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

<a href="http://www.game-advertising-online.com/" target=_blank>Game Advertising Online</a><br> banner requires iframes

LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info forum | HOMM4: info forum | HOMM5: info forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Heroes 6 - The New Beginning > Thread: Regarding Stack Limits
Thread: Regarding Stack Limits [ This thread is 2 pages long: (1) 2 ]
Elvin Online
Elvin

Hero of Order
Stillness within Movement
posted October 06, 2011 06:27 AM
Edited by Elvin at 06:31, 06 Oct 2011.

Poll Question:
Regarding Stack Limits

A number of king's bounty fans have expressed the wish to see your hero's army capped according to his leadership stat. While I am not so fond of the idea, I cannot dismiss it as not having merit: It could certainly retain the usefulness of destructive spells if the game gets too long and keep the buff effectiveness in check which would inevitably become a must in that very same scenario. Epic maps have been a concern on heroes balance in the past and it would be a shame to have the lategame imbalance in this installment, especially given the new feature of town/dwelling convertion.

So how do you feel about it? Obviously if there was a cap it would have to be tied to hero level instead of leadership for obvious reasons. I would rather make destructive spells have a mixed formula including a first part that deals damage according to hero level and spellpower and a second part that increases or decreases according to the size of the targeted stack. Not only because I feel it would be better balanced but because I really would like to keep my options open, some people enjoy epic army clashes, why spoil their fun? I do not like limits and frankly it would irritate me not being able to put all my army on my main hero. But of course there are other ways. Like adding extra effects as the armour-breaking properties of fire spells in H5, the deep freeze's added physical vulnerability and so on. We could even make destructive spells give an hp reduction to units due to injuries as per JJ's suggestion though it feels kinda radical..

Regardless, what are your thoughts on the issue?
____________
Cry havoc and let slip the goats of war!

Responses:
Limiting stack size might actually be a good idea
I'd rather see a change in spell formulas
Destructive spells aren't all that bad..
Other thoughts
 View Results!

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


Promising
Supreme Hero
Part of the furniture
posted October 06, 2011 06:36 AM

The topic title doesn't really match the poll. The title refers to stack size, but the poll then details destructive spells. Maybe reword the title to match this?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
kodial79
kodial79


Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
posted October 06, 2011 06:40 AM
Edited by kodial79 at 06:42, 06 Oct 2011.

It should be per level + a stat.

If it's only per level, then we will have a lot of main heroes having the exact same amount of army, which would be rather monotonous.

If it's by a stat alone such as leadership, it would be hopeless to see an epic battle any time soon, unless you're boosting nothing else but that stat.

If it's a combination of both though, the amount of army you can command rises with your level and you can still choose to gather even more troops by boosting this stat either through leveling it up or magical items.

It will still be difficult to gather your entire army under one hero, but I was never a fan of it. But if people like doing that, then maybe there could be an epic artifact that allows you to ignore army limits. A dynasty item would work great for that.

____________
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature!

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


Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
posted October 06, 2011 07:35 AM

I would keep that idea as a unique feture of KB and not try tu uplement it in heroes. Rather see some number changes in unites growth in Heroes

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

Hero of Order
Stillness within Movement
posted October 06, 2011 07:36 AM

Quote:
The title refers to stack size, but the poll then details destructive spells.

That is because destructive spells are - for me at least - the only serious reason to consider such a feature. The only other reason I could think of would be if H6 balance was dynamic but this does not seem to be the case. And if it was just a matter of taste I am fairly certain it would not be worth considering just because the risk of alienating long-time fans would be considerable - and the communities have certainly given the message that some changes are unwelcome unless there is a VERY good reason.
____________
Cry havoc and let slip the goats of war!

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


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted October 06, 2011 07:50 AM

they could tie destructive power to the amount of XP points

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
posted October 06, 2011 08:14 AM
Edited by Zenofex at 08:15, 06 Oct 2011.

