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


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Library of Enlightenment > Thread: What would you want to see from a "New" homm3?
Thread: What would you want to see from a "New" homm3? This thread is 8 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · «PREV / NEXT»
JollyJoker
JollyJoker


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted August 01, 2016 02:24 PM

No, as a new angle. You must get it in your head that "new angle" is one thing - and how it works out or how it's executed is quite another.

I mean, Ubisoft hired Nival, and Nival had done Etherlords and were working on Etherlords 2 - to everyone's surprise that ended with all these games having graphics similarities, but Ubisoft wouldn't have hired Nival, if they hadn't wanted to go 3d.

You should have a look at the adventure map of Age of Wonders III when you want to see something that can hold its own in that regard:

Example Depending on the graphics capabilities of your card and rig you can zoom in to basically directly to ground level and glorious detail, and you can zoom completely out, until the map switches to a stylized map like a real paper map.

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

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 01, 2016 02:37 PM

What does 3D add exactly?
____________

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


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted August 01, 2016 02:48 PM

You can botch 2d as well, and with today's resolution 2d isn't less work.

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


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted August 01, 2016 03:05 PM
Edited by Stevie at 15:08, 01 Aug 2016.

Galaad said:
Stevie said:
not changing anything, or making it a priority to change as little as possible


That's not it, just don't fix what doesn't need to be fixed why would you? Improve, add, expand upon. That gave us III after II, then V. These games are no clones of each other are they?


Here's the deal, and I'll demonstrate with precision what me and JJ are arguing for with this example:

- Heroes 3 had the classic one turn / one action in battles for creatures. It didn't need fixing or improvement, it was the classic and definitive system after all.

BUT

- Heroes 5 introduced a NEW system, the Active Time Battle system (ATB), which was NOT an addition to the classic one but a radically different feature. The main benefit was that it introduced the extra dimension of frequency to creature's turns that made battles more dynamic, unpredictable and fun.

From here you can draw 2 conclusions:

1. One, that "improving, adding and expanding upon" previous features is not a necessity to have successful mechanics, nor is it always the winning "formula" or mentality (especially within the gaming context of today).

2. Two, that entirely NEW features can be excellent independent of any predecessor's baggage by virtue of them being the right fit in the right context. This just stands to reason.

Conversely, Heroes 4 and Heroes 6 also had new features, but they were BAD features, or more accurately, features that were not fun or as fun as previous experience. But just because they were bad does not automatically make the conservative mentality the better approach, nor should it dissuade any further attempts at innovating. It just means that the developer needs to understand how to provide a better feature in the future, regardless of what that means, adjusting or complete change.


If this doesn't explain it, then nothing will.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler

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

Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
posted August 01, 2016 03:06 PM

Galaad said:
What does 3D add exactly?


Lizard showed something about properly implemented 3D in games. That UbiSoft managed to botch it in 3 game titles doesn't mean that 3D can't work. It just doesn't work in Team Erwin's hands .
____________
The last Reasonable Steward of Good Game Design and a Responsible Hero of HC. - Verriker

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


Promising
Supreme Hero
育碧是白痴
posted August 01, 2016 03:14 PM

Maurice said:
Galaad said:
What does 3D add exactly?


Lizard showed something about properly implemented 3D in games. That UbiSoft managed to botch it in 3 game titles doesn't mean that 3D can't work. It just doesn't work in Team Erwin's hands .


3D in H5 alpha seemed to work, imo.

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

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 01, 2016 03:19 PM
Edited by Galaad at 15:27, 01 Aug 2016.

Stevie said:
- Heroes 5 introduced a NEW system, the Active Time Battle system (ATB), which was NOT an addition to the classic one but a radically different feature.


True but wasn't its purpose to differentiate initiative from speed (movement) that were tied in III? So it didn't come out of nowhere either.

Maurice said:
Lizard showed something about properly implemented 3D in games. That UbiSoft managed to botch it in 3 game titles doesn't mean that 3D can't work. It just doesn't work in Team Erwin's hands .


Strawman!
I already explained to you my view on 2D vs 3D earlier, you never replied, btw.
____________

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


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted August 01, 2016 03:25 PM

3D map wasn't a new angle, it was a trend of its time. But with 3D, the realms felt much smaller, random map generator got messed up and everything became less readable.

