Heroes VI Wishlist And Engine Poll

The new Heroes games produced by Ubisoft. Please specify which game you are referring to in your post.

Moderator: Moderators

Do you think Heroes 6 should use the same engine as 5?

Yes. But give graphics a tweak. More Factions plz!
37
61%
No. Game looks bad enough. Upgrade time baby!
24
39%
 
Total votes: 61

User avatar
RommeL_666
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 92
Joined: 11 May 2006
Location: Dark side of the moon...

Postby RommeL_666 » Dec 19 2007, 9:54

Dacarnix_ wrote:Personally, I'd rather see broader variety in creature abilities than simply see more creatures. I'd also like to see some more faction flavor in how things play out. Certain creatures are very flavorful while others are just kind of bland. From a practical standpoint, really how different are a Scout and an Archer? A Horned Demon and a Zombie? Even a Green Dragon and Shadow Dragon? I'm not saying that every single Dungeon creature should have poison or invisibility, just that the themes and the feel of some factions are much stronger than others.


Agree..
I think that main problem is not bringing the new factions,but improving the existing ones. To me the new upgrades looks too much foolish,and their are not so diffrent then existing ones.The choice between upgrades that are available are too easy(in 90% of the cases).But bring something harder to choose from,like when I had in Heroes 4 the choice between Nightmare and efreeti,or griffin and unicorn,thunderbirds and bahemots...
So conclusion,keep the graphic but adjust the game a bit more better.

p.s. Pixie has large hands too,she could kill an elefant with them.
"There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people"

jeff wrote:Me to, I usually hire the two best looking female heroes. Ok a bit of a sexist, but if I am going to stare a pictures all day, I might as well enjoy the view. :devious:

User avatar
P0i50Z
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 18
Joined: 15 Dec 2007

Postby P0i50Z » Dec 19 2007, 11:57

I would like to see more factions and improved existing ones.That's what this game needs, in my opinion.The graphic it's just fine.Improvement means higher sistem requirements and there are barely a few on CH that'll have a necesairlly computer.I'm fine with the graphics, but I'll definetly want to see the Swamp faction with Basilisks as lvl 7s, some Nagas, Medusas, Gorgons, Lizard Warriors and all that stuff (each one with 2 upgrades to choose from).Also I think the Nomad faction whould be a great idea, posesing the Nomad itself, the Behemoth as tier 7 and other creatures related to it.Some modifications should be made to introduce the Effret in the Inferno faction.Some modifications should also be made in factions such as Dungeon (they're lvl 6 sucks if you ask me-something mightier would be welcome and also the BD is very small compared to the G one) and also the Fortress (just too many dwarfs) and maybe in all of them.Anyways, my opinion is that there should be more modifications on the factions, creatures (abilities, statisctics...), balance and all that stuff.I would be very pleased to see 10 factions, each with a very good balance.Imagine that...

User avatar
Muszka
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 2568
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Nowhereland

Postby Muszka » Dec 19 2007, 12:04

klaymen wrote:
Muszka wrote:Heroes III SoD had 8 factions, with the possibility for a nineth, and that was shown in WoG. And one more faction, is comeing in the new WoG, and I'm sure fans could create at least two more.


SoD had 9 factions - Castle, Rampart, Towers, Stronghold, Inferno, Necropolis, Fortress, Dungeon and imba Conflux

Wow. I wonder what was in my mind when I wrote that?
"Rage against the system, the system, what kills the human spirit."

User avatar
Avalon-Eternal
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 64
Joined: 01 Dec 2006

Postby Avalon-Eternal » Dec 19 2007, 16:52

Klaymen: Your example is quite valid, unless you consider that I said if they were as good as the eight we have now (However they may reach that point, and whatever creatures and ideas are used) And I think 12 would be a decent number. Anymore and problems would arise I believe.


Some good faction ideas! Whoop!

About the Nagas, the only evidenced to my knowledge for them as a team is the temple pict in Hammers of Fate, and maybe that was a barbarian temple. Who knows. Anyway, the reason I mentioned them is because it seems like whenever the "new faction" guessing game comes around, Nagas are strangely high on the list. Plus they'd fit in with swamp.

