Expansion HOMM 5

[Mytical]

Well I am a big HoMM fan, I even faithfully played HoMMIV and all of its expansions. Today I actually finished the campain (because of work, and some issues with the game it took me this long). Sadly I have to agree that the storyline was very sub-par, and really had no suprises. The only interesting part was at the end when Isabell's eyes were glowing (which we all know what that was a precursor to).

Some of the things I missed. I believe firmly (though I am sure others disagree) that each 'race' should have Might type heroes and Magic type heroes (thus Might AND Magic). The map editor, of course. The storyline could have been much better, on a scale of 1-10 I would get it about a 3 maybe 4 (5 if you count the eyes glowing bit, just because it looked wicked). The units were fine, and I really didn't miss the old ones. I realize that it has to grow, expand, and change to gather more players. I do wish there were more Seer quests and such. Need a lot different artifacts, not just same old same old, or maybe a more random element to the ones it does have (When at the end of a scenario you have no less then 8 of 1 artifact...). Well there were quite a few things that need improved. At least it did get me considering about more quests, items, skills, ect which is a good thing. Even if the actual game I could go for weeks and not actually desire playing it (no other HoMM title has this distinction). The other titles I could not wait to go back and get a little farther, to beat the map, a few less hours of sleep would be ok....
Anyhow I would hope the expansion(s) address some of these issues. And something to consider, without impacting the story of Dark Messiah, how would the expansions go? I mean they would have to be AFTER the Dark Messiah or risk interfearing in the congruity. Anyhow, I'm out for now....peace.

[Paulus1]

You have no idea.I cannot even count the number of times I replayed starcraft campaign.Even though I know it by hard and probably can do it in three days now.And recently Ive replayed HIV half dead campaign.As for movies and books,it even goes further.Fightclub Ive watched at least five times.There are even better movies(most of them were made in serbia)that I watched dozens of times,and still will.

But replayability isnt the only thing that makes a game good.If the story is very good,it makes you want to play more,not quit at the middle and never return to it.

Sure,tastes differ,but griffin eternal sucks big time,no matter the taste.

IMO the story is not great by any means, but it's okay. That makes it at least on par with many of its predecessors, HIV Lysander Campaign and H3 Armageddons Blade just to name a few.

Stacks are a good model of real life,thats why they work(although some tweaking is still needed),but caster splitting is a bad model(and dont give me the "its fantasy,not real life" crap).In the end it doesnt balance out.Splitting your 100 druids into 50 50 stacks will almost double their damage.And neutral casters are almost imposible to win in the begining,while some even stronger units(colossi,treants),you can beat blindfolded.

Even though it's annoying and somewhat illogical, I tend to think it solves a problem - to keep mages and druids from being overpowered like genies in HIV.

[asandir]

good call mytical, that was constructive, and although i liked the glowing eyes, it was hardly enough to save the story IMO

[DaemianLucifer]

Even though it's annoying and somewhat illogical, I tend to think it solves a problem - to keep mages and druids from being overpowered like genies in HIV.

No it doesnt!The easy way to solve it would have been to simply reduce the damage per creature.This way large caster stacks arent overpowered,true,but small ones certanly are.Like I said,having 50 50 druids do almost double damage than a single 100 druid stack.And you dont find that overpowered?

[asandir]

i find it illogical ....

[Jolly Joker]

Even though it's annoying and somewhat illogical, I tend to think it solves a problem - to keep mages and druids from being overpowered like genies in HIV.

No it doesnt!The easy way to solve it would have been to simply reduce the damage per creature.This way large caster stacks arent overpowered,true,but small ones certanly are.Like I said,having 50 50 druids do almost double damage than a single 100 druid stack.And you dont find that overpowered?

It's as illogical as having a small stack taking up the same space than a big one... (and lots of illogical things more). I mean, one Griffin taking up four times mor space than a gazillion of Minotaurs? Is that logical? You can obviously break every stacks down into more stacks enabling you to block space to cover units - which makes 3 stacks of 1 Footman each ALOT more powerful (in combination with a couple Archers) than one stack of 3 Archers.
So what?

[ThunderTitan]

The only logic that should matter is balance logic. And having 2 stacks of 50 druids do way more dmg then 1 stack of 100 isn't very balanced. And you should never justify one thing that's wrong by showing another thing that wrong. 2 wrongs != 1 right.

[DaemianLucifer]

Like I said,stacks are a good model,but even it needs tweaking.I never said that stacks are perfect,but that are balanced very good.Though they could be improved.Casters now are not balanced at all.

[Jolly Joker]

I'm not justifying it. I'm just saying that logic - or alleged illogic - is no valid point in itself. The only logic that matters is the WORKING logic and this thing works just as well as other as illogical things.
Btw, repeating the same stuff over and over again doesn't make it better. So 2 stacks with 50 Druids each can do more damage than one stack with 100 each. SO WHAT? They are double as vulnerableas well and you'd need an extra stack if you wanted to guard them. LOTS of units are split in the course of the game, ESPECIALLY in the beginning, JUST FOR ONE PURPOSE: To make the army stronger, guarding stacks, kill-retaliation stacks, whatever. It doesn't lead to the split stacks doing more damage, but it leads to other stacks suffering less damage or none at all.
So where in hell is the darn difference?