Saying 3D is a must in today's market is also wrong. 3D is not a "fascinating" feature anymore for the younger generations. It's like what color TV is for us, they are born into it. A black & white movie may have been perceived as something backwards in 1965, but today, it will be seen as the artistic choice of the director, same with 2D. (There are many popular games today, which are even pixeled like Atari games, it's a design style now.)  And when it comes to Heroes games, 2D really fits better: The board game feel, the ambiance of a land full of wonders, the feasibility with random maps...

JollyJoker said:
So in reality, every Heroes design must follow a very thin line, because IN ITS SUM all the parts must fit and keep the balance between player options/descision making/complexity/true variety and simplicity/ease-of-handling/AI-friendliness/balance. If one is out of kilter the game suffers from it.
Practically spoken, the game must be good and complex and interesting enough to warrant extensoive single-player gaming, and also fast and short and balanced enough to warrant MP play

In your long post, I only see this point as a sufficient objection to what has been said, as opposed to ignoring the counter argument and reducing it into wishing for a clone. Adding too much content can indeed hinder the multi-player aspects of the game but it's not something you can't overcome. Keep in mind that unlike the modding world of Era, the new features will be coherent and synced in the core game, not various settings that each player picks for themselves, replacing one another.  
____________
they can change, but these changes are usually more nuanced compared to the madness of youth. blizzardboy

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


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted August 01, 2016 03:49 PM

3d is just a matter of doing it right. AoW 3 has the best random map generator ever - ane even that is not exclusively positive, because there are not many who feel the need to make explicit maps for that game, since the RMG delivers.
And whether it's only a trend or not, it IS a new angle, albeit only a cosmetic one, as is HD.

For the rest you mention "new features". However, new features may make changes of old features necessary to work, because there may be redundancies. The more content you have, the bigger the redundancies. That is true for real content as well as for additional game features. For example, the more playable factions you have, the more difficult it is to make them sufficiently different in gameplay. The more creature levels you have the more creatures will be "fillers" only. The more neutrals you have, the less you will see specific ones. And so on.

The game cannot be expanded endlessly, but has to limited on all levels to avoid redundancies, repetition and boredom.

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


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted August 01, 2016 04:22 PM

Galaad said:
Stevie said:
- Heroes 5 introduced a NEW system, the Active Time Battle system (ATB), which was NOT an addition to the classic one but a radically different feature.


True but wasn't its purpose to differentiate initiative from speed (movement) that were tied in III? So it didn't come out of nowhere either.


You don't need ATB to differentiate between speed and initiative, you just do it regardless of the battle system. Heroes 6 and 7 have speed and initiative within the frame of the classical system, remember?

So no, ATB was a stroke of pure genius that didn't rely on any leading factors. It was just good innovation that demonstrates how what many perceive as core features can be challenged with new and amazing ideas.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler

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


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted August 01, 2016 04:41 PM

Of course the implementation sucked, because for one thing the initiative values and their potential to be changed were wrong, and for another there was the problem of showing the effect of potential initiative changes - in a tactical battle you should be able to get an idea what an action will do.

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

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 01, 2016 04:44 PM

Well I didn't fall in love with the ATB either, personally I'm fine with battles in both III and V, I wouldn't call it a genius stroke, but a change that didn't ruin the experience for me yes. I've written enough times the part I really love in V is the skill system, that was a freaking improvement IMHO
____________

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
posted August 01, 2016 07:25 PM

HorazVitae said:

Any kind of input would be appreciated...


I'll comply then. All I'll say and suggest are based on my impressions and likeness. You may use whatever you like.

To explain some things I'll point out, you must understand that I am one of those who do like H4, or at least had more fun with it than with other installments. However, the Heroes game I most like is H2. H3 comes at third and then H5, with a faint nod.

Let's take some topics:

STORY and LORE

I particularly don't care when they don't interfere too much with other levels of design of the game. Ashan bothers me given that intrusive methodology of dictating this and that and, in fewer cases, removing signature features of units for any unknown reasons. Tread carefully.

VISUALS

I prefer H2 above all else for units, H4 for map design. When 3 came out, I sort of liked it, but I also felt like it was less magical than 2. H4 had some of the worst unit visuals I set my eyes upon. Meanwhile, H5 felt so much warcraftish, something trendy I neither liked nor disliked, but it certainly wasn't unique. I also didn't usually enjoy 2D -> 3D transitions. Many of the games that I liked in 2D I completely lost interest when they got 3D, because they changed my perception of them so profoundly, made them lose their 'magic', so to speak. Age of Empires, Warcraft and GTA are other examples.