I'm going to post some more detailed wishes for 6 when I got the time, so I hope to see some of yours! [/quote]

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23263
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Dec 19 2007, 20:33

Dacarnix_ wrote:From a game-play standpoint, once you reach a certain point, the creatures become cookie cutters of each other with barely-noticeable differences. I'm not saying that any particular number of factions is good or bad, but I think that Darmani's point about 500 factions is just an extreme case to showcase the issue with flooding a game with "different" creatures that really aren't so different.


Not if you actually use your imagination instead of just copy/paste abilities from D&D... :tongue:

But really, if they lower the lvls for each town back to 6 and really spend time on each creatures abilities 9-10 towns can be done pretty well. If they could make all those skills why not creature abilities? (bring back First Strike pls).
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
MistWeaver
Wraith
Wraith
Posts: 1277
Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Location: Citadel of Frosts

Postby MistWeaver » Dec 19 2007, 21:36

. one that doesn't eat so many resources for so little.


Precisely. Also I would like to have epic perception of the strategy map back (pre-H5). So it wont look like a ride in the park again.

User avatar
Geo
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 8
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Location: Bergen, Norway

Postby Geo » Dec 20 2007, 16:18

I completely agree on diversifying the alternate upgrades. First of all to try and seperate one upgr. from the other through their looks. Some of the current alternates look far to similar to one another. Secondly to diversify the upgrades by way of their skills and stats.

I think the idea with alternate upgrades is a good one, and through a proper diversification of the upgrades it might be possible to strike a balance between the system of HIV/HIII&V. This would allow the player to choose many different strategies every time playing. The two upgrades to the skeleton is a good example of this, where with one upgr. you get a shooter, and with the other you get a warrior. Similarly, an alternate upgr. to the zombie could for instance be a spellcaster. This might not be a good upgr. (haven't given it much thought), but you get my point.

In addition I also agree on making the different factions feel more seperate from the others. I think Stronghold is one of the best in this matter, whereby you are not (almost) allowed to use any magic. I should like Nival to really think about what characterises every single faction, what defines them, and then how to employ this in the game. While not giving any particularly thought-through examples, I could for instance have liked to see the Sylvan faction more tied to the environment (both for good and bad), in that external surroundings on the battlefield might be used to their (dis)advantage. In diversifying the factions to a greater extent, changing troop-skills to reflect this would be an effective measure. By this I am thinking of for instance making more dark elf spell casters. Why do they only have one, when for instance Haven has two...?

As for graphics I think HV is a better starting point than going back to the drawing board with the game. I would like a more realistic take on graphics though, and not this rather cartoonish Warhammer-look. I also think HIV was a lot better on different-looking landscapes. With the better lighting effects in HV (as in TotE's Arantir campaign where conquered lands become dark and moody) and more varied landscapes, HVI would have a good starting point on landscapes. I would also like to see them employ/consult a geographer or geologist concerning landforms and the like. You might think this inconsequential, but portraying landforms and landscapes in a realistic manner actually does improve a game's looks quite drastically. On that same note, I should mention that fantastically looking landscapes should also have its place in the game.

Concerning 3d/2d I always play with an overhead view, so for me 3d is not important. In HV it detracts from the overall experience. The underground is hopeless. Updated graphics is fine, but don't make them "glorious" 3d so it "looks good" in trailers. 3d is not needed in HoMM in my opinion, and it is absolutely possible to create beautiul graphics without making a 3d-game trying to look good.

The battlefield should be enlarged. As it is today, it is far too easy to reach the enemy. It could at least be twice as large, or better yet, it could vary depending on location (sort of like in HV between siege and ordinary battle). A larger battlefield would also in my opinion lead to more varied tactics, and might give slow units a boost to effectiveness as opposed to today where speed is king.

A major point for me personally, and one which I have also missed in Heroes-games, is a world map. I dearly miss the ability to see where the different lands and regions are positioned in relation to one another, and where I am on any given scenario in relation to the world in general. I think this would add greatly to the coherency of the game.

