|
| Thread: Some Thoughs on the Heroes Formula |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · NEXT» |
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
posted September 30, 2011 01:07 AM |
|
Edited by Elvin at 22:05, 27 Jul 2012.
|
Some Thoughs on the Heroes Formula
I have been thinking lately. Having spent a fair share of time on each heroes installment, experienced their strengths and weaknesses, basked in their atmosphere, won and lost games.. It has been a good time. Each installment may be missing things I loved but always introduces something new that wins me over and challenges me in new ways. A lot of people complain about some installments failing to capture that heroes feel.. But is there really one? What does define this game, is there some special formula underlying the game's framework? What is it that keeps people coming back after all this time and what is it that drives them away when their perception of heroes does not match the delivered product? How does the series legacy affect expectations and how does it dictate its future? How much evolution is too much and what should be kept untouched?
I say who cares  I am not a game creator, I'm just a fan that enjoys rediscovering the series game after game and watching its evolution. Perhaps the problem is that people think too highly of their own ability to create a better game. Perhaps Ubi does not understand us as much as they should. Perhaps things get lost in translation. If you ask me they are all valid guesses, after all there is not one objective way to judge what is right and what is wrong for the series. We are all looking for something that triggers our imagination, fun and excitement, something that travels us to that land of fantasy so far away from here. In the end it comes down to personal taste which is impossible to fully satisfy, however is perfection all we really want? Are we so loathe to make compromises? Do we simply feel the need to impose our own desires on the rest? Or are we here to enjoy the game and each other's company and test our skills and planning?
But if I had to give an opinion on what I would like of this series to be..
SKILLS
I really liked the H5 skill system but it was too random for my taste and limited you to just a few trees. While not nearly as developed, I couldn't help but miss the H3 times when you could pick and max 8 different skills. But H3 was too simple for my taste and H5 skill/ability rearranging under common themes was a lot more tidy and appealing. H6 may be accused of being flat in comparison but it brought something new to the table. No need for useless pre-requisites, skill planning was not at the mercy of Lady Luck, there was much greater freedom in your hero build without being restricted to just x specific skills, no need to level up the base skill just because you want its branch abilities.
I believe that keeping the H5 system of trees but adding more core and advanced abilities in them, keeping the ability points as opposed to random level ups and dividing the accessible abilities into tiers, differentiating the trees for each faction and introducing faction specific abilities would be just the thing. For instance attack tree with archery that unlocks marksmanship, focused fire etc, dueling that gives you bonuses when fighting a unit one on one and other warfare-related skills. The realm section could have tracking to see trail of fleeing heroes, pathfinding, familar ground bonuses(different for each faction), scouting, ability to set minor traps before a battle starts, ambush(if you have x stacks more than your opponent and you fight on familiar ground, you can start the fight by having him surrounded from all sides) and so on. Tactics could have the classic extra line rearranging, reinforcements, offensive or defensive formations that actually require you to set your units in specific formations to get the bonus(like first strike, gaining shield wall or retaliating on adjacent stacks that attacked an ally). Luck could have the classic resourcefullness, soldier's luck, offensive as well as defensive(x% attack evasion) luck, foresight of luck rolls, ability to jinx an enemy unit and so on. Other skill trees could include warcries, warmachines, leadership, magic schools, defense, sorcery and enlightenment. Of course those would give a great amount of possible skills to mix and match.. Which is why level ups would give more than one ability points The emphasis would of course be on adding interesting or comboable effects than +x skills.
MAGIC
H5 did a good thing by having each faction have two specific schools but also allowing for non-native magic to appear. It gave faction magic an identity but also allowed for unpredictability and made the need for H4 annexes obsolete. However the spells were too few, some were too good while others poor or situational, most factions could not afford to mix and match spells like in the glorious days of H2 and H3. H6 brought back the fun of different school combos and eliminated the imbalance of high level spell rushing by limiting the powerful spells to a higher level. Doing away with mage guilds might seem a peculiar decision but actually gave you extra planning freedom and reduced your need to make trips back to town to learn spells.
