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 ]
New Server | HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info forum | HOMM4: info forum | HOMM5: info forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Heroes 4 - Lands of Axeoth > Thread: HoMM IV - poor MoM clone
Thread: HoMM IV - poor MoM clone This thread is 2 pages long: 1 2 · NEXT»
BunBun
BunBun

Tavern Dweller
posted April 12, 2002 01:17 AM bonus applied.

HoMM IV - poor MoM clone

Hi Folks,
I've played HoMM IV for a few days now and I for one don't
really understand why people are so excited about this
game, especially when you compare it to something like
Master of Magic (MoM).  Grant you, MoM did have its
own share of problems but when I look at Age of Wonders,
Lord of Magic, and HoMM series they all seem to be
poor imitations of MoM.  I was really hoping that HoMM IV
would be a vastly improved interpretation of MoM but
it falls short.  I just find it strange that HoMM IV
copied a lot of things that you see in MoM but
considering how old MoM is (it's a DOS games for
those who don't know), it's disappointing that
they didn't improve on the MoM's basics.

Some comparisons:
1) MoM magical disciplines (sorcery, life, nature, death,
chaos); HoMM IV (order, life, nature, death, chaos).
2) In MoM, you can select at the beginning which magic
books you can study; it's been awhile since I played but
I think only combination that was not allowed was
death/life.  Depending on how many books you selected,
you can get more powerful spells.  This is very analogous
to the building mage libraries in HoMMIV but you get
more choices w/ MoM.  Furthermore, how you get a spell
is based in part on conquest (taking an enemy city of
compatiable magic allows you to get the opponent's spell).
The traditional way to learn spells was to allocate
money to research or gain through a "quest"
3) Heroes - MoM had them and they also go up in ability
w/ experience just like in HoMM IV; MoM heroes don't
have any "abilities" though unlike HoMM IV.
4) Weapon/armor crafting - you could create your own
weapons/armor provided you have the enchant item ability
5) MoM had random sites guarded by creatures same as
HoMM IV.
6) To be successful in MoM, you had to conquer magical
nodes which provided mana for spell casting/research.
(For those of you not familiar w/ MoM, nodes were
anything but life/death aligned but had interesting
effects; ie, chaos spells have a higher chance of
failure when used in sorcery node but no such limitations
in chaos node)
7) In MoM, combat actually required some tactical thinking;
for example, you really couldn't take a city unless you had
"wall-crushing" ability (engineers or catapults and the
like) or flying creatures. Your combat area was also
much larger - cheesy way to get out of a really bad
situation w/o losses was to run away for 50 turns -
assuming you move faster than your opponent. FYI,
MoM also had distance penalities for archery type units.
8) Don't know if this happens in the higher levels of
HoMMIV- haven't seen it yet- but in MoM roaming creatures
can actually sack your city and destroy it.
9) Related to above, HoMM IV lacks any real tactics.
I have found it more often than I prefer to have to replay
a section b/c I didn't clear the map fast enough and
I encounter a band of level 4 creatures that I can't
take out.  HoMM IV emphasizes quantity over quality where
the reverse is more the case in MoM.
10) Creature experience matters in MoM; unlike HoMMIV
which tends to favor large armies in MoM, you could
create uber-elite troopers by keeping them alive
through various battles and they get more powerful
(better defense/attack)
11) In MoM, not only do you build buildings you can
also create cities.
12) And for those who haven't played MoM, you act
as the main spellcaster in the game; your hero can
also cast spells but if you expect to win, then you
have to do your share of the grunt work as well.

Are any former (or current) MoM players who haven't
wondered why HoMMIV didn't do much better?  I'm thinking
MoM in a campaign mode might have been an interesting
touch and relatively straightforward thing to do.




____________

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
-ing yummy foods
posted April 12, 2002 03:06 AM
Edited By: RMS on 11 Apr 2002

Ah, I see now. So my mom is really the graddaddy of all fantasy, turn based, strategy games, eh? Cool. So what's just so exiting about HoMM4 compared to my mom? Well, it's a cool game, and doesn't get on my nerves all the time, except for the rare occassion that (which I admit) the stupid AI manages to beat me, although mainly attributed to my lack of experience with particular towns and strategies of the game. However, one bad thing is that it can't provide me with tons of junk food, so I guess the two go together pretty well, until I have to start doing my homework and such.

...never played Age of Wonders, so I'm not going to bother trying to make some foolish remark saying why they aren't that great or whatever. However, I did not like Lords of Magic too much. Now, mind you I like Sierra because they almost always have truly stupendous ideas for their games with tons of cool things, but as the pattern is, most of the games aren't actually made up to their great potential...which leaves it a tad more vulnerable for others to take their ideas, and churn them back out into a newer and modified version.

True, companies borrow ideas from each other, and take successful and interesting things from different games, but if they're not sued, I consider it perfectly legal in all respects...and who is to say that is wrong? I mean if someone tried to come up with a game, with everything totally made from scratch, and had to research the entire history of all games to make sure they would make nothing like what has previously been done, then I believe this would be an extremely dull and boring world. The truth of genius is learning how to successfully borrow ideas, integrate them into your own product, and make it your own. it does you no good if you don't even understand it.
However, if you insist, then I suppose everything is a "clone" of something that came before it. I mean hey, I guess we're extremely advanced clones of those cavemen who said, "ugh, ugh" and drew those pretty things on caves, right?