Games which favor artistically and get a magical feeling on 2D (2.5D) are more akin to what I usually enjoy seeing. Games such as Ori and the Blind Forest feels pristine. The thing about 3D is that only in recent years that it started having a greater level of polishing and embellishment that was able to translate fantasy lines into 3D structure, so things don't look so mechanical, lacking of art, as it looked a few years back.

Regarding map, prefer the old maps. The way they are now, it feels like they want to make everything scaled somehow, so you have mounds and mounds of terrain with no use. It feels like there's no interaction around, no contrasting objects. Also, given that what I expect is having a holistic view of an area, it doesn't make any sense to me having means to zoom in an out to see small details and features of things I won't be interacting with.

UNITS and FACTIONS

Firstly, if you're going to make a HoMM of sorts, have units keep their signature abilities. Vampires suck life, liches hit with a deadly cloud, medusae petrify victims ... but I wouldn't mind if their looks or concept changed a bit as long as they would be identifiable as such. For example, if vampires were to be a construct of sorts, sucking life from enemies to renew their energy or increase their numbers.

As for factions, have the classic and the new and the bold. Wouldn't mind mind having mashed line ups here and there, but certainly wouldn't get hyped with the same old stuff all again. New line ups and factions are welcome, as long as they are consistent.

UPGRADES and TIERS

For me, a mixture of H2 and H4 would be perfect, although I also think that equipment forging would be an interesting option, even combined with a H2/4 structure. Sometimes, upgrades feel like they are 'forced', mainly because to fill in the gaps. In H2, units having upgrades felt like they needed it and changed considerably. Those who didn't have any didn't fell like they were inferior. Like in H4, where units had no upgrades, they didn't feel like upgrading either - of course, it needed a bit of time to getting used to this system, specially coming from H3 which had upgrades for all units. But in my personal opinion and taste, I don't expect or find interesting upgrades for all, but only for a handful units with room for consistent improvement rather than the 'why not' humdrum argument.

SPELLS

What I would like and prefer is a mixture of some elements and features. Spells would be a universal selection, not divided by schools. They would be they, unique, learn-able in its basic form by anyone who would start going into spell casting. However, each faction could meddle with magic on their own, being able to specialize certain universal spells into their own beliefs and needs, so a same spell could have some differences when compared its uses between two very different factions. In H2, it was nice having generic spells, whilst its effects were based more on spell power. It was simple, but it felt a bit more the way I liked with spell casting mechanics. Having a Magic Guild or support buildings in your town to research new branches of magic based on the spells learned and found about your adventure feel a bit more active imho. Researching magic could require your hero to stay in town for a couple of days to improve skills etc. Well, that's the gist of it.

HERO

I'm a fan of H4 approach in this matter. For me, it makes sense that a hero is there on the battleground fighting with the army. However, as some people, like Maurice, has pointed out, it's strange that a single hero can hit a whole army at once or influence it as if one hero was also a whole army (physically interacting, that is, not considering spell casting). But again, most army clashes in general history fluctuated around the possibility of taking down their leaders first, which meant that they were vulnerable and were target-able, thus, they needed constant protection or clever positioning, still they were present.

One idea that I considered I would like tested was our hero having a Commanding Are of Effect, in which units inside that area would be boosted by Hero's skills as a leader, and those beyond would start being astray (also prone to be charmed, hypnotized, flee, have lower morale etc.). Besides that, a hero without troops nearby would be vulnerable and also could be targeted by regular armies. This mechanic have many features which can be applied and thought out, so I'll just leave the idea about it, given that I'm simply stating my personal taste. I don't like heroes only being able to cast a spell or swinging a blade and then going back into an imaginary force field, untouchable.

ATTRIBUTES

As for attributes, it all depends on how heroes will or will not be directly involved in battle. But what I would expect and prefer is that heroes should have personal attributes in addition to commanding attributes (attributes which would be applied and affect troops under their command).

SKILLS

H4 and H5 have the most appeasing skills systems to my liking. However, I would rather have skills and branches of skill-trees considering a hero's proficiency (main actions taken as an explorer, a fighter or a ruler) than predetermined options, completely random or tied to classes. I think heroes could have options to stay alone without troops (having the risk to engage battle without protection) if roles such as explorer and ruler (and skills involved) would be implemented and considered a part of the kingdom expansion.

