|
| Thread: new battle scences | |
|
stargazer
Famous Hero
hero of order and life
|
posted March 31, 2003 09:02 PM |
|
|
new battle scences
I think they should add trees and lakes and rivers to some battle places.some of these could increase spells or decrease for ex a creature is under a tree a spellcaster casts a fire spell on the tree or grass causes all creatures exept flyers and emune to get damaged and it changes the terrian type from grass to subterrian or dirt.
or a creature is the water and the spellcaster a casts fire spell it doesnt work.
So the more terran oppsicals the better. you could even make a bridge over the water with the tree for your ground troops
____________
When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only Mortal for a little while
|
|
Lordskeleton
Adventuring Hero
The really REALLY bad guy
|
|
posted April 03, 2003 09:03 PM |
|
|
Having battles changing the landscape would be neat. Imagine, cursed ground and a burned forest where there were once a thriving realm. To turn it around, burned trees should regrow that not eventually the entire land be cursed. Perhaps (not logical though) the regrowth should depend whether the "good" or "evil" army stands victorious. If the evil army won, the ground would be cursed. If the good army wins, the ground would be scarred but regrown eventually.
Sorry for ending up somewhat off topic.
Noticed Djive had some similar suggestion for a spell in the spell thread.
____________
Vad gagnar det en människa om han vinner hela världen men förlorar sin själ?
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted April 03, 2003 11:02 PM |
|
Edited By: Djive on 3 Apr 2003
|
Yes, spells would be a good addition for making dangerous terrain.
But terrain with prelaid traps and dangerous plants (visble only to creature native to a certain terrain) can be a good idea.
I don't know about changing the terrain in combat. You'd have to do that through adventure map spells or the like. Putting obstacles on fire during combat adds fairly little to strategy but adds a lot of effort to programming. But more spells like the Landmine and Quicskand spells would be nice, and some terrain could come with similar effects pre-placed (based on the terrain on the tile where combat occurs).
They will have to make the placement of the dangerous terrain random, so the player don't know which hexes/squares are dangerous to step on (unless the player has creature who can see the dangerous spots)
|
|
stargazer
Famous Hero
hero of order and life
|
|
posted April 04, 2003 04:26 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes, spells would be a good addition for making dangerous terrain.
But terrain with prelaid traps and dangerous plants (visble only to creature native to a certain terrain) can be a good idea.
I don't know about changing the terrain in combat. You'd have to do that through adventure map spells or the like. quote]
i like these ideas but if a plyer cast a forgetfulness spell
or hypnotyze or illusion for that matter the opponet would think something happen and could fall into one of his own traps.
about the overland spell it could work for the day or week depending on the casters level
____________
When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only Mortal for a little while
|
|
this_other_guy
Famous Hero
{0_o} heh...
|
|
posted April 05, 2003 05:02 AM |
|
|
Ok... back to the battle terrain.
In homm4, the viewpoint of the battlefield is isometric (slanted), unlike the previous versions. IMHO, 3do/nwc should leave it like that coz it looks so much better. Also, I like to see more objects/obstacles on the battlefield than homm4.
____________
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
|
|
Marelt_Ekiran
Promising
Famous Hero
Watcher of All
|
|
posted April 05, 2003 05:32 AM |
|
|
I agree with the ideas here. The isometric view did look good, although it bothered some people that you would only see the backs of your troops. But isn't that what a real general would see as well?
For the spells, I think that a number would be applicable to this situation.
Something that I just thought of. Perhaps the spells should be a bit more connected to the spell power skill level (I'm talking about the skills like wizardry for Order, spirituality for Life, etc.). This would work like the skill in Magic of HOMM3. That would make those skills more valuable than just the "plus-so-much-percent" aspect. In for example, death magic, this number is hardly worth anything, because most spells are not caster level related.
I'll take an example for the terrain spells:
>Remove obstacle< (level 2, nature).
Removes certain obstacles on the battlefield.
Basic Meditation or none --> Removes loose material, like rocks and fallen trees.
Expert or advanced Meditation --> Removes solid material, like plants, trees and boulders.
GM or master Meditation --> Drains water
Other possible terrain spells:
>Negate terrain< (level 3, order).
All terrain is negated for both you and the enemy, eliminating both bonusses and penalties. It is as if you play on a neutral terrain. At higher levels, you could cast the spell, which gives only you benefit, while the enemy keeps any penalty.
>Destruct battlefield< (level 3, chaos).
The battlefield becomes chaotic, cutting all ground movement in half.
>Raise plants< (level 1, Archaeon).
Raises a number of plants, which do not alter movement in any form, but function as barricades for the ranged attacks.
>Bless terrain< (level 4, life).
Gives all life targets a boost of two in speed and movement and removes any curse on the terrain.
____________
Perception is everything.
|
|
this_other_guy
Famous Hero
{0_o} heh...
|
|
posted April 05, 2003 09:04 AM |
|
|
Good idea. Spells do the trick again! 
____________
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
|
|
stargazer
Famous Hero
hero of order and life
|
|
posted April 07, 2003 04:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I agree with the ideas here. The isometric view did look good, although it bothered some people that you would only see the backs of your troops. But isn't that what a real general would see as well? End quote
No a real general would be in front and the troops would see his back!I think that the spellcasters would see the backs of the troops.
____________
When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only Mortal for a little while
|
|
Magus
Hired Hero
Warper of Time-Space
|
|
posted April 07, 2003 09:52 PM |
|
|
A real general would be in the rear, a strategist is no good to his army if he is slain as the battle opens. Now idiots like kings, on the other hand....