...personally I really enjoy HoMM4 very much. Sure, there are some things that aren't so great, or something that could be better, but overall I give it an A+. I am afriad I have not played this DOS game that you speak of, but couldn't both games be quite resonable, and be fun? ...without mentioning that one is an antique, and one is still brand spanking new of course...


Quote:

4) Weapon/armor crafting - you could create your own
weapons/armor provided you have the enchant item ability
Ok, I don't quite understand that. Although it'de be cool to be able to make my own armor, I guess the option is not availiable, to help keep the balance of the game, and not to create unnecessary confusion. However, why would you need the enchant item ability to craft something? Wouldn't that mean you found some sword or something, and imbued it with the magical ability to protect it's wielder from magic or something? If I wanted to make something, I wouldn't fool with some wierd magic, I'd go to my local blacksmith.

6) To be successful in MoM, you had to conquer magical
nodes which provided mana for spell casting/research.
(For those of you not familiar w/ MoM, nodes were
anything but life/death aligned but had interesting
effects; ie, chaos spells have a higher chance of
failure when used in sorcery node but no such limitations
in chaos node)
Are you saying you had to actually be in a node to cast any spells? Well, I suppose that source of power makes sense, but in HoMM4, it seems that magic is a natural ability that can be learned with proper instruction or the hand of fate, and power is drawn from his or her own body, which can be developedthrough countless years of study.

7) In MoM, combat actually required some tactical thinking;
for example, you really couldn't take a city unless you had
"wall-crushing" ability (engineers or catapults and the
like) or flying creatures. Your combat area was also
much larger - cheesy way to get out of a really bad
situation w/o losses was to run away for 50 turns -
assuming you move faster than your opponent. FYI,
MoM also had distance penalities for archery type units.
Well, they did away with catapults, but there are still many different types of tactics. However, concerning this aspect, it still makes sense. Those within the fortifications have the upper hand, with generally higher ground, and being the one defending, they have a better chance. If you have flying creatures, you can go in, or you can shoot people that are putting themselves in positions at whicn they can attack you, but also making them vulnerable at the same time. Also, I believe the battlefield was intended to be limited, as that is the effective style of HoMM gaming, I believe...and if you want to increase the battlefield, go to your adventure map...the world is your battlefield if you wish to call it so.

8) Don't know if this happens in the higher levels of
HoMMIV- haven't seen it yet- but in MoM roaming creatures
can actually sack your city and destroy it.
Interesting idea, but HoMM4 monsters can't do that I don't believe. Even if I somehow missed their ability to do so, it's non-essential to the game.

9) Related to above, HoMM IV lacks any real tactics.
I have found it more often than I prefer to have to replay
a section b/c I didn't clear the map fast enough and
I encounter a band of level 4 creatures that I can't
take out.  HoMM IV emphasizes quantity over quality where
the reverse is more the case in MoM.
I don't think I quite understand what you mean. If this game had absolutely no tactics whatsoever, I highly doubt you would even take any interest in the game, and actually it would not even be considered a game...but some mindless coffee cup holder or something. Also, you prefer that you would have to replay a portion if not the entire scenario because you didn't act quickly enough? Well, I guess it's just me, but I'd prefer to do it right on the first try, but hey, it's just me. If you can't take out a creature, I guess it's your problem, for unless the odds are totally against you, and the situation is literally impossible, it is simply your inability to find a solution to the problem. In real life, if someone accidentally wanders into your house cleaning out your fridge, and you come home to find him, what are you going to do? Beat him up until he throws it all up?
Well, perhaps further explanation is in order, but what do you mean quantity is emphasized or quality? I believe that both are essential, but if you must, why would you go for 10 orcs, if you can have 10 Wasports instead? If you can choose, wouldn't you rather have a level 5 hero as opposed to a fresh new recruit out of the tavern?


10) Creature experience matters in MoM; unlike HoMMIV
which tends to favor large armies in MoM, you could
create uber-elite troopers by keeping them alive
through various battles and they get more powerful
(better defense/attack)
Been finding grammatical errors, but I'm not arguing about that . Well, the important things is that units are simply units. They can change in number or type, but those few that excel past those average guys on the battlefield are what you would call a hero. They use their abilities to enhance the overall performance of your army. Well, in HoMm4 you can also give your guys a bunch of stuff and tell them to wander around by themselves, and if you judge correctly and pick your fights well, you might just as well come out with some powerful superman type of guy. However, that is a bit difficult, not to mention already a bit unrealistic...seeing that a normal human, even level 25 general guy or something can take out 300 wolves by himself.

11) In MoM, not only do you build buildings you can
also create cities.
Well, in your towns you erect buildings, thus calling it a town. If you want to call it a city, then fine. Wait a couple months for your population to increase, and you can correctly call it a city. Congradulations! You have just been elected governor of Hippie City!

12) And for those who haven't played MoM, you act
as the main spellcaster in the game; your hero can
also cast spells but if you expect to win, then you
have to do your share of the grunt work as well.
Hmm, I'm assuming then that you are some overseer kind of guy, casting spells on the sidelines, but you stick some poor peon into battle to die for you? Ah, the tragedy of sorrupted power. Some leader you are.







____________
This space for rent.

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


Known Hero
Master of Reptiles.
posted April 12, 2002 05:58 AM

Well I only read the first bit of both your Posts... but from my experience as a gamer...