But I think TotE was for me the HV I had hoped for (at least partially). I know I will always be dissatisfied with something no matter how good the next game is, but TotE fixed most of my issues with HV. The story still seems like a thirteen-year-old wrote it after having read his first fantasy novel, and character depth is non-existing. The original HIV had at least to a certain extent fair enough stories and characters. For a game wanting to create a coherent world with characters intertwining and interacting through the story, a good story with good characters is alfa and omega. Withouth it, it becomes HV, where you skip all cutscenes in sheer embarassment. But gameplay-wise TotE delivered in my book, poor adventure-AI notwithstanding.

Nival has a good starting-point for HVI, but hopefully they focus on delivering an excellent game gameplay-wise and let graphics take a back seat this time. It's christmas, so I allow myself to wish for the impossible :)

PS! Hire a native english-speaking person to write dialogue and everything else, please...

PPS! I would love a water-faction and waterbased units like HIV's Sea Monster and Mermaids.

User avatar
Metal Wolf
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 103
Joined: 13 Jun 2006

Postby Metal Wolf » Dec 23 2007, 13:20

Avalon-Eternal wrote:
Keep the same engine. Just my opinion, but I rather have the same thing, with more content. Now that Heroes 5 is patched and exp'ed, general opinion seems to favor it as a whole. Why waste a year of labor on a new engine?


Agree... I am, unlike many other players, not bothered at all by rotating the camera from time to time...its kind of nice, actually - Homm is a whole new world, I like not only to play it, but also just watch it and enjoy the landscapes (which are great in H5, imo, and dont need an upgrade).

The Only thing is - can the old engine handle various adjustments and many new objects? If indeed so, then excellent.

Avalon-Eternal wrote:Ice team would be a nice new addition as well. With yetis and boars and ice giants. :D



Thats a really good idea. Maybe not an extremely original one, but I havent heard it before actually. This could be a great comeback for the boars, while the Yetis and the Ice Giants can fit really well into the HOMM universe imo. That reminds me a lot of Icewind Dale - maybe some ice salamanders, yuan-ti and some winter-lovin'-club-holdin' female clerics could join the fold as well...

As for some new Ideas of mine:

Castles:
- I strongly hope that we will be able to see creatures roaming at, and near, their dwellings - like in H1 (or promotional wallpaper for the academy in H5) . While it didnt work out so well in H1, with the modern technology it can be done. That will surely make the castles look much more lively and less static.
- The castles look good in H5, but eventually you stop looking at them an use the menues only. In order to make it a bit more interactive, I suggest that whenever you click on one of the buttons (marketplace, hiring creatures, etc.), The camera will quickly fly to that building/dwelling in the castle.

Battlefield:
- I hope to see different terrains on the battlefield, which will effect on creatures movement/statistics - like mud, shallow water streams, etc.
- I'd like to see the a battlefield which is not as flat as a wooden board, but a one that has small barrows and pits (which may also slightly effect on stats of creatures).
- While it is implemented in H5 to some extent, I would like to see even more objects from the adventure map, which are placed near the area where the fight takes place, to be seen at the background of the battlefield - shrines,nearby castles/dwellings etc.. Maybe if a battle takes place very close to a portal - the whole battlefield will be surrounded by swirling columns and glowing lights.

Adventure map:
- It would be great to have different weather from time to time... A rainy day may bring a totally new aspect in terms of playing atmosphere, and greatly add to it. (That can also be implemented at the battlefield).
-As for the ares which werent explored yet - I think something better than just total blackness could be used... like blue skies (again, looked good at the promotional pics) or if thats still hard to implement then maybe just darkness filled with stars, like in H2.
- The Sea : Im not the first one to say it - but one of the only few advantages H4 had was the interesting sea travelling, filled with creatures that roamed exclusively at sea. Why not adding pirates to the game? Not only in the H4 aspect, but ones which will be able to travel short distances and make life a bit tougher for the player? (Im against independently travelling neutrals, the pirates would be an exception).
I addition, the sea texture is, like the battlefield's texture, too flat. I want to see it sway and move, like a real huge mass of water even when its calm (like In LOTR:BFME II).