____________
So was the land riven by Chaos and Destruction, and so it was cleansed from existence. I did this, the Magus of Ly'kail, Magus of the Sylvan Kingdoms.
|
|
Marelt_Ekiran
Promising
Famous Hero
Watcher of All
|
|
posted April 08, 2003 06:23 AM |
|
|
A general walking in front of his troops????
I'm afraid that the poor little troops will have to do without a leader very soon.
____________
Perception is everything.
|
|
stargazer
Famous Hero
hero of order and life
|
|
posted April 08, 2003 04:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
A general walking in front of his troops????
I'm afraid that the poor little troops will have to do without a leader very soon.
I can see what you mean in a game but throught time generals lead there troops into the fray in front of them. Its in the books too.
____________
When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only Mortal for a little while
|
|
Marelt_Ekiran
Promising
Famous Hero
Watcher of All
|
|
posted April 09, 2003 01:33 AM |
|
|
I was talking in real life. In the olden days, the general was watching the battlefield from a hill (if available and if necesarry). In modern times, the generals stay in their cosy headquarters and lead the battle on their computer screens.
What books are you talking about?
____________
Perception is everything.
|
|
IYY
Responsible
Supreme Hero
REDACTED
|
|
posted April 09, 2003 03:00 AM |
|
|
Well, many books do desbribe the generals leading the army at the front but that's just to add some drama to those boring battles.
____________
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted April 09, 2003 05:35 PM |
|
|
as i understood djive, it's like preplacing quicksand in marsh and land mines in volcanic battle ground without neither side seeing them (maybe unless they are on natural terrain), and i'm surprised that it isn't in the game already.
i would appreciate forest being destroyed by most powerful fire spells like armageddon, and maybe terrain changed a bit by massive earthquakes. in addition to coolness, it would let the opponent know that you have e.g. the armageddon spell if you use it.
the passages like above ground - undergound and monoliths should also have appropriate battle screens.
having large 3d battlegrounds might be nice, but would't it be more appropriate for modern warfare? i have heard that in the ancient times the generals chose two hills with a nice view to the battlefield and let the armies fight there, like marelt_ekiran said. but i have also heard that later the generals did start to participate in battles, at least in some cases. and a hero and a general might not be the same person, so things might get a little confusing unless the whole system is rearranged.
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
stargazer
Famous Hero
hero of order and life
|
|
posted April 14, 2003 04:25 PM |
|
|
And also maybe by the type of the battle feild a creature stack could randomly apper to attack both partys or their mortal enemy
____________
When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only Mortal for a little while
|
|
nasty
Known Hero
castor nebun si orb pe cinste
|
|
posted April 17, 2003 10:22 PM |
|
Edited By: nasty on 17 Apr 2003
|
i think the buildings should apear into the battlefield....when you are having a battle near a sawmill...a part of it should apear in the background or even on the battlefield making it more real.i know it;s difficult but think about it.Or if near the battle would be a creature dwelling...it should apear in the battlefield..maybe with some harmless beasts around it.
____________
You can trick me with food.Possesions mean nothing to a navajo.
|
|
stargazer
Famous Hero
hero of order and life
|
|
posted April 21, 2003 04:39 PM |
|
|
I was thinking about that too. and here are some ideas about that
1 if the battle is in front of a mine or sawmill the win would get extra benifits from it after combat or if your battling in front of a flaged dwelling if it is yours you can recrut for twice the normal cost. but these creatures would ether remain on the screan at the end of battle to join for greater glory or attack
____________
When we are young
Wandering the face of the Earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we're only Mortal for a little while
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted April 22, 2003 10:50 AM |
|
|
when you look at the town screen, you see the fortress and creature dwellings and other buildings around it. should town buildings appear on the siege battlefield? they would be empty as the creatures have gone to hide in the fort, of course, and it might be more honorable if the sieger attacked the fort than destroyed the empty dwellings (maybe more acceptable with chaos alignment). or maybe the main cost of the dwelling would be associated with the creatures, so that if the building is destroyed, the cost of rebuilding would be minor.
in any case it seems that town buildings might also appear on siege battlefields without the danger of getting destroyed every time. but should they?
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
Nasty
Known Hero
castor nebun si orb pe cinste
|
|
posted April 23, 2003 08:58 PM |
|
|
I think that creatures dwellings shouldnt apear in the siege battlefield unless they cannot be destroyed....because if they could be destroyed ...then the enemy could send small armies with siege weapons that would destroy them easily...so it;s not a very good ideea...
____________
You can trick me with food.Possesions mean nothing to a navajo.
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted April 24, 2003 09:50 AM |
|
|
or you could go with the thief and rob those dwellings. starts to sound like buildings could be built into the adventure map around the castle like neutral creature dwellings that you can flag in existing homms.
hmm.. if you are so much afraid of them getting destroyed, put the buildings into the bacground picture in the siege screen like in some homm games there's a nice background in the battle screens (forest, etc in the upper part of the screen).
========
ok, seriously, are the creature dwellings inside the fortification or not? and where should they be?
Moderator's note:This topic has been closed, as it refers to an older version of the game. To discuss Heroes 3, please go to Library Of Enlightenment, to discuss Heroes 4, please go to War Room Of Axeoth, to discuss Heroes 5, go to Temple Of Ashan.
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
|
|