'MOM' KICKS ASS!!!!! Merlin all the way  
oh and Draco The Draconian Rocks HOUSE!!
Animate Artifact is godly.
And so is Myrryan


____________
All living things have a history. The history of the Tortoise is long and rich.


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


Promising
Famous Hero
posted April 12, 2002 07:00 AM

Well after all HOMM is all about strategy... Some people are just wrongly accusing the game of being RPG only... it's not for me

HOMM series are the best turn-based strategy games - that's what I think....

After that probably comes Battle Isle, Disciples and Age Of Wonders...

Of course without Heroes4 - that's poor's man work excuse..
____________

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


Bad-mannered
Known Hero
Destroyer of Morons
posted April 12, 2002 07:03 AM

Quote:
Creature experience matters in MoM; unlike HoMMIV
which tends to favor large armies


DUH!! Its a strategy game. Large armies always have advantage. Thanks for stating the obvious.

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


Hired Hero
posted April 12, 2002 07:55 AM

To be accurate, MOM copied NWC's "Heroes" series, not the other way around.

Heroes is actually the 3rd version of the game, after Anvil of the Gods and King's Bounty. KB was made for Apple ][, so it's way before MOM ever came out.

SimTech (the makes of Masters of Orion) created Masters of Magic and blatantly copied Magic The Gathering's color/magic system. They even have the same spell names.

HOMM4 is the only one to copy MTG's magic system, and they're a little bit more creative with it.

Heroes is much stronger on the aspect of Hero creation, and this is why it appeals to so many people out there.

MOM is much more of a strategy game.

I think both are good games, i prefer MOM but i am a strategy game fan. I know a lot of people who don't necessarily play strategy games like Civ but enjoy HOMM.
____________

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

Tavern Dweller
posted April 12, 2002 07:38 PM

Quote:
Ah, I see now. So my mom is really the graddaddy of all fantasy, turn based, strategy games, eh? Cool. So what's just so exiting about HoMM4 compared to my mom? Well, it's a cool game, and doesn't get on my nerves all the time, except for the rare occassion that (which I admit) the stupid AI manages to beat me, although mainly attributed to my lack of experience with particular towns and strategies of the game. However, one bad thing is that it can't provide me with tons of junk food, so I guess the two go together pretty well, until I have to start doing my homework and such.

...never played Age of Wonders, so I'm not going to bother trying to make some foolish remark saying why they aren't that great or whatever. However, I did not like Lords of Magic too much. Now, mind you I like Sierra because they almost always have truly stupendous ideas for their games with tons of cool things, but as the pattern is, most of the games aren't actually made up to their great potential...which leaves it a tad more vulnerable for others to take their ideas, and churn them back out into a newer and modified version.

True, companies borrow ideas from each other, and take successful and interesting things from different games, but if they're not sued, I consider it perfectly legal in all respects...and who is to say that is wrong? I mean if someone tried to come up with a game, with everything totally made from scratch, and had to research the entire history of all games to make sure they would make nothing like what has previously been done, then I believe this would be an extremely dull and boring world. The truth of genius is learning how to successfully borrow ideas, integrate them into your own product, and make it your own. it does you no good if you don't even understand it.
However, if you insist, then I suppose everything is a "clone" of something that came before it. I mean hey, I guess we're extremely advanced clones of those cavemen who said, "ugh, ugh" and drew those pretty things on caves, right?

As to LoM, I didn't care much for the game itself but
thought the real-time combat phase was amusing.  As to
companies copying ideas off one another, I have no
qualms w/ that as long as the copy is an improvement
over the original.  Considering how old MoM is and
if as another poster indicates MoM is a copy of HoMM,
then it's even more odd that HoMM IV is moving closer
towards an old game idea.  It is this latter part
of going back to the old I think that could be improved



...personally I really enjoy HoMM4 very much. Sure, there are some things that aren't so great, or something that could be better, but overall I give it an A+. I am afriad I have not played this DOS game that you speak of, but couldn't both games be quite resonable, and be fun? ...without mentioning that one is an antique, and one is still brand spanking new of course...

If you can find it, there are still some copies
around OR if we all lucky and they make MoM II - people
who are making Master of Orion III have hinted they
would like to take a stab at MoM II, you should definitely
take a look at it.  Graphics aren't great and it
was a pain in the ass to get working even in DOS, but
I think you'll find it to be an enjoyable game.



Quote:

4) Weapon/armor crafting - you could create your own
weapons/armor provided you have the enchant item ability
Ok, I don't quite understand that. Although it'de be cool to be able to make my own armor, I guess the option is not availiable, to help keep the balance of the game, and not to create unnecessary confusion. However, why would you need the enchant item ability to craft something? Wouldn't that mean you found some sword or something, and imbued it with the magical ability to protect it's wielder from magic or something? If I wanted to make something, I wouldn't fool with some wierd magic, I'd go to my local blacksmith.

The way the enchantment works is first you have
to research the "Enchant item" spell.  Once you
get it, you can enchant an item up to a certain level
depending on what spells you already know.  I can't
remember the details but you can't imbue the highest
level spell that you know but maybe part way.  So,
if I were to use a HoMM IV analogy, if you knew
level 5, you could imbue maybe up to level 2 or 3
spells on the item.  Enchanting an item is a casting
spell that takes several turns to do, so if you want
such an item it will take you several turns for it
to appear during which you can't cast any global
enchantments.  In MoM, you can cast spells outside
of combat (sorta like the town gate spell in HoMMIV).
The caveat is if you want something high level it could
take you 20+ turns before you get it.  On the other
hand, you can't buy items like in HoMM IV, you either
create them or find them.