I think that keeping mage guilds but retaining the H6 mechanics might be worth considering. You build a mage guild that unlocks a number of spells, however you require magic ability points to learn them. Each town would have its favoured schools with spells randomly appearing from a specific pool but more numerous than H5 and would be able to recharge every x weeks. The magic skills would keep abilities like combustion(when a fire spell lights a unit on fire, adjacent units also catch fire), muddy ground(when water spell cast on specific ground, it causes speed/init penalties for walkers), soak(lightning vulnerability etc while the guilds would have spells like they always did. Magic heroes would gain more magic ability points than might ones and of course have access to more magical abilities, also the last magic tier that would be barred from might.
ARMIES
Say what you will of the tier system but I really like it. That is not to say that the old system was faulty but I find the new take on unit strength reasonable and it adds to unit synergy and combinations. That is harder to pull off when some units are way more fragile or expendable than others, now all core units are equally useful and more specialized for the role they play on the battlefield. It is no longer a matter of plain damage dealing, there are more things to consider. Of course.. I wouldn't mind if there was an extra tier making it 2 core, 2 intermediate, 2 elite and 1 champion. That would give some nice differentiation into the system, some flavour.
Also.. It would be nice if each dwelling allowed the production of two alternative units, for instance barracks would produce either two-handed swordsmen or sword & shield swordsmen, archer's tower would produce either archers or crossbowmen, monastery would either produce the hybrid monks or the more magical priestesses and so on. There would still be upgrades for each but there would be a lot more combinations and variation in earlygame according to the neutrals you have to face, which enemies are near your area etc. The whole point would be to use them as counters(arrow protection, more damage against undead etc) against the various neutrals you may get, without depending on specific hero spells/abilities. I would support a retrain option at a fee though a more costly one than H5 was.
TOWNS
I quite liked the H5 town level system with the more important buildings both having prerequisites and requiring a specific town level. I don't like the idea that you can build whatever you want if you meet required costs, not only does it add to the imbalance but it also makes towns look more uniform with each other.
As far as town prerequisites go I very much liked them, they gave towns a more distinct feel. Like fortress allowing for a day 3 wyvern building or stronghold being possible to rush behemoths. Then there were some nice little touches like angels requiring a monastery or swordsmen a blacksmith that felt right. As long as the building prerequisites are not useless, why would anyone dislike them? It beats building city hall + 3 core units on the first week. With every single faction.
It's all about finding a way to make prerequisites useful, in a way that they give specific strengths and a distinct flavour. Also making certain units come later in play whether the map is poor or rich. One faction could work great with an accessible elite dwelling on week 1 while another with more accessible core upgrades or basic cores plus a special building that boosts them or the hero. In general it should be possible to get the mid tiers week 2 and the higher tiers within weeks 3-4 so as to keep changing your hero army and combat capabilities, being stuck with the same units for more than a week would be dull. But the dwellings themselves should not be the complete focus of your building plan, there should be incentives to try different approaches.
Some classic buildings could also use some change. For instance blacksmith, it has been your source of warmachines since H3 but for the most part it was that building you are forced to build to get another or to increase your town level. It would be nice if it also could upgrade units that carry blades or those that carry an armour. For instance reduce the minimum damage for swordsmen by making their blades more balanced. Or produce pickaxes (for the mine workers you never see  ) that could upgrade mine production near town. Marketplace could have a black market, different exchange rates according to the week, a random resource income and so on. Fortifications could cost more wood or ore according to what they are made in each faction, you could imagine the elves erecting wooden and less sturdy fortifications while humans would have stone walls.
Finally I very much liked the H2 system of upgrades. Not all units must have an upgrade and it would certainly be awesome if some had a second level of upgrade.
CLASSES AND STATS
I love the might and magic dichotomy when it comes to hero and unit stats in H6, also the fact that luck and morale are secondary stats but each unit also has its own values on them. Magic damage and magic defense was a most anticipated change for me, or the fact that magic units are more powerful under magic classes. But I am not sure if if I would like advanced classes tied to reputation, while the theme of tears and blood is an excellent change over the classic good or evil I tend to think of advanced classes as more of a specialization than a hero path. Other than that I very much like the fact that advanced classes in H6 have their unique skills, I think it would be even better if they unlocked a few extra ones from the skill trees that you had to pick than gain automatically. The fruit of your specialization, more advanced abilities.
