|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
posted October 30, 2017 03:23 PM |
|
|
I'm not a fan of having both a 'lord' in Fortress T6 and academy T7 since they are very different creatures.
In any case, I doubt anyone cared about thane and thunder thane before you mentioned this.
@ereinon:
1. both reported 'issues' must be in TOE source code, so cannot be modified, except for the description.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
Skeggy
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 03:45 PM |
|
|
|
“Melee preference“ seems to be problematic, at least with Haven T5 because they tend to move away from direct melee clashes so they could find spot for nice ranged attack. I suppose they have more “range preference” than “melee preference”.
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 03:58 PM |
|
|
|
thGryphn
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 04:06 PM |
|
|
magnomagus said:
I'm not a fan of having both a 'lord' in Fortress T6 and academy T7 since they are very different creatures.
In any case, I doubt anyone cared about thane and thunder thane before you mentioned this.
Actually, I had thought about Thane and Thunder Thane, no kidding 
So for Academy, why don't we do Giant -> Titan, Colossus
and for Fortress, Thane -> Flamelord, Stormlord (singleword)
?
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 06:51 PM |
|
|
..for some reason I like thane more than lord, also elvin source seems just something madeup for purpose of that fantasy game. Historically a thane is actually a scottish feudal lord and in other fantasy games like elder scrolls it has a very different meaning.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
ea0o
Hired Hero
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 07:03 PM |
|
|
so who is strongest in late game now? (after ini specs nerfs)
p.s. staff -20% ini must be nerfed harder than -2 morale.
|
|
dredknight
Honorable
Supreme Hero
disrupting the moding industry
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 07:39 PM |
|
|
I prefer Thane too. Lord is just too trivial.
"trivial" is a weak word for someone who has manually gone through every fan made NCF creature and I can promise you there are quite a few lords there... 
____________
Join our official discord channel | NCF Utility Beta
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 08:49 PM |
|
|
Did some digging as well but didn't find any historical relevance to that. Disappointing, sorry for the false alarm.
I do very much like thane but the upgrade names are cringeworthy. That's the problem with upgrade names, if the basic unit has a good (or accurate)name you'll have to get the upgrade a different name to avoid overused additions like master, lord, warrior and the like..
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Skeggy
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 09:13 PM |
|
Edited by Skeggy at 21:53, 30 Oct 2017.
|
magnomagus said:
Ability names are never based on AI behavior, otherwise I could just as well give all creatures a 'dumbness preference' ability.
It is not about process of naming, however descriptive it may be, if the given ability is making the monster and whole faction weaker because creature is using the ability wrong. I mean, yes, it does retaliate in melee, but it does not attack in melee. It’s the similar problem we had with the frenzy spell.
What is wrong if range-attack-caster have no melee penalty and standard damage in range attack, especially if its AI behavior cannot be changed? This “melee preference” will just lower the Haven AI damage output.
Perhaps the problem is that there are too much similar units?
If you want to make things interesting why not give all range attackers without “no melee penalty”, maneuver ability.
It would certainly be interesting if one of Haven T5 upgrades could have maneuver ability. Well, why not both, range-attack-caster is quite the specialization, how does that unit find a time to learn to behave so well in proper melee combat??
EDIT:
Correction, why not give all range attackers WITH “no melee penalty”, maneuver ability.
Meaning it would be better to replace “no melee penalty” or “melee preference” with maneuver ability.
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 09:51 PM |
|
|
@Skeggy: I just tested it and you are wrong, the AI does not only retaliate but also attack in melee. Also the ranged damage is only 20% lower than it was before, while melee damage is more than 60% higher.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
Skeggy
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 10:12 PM |
|
|
magnomagus said:
@Skeggy: I just tested it and you are wrong, the AI does not only retaliate but also attack in melee. Also the ranged damage is only 20% lower than it was before, while melee damage is more than 60% higher.
According to my tests, if creature (Haven T5) has a choice between melee and ranged (that means if T5 has no more mana to cast spells and still has unused shots left) it will rather shoot projectiles than attack. If given a choice, it will attack in melee only after using all shots.
Also to repeat correction from above:
Why not give all range attackers WITH “no melee penalty”, maneuver ability. Meaning it would be better to replace “no melee penalty” or “melee preference” with maneuver ability.
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 10:28 PM |
|
|
|
Skeggy
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 30, 2017 10:58 PM |
|
Edited by Skeggy at 02:38, 31 Oct 2017.
|
If some creature is able to give full damage both in ranged and in melee, that would definitely qualify that creature to have enough agility to have the possibility of maneuver, and maneuver simulates “no melee penalty” (which is removed), and you get similar reduction of damage as if the creature has “melee preference” if you manage to pin the creature to the corner.