6) To be successful in MoM, you had to conquer magical
nodes which provided mana for spell casting/research.
(For those of you not familiar w/ MoM, nodes were
anything but life/death aligned but had interesting
effects; ie, chaos spells have a higher chance of
failure when used in sorcery node but no such limitations
in chaos node)
Are you saying you had to actually be in a node to cast any spells? Well, I suppose that source of power makes sense, but in HoMM4, it seems that magic is a natural ability that can be learned with proper instruction or the hand of fate, and power is drawn from his or her own body, which can be developedthrough countless years of study.

Sorry for the lack of clarity, you need to conquer
nodes in MoM just like you need to conquer resources like
gold in HoMMIV.   MoM just has one really major resource and
that's mana.  Some creatures generate mana but most
do not.  As mana is the pool from which you cast spells
as well as the "money" that allows you to do research,
you want to conquer as many nodes as possible.  What's
a bit different in MoM (memory is a bit fuzzy here)
is that I think you extract more mana from the node if
your alignment is similar to that of the node itself-
nature wizards get more from nature nodes than chaos
nodes.  Depending on what other specialities you pick,
your mana extraction can be more efficient.



7) In MoM, combat actually required some tactical thinking;
for example, you really couldn't take a city unless you had
"wall-crushing" ability (engineers or catapults and the
like) or flying creatures. Your combat area was also
much larger - cheesy way to get out of a really bad
situation w/o losses was to run away for 50 turns -
assuming you move faster than your opponent. FYI,
MoM also had distance penalities for archery type units.
Well, they did away with catapults, but there are still many different types of tactics. However, concerning this aspect, it still makes sense. Those within the fortifications have the upper hand, with generally higher ground, and being the one defending, they have a better chance. If you have flying creatures, you can go in, or you can shoot people that are putting themselves in positions at whicn they can attack you, but also making them vulnerable at the same time. Also, I believe the battlefield was intended to be limited, as that is the effective style of HoMM gaming, I believe...and if you want to increase the battlefield, go to your adventure map...the world is your battlefield if you wish to call it so.

In MoM, it was similar to classical siege warfare.
You couldn't take a city w/ walls unless you could break
the wall down, lure the enemy out of the gates or could
bombard the troops inside.  So there were times an army
would come to a city and simply give up; the attacking army
had no "siege" capability and the defending army had
no ranged attack- end result  was a stalemate w/ the city
intact.  Of course, if you had the right spells, you could
still attack the city w/ magic and seize it when the
defenders were all dead.

As to the battlefield, it is bigger than HoMM.  But big
enough that you could execute flanking moves w/o your
troops running into each other but not so big that you
spend most of it walking.  Probably the best way to
think about it is that the distance is probably about
5 rows longer from battle line to battle line and about
2-3 columns wider on the edge of each army.






8) Don't know if this happens in the higher levels of
HoMMIV- haven't seen it yet- but in MoM roaming creatures
can actually sack your city and destroy it.
Interesting idea, but HoMM4 monsters can't do that I don't believe. Even if I somehow missed their ability to do so, it's non-essential to the game.

Well, I wouldn't say it's nonessential if the
creatures could truly roam freely and sack your city as
you pulled out your garrison for reinforcing your main
assault.  It would definitely affect game play since
you have to spend more troops and money on garrisons.



9) Related to above, HoMM IV lacks any real tactics.
I have found it more often than I prefer to have to replay
a section b/c I didn't clear the map fast enough and
I encounter a band of level 4 creatures that I can't
take out.  HoMM IV emphasizes quantity over quality where
the reverse is more the case in MoM.
I don't think I quite understand what you mean. If this game had absolutely no tactics whatsoever, I highly doubt you would even take any interest in the game, and actually it would not even be considered a game...but some mindless coffee cup holder or something. Also, you prefer that you would have to replay a portion if not the entire scenario because you didn't act quickly enough? Well, I guess it's just me, but I'd prefer to do it right on the first try, but hey, it's just me. If you can't take out a creature, I guess it's your problem, for unless the odds are totally against you, and the situation is literally impossible, it is simply your inability to find a solution to the problem. In real life, if someone accidentally wanders into your house cleaning out your fridge, and you come home to find him, what are you going to do? Beat him up until he throws it all up?
Well, perhaps further explanation is in order, but what do you mean quantity is emphasized or quality? I believe that both are essential, but if you must, why would you go for 10 orcs, if you can have 10 Wasports instead? If you can choose, wouldn't you rather have a level 5 hero as opposed to a fresh new recruit out of the tavern?


Personally, I would prefer to get things right from
the beginning but one thing I have observed at
least in the HoMMIV campaigns is there are occasions where
you will find numerous level four creatures (>band) or
tons of level 3's and you only have mostly level 2 w/
some level 3 units.  You can take them out if you have
selected the right "research path" w/ your heroes but it
can be costly. Perhaps I should have gotten to them
earlier - well, this assumes I know where they are.  It's
just in some games I find myself not checking out one
section of the map only to find some efreets or worse black
dragons spawning there.  I personally find that having
even genies and tons of halfings even w/ my heroes doesn't
really do much damage here.  Titans would be nice but
if I don't have the resources to get them well I just
have to wait.....


Now I realize that I don't send out as many armies and heroes that I should for scouting but the reason why I don't do that is I find the hero leveling is a bit slow if
you don't have your hero engage in as many battles as
possible.  Therefore, I'm loath to engage creatures w/o the "main" force as the experience gain opportunities are harder for higher lvl guys.  I don't like my hero bouncing from one section of the map to another unless the area
has been fully explored but this mentality may need to be
changed.