Spells:
While the spell system in H5 is excellent (especially after some of the patches came out), I'd like to see more adventure-map spells:
Seems weird that the insanely strong magic-wielding heroes can cause so much havoc on the battlefield, but can do nothing outside of it, besides the typical old summon boat/summon creatures/teleport to town. Fot a start, the "haunt mine" spell from H2 and the spell that slows down enemy hero movement from H4 could be brought back.
And why not make an adventure-map spell that causes a wave barrier/tsunami (doesnt deal any damage, just prevents from passing through a few tiles) that will hold for only one day, but will give the player some advantage over an enemy which tries to hunt him down at sea?

Balance:
imo every creature, especially low-lvl creatures, should have more HP per the damage it deals... would make battles longer, shooters less dominant, and will cause less situations in which a stack kills an equally large other stack - which is only one or two tiers lower than the attacking one - in just one hit (shouldnt be that way imo). That will also make low-lvl tier creatures more valuable.

Soundtrack:
Maybe its just nostalgia, but imo the music from H2 was far better then at any other Heroes title. Each terrain and every castle had its own mood.

OK, I think that enough for now!

User avatar
Bahototh
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 45
Joined: 06 Oct 2006

Wishes and what not

Postby Bahototh » Dec 23 2007, 15:35

I actually like being given a new faction or two with add-ons, so for me the factions could be 6-8 from the start. But as many have said, I'd like a bit more theme-based factions.

Also: I can't really pinpoint why, but in H2-3, the feeling of travelling on the map was much more fun. In H5 I don't have the same feeling, even if you go from one end to the other(lots of turns) , it seems like a short stroll...
Anyone else have a clue what I mean...?

There was something special about the 2d graphics of old.

HOMMV_N00B
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 55
Joined: 22 Dec 2007

Postby HOMMV_N00B » Dec 23 2007, 18:47

This is a game that takes place in a fantasy world. How can it be hard to imagine new creatures? And why make completely new ones? We have one angel (with 2 upgrades). Create a dark angel (mabe not very creative, but very flavourful)
and am I the only one who thanks that the angel doesn't fit in the faction it is now. It's a human only faction, until tier 7...

Or maybe creature's that improve a certain spell. And Ice creature that improves ice bolt etc.

And you guy’s are talking about the balance thing. Unbalanced factions aren’t necessarily a bad thing. When I play it, I also think the faction are way to similar. Why? Exactly because of the whole balance thing. Making them unbalanced can improve this. The problem is that it’s a lot harder to do this than it is to make similar (balanced) looking one’s.

User avatar
The Mad Dragon
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 2179
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Location: Chatham, Ontario, Canada

Postby The Mad Dragon » Dec 23 2007, 19:30

The problem with unbalanced factions is that if a faction is too weak, no one will play the faction. A lot of people tend to power play and will go for the more powerful faction. That isn't at all right. Now, factions are similar, but balance is required for each faction so then all factions have an equal chance of being played and winning.

User avatar
Alamar
Golem
Golem
Posts: 605
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Re: Wishes and what not

Postby Alamar » Dec 23 2007, 19:44

Bahototh wrote:I actually like being given a new faction or two with add-ons, so for me the factions could be 6-8 from the start. But as many have said, I'd like a bit more theme-based factions.

Also: I can't really pinpoint why, but in H2-3, the feeling of travelling on the map was much more fun. In H5 I don't have the same feeling, even if you go from one end to the other(lots of turns) , it seems like a short stroll...
Anyone else have a clue what I mean...?

There was something special about the 2d graphics of old.


I know exactly what you mean. H2 && H3 battles felt like they took place across a country or continent. Even the super large maps of H5 make things seem like you're battling in Jones County, Rhode Island.

I like many of the 3d elements but the size of individual trees and things of that nature make a lot of the maps feel like they have a lot smaller scale. For me it hurts the immersion.

User avatar
Darmani
Blood Fury
Blood Fury
Posts: 468
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA

Postby Darmani » Dec 23 2007, 21:02

It seems that I was a little too vague on how 500 factions, no matter how great they are, would still be bad, so I should pipe in:

It might be incredibly difficult and taxing, but I'm sure that it is somehow possible to find 500 themes and 3500 unique creatures to create 500 great factions. With some decades of playtesting, it will be possible to balance them.

Nevertheless, even if 500 excellent, balanced factions were created, there is still a problem intrinsic to bloat: learning curve.