On a completely unrelated note I would like to see a diplomacy system much like in age of wonders. Offer peace or alliance to an enemy player, propose a common war and so on. It would add some depth to those crowded maps
ADVENTURE MAP
Age of wonders also had some cool ideas where the adventure map was concerned. Some units could move effortlessly in woodland areas, others could see farther in underground and so on. That gave each faction a more distinctive feel.
During H5 some of us wished for racial-tied locations like an avenger's guild or an artificer location so that sylvan or academy do not have to backtrack to take advantage of their racial. H6 went ahead and added some of the unique buildings as locations which could offer some delicious strategies, which is even better. And having the area of control system to automatically flag hero-claimed locations in your area was a good way to save time from the mundane task of flagging them one by one. You want them, you have to claim the control point. But the universal unit pool and being able to recruit units from just about anywhere regardless of where they were produced.. I'd probably keep it old style. It's just more reasonable.
The other things I sorely miss is the special terrain from H3. How beautiful were the magic plains, how annoying were the anti-magic garrisons, how atmospheric was the cursed ground.. You couldn't but love the whole thing.
Having spells affect the environment might be interesting as long as one faction did not have advantage over the others. Being able to fireball an obstacle that was in the way would be cool but that would only be a source of imbalance if only a few had it. But having functions that are not make-or-break the map would certainly be welcome. Like dark having the cover of darkness, being able to turn the land as in curse or make it bloom, summon a patch of shrubs that slows enemy heroes, the possibilities are endless. Again age of wonders had some brilliant ideas on the matter.
LUCK AND MORALE
I have yet to find a heroes game that got it right - with H1-3 being satisfying yet rare, H4 being a departure in mechanics that I disliked, H5 both frequent and powerful, turning the game into a luckfest and H6 feeling lackluster. Having each point at 1% triggering chance for +50% effect just doesn't feel enough nor can they be compared to the other primary stats that give a guaranteed +2.5% effect per point. It makes sense that they would be part of the primary stats but the implementation wasn't quite right, not just because they are not balanced with the rest of the stats but also because they are so much different in their effect. Also gaining +1 luck at a level up and knowing you have gained a whole +1% chance for critical feels.. lame really. It is a good thing that luck-based factions like inferno or morale-based factions like haven get more of their favoured stats now that skills are not tied to chance but there are other ways to go about it.
I would instead propose that luck/morale points give a 5% chance for +50% effect with a theoretical cap of 20, where the triggering chance would be 100%. That should be more balanced but also more trigger-happy kind of fun and at the same time easy to calculate your chances at any given time. Whether they would still be part of the primary stats is a matter of taste and balance but personally I would rather have them as part of the skill system and expand the skill trees of certain factions with specialized perks. Like warlock's luck(+x% boost to the next spell for each lucky attack triggered until now), elven luck(+x% dmg to lucky attacks), dead man's luck(-x luck for opponent), retribution(+x% dmg boost for each morale point), battle frenzy(+x morale to the unit that kills a stack), demoralize(-1 morale to all units for each stack that dies) etc. Of course the units could retain their starting luck/morale values ranging from 0 to 2 according to a unit's nature and native faction and maybe include -1 and 3 in extreme cases If needed we could use a cap to avoid the triggering chances getting out of hand.
And of course.. I would like to see potential strategies that can fully demoralize or rain ill luck on an opponent That part hasn't really been explored in heroes yet.