As to the quality versus quantity, w/ the exception of
heroes, HoMM is driven by quantity. In other "strategy"
games like Panzer General series or Civ, your army
can gain experience and become stronger so it pays
for you not to have them needlessly slaughtered. Since
there is no HoMM analogy, it's difficult to compare but
imagine if you could have 20 experienced halfings versus
100 green halfings.  The experienced ones could have higher
morale, not as much distance penalty, compared to the green
recruits.  In HoMM, it's simply 20 versus 100.  HoMM sorta
does this w/ shrines and all but then it comes back to
traversing all over the map.



10) Creature experience matters in MoM; unlike HoMMIV
which tends to favor large armies in MoM, you could
create uber-elite troopers by keeping them alive
through various battles and they get more powerful
(better defense/attack)
Been finding grammatical errors, but I'm not arguing about that . Well, the important things is that units are simply units. They can change in number or type, but those few that excel past those average guys on the battlefield are what you would call a hero. They use their abilities to enhance the overall performance of your army. Well, in HoMm4 you can also give your guys a bunch of stuff and tell them to wander around by themselves, and if you judge correctly and pick your fights well, you might just as well come out with some powerful superman type of guy. However, that is a bit difficult, not to mention already a bit unrealistic...seeing that a normal human, even level 25 general guy or something can take out 300 wolves by himself.

I noted a lack of a period at the end but found no
grammatical errors at least in the passage.  If you
were to comment style-wise, I can understand .  
See the previous comment about the halfing example
for the quality versus quantity and why units don't
have to simply be just units.



11) In MoM, not only do you build buildings you can
also create cities.
Well, in your towns you erect buildings, thus calling it a town. If you want to call it a city, then fine. Wait a couple months for your population to increase, and you can correctly call it a city. Congradulations! You have just been elected governor of Hippie City!

Ok, how about urban troop building factories.  MoM
is like Civ in that you can create "towns" and also
erect buildings in those "places."



12) And for those who haven't played MoM, you act
as the main spellcaster in the game; your hero can
also cast spells but if you expect to win, then you
have to do your share of the grunt work as well.
Hmm, I'm assuming then that you are some overseer kind of guy, casting spells on the sidelines, but you stick some poor peon into battle to die for you? Ah, the tragedy of sorrupted power. Some leader you are.

Yes and no.  By default, you are the overseer
wizard.  But people have played strictly on their
local heroe's abilities to lead the army and cast
spells.  It's all up to you.   Btw, poor peons always
die for you in this game as we have no diplomacy....









____________

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


Known Hero
Pikeman
posted April 12, 2002 08:03 PM

Whether a game is a clone or not is not important to me. I just know I always like the Heroes series (II, III, and now IV). Every game in the series is fun to play! I already spent more than 50 hours playing Heroes 4.  
____________
Also a Civilization fanatic:
http://www.civfanatics.com || forums

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

Tavern Dweller
posted April 12, 2002 09:29 PM

Quote:
Quote:
Creature experience matters in MoM; unlike HoMMIV
which tends to favor large armies


DUH!! Its a strategy game. Large armies always have advantage. Thanks for stating the obvious.


Uh-yeah, I guess then there is no accounting for
intelligence in strategy games if numbers rule the
day.  You may be surprised to find that there are
strategy games where larger armies do not necessarily
win (PG series, Civ series, MoM, etc);  this has also
been demonstrated several times in history as well
(Athenians vs Persians, Frederick the Great against,
well, Europe, South vs North in early US Civil War, etc).
IMO, a person who w/ 3 black dragons and no hero can
through tactics/manuevering  consistently beat 10 black
dragons-> that's impressive and would be indicative of
a tactful mind.  Someone who can defeat 10 dragons w/
even force consistently w/o a hero would adequate.  
Someone who can beat 10 dragons w/ 20 dragons - well,
if you can't do that, then tactics (more than strategy)
is not your forte.  Larger is not necessarily better
in terms of armies BUT HoMM tends to be biased in
this regard.


____________

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

Tavern Dweller
posted April 12, 2002 09:43 PM

Quote:
To be accurate, MOM copied NWC's "Heroes" series, not the other way around.

Heroes is actually the 3rd version of the game, after Anvil of the Gods and King's Bounty. KB was made for Apple ][, so it's way before MOM ever came out.

SimTech (the makes of Masters of Orion) created Masters of Magic and blatantly copied Magic The Gathering's color/magic system. They even have the same spell names.

HOMM4 is the only one to copy MTG's magic system, and they're a little bit more creative with it.

Heroes is much stronger on the aspect of Hero creation, and this is why it appeals to so many people out there.

MOM is much more of a strategy game.

I think both are good games, i prefer MOM but i am a strategy game fan. I know a lot of people who don't necessarily play strategy games like Civ but enjoy HOMM.


Thanks for the clarification.  My beef was that
HoMM is still considered to be a fantasy strategy game and
the latest incarnation seems more MoMish compared
to its predecessors.  I mean NWC makes a big deal
about heroes being on the battlefield and all- that's
nothing really new. I also am more of a strategy
gamer though I do play games like Diablo 2 and such.
But I digress, in short, considering what has been done
and what's out there, HoMM IV could have been
done far better than what is now.