But for this subject, a really long and detailed thread is required.

TURNS

I like AoW3 way to take care of turns and actions, giving you the way to perform actions in a way that they can be split into three different actions in a single turn (if you move, you can still attack depending on how far you go. If you only attack, you can attack twice or thrice). Although I like systems such as we see in Final Fantasy Tactics, which is also similar to the one used in H5, I think it leaves a bit of an opening for abuse, as slower units happen to act very little or don't even have the chance to act at all.

Something that could be arranged and considered would be great turns where fast units could squeeze in more actions than slower units, but, in the end, no matter what, all units would have a chance to take actions within that turn, and heroes would have only ONE chance to act in that turn freely.

TERRAIN and BATTLE MAP

My mind fawns on an idea of having battles affected by terrain irregularities and weather and elements. Heroes, imho, has a dull battle ground. Sometimes there's an obstacle or so, and that's that. Having different heights or so make the game somewhat more realistic, prone to more strategy related to positioning, changing a bit the odds of some no-brainer battles. Also, another subject of discussion that can linger on and on. Relation to elements and weather is another interesting possibility, such as ranged attacks losing power during a storm, or lightning magic inflicting greater or wider damage upon sopping wet areas. You can tell other interactions of course.

LUCK

In my point of view, luck should be impartial, uncontrollable, a global variable, untied to any sort of skills or magic and that should influence many aspects of the game. Call it a "Theory of Chaos" within the game. Things a player cannot control which can unexpectedly happen anywhere.

MUSIC and SFX

Getting some of the old and the new, mix this and that. ^^ As for sounds, they must be very easy to tell when you are picking things, moving, listening to the environment. They must be distinct, but not at the point to be annoying.

MINI GAMES

Speaking for myself here, I would enjoy having Arcomage in a Heroes map, something on the lines of Quests or Gamble for gold or resources, depending on how one would think interesting designing this. You could play it in Taverns, just like you could in MM games.



If you have some spare time, you can also take a look at this thread where I was venting some ideas for discussion regarding some of the topics I mentioned above. Again, that thread might show things some people don't like, so it's more like informative.

And that's a resume of what I want to talk about. Now, I'll only wish you luck on your endeavor and that your wishes regarding this project are fulfilled somehow.
____________
"Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster."
GlaDOS Portal 2

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

Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
posted August 01, 2016 11:54 PM

Nice writeup, Panda. I'm going to pick out one item you brought up:

PandaTar said:
HERO

I'm a fan of H4 approach in this matter. For me, it makes sense that a hero is there on the battleground fighting with the army. However, as some people, like Maurice, has pointed out, it's strange that a single hero can hit a whole army at once or influence it as if one hero was also a whole army (physically interacting, that is, not considering spell casting). But again, most army clashes in general history fluctuated around the possibility of taking down their leaders first, which meant that they were vulnerable and were target-able, thus, they needed constant protection or clever positioning, still they were present.


As you refer to me, I can't help but comment on it. In reallife, army clashes before the First World War had military leaders and commanders on the actual battlefield, directing their troops. They could do so because while there was danger, they were still behind their own lines and thereby relatively safe. This changed with the advent of gun technology as snipers could pick off enemy leaders too easy. The whole "rank and file" smashing into eachother was also left behind as a relic of the past in about the same period. I believe the French still did this in their opening battle of WW1, but after running into German machine guns and getting mowed down, they decided another approach was needed.

Anyway, those rank and file armies were pretty much positioned strategically on the battlefield, both sides hoping to outsmart the other. Army leaders were directing their troops, deploying strategic reserve forces where needed, either to reinforce their own lines or to increase pressure on weak points in the enemy lines. Getting to the juicy enemy leaders was indeed a way to break army morale and hopefully send the enemy army routing. Battlefield positioning was crucial for this, with various regiments at various locations according to the plan devised by the army leaders.

As such, if you wish to introduce army leaders (Heroes) on the battlefield, it's in my opinion almost inevitable that you change the battlefield mechanics themselves. No longer can you have a stack of a million pikemen on a single hex, you would have a maximum amount of troops per regiment within a hex. A Hero who carries a large army would then require a large space on which to field his army - which inadvertently means you'll need to increase battlefield size, possibly to multitudes of what it currently is. That in turn means leaving behind the notion of having the total battlefield in a single overview.