BATTLEFIELD
I would like to see some larger battlefields and an extended placement room for rearranging your army without the need of tactics. I believe that would give birth to new strategies and more diverse placement possibilities. I love H6 idea of special tiles and locations in the battlefield, expanding on that would be cool. In general making the battlefield more interactive, having it respond to the spells you cast, having special areas(like tangled growth that slows movement of those who cross it, pools of water that soak), allowing tactics from which position you want to approach the opponent. If the battlefield was large enough and you could attack from the north while the enemy hero was placed on the east for instance - though that should probably be reserved for special open battlefield arenas while others would be smaller. Or like I mentioned on ambush, making it possible to surround him if some conditions are met. And of course.. Weather effects! It would be nice if chilling snowfall was possible on some weeks or a blizzard could randomly appear in an area that would then cross the battlefield in a random pattern and disappear somewhere on the other side. Or random lightning bolts falling in a storm, an earthquake affecting a portion of the battlefield and shattering some obstacles etc. Making it possible to predict the appearance of such natular elemental phenomena with the appropriate elemental mastery would make it even more interesting. Of course we could limit such effects to special terrain only for balance reasons though they wouldn't have to be potent effects, in fact I'd rather they were minor.
Of course those fancy stuff are hardly required for one to enjoy heroes though they might be interesting to see. I think it's possible to recreate a great heroes experience just by mixing stuff that has already been done, adding a few tweaks, good music, tasteful aesthetics and a healthy dose of imagination. But either way I cannot condemn innovation, some of my favourite features I owe to the evolution of the series. I am rather surprised how one thought triggered all that but the thread gained a life of its own the moment I started writing I hope you found it interesting.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
posted September 30, 2011 02:11 AM |
|
Edited by Avirosb at 02:12, 30 Sep 2011.
|
As a magic-type hero (one who cares mostly about atmosphere, aesthetics and storytelling, as opposed to technical stuff and math,
I find it difficult to say something positive about H6.
Regardless, I'm gonna try:
...
Uh... It has some pretty decent voice acting?
I mean, it's better than H5 at least (judging from what little I've heard anyway).
|
|
Aosaw
Promising
Famous Hero
Author of Nonreal Fiction
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 02:31 AM |
|
Edited by Aosaw at 02:36, 30 Sep 2011.
|
Quote:
Elvin talking 'bout stuff.
This.
Seriously, if half of the things you describe here were implemented, I would leap at the chance to play this game.
What you've described is innovation within form, and that's always a good thing. Changing the way skills work while keeping the parts of the skill tree that worked well before, changing the way spells and mage guilds work while maintaining the idea of mage guilds that players really enjoyed.
What Ubisoft has done, for the most part, is innovation against form. Changing the town development to no longer require the lower-level dwellings before the higher-level dwellings, making all skills be "+X to Y" instead of more flavorful abilities... All of these things are ideas that look only at what was broken about the old system, without any acknowledgment of what worked well.
Unfortunately, it just makes me more depressed about what we have instead.  But all good ideas; I would definitely play that game.
|
|
Dave_Jame
Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 08:43 AM |
|
|
Some reaction on your points
Creatures:
What you describe rings the H4 bell in my ears. That is not bad, the alternative unites were one of few thing I liked about it.As long as you have the same population to buy and have to make a choice, why not.
Buildngs:
Blacksmith and market place are two buildings with unused potential. The Blacksmith could fo example reduce the upgrade cost for some unites, or increece gold gaind like the Marketplace does in H6.
Skills and magic.
I can't help But to think that there are to little skills and magic in H6, eventhou there are more skill Trees. One thing I think that has to be done is to devide Spells from non-magic skills. give them some specific point tip, Magic heroes would then get more magic points to spent on spells, might heroes would have more non-magic skill points. Also I would recomand the returne of the Mageguild in some remade form.
But I really like some fo your non-magic skill ideads.
Edit:
@ skills again
There really should be racila skill and reputation skills
____________
I'm just a Mirror of your self.
We see, we look, we gather, we store, we teach.
We are many, and you can be one of us.