____________

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


Known Hero
Pathetic Loser
posted April 13, 2002 12:35 AM

Quote:
Uh-yeah, I guess then there is no accounting for
intelligence in strategy games if numbers rule the
day.  You may be surprised to find that there are
strategy games where larger armies do not necessarily
win (PG series, Civ series, MoM, etc);  this has also
been demonstrated several times in history as well
(Athenians vs Persians, Frederick the Great against,
well, Europe, South vs North in early US Civil War, etc).
IMO, a person who w/ 3 black dragons and no hero can
through tactics/manuevering  consistently beat 10 black
dragons-> that's impressive and would be indicative of
a tactful mind.  Someone who can defeat 10 dragons w/
even force consistently w/o a hero would adequate.  
Someone who can beat 10 dragons w/ 20 dragons - well,
if you can't do that, then tactics (more than strategy)
is not your forte.  Larger is not necessarily better
in terms of armies BUT HoMM tends to be biased in
this regard.



that's funny.  Civ3 (and 2 and 1) is quite biased toward large armies, just read the posts on civfanatics.com (spearman vs. tank debate, anyone? HappyPike, defend me here, you've seen those debates!)!  And I HAVE played MoM quite a bit (Sprites kick *** in that game, BTW).  It was a very blatant copy of civilization with aspects of MTG thrown in.  You would build towns with settlers, build improvements in the towns just like civ, and even grow population in towns to increase revenue and production, just like Civ.

As for your 3 dragons vs. 10 dragons, I don't see the comparison.  If you have battle tactics, that implies that somebody is leading those 3 dragons.  In a battle without heroes, it makes no sense to say those 3 dragons should be able to win.  Besides, try to do that in MoM!!  Other than a very weak AI, numbers almost always won!

The entire magic system is stolen from MTG, and most core concepts are stolen from Civ, so how is that remotely unique?

Don't get me wrong, an updated MoM game would probably blow away what's out there right now (including H4), but its system was good because it was cloned, as is H4.  Both use stolen ideas, and throw in some improvements and a few unique concepts.

The only concept shared from H4 to MoM is the magic system, and not because H4 stole it from MoM, but because they both stole it from MTG... and it wouldn't surprise me if MTG stole it from somewhere too...

Quote:

HoMM is still considered to be a fantasy strategy game and
the latest incarnation seems more MoMish compared
to its predecessors.



Uh, they have heroes in battles and they stole the same magic system that MoM stole.  That's what makes it more MoMish?  Interesting... so MTG (the computer game, not the card game) should be more like MoM too, right?

I think your problem is you wanted H4 to be MoM 2 or something... ain't gonna happen, it's a new flavor of heroes, that's all.  And I for one like it.
____________

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

Tavern Dweller
posted April 13, 2002 01:57 AM

Quote:
Quote:
Uh-yeah, I guess then there is no accounting for
intelligence in strategy games if numbers rule the
day.  You may be surprised to find that there are
strategy games where larger armies do not necessarily
win (PG series, Civ series, MoM, etc);  this has also
been demonstrated several times in history as well
(Athenians vs Persians, Frederick the Great against,
well, Europe, South vs North in early US Civil War, etc).
IMO, a person who w/ 3 black dragons and no hero can
through tactics/manuevering  consistently beat 10 black
dragons-> that's impressive and would be indicative of
a tactful mind.  Someone who can defeat 10 dragons w/
even force consistently w/o a hero would adequate.  
Someone who can beat 10 dragons w/ 20 dragons - well,
if you can't do that, then tactics (more than strategy)
is not your forte.  Larger is not necessarily better
in terms of armies BUT HoMM tends to be biased in
this regard.



that's funny.  Civ3 (and 2 and 1) is quite biased toward large armies, just read the posts on civfanatics.com (spearman vs. tank debate, anyone? HappyPike, defend me here, you've seen those debates!)!  And I HAVE played MoM quite a bit (Sprites kick *** in that game, BTW).  It was a very blatant copy of civilization with aspects of MTG thrown in.  You would build towns with settlers, build improvements in the towns just like civ, and even grow population in towns to increase revenue and production, just like Civ.

Not necessarily.  True, you can play w/ large
armies but they aren't essential - perhaps more
so w/ Civ 1 and 2 than w/ 3.  You could buy cities
w/o using a single tank.  Yeah, I was one of those
people who switched to Fundamentalism and bought
everyone in Civ 2.  But you still see situations where
a few outnumbered hopelites entrenched in mountain fortifications disproportionately taking out
larger superior forces.


As for your 3 dragons vs. 10 dragons, I don't see the comparison.  If you have battle tactics, that implies that somebody is leading those 3 dragons.  In a battle without heroes, it makes no sense to say those 3 dragons should be able to win.  Besides, try to do that in MoM!!  Other than a very weak AI, numbers almost always won!

Not really.  Elite troopers could take out larger
number greener troops easily.  Think of paladins in MoM and
their first strike.  On several occasions, I have had
my smaller army take out larger troops because I would
hit them and wipe them out before they could retaliate.
(Wyrms on wyrms would be a tough battle I agree)

Another example is a game like Myth, where the terrain
affects combat.  Being on higher ground than your opponent gives you an advantage. I'm not saying that the scenario
I'm describing is easy as it's meant as an illustration.
HoMM doesn't model terrain effects on combat (very weakily)
and doesn't consider unit levels.  If you add both of
these elements, the game has a stronger tactical component
and numbers don't always win.  I mean it isn't that
difficult to do the terrain thing since you can already
hide behind your frontline units, why can't you hide
your ranged attackers behind trees or rocks and shield
them from assaults from certain angles?  HoMM
in siege mode gives the defender advantage in the towers
so it's not like HoMMIV already doesn't have the basics
to pull it off[i/]


The entire magic system is stolen from MTG, and most core concepts are stolen from Civ, so how is that remotely unique?

