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 > Heroes 7+ Altar of Wishes > Thread: Economic Discussion
Thread: Economic Discussion
MattII
MattII


Legendary Hero
posted November 27, 2020 11:25 AM

Economic Discussion

Another discussion thread, like my previous one for magic, but this time based around the economy of a potential future game. Now I'm personally against the simplification made in heroes 6, but that's not to say the old system is without its flaws. One flaw f.e. is that the non-gold resources are so rare that their use is rather limited. If we bumped it us so that wood and ore were generated as rate of 10/day/mine, and the other resources were generated at a rate of 5/day/mine, then we could make it so that creatures as low as 4th tier cost resources beyond gold.

But what are your guys thoughts? What would you like to see from the economic system of the next game?

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


Promising
Known Hero
posted November 27, 2020 04:46 PM

Collecting resources with heroes or through caravans.
Limitation of armies by hero level, using the remaining units, for tactical defense of mines and steps.
New resource "food", necessary to move the hero. Large armies, will cost to move, but not keep them in defense. It could be a number similar to the power of each unit. and so about 100 more ideas haha

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


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
posted November 27, 2020 09:16 PM

I think xuxo's suggestion quite decent. The player does not 'suffer' for moving impossible huge armies to and fro. There's no maintenance cost for anything, for moving, for existing, for garrisoning, and you can apparently be away from provisions indefinitely. This upkeep cost could be named food, or provisions.

And if I was ever to change resources, it would be mainly their names for a symbolic abrangency:
- Coins: same as gold
- Stone: same as ore
- Wood: same as wood
- Metals: as for iron, steel, gold, mythril, brass, etc.
- Chemicals: instead of mercury.
- Gemstones: for magical.
- Ethergems: for spectral and undead.
- Provisions: the upkeep cost.
____________
"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
Rimgrabber
Rimgrabber


Famous Hero
It's a fixer-upper
posted November 27, 2020 10:32 PM

I have mixed feelings about that. I understand the logic, but I worry it would mess too much with the core of the game. I'd have to see it in practice before I could decide if I like it or not. Although, it could make logistics less absurdly necessary by having it reduce upkeep costs rather than let you do 30% more things in a turn.

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


Legendary Hero
posted November 27, 2020 11:27 PM

Upkeep is likely to be a more complicated issue in Heroes than in other games, primarily due to the existence of the undead, golems, elementals, etc. There's whole factions where food for upkeep makes no sense at all.

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


Known Hero
posted November 28, 2020 02:43 AM

Yes, and that's fine - if you play necropolis you need upkeep for your towns, but not your army.

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


Legendary Hero
posted November 28, 2020 04:43 AM
Edited by MattII at 12:30, 28 Nov 2020.

Alon said:
Yes, and that's fine - if you play necropolis you need upkeep for your towns, but not your army.
Oh you need upkeep for your army, but for the Necropolis, the upkeep is going to be magic, not food.


Onto other posts:
xuxo said:
Collecting resources with heroes or through caravans.
Caravans are good, but if mines generate caravans, why should heroes get a free pass on picking up resources? do they have some sort of magical connection to cities?

Quote:
Limitation of armies by hero level, using the remaining units, for tactical defense of mines and steps.
An interesting idea, how were you planning on working out the numbers?

Quote:
New resource "food", necessary to move the hero. Large armies, will cost to move, but not keep them in defense. It could be a number similar to the power of each unit. and so about 100 more ideas haha
Not so sure about this. How does "Food" work for Necropolis units? Or half the Academy ones?

PandaTar said:
I think xuxo's suggestion quite decent. The player does not 'suffer' for moving impossible huge armies to and fro. There's no maintenance cost for anything, for moving, for existing, for garrisoning, and you can apparently be away from provisions indefinitely. This upkeep cost could be named food, or provisions.
Nor do you lose any resources from mines on other land-masses. There's a lot of things that have been streamlined, and un-streamlining them would slow things down. Not that that's a bad thing, but you have to be careful with it.

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


Promising
Known Hero
posted November 28, 2020 12:48 PM

The mines would function like any unit dwelling. you can collect the accumulated materials, or take them in caravans to the cities. For this, you need to have a clear path. the tactic works when there are remote mines, so they would cost more to maintain. The issue of limited armies for me is essential. Currently we all play with 1 super powerful hero, avoiding crossing with another super hero, and a lot of tracker heroes. defenses are hardly used in mines and garrisons.

It would be as easy as limiting the unit's power points, taking for example the case of heroes V, based on their current power points.

Heroes level 1 = 1000 points.
1 peasant= 40 points.
You can have 25 peasants.
1 archer = 140 points
You can have 2 archers and 12 peasants.

Heroes level 5 = 10,000 points
100 peasants, (4100)
13 archers (1820)
15 swordsmen (3015)
2 gryphons (1048)
Total = 9983 points.