[Gaidal Cain]

First thing, I hate truncated quotes, GC.

And I hate posts where lots of irrelevant stuff is attached and not replied to. Thus I snip away the parts I don't reply to.

The reason is that no story of the world will keep you playing the same story over and over again, no matter how good.

Yes, noone ever reads the same book over again

The bottom line here is, simple and easy: They story can be as good or bad as it gets, it won't make the game in the long run

Had the map editor been released when it should have been, that would have been true. Now the whole summer has passed, and campaigns should thus have been vital in keeping SP going.

It solves a problem, and there is no denying that.

Which is? That units are supposed to be balanced?

All the magic units are pretty important in the early stages, but get slowly more "regular" which is as it should be.

...as it shouldn't be. Anything else is crappy balance. Case in point: would you rather fight 10 mages using 3 angels or 100 mages using 30 angels?

H IV has stories, but unconnected, at least in the main game.

And? They're among the best stories I've read in any game I've seen. Much better than the connected but rather bland H5 stories.

[Jolly Joker]

GC, all I see here, is some inflexible and very abstract flag with the big word BALANCE on it, that you are carrying before you and waving it, almost like some doctrine no one ever asks about the why.
We all agree that it is pretty imbalanced when 1 Imp can use up the retaliation of 1000 Angels. No, I'm not trying to justify ANY imbalance with the fact that one is already there. I'm just saying that logic, balance or whatever else is no virtue in itself. The only important thing is the question whether a rule works or not, not whether some doctrine is fulfilled, that isn't fulfilled anyway. And the 1 Imp thing works and doesn't need to be fixed, even though it's imbalanced as hell and illogical as that.
And this here works as well.
Of course you could do it any other way. But Nival chose this way, and since it works there is no reason to go crazy about the fact that 2 stacks of 5 Druids will act differently than 1 of 10. Depending on the game situation you will get different results of effectivity with every kind of unit depending on the way you divide stacks or not). So I ask again. SO WHAT?
Which is all I have to say to this. Sorry.

[ThunderTitan]

Btw, repeating the same stuff over and over again doesn't make it better

No, but it might make you aswer our concerns head on.

So 2 stacks with 50 Druids each can do more damage than one stack with 100 each. SO WHAT? They are double as vulnerableas well and you'd need an extra stack if you wanted to guard them. LOTS of units are split in the course of the game, ESPECIALLY in the beginning, JUST FOR ONE PURPOSE: To make the army stronger, guarding stacks, kill-retaliation stacks, whatever. It doesn't lead to the split stacks doing more damage, but it leads to other stacks suffering less damage or none at all.
So where in hell is the darn difference?

Double as vulnarable? Since when? Sure they don't retaliate with as much force, but the enemy has to spend 2 turns to tackle both stack.

And the difference is that with all the others you don't get extra dmg as well as a tactical advantage. You minimise the losses by using certain tactics, not by getting uncaled for bonuses.

[DaemianLucifer]

I'm not justifying it. I'm just saying that logic - or alleged illogic - is no valid point in itself. The only logic that matters is the WORKING logic and this thing works just as well as other as illogical things.

No it doesnt work.Sure,its illogical for a single peasant to steal a retaliation from 100s of dragons,but this onedoesnt make you loose twice as many troops just because your opponent decided to split his stacks.

Btw, repeating the same stuff over and over again doesn't make it better. So 2 stacks with 50 Druids each can do more damage than one stack with 100 each. SO WHAT? They are double as vulnerableas well and you'd need an extra stack if you wanted to guard them. LOTS of units are split in the course of the game, ESPECIALLY in the beginning, JUST FOR ONE PURPOSE: To make the army stronger, guarding stacks, kill-retaliation stacks, whatever. It doesn't lead to the split stacks doing more damage, but it leads to other stacks suffering less damage or none at all.
So where in hell is the darn difference?

Wait,I dont understand you here.First you justify druids doing double damage because they are double vulnerable,then you say that stacks are being split to make them less vulnerable?

And its not just caster splitting thats wrong here.Theres too much luck in the game.The time I experienced week of festivals followed by plague I knew the game was too much based on luck.Not to mention fights in which a single lucky shoot meant the difference between loosing and winning flawlessly.

The thing is that most of these things were started being adressed to by 3DO,yet all the work they did here was simply overlooked by nival.

And the 1 Imp thing works and doesn't need to be fixed, even though it's imbalanced as hell and illogical as that.
And this here works as well.

Oh,I see.Dont fix it if it works.Sorry,but I dont buy it.Whenever you can improve something,do it.This one works,sure,but barely.And it doesn need improvement.

[ThunderTitan]

No it doesnt work.Sure,its illogical for a single peasant to steal a retaliation from 100s of dragons,but this onedoesnt make you loose twice as many troops just because your opponent decided to split his stacks.

You could always claim that's actualy just one dragon imbued witht he power of 100.