EDIT: In case of 2x2 creatures just the opposite, “no melee penalty” instead of maneuver, they are too large for maneuvering.
EDIT 2:
So, to summarize:
I would like to replace “no melee penalty” ability with maneuver ability for range-shooter-caster creatures (if they are 1x1, and opposite process if they are 2x2) and removing “melee preference” (opposite if they are 2x2, but then damage increase is needed, like in Haven T5 now) for the same creatures (not including cyclops of course).
This idea creates additional contextual meaning for both large and small units and makes game more dynamic, and not only because of more moving on the battlefield, but also because of more emphasized connection between maneuver ability and amount of available shots and amount of hit points of ammo cart (so war machines comes in play if the skill provides ammo cart with high amount of hit points to keep the shooters active in maneuvering).
I suppose other option would be to apply this combination of “melee preference” and damage increase applied to Haven T5 to all other ranged shooters with “no melee penalty” ability.
|
|
ea0o
Hired Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2017 09:38 AM |
|
|
|
what wrong with t5 heaven units?
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted October 31, 2017 11:43 AM |
|
|
there is nothing wrong with haven T5, the purpose of special abilities is to create differentiation between units, applying one to a whole category of units has the same effect as for example H4 all shooters having ranged retaliation and changes the game significantly. H55 combat still has to fit in H2 tradition of melee units walking up to shooters to block them, so this is not going to happen.
____________
MMH5.5 Downloads | MMH5.5 Translations | MMH5.5 FAQ
|
|
Skeggy
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2017 12:48 PM |
|
|
magnomagus said:
there is nothing wrong with haven T5, the purpose of special abilities is to create differentiation between units, applying one to a whole category of units has the same effect as for example H4 all shooters having ranged retaliation and changes the game significantly. H55 combat still has to fit in H2 tradition of melee units walking up to shooters to block them, so this is not going to happen.
Well, sure, why not observe all units individually and apply particular effects to each one of them. That is definitely one way of doing things. Because, if we want to be consistent, we would have to apply chain shot to every range unit. Right? Well, there is a silver lining even in a stretched up view of consistency like that.
There are these combos that are not categories, but just below the categories. Combos like range unit that has no melee penalty. Sure, you can see these combos as ordinary regular unit with special ability, but if specific combos allow not only the possibility of consistent typization throughout the classes and factions, but also connection to various contextual possibilities, it would be wrong just to neglect that possibility.
The lack of, or better to say intentional avoidance of consistent typization of specific combos and its connection with various contextual possibilities is the real reason why Might & Magic Heroes VI are so impoverishing and down-and-out game (among other things).
This critique could sound a little bit harsh, but that is only because no one dares to create a quality-based critique of established impoverishing standards of modern games.
|
|
ea0o
Hired Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2017 03:25 PM |
|
|
|
barab qurog didnt get +1 atack from spec(((
|
|
magnomagus
Admirable
Legendary Hero
modding wizard
|
|
posted October 31, 2017 04:13 PM |
|
|
|
ea0o
Hired Hero
|
|
posted October 31, 2017 05:52 PM |
|
|
|
i think some heroes with +1 stat on start from spec didnt got it.
|
|
Pavijan
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted November 01, 2017 03:03 PM |
|
Edited by Pavijan at 15:28, 01 Nov 2017.
|
Thanks for anwering people!
1. @magnomagus: Where has Air been designated as second element for Fortress by Nival? I see no connection there apart from Thunder Thanes, and just one creature hardly makes a town wide connection...
Anyway, I agree that the way you have set them up is good from gameplay perspective, but thematically air and dwarves totally do not mix at all.
2. @thGryphnThane: Thane -> Thunder Thane didn't really bother me, because first is a base creature, and second is improved version of the creature, therefore prefix (which indicate enhancement) fits.
Also, T6 Fortress 2up is Flamelord (one word) and for T7 Academy 2up I suggested Storm Lord (two words), but yeah that can sound too similar for unrelated creatures.
That said, I like your suggestion, Storm Giant wold be cool. Colossus -> Titan and Storm Giant seems great to me. 
3. I agree that Red Dragon would be too OP with flame immunity, just wanted to see what do you guys think.
4. @thGryphnThane: I agree with your idea for balancing Sky Daughters, that way they can actually fulfill their role of "semi-ranged" creature more consistently. Although I don't think that Earth Daughters should get Earth Shower, they seem more melee focused, and if they can cast Slow at the creature at beginning and than attack it without retaliation that seems fitting to me.
|
|
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