This would force to distribute the troops in more heroes, and more tactical movements would be generated, inside and outside the battle.

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


Legendary Hero
posted November 28, 2020 06:49 PM
Edited by MattII at 20:46, 28 Nov 2020.

1,000 points is way too low for level 1 hero given those creature costs.

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


Promising
Known Hero
posted November 28, 2020 11:10 PM

MattII said:
1,000 points is way too low for level 1 hero given those creature costs.
It is a quick example so that it is understood xD

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


Legendary Hero
posted November 29, 2020 04:09 AM

xuxo said:
It is a quick example so that it is understood xD
Fair enough.

Actually, looking at, I'm liking this solution more and more. It's a simple, easy-to-understand idea that would nevertheless add significant complexity to the game. It would likely also reduce the number of game-ending battles, as even the loss of a powerful hero would only be a setback, not a cataclysm.

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


Famous Hero
It's a fixer-upper
posted November 29, 2020 06:00 AM
Edited by Rimgrabber at 06:07, 29 Nov 2020.

Were something like that to be implemented, I'd prefer it to be either optional or map dependant. I always like maxing everything out and having 1 superpowered hero, although I do agree that doing that in EVERY game can get quite stale. Overall, I'd like to see more map dependant features like that. You want the classic HoMM experience? There are maps and RMG options for that. You want limited armies, upkeep, tech trees, etc? There are maps and RMG options for that too.

I know this is probably not a widely-held opinion, but I actually think that had H7's skill system diversified the classes better and been designed with a random option in mind from the start, it would have been the best skill system in the series. I like the idea of being able to toggle whether skills are random or not. It makes it easier to test out build ideas, introduce new players, and can even create some interesting map possibilities where you have to budget your XP and skill points in a very specific way to clear the map. As long as it's designed around the assumption that most games are going to have random skills, I like the option to play a game without the randomness from time to time.

Sorry for getting a bit off-topic, what I'm trying to say is that more customizable mechanics to make the game as innovative or conservative as you're comfortable with and cool possibilities that wouldn't otherwise be possible would be good, and I think that both random/nonrandom skills and army limits would be great examples of what I mean.

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


Legendary Hero
posted December 02, 2020 06:47 AM

Rimgrabber said:
Were something like that to be implemented, I'd prefer it to be either optional or map dependant. I always like maxing everything out and having 1 superpowered hero, although I do agree that doing that in EVERY game can get quite stale. Overall, I'd like to see more map dependant features like that. You want the classic HoMM experience? There are maps and RMG options for that. You want limited armies, upkeep, tech trees, etc? There are maps and RMG options for that too.
Sort of like the different game modes in the Age Of (X) series? I could go with that.

Taking an idea from HoMM4, I wouldn't mind seeing a variant where the map is mostly undeveloped, with only the Lumber Camps and Ore Pits in each player's home territory built, and the rest of the map covered in resource veins rather than mines.

I also think there's something in a town management system that draws inspiration from the Civilization series (though not actually being that similar to it).

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


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
What if Elvin was female?
posted December 02, 2020 12:33 PM

Upkeep in heroes, that doesn't sound fun :/
____________
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

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


Supreme Hero
posted December 02, 2020 04:34 PM

I always preferred the H1/2/4 style. Where Most factions cannot afford their week’s worth of creatures without the help of a goldmine or another castle’s income. Forces players to explore and manage their economy a bit more imo.

Makes for more unique factions too in terms of early/mid/late power levels.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jiriki9
Jiriki9


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
posted December 02, 2020 06:32 PM

I think here are some interesting ideas.
...BUT...
...hoMM was never designed as being realistic. It was never meant to be. And I am not sure the food mechanic would work good with the game.

On the resources....while I also often think of doing a refreshment here, I think the Gold + 2 "common" + 4 "rare" resources system has shown to work very good in HoMM-context.
I really do like the idea of adjusting the numbers there, though, especially for wood & iron.

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


Legendary Hero
posted December 02, 2020 09:44 PM
Edited by MattII at 23:52, 02 Dec 2020.

Elvin said:
Upkeep in heroes, that doesn't sound fun :/
I personally wasn't thinking so much 'upkeep' as limiting the size of a heroes army to some degree.

The_Green_Drag said:
I always preferred the H1/2/4 style. Where Most factions cannot afford their week’s worth of creatures without the help of a goldmine or another castle’s income. Forces players to explore and manage their economy a bit more imo.
I did once think that, in the event of a siege, any as-yet-unrecruited creatures could be hired for half their recruitment cost to fight for that one particular battle.

Jiriki9 said:
I think here are some interesting ideas.
...BUT...
...hoMM was never designed as being realistic. It was never meant to be. And I am not sure the food mechanic would work good with the game.
Agreed. Not like it would even work for golems, etc. Or the undead.

xuxo said:
and so about 100 more ideas haha
Care to share a few more?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread »
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0554 seconds