Don't get me wrong, an updated MoM game would probably blow away what's out there right now (including H4), but its system was good because it was cloned, as is H4.  Both use stolen ideas, and throw in some improvements and a few unique concepts.

The only concept shared from H4 to MoM is the magic system, and not because H4 stole it from MoM, but because they both stole it from MTG... and it wouldn't surprise me if MTG stole it from somewhere too...

Again, I have no problems who copies what from who.
I'm just saying that it would be nice if they improved
on something especially if they have such a strong
resemblance.  I really doubt that the NWC folks never
played MoM or Age of Wonders and have absolutely no
idea of heroes participating on the field of combat thing.
Considering the game is at least the 4th incarnation,
I was expecting a bit more.  Sorta like seeing a flat
panel display that is only monochrome green.  Interesting
but could have been better.


Quote:

HoMM is still considered to be a fantasy strategy game and
the latest incarnation seems more MoMish compared
to its predecessors.



Uh, they have heroes in battles and they stole the same magic system that MoM stole.  That's what makes it more MoMish?  Interesting... so MTG (the computer game, not the card game) should be more like MoM too, right?

I think your problem is you wanted H4 to be MoM 2 or something... ain't gonna happen, it's a new flavor of heroes, that's all.  And I for one like it.


Haven't played MTG (card or computer) and saw MoM
before MTG so for  me the reference was from that direction.

I guess it boils down to I wanted a cool fantasy
turn-based strategy game.  HoMM IV is ok but nothing
earth shattering just like Civ 3 was to Civ 2.  Perhaps,
I was too optimistic in hoping that NWC would be willing
to do something more cutting edge.




____________

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


Known Hero
Pathetic Loser
posted April 13, 2002 02:25 AM

In civ3, numbers are everything.  Obviously if you're in a city and well fortified, you are more powerful, but that's an if, and a big one.  For the most part, many weak troops defeat few strong troops no matter what.

Same was true of civ 1 and 2, unless you had TONS of cash.  Even so, when you look at battle alone, numbers still won.  If you were fortified, if you were in a city, if you were on a hill, if, if, if...

Throw an "if" into heroes 4: If your dragons are in a city and they have a tactics hero leading them, 3 will easily take 10.  No way will the 10 win, because the defenders get like 150% bonus to defense (100% from towers, 50% from hero), making the 10 do 40% of their normal damage.  And the 3 defenders will do 50% extra damage from tactics hero.

The relative strengths become important here: 10 dragons at 40% are like 4 dragons, damagewise.  3 defenders hitting at 50% bonus are like 4.5 dragons, damagewise.  Add in high luck and morale, and those 3 will easily defeat the 10.

MoM: Yeah, paladins kicked ***, but in a typical battle, 3 paladins vs. 8 paladins (couldn't fit much more than that into a battle as I recall) and no heroes or spells, the 8 will win hands down.  If the 3 are veteran/elite (can't remember which was the last rank), they'll have a good bonus (+1 attack, +1 defense, +1 HP, +1 magic res), but they'll still lose.
____________

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

Tavern Dweller
posted April 13, 2002 02:57 AM

Quote:
In civ3, numbers are everything.  Obviously if you're in a city and well fortified, you are more powerful, but that's an if, and a big one.  For the most part, many weak troops defeat few strong troops no matter what.

Same was true of civ 1 and 2, unless you had TONS of cash.  Even so, when you look at battle alone, numbers still won.  If you were fortified, if you were in a city, if you were on a hill, if, if, if...

Superior numbers do not always translate to victory.  There is a point where position, unit level, and unit strength favors the technologically superior unit over the inferior one.  Where that point depends on the ratio of forces and the difference in strengths.  For example, I
don't expect 20 halfings to take out a black dragon, but there is some number of halfings that will do the job.
Until you reach that point, the odds favor the dragon.

But the point I'm alluding to is that tactics/strategy
are more important for an outnumbered force than they
are for one w/ overwhelming numbers.  



Throw an "if" into heroes 4: If your dragons are in a city and they have a tactics hero leading them, 3 will easily take 10.  No way will the 10 win, because the defenders get like 150% bonus to defense (100% from towers, 50% from hero), making the 10 do 40% of their normal damage.  And the 3 defenders will do 50% extra damage from tactics hero.

The relative strengths become important here: 10 dragons at 40% are like 4 dragons, damagewise.  3 defenders hitting at 50% bonus are like 4.5 dragons, damagewise.  Add in high luck and morale, and those 3 will easily defeat the 10.

Uh, I thought you said earlier that many weak units
will beat a few strong ones... Of course, this comes
down to semantics as to how many do we consider many
and few to be


MoM: Yeah, paladins kicked ***, but in a typical battle, 3 paladins vs. 8 paladins (couldn't fit much more than that into a battle as I recall) and no heroes or spells, the 8 will win hands down.  If the 3 are veteran/elite (can't remember which was the last rank), they'll have a good bonus (+1 attack, +1 defense, +1 HP, +1 magic res), but they'll still lose.