But then again you could also say that one peasant attacking from the left draws the attention of the 100 dragons from the guy that come from the right a few minutes after. Because frankly a few seconds is all you really need to be able to retaliate again in RL.

[DaemianLucifer]

But then again you could also say that one peasant attacking from the left draws the attention of the 100 dragons from the guy that come from the right a few minutes after. Because frankly a few seconds is all you really need to be able to retaliate again in RL.

Then again,one might point out that in real life no one would wait for its opponent to strike before they can retaliate.At least,no one sensible would do that.

[vhilhu]

but that caster splitting makes druids more important as ranged units later on. which i think is not so good, they were supposed to be casters.

anyway, i have always thought that it doesnt make sense too that non-magical (not lich or mage or titan) archers are able to kill more units than there are of them. i mean 1 arrow somehow flies through 10 imps?

[Paulus1]

The only logic that should matter is balance logic. And having 2 stacks of 50 druids do way more dmg then 1 stack of 100 isn't very balanced. And you should never justify one thing that's wrong by showing another thing that wrong. 2 wrongs != 1 right.

This trait was also very much present in your beloved HIV.

Have you ever split genies or water elementals to make the best of their spell casting abilities?? One genie/WE shouldn't be as effective at song of peace, morale, slow as 100, right?

[Meandor]

Finished reading this topic, now i understand why JJ recieved some negative comments in other thread about map editor.

IF there was an official announcement about an addon to be heard there, said addon would clearly be the best HoMM addon ever with lots of content, lots of surprises and some REAL killers no one here or elsewhere including myself would have imagined. smile

So they are probbably not working on it, but you heard somewhere that IF they would work on it and announce it then it would totaly rock!! Sorry but that looks stupid.

Okay, let's see. I don't think, story is an important element for a strategy game.

Welcome to the reality. Today, good story is a must for practicaly every serious game. And as GC said, H5 has some RPG elements, so story should be even more important.

balance: ghosts are maybe the coolest-looking creatures, but their special get so much on my nerves, its like 100% depending on luck whether you win or lose.

It`s good thing that you don`t have to use them while playing necro.

When it counts, you don't have a free slot AND the dividing is only interesting with very few of them 20 or 10 and 10 makes not much difference.

How come i won`t have free slot? For example i`m playing Sylvans. In normal situation i should rush for hunters and druids, then try to preserve them because they are main force of army- all others units are only fodder. Naturaly you`ll lose some of your fodder and when it will count it will be better to deploy 20 and 20 druids than 40 druids and 2 unicorns.

Hmm. Where's the story in H I-III campaigns? I mean, the STORY, not an explanation of why you are doing this or that.

oK... it looks like someone doesn`t really understand what story is, now i finally understood why some people like H5 story.

i think demons invading the world should NEVER EVER be the main storyline

Even more for strategy game.

And something to consider, without impacting the story of Dark Messiah, how would the expansions go? I mean they would have to be AFTER the Dark Messiah or risk interfearing in the congruity. Anyhow, I'm out for now....peace.

I don`t see a problem here, expansion can even go without campaign, or at some distant land which would have no impact on DM story, or even it could be prequel(like shadow of death).

LOTS of units are split in the course of the game, ESPECIALLY in the beginning, JUST FOR ONE PURPOSE: To make the army stronger, guarding stacks, kill-retaliation stacks, whatever. It doesn't lead to the split stacks doing more damage, but it leads to other stacks suffering less damage or none at all.
So where in hell is the darn difference?

Here comes your argument that you won`t/can`t do it when it counts. Splitting caster, most of the time, gives much more benefit than splitting any other stack.

Double as vulnarable? Since when? Sure they don't retaliate with as much force, but the enemy has to spend 2 turns to tackle both stack.

And 20 druids could get huge overhit, while if you had all 30 in one stack it might had killed all 30.

[ThunderTitan]

Then again,one might point out that in real life no one would wait for its opponent to strike before they can retaliate.At least,no one sensible would do that.

Damn your insidious praise of H4.

This trait was also very much present in your beloved HIV.

Just because i happen to mostly defend it against people that unjustly consider it The Devil doesn't mean i'm not aware of it's shortcomings, you might have noticed that if you weren't under the thrall of them blue orbs most of the time.

It also sucked in the previous games isn't a good excuse.

[DaemianLucifer]

This trait was also very much present in your beloved HIV.

Have you ever split genies or water elementals to make the best of their spell casting abilities?? One genie/WE shouldn't be as effective at song of peace, morale, slow as 100, right?

So?The fact that I like HIV the most doesnt mean I dont hate its imbalances and lack of AI.I even said quite a few times that these features need fixing.And Im glad equi team is working on it.They did make some of the spells become mass after a certain number of creatures is reached,so splitting casters is not always a good idea.

And thank you for bringing up one more imbalance.It seems that shadow matriarchs are most effectevie when deployed 1,1,1...,others,because the single creature stacks can slow your enemy/boost you while the big stack shoots.

Damn your insidious praise of H4.

I didnt do it in a long time,so I simply had to now