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 10:43 AM |
|
|
|
some very interesting points! unfortunately I don't have really time for a real response, but I'll give one this evening or maybe tomorrow
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 11:10 AM |
|
Edited by Elvin at 11:11, 30 Sep 2011.
|
Thanks Aosaw. Maybe one day, though we may get some of those suggestions for H6. Theoretically mage guilds could return as a building that gives extra magical points to purchase spells and replenishes mana or even unlock town specific spells that you wouldn't otherwise have access to. Weather effects certainly could be implemented. Some differentiation in the skill system between factions and classes is certainly possible. Innovation out of form would remain but we could go for the next best thing. And if H7 ever happens I'll be certain to make a few suggestions
------
Sure Dave, I love the racial concept and so far I am enjoying the reputation idea. Reason I did not mention the latter however is because it has not been thoroughly tested in multiplayer and I am not certain if there would be a better design for it. For instance I am not sure that that warcries and spells giving the same amount of points regardless of tier and cost is a good idea, since that might promote point farming with just a lvl 1 warcry. Nor with the fact that it depends on letting units flee or pursuing them since fleeing units are an unpredictable occurence. Actually.. I think I might like a system closer to the age of wonders temples. There you could build one of 4 temples, to war, nature, magic and what else. Each would give you a quest every x days like war asking you to destroy a neutral stack or conquer a town. Now if we had a monument of tears or blood that gave random quests in a similar manner in order to advance your reputation.. That just might work. I would also like the introduction of specific battle locations where you had to make a choice, like meeting a group of units attacked by slavers that after defeating their captors you could choose to liberate them and accept their reward or keep them as your own slaves. Adding a number of such locations acting like mini quests could also work. Or assigning quests to certain artifacts like a resistance artifactin H3 says that you help a paladin slay a necromancer and he gives you the artifact in gratitude. That could be arranged to actually happen ingame. Or perhaps the classic rpg way of having your right hand tell you of the affairs your towns need taken care of.
But frankly.. I am not so sure all these have a place in heroes. All this quest stuff feels forced and not for the sake of itself. Making it a matter of which path's abilities you learn and which you use most would be so much simpler. But not in a points-per-cast way, more like a percentage of x% tears and (100-x)% blood and have your reputation grow as your level does. Anyway let's just see how the H6 works and how it might be tweaked in the future.
------
No rush Jiriki.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Gweret
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 12:04 PM |
|
|
@Elvin
I don't think that your skill approach is good from User Interface design perspective.
It is too fine-grained. Just imagine all those grouping in UI, there would be plenty of them having only few skills like (5-8). Of course you could put more like 15 but this would result in insane amount of skills which is good from player perspective but nightmare from dev.
Faction specific skills could be added in expansion, but only if current skill system would be balanced. Adding them in expansion could give enough time for developers to balance them.
Magic Guilds are problematic. Lets say that as you proposed they unlock some skills which are must have. Then you will have to build that building in other to YOUR HERO to progress/(to be efficient). This is bad design. To avoid this buildings should not affect your hero progression.
Making Magic Guilds as you said would make them must have for evolution.
I'm not sure if there is a place for Magic Guilds as there were. They could affect creatures magic abilities instead of Hero. They could add some spells for creatures.
They could give us something more to build. Currently I have a feeling that it is not enough.
Reputation system could be improved in multiplayer by allowing map makers to create "Quests" and introduce new quest travel map objects. For ex. witch hut with dialog poping.
Travel map also could be given more objects you could interact with.
|
|
DoubleDeck
Promising
Legendary Hero
Look into my eyes...
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 12:04 PM |
|
|
Nice read Elvin!
My comments:
Skills -> Good system but too uniform and alike for all factions, would like to see more faction related skills (eg. from H5: nature's wrath for Sylvan)
Magic -> Nice change as you can choose your spells, but maybe for every ability point you can get two spells instead of one (if going for abilities that are spells)
Armies -> Tier system is great
Towns -> Bring back pre-requisities!
Classes and stats -> Cool but for magic heroes, make the advanced and Ultimate abilities with less Mana to cast!
On battlefield -> in big battles it seems too crowded and I cannot see how many troops die cos there's so much other stat affects happening too when troops get attacked...I only need to see troops lost and the other info can be on the combat log
|
|
infinitus
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 02:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Magic Guilds are problematic.
I like how current H6 magic system work. Magic guild is not gone completely even now. Advanced market is kind of magic guild, you can buy scrolls to surprise your opponent. I will like to see building on map offering one free level up. Not seen such building on maps i played.
|
|
e3772014
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 08:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Towns -> Bring back pre-requisities!