The Total War games pretty much do this; they have a huge area and part of the area is assigned to be the deployment zone of one side and another part of the area is for the other side. Total War games don't have tile based battlefields, though, it's all free format. In Age of Wonders 3, battlefields are also far larger than can be fit within a single screen, but those battlefields are divided in hexagons where units can be deployed. Heroes are present on the battlefield there too, but there it works since each Hero can only carry a very small army with them; besides the Hero only 5 units (though stacks neighboring them on the adventure map will also join in on the actual battlefield).

It's a question whether it could still be called Heroes of Might and Magic (or Might and Magic: Heroes) if you take the game in that direction - and all of that just to add the Hero to the battlefield as a target for the enemy to try and take down. Heroes 4 failed rather badly at this aspect, as low level Heroes died too fast, while high level Heroes were one-man armies. I don't really see how you can easily balance this against the stack sizes of the creatures they fight against.

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
posted August 02, 2016 12:54 AM

Agreed. Balancing that feature, the way it was implemented, was very difficult. So, on that other thread, I was trying to gather some talking about it, trying to find a solution, brainstormly.

The talk went until we were talking about heroes only moving on the boundaries of the battlefield and having the Commanding Area of Effect, for either skills benefit and self protection. But the discussion went into oblivion. ^_^'
____________
"Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster."
GlaDOS Portal 2

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


Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
posted August 02, 2016 02:03 AM

PandaTar said:

SKILLS

H4 and H5 have the most appeasing skills systems to my liking. However, I would rather have skills and branches of skill-trees considering a hero's proficiency (main actions taken as an explorer, a fighter or a ruler) than predetermined options, completely random or tied to classes. I think heroes could have options to stay alone without troops (having the risk to engage battle without protection) if roles such as explorer and ruler (and skills involved) would be implemented and considered a part of the kingdom expansion.

But for this subject, a really long and detailed thread is required.


do it!

you have me intrigued.

great post btw.
____________

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


Famous Hero
Nighonese National Front
posted August 02, 2016 02:32 AM
Edited by AnkVaati at 02:32, 02 Aug 2016.

There was really one thing they did well with Heroes 5: the skill system. It combined the best elements of H3:s and H4:s dito. Sadly, that was also the first thing they blew up when making Heroes 6.

Great post, PandaTar!
____________

Ank's Old School (kinda) H8 proposal <- best thing evvah, trust me

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


Promising
Supreme Hero
Always loyal to HC
posted August 02, 2016 11:47 AM
Edited by Dj at 11:48, 02 Aug 2016.

just adding my 2 cents on what i'd like to see:

1) better graphics arent necessarily better for a turn-based strategy game. h6 and h7 proved that 3d graphics increase drastically the duration of the turn, which is a huge flaw of the game. i didnt even bother to play those 2 games only because of this reason. it gets too  boring.
2) statistically, the most preferred game is clearly h3, so the devs should go from that point in most of the game aspects.
3) content and replayability: based on h3 gameplay and graphic style, id suggest a few things to improve or add:

a) unique heroes/bosses in terms of abilities (skill/talent tree) and graphics -> this would enhance the gameplay. the same map played over and over would be different every time if you play with different heroes that have different abilities and roles. another idea is to put the heroes on the battlefield based on the wog commander scripts
b) online platform integrated -> hopefully it will be possible with VCMI: create an account and get points/stars (like mobile game apps) from single scenarios, campaign and multiplayer gaming too which will boost you up in the Hall of Fame.

3) artifact expansion: more slots for artifacts now that we have G and XG (?) maps like 5 slots of rings at each hand, special slots for carts of wood/ore because you cant put them in you backpack, another slot for weapon (a hero may be two handed) + unique artifacts. another thing that should be improved is the grail system which is almost impossible and even useless to try to get it on random G maps.

