 pages long: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 ... 70 140 210 280 350 420 490 525 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.1472 seconds