I think 9 is max and elite is highest rank.  But
3 paladins can beat 9 and I'm not the only one who has
done it w/o spells and heroes.  Key is adamantium
units if w/o spells w/ spells is flight casted on them
beforehand.  Really ugly is the flying invisible warship.
That could pretty much mow down anything....




____________

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


Bad-mannered
Known Hero
Destroyer of Morons
posted April 13, 2002 04:43 AM
Edited By: Pure_Chaos on 12 Apr 2002

Quote:
Uh-yeah, I guess then there is no accounting for
intelligence in strategy games if numbers rule the
day. You may be surprised to find that there are
strategy games where larger armies do not necessarily
win (PG series, Civ series, MoM, etc); this has also
been demonstrated several times in history as well
(Athenians vs Persians, Frederick the Great against,
well, Europe, South vs North in early US Civil War, etc).
IMO, a person who w/ 3 black dragons and no hero can
through tactics/manuevering consistently beat 10 black
dragons-> that's impressive and would be indicative of
a tactful mind. Someone who can defeat 10 dragons w/
even force consistently w/o a hero would adequate.
Someone who can beat 10 dragons w/ 20 dragons - well,
if you can't do that, then tactics (more than strategy)
is not your forte. Larger is not necessarily better
in terms of armies BUT HoMM tends to be biased in
this regard.




Um, This is just a GAME, not a super realistic war simulation. And to make sure that the game STAYS fun, there should be NO way for someone to beat 10 dragons with 3 (assuming all other factors are equal) because it would not be very fun. There is absolutely no game out there which has things you described.


As for Civ series, have you actually played them? or are you just randomly trolling? Larger number (even if your units are much weaker and low tech) is always superior, as you can harass the enemy from all sides and uncover huge territory quickly, while your few super units will be hard pressed to even defend your empire, much less think about expansion.

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


Known Hero
Pathetic Loser
posted April 13, 2002 06:59 AM

Quote:
Uh, I thought you said earlier that many weak units
will beat a few strong ones... Of course, this comes
down to semantics as to how many do we consider many
and few to be



yes, but also that heroes become the "tactics" that you speak of.  A leader (the hero) who is strong can make a smaller force defeat a bigger one.

Quote:

I think 9 is max and elite is highest rank.  But
3 paladins can beat 9 and I'm not the only one who has
done it w/o spells and heroes.  Key is adamantium
units if w/o spells w/ spells is flight casted on them
beforehand.  Really ugly is the flying invisible warship.
That could pretty much mow down anything....




again, that's just playing with the numbers.  Adamantium + elite = +2 attack +2 defense, and the HP and magic res bonus of +1 (I haven't played in a while so these numbers may be off).  You're still giving an advantage one way or another.  In heroes a "unit" isn't experienced, but a leader (ie hero) can be.  Either way, it's just a way to represent experience at battle.
____________

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


Promising
Famous Hero
posted April 13, 2002 09:30 AM

MoM, wow, what a great game even in today's standard (well, except graphics, of course. )

If my memory is not wrong, elite is not the highest exp level for creature. You can get ultra-elite creatures if you have warlord starting speciality. I like to start with dark elf race. Warlock with doom bolt kick ass.
Sorcery & chaos are also good. You can summon sky drake of great drake. Get them to elite level, they are invincible. I also like the spell: summon champion which you can summon a greater hero to lead your army. My favorite hero is the Chaos Warrior (forget the name).

Ya, H4 did have something very similar to MoM. Well, I don't mind who copy who. I just want a good and interesting game. I think the H4 can't undergo some major changes, say in h5, coz ppl take time to get used to the game. But some minor aspects of MoM can be taken. e.g.
1. create artifact: tailor make your own powerful artifact.
2. magic node system: apart from normal mines, you should be able to flag some magical resource nodes by defeating the guardians so as to boost up your magic power.

There are many good games out there. MoM is surely one of the greatest strategic game. It's a pity that Micropose never develop sequel for it. They focus on Master of Orion series which I don't like much.
____________
Choose what you love
and love what you choose.

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


Promising
Adventuring Hero
extinct but alive!
posted April 13, 2002 10:46 AM

I once read some gamers forum (maybe gamespot!!) giving MOM the reward of the game there most of all deserved a sequel!!
A join that thought!!

____________
The Oxe is slow, but earth have patience

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

Tavern Dweller
posted April 13, 2002 11:38 AM

of all that being said i should mention that MTG made by todays graphic standarts would kick all thouse game so far away, but also i play heroes since 2nd but i still think heroes 3 is the best, 4 has still too much bugs, i am 1 of those who expeted homm4 to be garphicly improved homm3, and i found totaly new game, and it is a bit stupid sometimes, i thought the whole idea of homm is to live in that world and stuff like magic fist and some of the creatures, reasebles more of a stupid cartoon. on the ther hand there is still a lot of playing before judment, but right now i feel like geting back to homm3
____________
MTG + HOMM3 still waiting

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


Famous Hero
posted April 13, 2002 04:37 PM

You're right. Nothing can touch MoM. Age of Wonders comes the closest, and AOW2 will likely be awesome.

Come to think of it, HOMM4 does take a step towards MoM with the alignment system, except they call Sorcery 'Order' instead. They aren't the only game to rip off MoM though.. There were many before it.

The similarities also go beyond just the alignment system. Oh how I yearn for an updated MoM.. I'm most disappointed that a sequel was in the works but got cancelled before it was even officially revealed.
____________

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

Page compiled in 0.1903 seconds