4) balance: i think that the magic schools system should get a total revamp. in order to make things more complex, i would suggest for more magic schools: the traditional 4 (air, fire, earth, water) and light magic, dark magic (which can be found in the m&m games, iirc), energy magic (lightning and electricity), ice magic, nature magic (different from earth), psychic (mind based spells), meaning that every elemental from conflux would get a magic school after it s image, upgraded or nonupgraded (besides light and dark).
more magic schools: destruction, alchemy, adventure

every city ought to get 2 magic, besides tower which gets 3.

castle: light + water
rampart: nature + air
tower: air + ice + psychic or energy
inferno: fire + dark
necropolis: dark + ice
dungeon: destruction + earth
stronghold: air + fire
fortress: nature + water
conflux: 2 of choice without light and dark -> conflux's advantage to choose
other cities:
cove: water + energy
forge: energy + fire
grove: nature + earth
oasis: fire + light
bastion: fire + psychic
abyss: water + psychic (aquatic people use sound waves under water in order to communicate, hunt and fight, so their psychic power is highly developed)
romanian: nature + dark

(am i missing any new city?)

i think that the magic school should become more homogeneous for balance, meaning all types of spells in every magic school: buff, debuff (single target, aoe, mass), control, damage (single target,  Area Of Effect, chain), Damage Over Time, heal, Heal Over Time, summoning, but on different levels. here is an example of two magic schools:

Air Magic:
level 1:
1) wind:haste: 1/2/3 more hexes if applied on a friendly unit, 1/2/3 less hexes if applied on enemy unit
2) clarity gust: precision: 10%, 20%, 30% more ranged damage if applied on friendly unit, 10% 20% 30% less ranged damage if applied on enemy unit.
3) protection from air: single target
4) counterstrike: single target

level 2: summoning and damage
1) air portal: summon air elementals which are lvl 2
2) shear: deals low damage  and debuffs the single enemy target with 5% 10% 15% less melee damage
3) typhoon: deals aoe damage (fireball sized)
4) cleansing mist: dispels 1/2/3 debuffs

level 3:
1) refreshing breeze: 20% 40% 60% of the previous damage taken (recovers the number of the units lost)
2) hurricane: deals aoe damage (inferno sized)
3) healing winds
4) prot from air: mass

level 4:
1) air shield
2) air protection: magic resistance to water, psychic, dark
hurricane (basically, it protects you from the magic schools that the air is effective against)
3) dividing gust: splits the unit into 2/3/4 equal stacks
4) mass haste
5) mass counterstrike

level 5:
1) air implosion: deals single target massive damage
2) feathers of air: the target flies for one turn
3) mass heal
4) cleansing mists: mass dispel: 1/2/3 debuffs

Fire Magic:
level 1:
1) burn (small damage and dot)
2) molten armor: damage on attacker (like OLD fire shield)
3) ember torrent: heats up the weapon the attacker and causes him to inflict half the damage
4) bloodlust: heats up the blood of the ally and increases the damage by 15% 25% 35% and 1/2/3 more moving points.

level 2:
1) fireball
2) fire shield: resistance to energy, ice, nature, air, dark
3) lava ground: burn + 1/1/2 less moving points (AOE)
4) fire wall

level 3:
1) inferno
2) mass protection from fire
3) blinding fire: blinds the target for 1/2/3 turns
4) mass heal

level 4:
1) Armageddon
2) fire portal: summon fire elementals
3) purifying flame: dispels 1/2/3 debuffs (single target)
4) mass bloodlust

level 5:
1) gives dragons breath to the target
2) fire implosion (single target)
3) purifying flames: dispels 1/2/3 debuffs (mass)
4) flaming carcass (buff): absorbs 50%/60%/70% of the next attack and heals over time.

the list would go on and on and obviously needs more thinking; this is just a suggestion/idea post. i ve left curse, sacrifice to dark magic and bless, prayer to light magic.



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

Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
posted August 02, 2016 12:33 PM

Dj said:
just adding my 2 cents on what i'd like to see:

1) better graphics arent necessarily better for a turn-based strategy game. h6 and h7 proved that 3d graphics increase drastically the duration of the turn, which is a huge flaw of the game. i didnt even bother to play those 2 games only because of this reason. it gets too boring.


I'd say that this is due to poor programming. Age of Wonders 3 is 3D as well, but that game doesn't suffer from these issues.
____________
The last Reasonable Steward of Good Game Design and a Responsible Hero of HC. - Verriker

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


Promising
Supreme Hero
Always loyal to HC
posted August 02, 2016 12:37 PM

just compare how long it takes for a creature when it turns around on a battlefield in h6/7 VS in h2/3

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 8 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll Post New Topic Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.1259 seconds