|
| Thread: Opinions Wanted: Idea for addition to Combat Mechanics |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted June 13, 2014 07:10 PM |
|
|
Opinions Wanted: Idea for addition to Combat Mechanics
Let's assume, a potential HoMM 7 would keep the battlefield geometry of HoMM 5 & 6: squares and two unit sizes, 1x1 and 2x2.
(Yes, I know, there might be better options, but for the sake of the argument, let'ss just assume this.)
Considering that the big size isn't an asset, but a liability, I'd like to discuss the following THREE general combat additions, that transfer into abilities for all BIG (2x2) units depending on what kind of unit they are:
1) MANEUVERABILITY
This is already known. All 2x2 SHOOTER units gain the intrinsic ability to EITHER first shoot and then move OR to first move and THEN shoot. Retaliation MIGHT or MIGHT NOT include a move before shooting.
2) OVERRUN
If the hypothetical Minimum Melee Damage of a 2x2 WALKER against an enemy unit it could legally attack in its turn is (100 +X)% against a 1x1 and (100 + Y)% against a 2x2 of the damage needed to kill the unit completely, the attack becomes part of the movement and does not stop the turn of the unit. The attack may or may not cost additional movement points. The overrunning unit may or may not suffer a retaliation damage (it would otherwise not receive) that may be a fraction of the hypothetical retaliation damage or even more (depending on the opponent).
Any number of enemy stacks may be overrun in one turn provided the movement allowance, well, allows it.
I would imagine a difference here in overrunning small and big units. Overrunning small units might be fairly simple; "X" might be simply "0" in which case any attack of a 2x2 Melee Walker against an 1x1 unit that would be GUARANTEED to kill the 1x1 would qualify as an overrun. The penalty for "storming over the enemy with disregard of the own defense" MIGHT be, that the overrunning unit would suffer from a regular retaliation attack.
Overrunning a 2x2 should be more difficult. The overrun it might get an automatic "Preemptive Strike", done at max damage, and for the overrunning unit to be eligible for an overrun, it would have to be still eligible after suffering that preemptive strike, otherwise it wasn't possible.
3) CRUSH
This would allow a 2x2 Flyer to land on a square blocked by "too light" opponent forces, in much the same way than above (imagine a bunch of Black Dragons simply landing on a lone Dwarf). The difference would be that this "attack-while-moving" would be possible just once per turn (once the flyer has landed it has landed).
Opinions?
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 07:32 PM |
|
|
For ALL?! Ridiculous! No way.
I don't get it, why would you even want that.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 07:48 PM |
|
|
Question:
When playing HoMM 5 and 6, if you could CHOOSE the size of a unit for YOU - that is, in your army - would you pick big or small?
Do you think that Liches in HoMM 5 are a great shooter?
Do you think Haven Cavalry would be better, if 1x1?
What do you think - how small can your army be fighting a neutral stack of BIG creatures vs. SMALL ones?
In other words - do you think size matters?
Do you think it's ok that big units can be easily blocked?
|
|
adriancat
Famous Hero
Protector Of The Peace
|
posted June 13, 2014 07:48 PM |
|
|
|
He wants that for a new Heroes game, don't you get it ?
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 07:55 PM |
|
|
|
I think in general, large creatures should have an advantage of stamina, hit points and resistance (not necessarily all of them at once) but they should be slower and more vulnerable to ranged attacks. Exceptions will be exceptions though, you cant have slow or small dragons for example.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:04 PM |
|
|
Let's also assume you wanted to change the flow of combat and so on - a fresh element.
The problem with big vs. small units is, that big units are FOUR times as big as small ones (was double until HoMM 3, was a lot of different sizes in the square-BF HoMM 4).
|
|
Storm-Giant
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
On the Other Side!
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:05 PM |
|
|
I do agree this needs some kind of change if Ubisoft is going to keep squares instead of hexes.
I like the #1 and #3 ideas...as for #2, I would rather have some kind of "relatation bar" linked to each creature turn (anyone, doesn't matter the size), so some traditional gimmicks could be avoided.
For example, imagine a small stack (1 peasant) attack a big stack (100 Dragons). That shouldn't take all the relatation. Put a minimum (25%, for example) when the difference is overwhelming and make the game rely on something more interesting than just "1 creature bait into mass surround turn"
Now it could get interesting if you want to go even ahead and add an action bar too...so it applies when attacking too.
So no, I don't like the second idea applied only to 2x2 shooters.
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:10 PM |
|
|
First of all I think that the current concept of battleground with squares/hexes is flawed and limiting. I tried searching for a better grid and eventually thought of intercalated small and big circles but that's probably too complicated and it might still not work.