Right now, I can recite the stats of quite a few of the creatures in H2 off the top of my head. I'd probably be able to do that to a lesser extent with H3 if I played it more, but I'm at least still able to recite the special abilities of many creatures.

If there were 500 factions however, you'd probably not be able to do even that. While 6 factions means 36 possible matchups between factions and 10 factions means 100 possible matchups, 500 factions means 250,000 possible matchups. Let's not even get started with potential army matchups. At that level, not even the most dedicated powergamer would be able to know the game by heart. Of course, you wouldn't have to - there would doubtless be plenty of ingame documentation. Unfortunately, that wouldn't quite do it.

When I fight a neutral or a faction, I am drawing upon my knowledge of countless previous matchups of this type to enable me to quickly adapt and make the best decisions. With less factions, it is quite possible to know the ins and outs of every single one. No amount of pouring over manuals can replace that.

Of course, in H3 it is not quite as necessary to know the ins and outs of a particular faction to play it or against it well. But that's because they're not varied as much; for example, every tier 1 creature is comparable in cost and strength to every other tier 1, and the same for most of the other tiers. In practice, it will be impossible to make 500 playable factions without making them too similar, in which case I'd rather be stuck with 10 or less.

imo every creature, especially low-lvl creatures, should have more HP per the damage it deals... would make battles longer, shooters less dominant, and will cause less situations in which a stack kills an equally large other stack - which is only one or two tiers lower than the attacking one - in just one hit (shouldnt be that way imo). That will also make low-lvl tier creatures more valuable.


In my opinion, this is just about the worst thing you can do to a Heroes game while still having it be a Heroes game.

In every Heroes game except H4, the attacker has first strike. This means that for many creatures, there is quite an emphasis on making sure they don't get attacked first. For example, in H2, a Crusader deals more damage than a Titan, yet has a fifth the HP. 15 Skeletons could easily do more damage than a Bone Dragon, yet again they have a much lower HP.

It seems that most players like different factions having different feels, but this suggestion would completely destroy that.

User avatar
Metal Wolf
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 103
Joined: 13 Jun 2006

Postby Metal Wolf » Dec 23 2007, 22:32

Darmani wrote:
imo every creature, especially low-lvl creatures, should have more HP per the damage it deals... would make battles longer, shooters less dominant, and will cause less situations in which a stack kills an equally large other stack - which is only one or two tiers lower than the attacking one - in just one hit (shouldnt be that way imo). That will also make low-lvl tier creatures more valuable.


In my opinion, this is just about the worst thing you can do to a Heroes game while still having it be a Heroes game.

In every Heroes game except H4, the attacker has first strike. This means that for many creatures, there is quite an emphasis on making sure they don't get attacked first. For example, in H2, a Crusader deals more damage than a Titan, yet has a fifth the HP. 15 Skeletons could easily do more damage than a Bone Dragon, yet again they have a much lower HP.


Thats quite the opposite, my friend... First of all, the examples you've mentioned are far from being correct:
** Crusader deals 10-20 dmg , while Titan deals 20-30. Even if you assume that the second strike of the crusader will deal the same dmg as the first one (which I seriously doubt, since due to its low durability some Crusaders will likely to die after the enemy's retaliation {assuming we're dealing with real battles and not petty mine conquering} and hence the second strike will be dealt by a smaller force) - still, The titan has 15 attack rate while the crusader only 11 (in H2 att./def. rates are highly important, since every point of attack higher than the enemy's defence grants the attacker 10% addition to dmg [and not 5%, like in H3&4]). And so, as you can see, The Titan has an overall higher dmg.
** 15 skeletons will deal approx. 30-45 dmg (one deals 2-3 dmg) while Bone Dragon deals 25-45 dmg. Add to it the aforementioned attack factor (11 compared to 4) and you will see that not only that 15 skeletons could NOT "easily do more damage than a Bone Dragon", but quite the opposite - it is the Bone Dragon who will deal A LOT more dmg than the skeletons.

Besides, the 1st tier creatures of H2 are an exception since they are by far weaker than 2nd tier ,compared to 2nd tier than 3rd tier etc. Thas is, since in H2 there were only 5 slots in a Hero's army - so 1st tier creatures werent meant to participate in battles as soon as you had 6th tier creatures.