I'm strongly against limiting the stack size. It works in King's Bounty but the latter is a more of a RPG than a TBS and limiting the stack size is one way to control the character's progression throughout the game. Applying the same thing to Heroes will be a meaningless penalty to one hero's effectiveness and will make the conquering of additional towns, not to mention converting them, pretty much useless (or the limit could be quite high in which case it doesn't really matter if it will be there or not). Just because they can't find a proper way to make the direct-damage spells scale well doesn't mean that they have to alter such an important part of the game mechanics and eventually mess the things up even more.
That said, the direct-damage spells are currently at their worst and have never been so weak. They are still somewhat useful in the early game but later every sane person will use the lame "re-spec" thing and get rid of them in most scenarios. They should have 4 modifiers:
- hero Spell Power
- hero level
- hero affinity (greater damage for Blood heroes)
- target creature tier (greater damage to the lower tiers, this by the way will be a boost for the upper tiers in an indirect way)
And of course their basic damage should be improved. Nobody wants a Heroes III version of Implosion, just something useful that is not so decisively overshadowed by the regular crowd control spells. And finally, it will be good to see some Magic Defense-penetrating skill because the current low efficiency of the direct-damage spells is largely due to the universal reduction of their damage, no matter what creature is targeted.

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

Hero of Order
Stillness within Movement
posted October 06, 2011 08:28 AM

Quote:
And finally, it will be good to see some Magic Defense-penetrating skill because the current low efficiency of the direct-damage spells is largely due to the universal reduction of their damage, no matter what creature is targeted.

Precisely. I have suggested adding tier 3 abilities that would work like empowered or irresistible spells, also a rework of the magic boosters other than +3 power/mastery for the specific element. Like mana cost reduction, duration increase, cooldown reduction or +x% to spell effectiveness like meditation was for nature magic. It would be more interesting too and avoid the magic skills overbuffing the magical units' already high damage.
____________
Cry havoc and let slip the goats of war!

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


Promising
Legendary Hero
fallen artist
posted October 06, 2011 09:52 AM

I think it's fine and there should be clear distinction between KB and Heroes mechanics.

First solution works fine in campaign, allowing to extend it to many days of gameplay and hundred of battles. You can pick tiny flags with leadership points all day long and nevert get enough.
In heroes, however, gamemplay in many ascpects fits multiplayer, where you make a quick skirmish in a few weeks and there is no way to develop huge army.

On the other hand, destructive magic can do wonders in early game, both in H4 and H5. In H3, it also worked pretty fine in free-for all games with intense gameplay and limited armies, like on Reunion map.

It only become a prblem on epic maps. In H3, spellpower was capped at 99 which was just not enough for hundreds of tier 7 creatures, while attack & defense remained useless.
In H4, there was no spellpower at all, which also limited its use.

In H5, this was fixed by introduction of Deep Freeze, which scales perfectly with he size of your army and remains badass in the very late game. On the other hand, Frenzy, Vampirism and Wasp Hive with unlimited spellpower become ridiculous.

Well, it's all the matter of balance. But I think it's better to leave balance for mapmakers than just encode them explicitely in game mechanics. This can't be reversed.
____________

The future of Heroes 3 is here!

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


Promising
Legendary Hero
Look into my eyes...
posted October 06, 2011 09:56 AM

Sometimes the key to master a game of Heroes against your mate is to survive with all your troops after battles so that in the final battle you have maximum troops. This is a key aspect of Heroes, and not King's Bounty / Disciples...so limiting stack size might make this meaningless (like so what if I lose 10 arhcers, I can get 10 more to my max archer limitation)...

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


Promising
Famous Hero
posted October 06, 2011 01:24 PM
Edited by Nocturnal at 13:38, 06 Oct 2011.

    I also thought about that when I started to play King's Bounty. But that leadership system wouldn't work on Heroes.

    Because in KB, the creatures are found in stacks in buildings and they don't grow any more. So, if it were not for the leadership system in KB a hero with many golds, would buy the whole stack and would be invincible and the total balance would be destroyed.

    But in Heroes, the creatures grow week by week. This is already the stack limit in Heroes. There is already a limit -gold- to the creatures you can buy, but more importantly a limit - weekly growth- to the size of the creatures available, which is the alternative of KB's leadership system.

    So, to put a third limit to the stack size would choke the game. The significance of finding a new dwelling for a unit, or a neutral unit's wish to join you and capturing new towns would vanquish. Also, if the size limit would grow by hero's level, any 19 level Heaven hero would have the same army and that wouldn't be so interesting. If what determines the limit was a skill, say "Army Size", it would be a mendotary skill to get for everyone leaving even less skills to get for the player.
____________
True beauty transcends such
simplistic labels such as "good" and
"evil" -Vega

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


Supreme Hero
Eats people with Ketchup
posted October 06, 2011 01:28 PM
Edited by MrDragon at 13:32, 06 Oct 2011.