I disagree. The pre-requisites in H5 only prevented people from coming up with their own ways to play. Having an overly structured approach to town building makes it boring, imo, since you're not really in control..
|
|
Dave_Jame
Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 08:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I disagree. The pre-requisites in H5 only prevented people from coming up with their own ways to play. Having an overly structured approach to town building makes it boring, imo, since you're not really in control..
I disagree. Not only do thay add logic and atmosphere, but also they help to determin the game pase, and add a strategic depth to the game.
Look now at heros VI whithsome luck at the start you can have the champion in week one. H5 style helpd to give everybody a fair chance, 15(21) days to get the Tier 7 unit.
The H6 structure system is extremly shallow, so shallow it hutrs.
|
|
e3772014
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 30, 2011 08:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I disagree. Not only do thay add logic and atmosphere, but also they help to determin the game pase, and add a strategic depth to the game.
Look now at heros VI whithsome luck at the start you can have the champion in week one. H5 style helpd to give everybody a fair chance, 15(21) days to get the Tier 7 unit.
The H6 structure system is extremly shallow, so shallow it hutrs.
That doesn't make sense. How does determining the game pace through a rigid system add a strategic depth to the game?
More choices = more strategic depth. Not the other way around. And yes, I'm aware that the choices right now aren't really balanced (heavily favoring an economic approach), but with this basic SYSTEM in place, that can be fixed.
Whereas you're not really arguing against more choices-you're just against people being able to get a champion in week one, which at the moment seems to be overpowered. With a balanced system, it should not be overpowering to get champions in week one.
Make an argument for your type of system, not the balance. Both systems can be balanced or imbalanced depending on how much the devs care about the game =P
|
|
Aosaw
Promising
Famous Hero
Author of Nonreal Fiction
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 01:14 AM |
|
|
I think a better way to "balance" it would be, instead of having separate buildings for each fortification type, have it be one building that gets upgraded (like the town/village/city hall), and each upgrade requires that your town be of a certain "level".
Then you can do the same thing with the creature dwellings. Want to build your dragon dwelling? Fine. Build sixteen other buildings first, and you can have dragons.
That way no Tier 7 unit will be available before the start of week 3, and "upgradeable" buildings make more sense. The names can continue to change (Fort, Castle, Citadel), but instead of being several separate items on a building tree, it's one item that you upgrade.
|
|
Dave_Jame
Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 01:18 AM |
|
|
Quote:
That doesn't make sense. How does determining the game pace through a rigid system add a strategic depth to the game?
More choices = more strategic depth. Not the other way around. And yes, I'm aware that the choices right now aren't really balanced (heavily favoring an economic approach), but with this basic SYSTEM in place, that can be fixed.
Whereas you're not really arguing against more choices-you're just against people being able to get a champion in week one, which at the moment seems to be overpowered. With a balanced system, it should not be overpowering to get champions in week one.
Make an argument for your type of system, not the balance. Both systems can be balanced or imbalanced depending on how much the devs care about the game =P
I Disagree agein
More choices =/= more strategic depth. Why? well If I can chose everything I will chose the best, there is no strategy in the best, the best is a status. that leads to stereotypes and repetitiveness. But if I have opstacals (Town level, resources ASO.) I have to chose the best strategy to get to my goal.
An easy example on H6. If I have limited resources only for one Elite at the beginning of the game, I will chose the one who is most usefull in creeping. Why,not nothing limits me. But If I have limits, I will chose the thing that is most advantages or most efective.
And to explain what I ment by the depth of the game. In heroes 6 it is only gather-build-destroy, you can build everything so you do not care and do not think much about your construction system.
That is the main problem and point. You do not think about the development of your town. And you get everithing to easy
For me. Strategy is about finding the best way to come over ospticals. If you delete the obstical, what do you have left? They already change many obcticals becaus they were two random. This was not one of them and this on cloud easly be implemented.
Whitout obstacles, a journey just becomes a road.
