|
| Thread: Opinions Wanted: Idea for addition to Combat Mechanics |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:11 PM |
|
|
verriker said:
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
Nah. Just ... nah.
|
|
War-overlord
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Presidente of Isla del Tropico
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:13 PM |
|
|
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.
I see, well, I suppose I could get behind that as well. But the way you explain it a bit overcomplicated, making it a bit hard to follow what you say.
Matt said:
Oh I wasn't thinking on anything complicated, just make the battlefield larger and bump a handful of creatures up to 3x3 size.
So roughly what Steyn was getting at. I suppose that could work.
____________
Vote El Presidente! Or Else!
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:20 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 22:22, 13 Jun 2014.
|
You guys for real?
So all those tactics with stacks of 1 creatures gone to waste? Just all out brawl? Griffins crushing shadow matriarchs? What if there're 2 pixies near each other? And why wouldn't a Faceless 1x1 be able to crush one pixie?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:23 PM |
|
|
MattII said:
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.
It's meant as a general BUFF to big-sized creatures since being big-sized is in itself a debuff.
You should WANT to build big creatures, not cursing the fact they ARE big.
I mean, consider the difference between, say, Lacerators or Spring Spirits and Kensei. The difference is - you can easily block Kensei. Or imagine Dreamwalkers and Panther Warriors. Imagine Panther Warriors with the Overrun ability - you'd want them.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:27 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
You guys for real?
So all those tactics with stacks of 1 creatures gone to waste? Just all out brawl? Griffins crushing shadow matriarchs? What if there're 2 pixies near each other? And why wouldn't a Faceless 1x1 be able to crush one pixie?
Actually, it would be an ability of SIZE, not of numbers, although numbers would play a role in determining validity. It's HEROES.
|
|
War-overlord
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Presidente of Isla del Tropico
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:29 PM |
|
|
I understood why you wanted to buff bigs, JJ. What you explained somewhat overcomplicatedly is how you wanted to do that.
Personally, I never considered being big that big of a debuff for big creatures, but I can see where you come from.
____________
Vote El Presidente! Or Else!
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:44 PM |
|
|
I hope Ubi won't take JJ seriously on this. There are many other ways to counterbalance a deficit, not waste precious time implementing 3 mechanics to just kill 3 pixies.
Blocking a big creature with a small unit is part of the fun, even when it happens to you. That's why there is fodder in the battlefield, to restrict the opponent's moves or make them as inefficient as possible. I've never seen this as an obstacle.
Whatever, I said what I had to say. It's just ridiculous.
|
|
verriker
Honorable
Legendary Hero
We don't need another 'eroes
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 10:48 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
He did?! LuLz.
Yeah totally, just went back and checked lol
here he talks all about COH before it's revealed
and here about a DOC expansion
I know there's more
JollyJoker said:
Nah. Just ... nah.
a real convincing rebuttal lol
anyway, I'm not saying this topic is for Heroes 7, but it's probably for Heroes 7 lol
don't mean to be rude, sorry for offtopic
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2014 11:26 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 23:32, 13 Jun 2014.
|
And this guy... is an insider?!
Edited: Not gonna pick a fight. Just gonna say that Ubisoft deserves him.
Whatever, I'm out of here.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 14, 2014 09:22 AM |
|
Edited by MattII at 16:32, 14 Jun 2014.
|
War-overlord said:
Personally, I never considered being big that big of a debuff for big creatures, but I can see where you come from.
Restricted movement for non-flyers, plus take extra damage from area spells. OTOH, you could balance it by making larger units that much tougher than smaller units.
Quote:
Whatever, I'm out of here.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted June 14, 2014 01:15 PM |
|
|
1) I like maneuverability but only for centaurs. It is a huge advantage to have but stronghold is known for its mobility and offense so it makes sense there. H5 centaurs had the ability to retreat and then shoot in retaliation so giving them maneurability was a logical step of evolution. As such I consider it a centaur trademark. The breeders got it too in one of the later patches but that was just a balancing suggestion to a problem that should never have been there in the first place.
2) Overrun sounds similar to the juggernaut's ram. I'd like that but only for a unit known for being unstoppable, which could work for either inferno or stronghold. I appreciate the requirement of having enough force to kill a stack so that you'd be able to overrun it and push through though I'd prefer such an ability to be active and definitely not for every large unit.
3) Ooh, a dive bomb! That would be so much fun. Would also be fun for leaping units like the kappa. Displacement abilities would make the game more interesting.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
flonembourg
Known Hero
|
|
posted June 14, 2014 04:57 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
Question:
In other words - do you think size matters?
Yeah man!!! Of course "SIZE matters"  ... even if women say no...
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted June 14, 2014 05:46 PM |
|
|
size matters and size must be higher than average isn't the same. 
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted June 15, 2014 05:16 PM |
|
|
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.
(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?
I'll try to add my 2 cents:
1) I would be up for this. As it is archers are either great or useless, depending on situation, and it's too black or white situation. Toning down archer damage but introducing move-then shoot possibility tends to work better (as shown in King's bounty Games).
2) and 3) look interesting on paper, but i feel that the battlefield is already too cluttered with abilities, light-shows, and different combinations. Then again, I would rather have that than ability clutter if i could pick among the two.
|
|
malgore
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted June 16, 2014 09:52 PM |
|
Edited by malgore at 21:53, 16 Jun 2014.
|
JollyJoker said:
1) MANEUVERABILITY
No, since mechanic of such ability seems to be very unit specific rather then universal.
Quote:
2) OVERRUN
This one feels reasonable and useful, but only for high tier non-flying Large units.
Quote:
3) CRUSH
Contrary to Overrun, this one suits well for high tier Large Flying units (only).
As for other opinions:
1) I would suggest to extend attack area for all Large melee units for 2x1 area. Damage auto-splits 50/50 if two standard units were attacked. Seems fair enough for leveraging the size.
2) Large units may have Siege Breaker ability like getting 1,5 damage boost against walls and gates.
3) if Heroes 7 will have 3-4 unit tiers (like in H6) then it might be a good idea to make a set of universal abilities for Large units of specific tier.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 17, 2014 11:15 AM |
|
|
|
I wonder, would it upset the balance if large-size ranged units could still use their ranged attacks while being attacked by normal-sized melee units?
|
|
|
|