I say the problem is bigger then spell damage, it's a problem that's been with the series since HoMMI.

My biggest gripe with LATE, late game, is it becomes more of a whoever's stacks hit the other's stack first wins.

Say whilst 20 spearmen vs 20 spearmen the battle even after the first attack can still be settled one way or the other with only minor influences from other units. A 20000 vs 20000 fight the first stack to deal damage will, for example, kill 4000 dudes. Proportionally this makes sense but because you're dealing with two variables, hitpoints and stack size the numbers do not scale the same way, throw in the hero's offense score tweaking matters and that first hit made it nigh impossible to balance out the damage that was done.

It's a bit vague and I'm not very good at explaining it but surely other people have bumped into this problem before.
Though, even KB with it's leadership mechanic still has SOME of this problem.

I personally because of this, enjoy the early/mid-game of both more then the late, because in the early to mid game, the slightest tactical change could radically alter the outcome of a fight but in the late game, most fights are essentially decided in the first few turns and the rest is just a chore of wearing down the numbers.

I must acknowlege the fact that, simply put: big numbers at the end of your toils for propperly managing your army and then crushing everything with it... is VERY satisfying.

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

Hero of Order
and Light
posted October 06, 2011 03:07 PM

I don't see the issue. Destructive Magic is good in early game. Light and Dark Magic is good in late game. That's just part of the game mechanism. Each skill has its good sides and its bad sides. H6 even introduced a feature to forget skills in late game if you don't like it anymore, so they even eliminated that tactical twist.
____________
Heroes 7 - News overview | Heroes 7 - Discussion thread

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


Known Hero
posted October 06, 2011 03:30 PM
Edited by einomida at 15:42, 06 Oct 2011.

Quote:
I don't see the issue. Destructive Magic is good in early game. Light and Dark Magic is good in late game. That's just part of the game mechanism. Each skill has its good sides and its bad sides. H6 even introduced a feature to forget skills in late game if you don't like it anymore, so they even eliminated that tactical twist.


I think the problem is directly tied to map sizes that render some builds (as well as factions) significantly weaker than others.

Anyway, spell penetration and extra effects for spells would be the way to go. Perhaps even combo effects like "soaked" enemies take extra Lightning damage or Frozen enemies can be shattered for extra damage (yup, Dragon Age had it nice).

For example:

1) low scaling, but high base damage spells that also provide extra bonus effects. Benefit more from Spell Pen, less from Spellpower, leaving you open for other skills instead of improving you SP.

2) high scaling, moderate base damage spells that are mainly meant to deal damage. Benefit most from Spellpower, but also from Spell Pen.

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


Promising
Supreme Hero
posted October 06, 2011 03:37 PM

Quote:
H6 even introduced a feature to forget skills in late game if you don't like it anymore, so they even eliminated that tactical twist.

I haven't seen any in-game respec feature other than in the dynasty hero creation.

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


Adventuring Hero
posted October 06, 2011 05:24 PM

In my opinion the best way to improve damage spells is to give them non damage abilities.

Think of it:

Lets say that on level 30 you can kill 20 champions with some dmg spell:

By avg it means that you deal:
20 x 300(avg champion hp) * 2(avg. dmg reduction ratio %50 without hero boost) = 12k dmg.

It would also mean that you would be able to kill by avg. 10 times more cores (if avg. core hp is 10 times lower than champion hp) that is around 200...

What is problem here? If on given map you could have at level 30 let say 200 champions, killing 20 with one spell would not be big deal, but if it were only 50? The same thing goes for cores.


But then, not being able to kill 20 champions on level 30, how useful is that?

How would you balance this against might hero?

This is the reason why damage spells should have some special effects to scale at higher levels. With effectiveness, not damage dealing.

This is also they way UBI have turned with some spells, but currently there are not enough skills boosting non-dmg abilities.

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

Hero of Order
and Light
posted October 07, 2011 03:10 AM
Edited by alcibiades at 03:12, 07 Oct 2011.

Quote:
Quote:
H6 even introduced a feature to forget skills in late game if you don't like it anymore, so they even eliminated that tactical twist.
I haven't seen any in-game respec feature other than in the dynasty hero creation.
Oh, good thing if they got rid of that I guess.