Edit
@ e3772014:especialy for you I made an additional spell check. I have been writting this post at 1 am. that is a time I do not have time or mood for such thing, But i think your reaction was unnecesary and somehow insulting. There are many users and sometimes even those that highly respected that make errors
|
|
Aosaw
Promising
Famous Hero
Author of Nonreal Fiction
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 01:50 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Without obstacles, a journey just becomes a road.
Editing for spelling mine.
Actually, it becomes a barren field. Even a road is an obstacle of a sort.
The ability to build one of three dwellings doesn't take away strategic depth; it adds to it. If you have to make a choice between three different strategies based on circumstances, that's a choice you have to make.
However, if one of those three dwellings is core, another elite, and another champion, and you don't have to jump through any hoops to get them...then that affects balance. If you're going to have champions and elites available at the same time, then the units should logically be of the same strength, which we know they're not.
The problem, though, is pacing, and that can be resolved with level requirements just as effectively as by building requirements.
|
|
Brukernavn
Hero of Order
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 03:10 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Elvins O.P.
I practically agree with all your points, and I think the skills and magic parts were spot on! But I disagree with the last part about creatures. I've always hated alternative upgrades/creatures, be it the H4 or H5 version. I agree that it in principle gives you many different strategic choices, but either the choice would be too similar to make any significant difference, or be very diverse but a nightmare to balance. The H5 alternative upgrades were very interesting, but if you exclude the trivial and obvious choices you're not left with too many alternatives. I'd rather have an extra faction or two than alternatives.
But I think the main reason I don't like the idea (and mostly the H4 version) is because you get the feeling of not building something. Heroes people are strange that way, they want choices, but they want to have it all, not choosing one thing over the other.
|
|
Aosaw
Promising
Famous Hero
Author of Nonreal Fiction
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 03:38 AM |
|
|
What might work better is if the "alternate" units were a flat "+X to stat Y" versus "+X to stat Z".
So that, for example, the two-handed swordsman would have a +5 bonus to attack, whereas a sword-and-board swordsman would have a +5 bonus to defense.
So that the difference is purely numeric, rather than dealing with special abilities, but lets you customize your army to a certain extent.
|
|
Brukernavn
Hero of Order
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 04:02 AM |
|
|
|
That wouldn't justify an alternative IMO. Why not just make the +5 def/att a choice for the one creature instead of having two different creature models? It would make boring alternatives anyway
|
|
e3772014
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 06:32 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I Disagree agein
More choices =/= more strategic depth. Why? well If I can chose everything I will chose the best, there is no strategy in the best, the best is a status. that leads to stereotips and repetivnes. But if I have opsticals (Town level, resources ASO.) I have to chose the best strategy to get to my goal.
An easy example on H6. If I have limited resources only for one Elite at the beginign of the game, I will chose the one who is most usefull in creeping. Why,not nothing limits me. But If I have limits, I will chose thething thet is most advantagesm or most efective.
And to explain whot I ment by the depth of the game. In heroes 6 it is only gather-build-destroy, you can build everithing so you do not care and do not think much about your construction system.
That is the main problem and point. You do not think about the development of your town. And you get everithing to easy
For me. Strategy is about finding the best way to come over ospticals. If you delete the obstical, what do you have left? Thay already change many obcticals becaus they were two random. This was not one of them and this on cloud easly be implemented.
Whitout obsitcal, a jurnay just becomes a road.
If you could understand logic better, maybe you would realize what I was saying...You're saying that IF more choices lead to ONE absolute best path, then that's a bad thing. Yes, of course that is. But few choices can ALSO lead to one absolute best path.
You're still not arguing against the system of having more freedom of choice.
I'm not even going to bother reading the rest because you obviously didn't care about your point enough to even do a simple spell check...
|
|
Aosaw
Promising
Famous Hero
Author of Nonreal Fiction
|
|
posted October 01, 2011 06:57 AM |
|
|
Read his post anyway, enumbers. He makes some good points despite the lack of spellcheck.
There are enough non-English-speaking people who post on this forum that if you're not willing to meet people halfway when it comes to language and spelling, you'll never get anything done. Sure, it goes both ways - if you're posting on an English forum, you should make an effort to not murder the language - but let's not make the discussion about grammar and syntax, shall we?
|
| |
|
|