The funny thing is, my intention by posting that was to BRING BACK THE MODEL OF H2 (besides the 1st tier thingy) , the one exactly you've used to counter my suggestion.
Take a look:
Vampire Lord in H2 had 35 hp and 5-7 dmg.
Vampire Lord in H5 has 35 hp and 7-11 dmg.

Steel Golem in H2 had 35 hp and 4-5 dmg.
Steel Golem in H5 has 24 hp and 5-7 dmg.

There are many other examples... Sure some of them wouldnt be accurate, since H2 had 6 tiers and H5 has 7, and of course creatures were'nt meant to maintain exactly the same power compared to other creatures throughout the series, and despite that - the tendency of things can be seen: creatures have less hp and deal more dmg as the series progress.

Now why did I bring all this tiresome info? Because, as I've mentioned earlier, in H2 a creature of - say,5th tier - couldnt kill a creature of 3rd tier in one hit, a fact that made battles longer and more interesting. Shooters were less dominant and relatively low lvl creatures were really valuable. It created a situation in which one, when short in cash, wouldnt blindly choose 5th tier creatue over 2nd tier, as it has been since H3 and until today. Gladly, unlike in H3, H5 largely compensates it by neat unique skills and by a cheap cost of low lvl creatures per what you get... And nonetheless, H2 model was the best imo.

p.s. I think that some of my other ideas are much more worthy of attention than this one! :)

User avatar
Darmani
Blood Fury
Blood Fury
Posts: 468
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA

Postby Darmani » Dec 24 2007, 1:15

I fear that if I don't make this post right, it will lead to a major off-topic squabble. So, I'll do my best.

You do make a point about the Crusader vs. Titan. However, the double attack yet another thing that adds variance - it adds a strong incentive to attempt o soak up the retaliation with something less valuable.

And, of course, remember that there is a maximum bonus to attack of 100%, meaning that, using a hero with decent Attack against non Tier 6s, the Crusaders will likely get the same bonus as the Titans - the maximum ones. With a strong might hero, it may be at least partially the same with the Skeletons vs. Bone Dragons (e.g.: Skeletons getting 70% vs. the Bone Dragons getting 100%). Replace 15 skeletons with 20 skeletons, and it's the same point.

That's completely beside the point however. What I was attacking was the statement "A creature's hit points should be roughly proportional to its damage," which is how I read the quote "imo every creature, especially low-lvl creatures, should have more HP per the damage it deal." A Titan has nearly 5 times the HP of a Crusader, yet it certainly doesn't deal 5 times the damage. If I have misread this, then perhaps you could clarify yourself?

Besides, the 1st tier creatures of H2 are an exception since they are by far weaker than 2nd tier ,compared to 2nd tier than 3rd tier etc. Thas is, since in H2 there were only 5 slots in a Hero's army - so 1st tier creatures werent meant to participate in battles as soon as you had 6th tier creatures.


Actually, the phenomenon I brought up - that, in H2, the damage dealt by a creature has little to do with its HP, makes that false. For example, Sprites, in addition to being flyers, have a much higher damage to HP ratio than Dwarves, meaning that I routinely choose to leave the latter behind. Yet, since they're so fragile for how much damage they deal, I have to be especially careful at making sure they hit without being hit. Similar things happen for Skeletons versus Zombies and Mummies and Halflings versus Boars.

Take a look:
Vampire Lord in H2 had 35 hp and 5-7 dmg.
Vampire Lord in H5 has 35 hp and 7-11 dmg.

Steel Golem in H2 had 35 hp and 4-5 dmg.
Steel Golem in H5 has 24 hp and 5-7 dmg.


I'm sorry, but I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make. The two H2 creatures you brought up have the same HP, yet one does much more damage than the other. The two HV creatures you brought up each have approximately a 1:5 HP:min damage ratio. The H2 system certainly doesn't seem to be exemplary of "every creature...should have more HP per the damage it deal." Again, am I misunderstanding you?

I must agree with you on the rest of your post about how tiers were mostly closer together and more useful in H2, but I have no idea why you brought that up.

I think that some of my other ideas are much more worthy of attention than this one!


This is the only one I had a problem with. ;) Most of your other ideas I'd rank as mildly interesting to highly intriguing (I like the tsunami spell idea :)). None of those were demanding comment, however.