Quote:
I think the problem is directly tied to map sizes that render some builds (as well as factions) significantly weaker than others.

Anyway, spell penetration and extra effects for spells would be the way to go. Perhaps even combo effects like "soaked" enemies take extra Lightning damage or Frozen enemies can be shattered for extra damage (yup, Dragon Age had it nice).

For example:

1) low scaling, but high base damage spells that also provide extra bonus effects. Benefit more from Spell Pen, less from Spellpower, leaving you open for other skills instead of improving you SP.

2) high scaling, moderate base damage spells that are mainly meant to deal damage. Benefit most from Spellpower, but also from Spell Pen.

I'm deffinitely for all of those things, and I think there is a balancing issue if Destructive spells are not useful in early game, but I don't think it should be possible to nuke entire enemy armies with destructive spells through the whole game.
____________
Heroes 7 - News overview | Heroes 7 - Discussion thread

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


Promising
Famous Hero
posted October 07, 2011 04:29 AM

Hi Mr. D, long time not see your comment.

Regarding the stack limit, I can think of a stack over-leadership point penalty, while I can't be sure how this can be done but the idea is, when the stack is over the leadership point limit, the stack will overdo some penalty. Not necessarily like KB in which you loose complete control of over-leadership point creature.

Maybe a randomized penalty to their def/mdef value or even some attack/m-attack value.

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


Promising
Supreme Hero
posted October 07, 2011 04:34 AM
Edited by Nelgirith at 04:37, 07 Oct 2011.

I'm not fond of spells scaling with the hero's level, that's what spell power was made for. Instead, since we have a free skill system, I would rather make spells scale with how many points you spend in its magic tree.

For example, with equal spellpower the Fireball of a hero who spent 7 points in the Fire Magic tree would be stronger than the Fireball of a hero who just went to supermarket and cherry-picked Fireball as its only Fire Magic spell.

Instead of being a raw +X% effect per point invested in a tree, they could be creative with this "magic specialization".

- Each point spent in Fire Mage = +5% chance to crit with Fire spells and +5% critical damage. Effect of buffs/debuffs of fire spells increased by 2.5%.
- Each point spent in Water Magic = Effect and duration of buffs/debuffs of water spells increased by 5%. Damage of water spells increased by 2.5%.
- Each point spent in Air Magic = Damage of air spells increased by 5%. Effect and duration of buffs of air spells increased by 5%. Effect and duration of debuffs of air spells increased by 2.5%
etc...


This would remove the supermarket feeling where people just cherry-pick the spells they like the most and would give people a choice between being a jack-of-all-trades with a lot of weaker spells or becoming a specialist with fewer but stronger spells.

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

Hero of Order
and Light
posted October 07, 2011 10:00 AM
Edited by alcibiades at 10:01, 07 Oct 2011.

Quote:
I'm not fond of spells scaling with the hero's level, that's what spell power was made for. Instead, since we have a free skill system, I would rather make spells scale with how many points you spend in its magic tree.

For example, with equal spellpower the Fireball of a hero who spent 7 points in the Fire Magic tree would be stronger than the Fireball of a hero who just went to supermarket and cherry-picked Fireball as its only Fire Magic spell.

Instead of being a raw +X% effect per point invested in a tree, they could be creative with this "magic specialization".

- Each point spent in Fire Mage = +5% chance to crit with Fire spells and +5% critical damage. Effect of buffs/debuffs of fire spells increased by 2.5%.
- Each point spent in Water Magic = Effect and duration of buffs/debuffs of water spells increased by 5%. Damage of water spells increased by 2.5%.
- Each point spent in Air Magic = Damage of air spells increased by 5%. Effect and duration of buffs of air spells increased by 5%. Effect and duration of debuffs of air spells increased by 2.5%
etc...


This would remove the supermarket feeling where people just cherry-pick the spells they like the most and would give people a choice between being a jack-of-all-trades with a lot of weaker spells or becoming a specialist with fewer but stronger spells.
This gets my full approval!
And why was it that the old system where picking the native skill (e.g. Fire Magic I, II, III) improved the spell scale modifier and not just gave a SP boost wasn't good?
____________
Heroes 7 - News overview | Heroes 7 - Discussion thread

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
[ This thread is 2 pages long: (1) 2 ] < Prev Thread . . . Next Thread >
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0793 seconds