Secondly, I don't really like the small vs big creatures thing myself. The size of smaller units is definitely a plus but not in all situations. And even so there are ways of balancing that deficit by buffing the attributes of the big creatures, or give them certain abilities.
Thirdly, the best way that I see right now is for Ubi to drop the entire 2x2 thing and go for full 1x1. Then add "big creature" to some of them and give them larger models. Although in my mind this is still a compromise, and the game might become even more dull.
|
|
Steyn
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:12 PM |
|
Edited by Steyn at 20:13, 13 Jun 2014.
|
What if the squares would be smaller (and the battlefield therefore larger). If a small unit is 2x2 and a large one 3x3 (and perhaps a huge one of 4x4 or even larger) the difference between the two sizes becomes more like in H3 again.
And I really like #3: CRUSH 
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:15 PM |
|
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:19 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 20:20, 13 Jun 2014.
|
|
Excuse us for having opinions different than yours, oh, your holy sighedness.
|
|
verriker
Honorable
Legendary Hero
We don't need another 'eroes
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:21 PM |
|
Edited by verriker at 20:22, 13 Jun 2014.
|
JollyJoker said:
Let's assume, a potential HoMM 7 would keep the battlefield geometry of HoMM 5 & 6: squares and two unit sizes, 1x1 and 2x2.
HoMM 7 confirmed
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 08:47 PM |
|
|
@ Stevie
You forget,. that I ASKED for your opinion. However, I asked a specific question, and if you ask if you want blue or not, "I think all colors suck" is none.
@ Verricker
That sounds a bit like:
verriker said:
JollyJoker said:
... HoMM 7...
HoMM 7 confirmed
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 09:08 PM |
|
|
|
I think I've made myself perfectly clear. The idea of having those abilities/mechanics for all 2x2 creatures is ludicrous.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 09:09 PM |
|
Edited by MattII at 21:10, 13 Jun 2014.
|
|
Can't say I see the logic behind #1, and I don't quite see what you're getting at with #2, but I'm definitely behind #3. More varied creature sizes would help too, I mean realistically, stuff like centaurs and knights and such don't fit really well in either category, they're too big to really appear as standard sized units, but seem to be very small when compared to many of the other large sized units
|
|
War-overlord
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Presidente of Isla del Tropico
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 09:21 PM |
|
|
MattII said:
Can't say I see the logic behind #1, and I don't quite see what you're getting at with #2, but I'm definitely behind #3. More varied creature sizes would help too, I mean realistically, stuff like centaurs and knights and such don't fit really well in either category, they're too big to really appear as standard sized units, but seem to be very small when compared to many of the other large sized units
This I can agree with.
Though having sizes that aren't able to pivot on the spot might get troublesome when trying to calculate movement. But I do think JJ has said certain things about that in the past
____________
Vote El Presidente! Or Else!
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 09:29 PM |
|
|
For explanation,
2)
just means that a 2x2 Walker gets the ability to stomp over ridiculous ressistance. If you agree with the notion of a single Dwarf just being crush under a pack of Black Dragons, than the idea that a stack of Cyclopses simply waltzes over a single Sprite shouldn't sound strange.
|
|
verriker
Honorable
Legendary Hero
We don't need another 'eroes
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 09:37 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
@ Verricker
That sounds a bit like:
verriker said:
JollyJoker said:
... HoMM 7...
HoMM 7 confirmed
not really, man, you telegraph these things pretty often
you've posted design details about Clash and Heroes, DOC and Heroes 6 expansion shortly before they announcement, IIRC
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 09:57 PM |
|
|
He did?! LuLz.
Also you might wanna check this if you're interested in some unconfirmed speculations about H7 being developed. I'd say Limbic is working on it as we speak.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:09 PM |
|
|
War-overlord said:
Though having sizes that aren't able to pivot on the spot might get troublesome when trying to calculate movement. But I do think JJ has said certain things about that in the past
Oh I wasn't thinking on anything complicated, just make the battlefield larger and bump a handful of creatures up to 3x3 size.
JollyJoker said:
For explanation,
2)
just means that a 2x2 Walker gets the ability to stomp over ridiculous ressistance. If you agree with the notion of a single Dwarf just being crush under a pack of Black Dragons, than the idea that a stack of Cyclopses simply waltzes over a single Sprite shouldn't sound strange.
Oh so #2 and #3 are similar ideas just for walkers and flyers respectively? I can see those, although there ought to be some exceptions, like if you try it with pikemen the larger units takes equal damage to the smaller unit.
|
|
|
|
