|
| Thread: A Chance to Balance Heroes | |
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
posted September 07, 2001 06:58 PM |
|
|
A Chance to Balance Heroes
One of the biggest complaints my friends and acquaintances have had in H3 was the need to have one main hero do the fighting and every other hero act as scouts, looters, and convoys. Narrowing the amount of artifacts a hero could use at one time didn't seem to make a difference. On top of that, players would wait until they could get one of the 'A' list heroes with a super stupid-powerful specialty. Now that specialties have been removed the second grievance won't factor at all. But what to do about the first...
A friend of mine suggested about two years ago that there should be some sort of way that your heroes can be 'paralyzed' for say-- a week. Random events and traps set on a map that could trigger a natural disaster won't be effective in the long run. But what about battle fatigue? Just as the heroes had to worry about spell points I think that heroes should have to worry about endurance, or battle fatigue.I'm not talking about the creatures themselves, just the heroes. Once their endurance is reached they must rest or suffer severe consequences for themselves and their troops. Now that Heroes gots to fight it makes perfect sense.
With my proposal a new secondary skill is created--stamina. (By the way-- 100% magic resistance is ridiculous--just as 15% expert resistance was in Homm3.) Stamina is something that would obviously be more available to the warriors and especially the barbarians.
There's the crux of my idea. And now onto little things. Does anyone else remember the first time they visited the Daemon cave in Homm2 with their big, bad, butch army only to be destroyed without a fight? I found that kind of huge risk and great reward to be incredible. I hope that the Heroes4 creators will bring something akin to that and the Sphinx back. Those were some of the things that made me feel that Homm2 was funner than 3. Not better, just funner.
_______________________
"Many will not like what I have to say, but few will doubt its validity."
The Gootch
____________
|
|
niteshade
Known Hero
|
|
posted September 07, 2001 07:29 PM |
|
|
I actually disagree that the demon cave and sphynx were so cool. I don't like having weither you win or lose based on the flip of a coin, especialy in multiplayer.
Having multiple heroes could be important in H3 if it was a big map. Then you couldn't get away with just one hero, at least not efficiently. And if you waited to get a hero with a good specialty on any but the most forgiving map, you would probably lose for wasting so much time. Certainly that would be suicidal in multiplayer.
The main thing though that will always encourage you to just use one hero is not the heroes, but the army. Having all your troops in one group will always be a major advantage tactically. So even if all heroes were equal you would still probably tend towards only using one of them unless you needed to split up to cover more ground.
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.
|
| |
|
|