User avatar
Metal Wolf
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 103
Joined: 13 Jun 2006

Postby Metal Wolf » Dec 24 2007, 10:40

Yeah, I'm afraid we're getting far away from the topic, but nonetheless I'd like to clear myself:

Darmani wrote:...
And, of course, remember that there is a maximum bonus to attack of 100%, meaning that, using a hero with decent Attack against non Tier 6s, the Crusaders will likely get the same bonus as the Titans - the maximum ones. With a strong might hero, it may be at least partially the same with the Skeletons vs. Bone Dragons (e.g.: Skeletons getting 70% vs. the Bone Dragons getting 100%). Replace 15 skeletons with 20 skeletons, and it's the same point.


Again, thats not how it works in H2 (yes, I'm a freak of H2!) - since the max. addition to dmg is not limited to 100%... Meaning that, for example, if a Crusader will attack a Wolf (which has a def. rate of 2) he will have a 90% addition to his dmg output, and if a Titan will attack it - he will have a 130% (!) addition to his dmg output. Same goes for bonuses recieved due to a high attack skill of a commanding Hero, and same goes for the example of Skellies compared to Bone Dragons.

But, as both you and I mentioned before, thats not the main point.

As for the entire rest of your post, yes, I'm afraid there was indeed a misunderstanding. By all means, I dont want to see a Heroes game where there are stronger and weaker creatures, but all of them deal would have an approx. the same ratio between (their own) dmg and hp (if that's indeed what you've though I meant).... Of course I do want to see versatility, where certain creatures do more dmg than others but are more vulnerable, faster/slower, etc.

What I did mean is - that in my vision, things should be more like in H2 - meaning that, again, (I'll try put in a simpler way) - each and every creature will deal less dmg. thats all. The examples I've brought up demonstrate exactly that point: In H2, creatures in same tiers as in H5 had the same (or even more) hp, but dealt less dmg. The outcome? mentioned in previous posts.

Im not suggesting anything new, I just prefer to use the H2 model in this case.

Darmani wrote:
I think that some of my other ideas are much more worthy of attention than this one!


This is the only one I had a problem with. ;) Most of your other ideas I'd rank as mildly interesting to highly intriguing (I like the tsunami spell idea :)). None of those were demanding comment, however.


Thanx! :)

HOMMV_N00B
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 55
Joined: 22 Dec 2007

Postby HOMMV_N00B » Dec 24 2007, 13:17

The Mad Dragon wrote:The problem with unbalanced factions is that if a faction is too weak, no one will play the faction. A lot of people tend to power play and will go for the more powerful faction. That isn't at all right. Now, factions are similar, but balance is required for each faction so then all factions have an equal chance of being played and winning.


I don't mean you have to make unbalanced factions on purpose. I mean that you have to meak them less simulair. A consecance of that is that's there's a change that their will be some unblanced factions. For those who have played starcraft or rise of legends. Those games have very different factions.
This makes the game a lot more fun to play, because you have the feeling you're really playing with different factions, instead of the same one that's changed a bit.

User avatar
The Mad Dragon
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 2179
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Location: Chatham, Ontario, Canada

Postby The Mad Dragon » Dec 24 2007, 23:05

Yes, Starcraft has different factions. However, there are LESS factions. Only 3. It makes balancing easier. With a game like HoMM, since there's more factions, balancing becomes harder since there's more factors to take in.

HOMMV_N00B
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 55
Joined: 22 Dec 2007

Postby HOMMV_N00B » Dec 25 2007, 9:56

I agree that's harder to pull off, but I think that it should be possible. Since that's the only thing they have to do.

User avatar
Bahototh
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 45
Joined: 06 Oct 2006

rants...

Postby Bahototh » Dec 27 2007, 1:07

I remembered something I've wanted since maybe H3; More interactive stuff on the adventure map. I don't mean buildings, but for example moving characters. An example would be trading wagons, merchants selling stuff, armies for hire and such...

these could appear once a month, or something like that. That way it would be special and perhaps add a little excitement. Something to keep the adventure map interesting throughout the game.

Reactions?


Return to “Heroes V-VI”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests