|
|
Zazu1
Adventuring Hero
Makes Sense
|
posted July 12, 2008 07:44 AM |
|
|
Quote:
One thing I very much like in heroes 5, is that every creature has unique abilities. But that only makes them unique in one aspect.
Abilities aside!
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 12, 2008 07:55 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Abilities aside!
No, abilities not aside, you can't remove a unit's abilities and just compare the looks because that is a patently false way of judging.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted July 12, 2008 08:03 AM |
|
|
I have nothing to add besides what MattII just said. 
(And note to the person who posted after me: No need to be that personal in the discussion, it does not really add anything constructive.)
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Zazu1
Adventuring Hero
Makes Sense
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 12:55 AM |
|
|
umm.. NO, this whole argument has been about what the creatures are, not what the creatures do.
Quote:
(And note to the person who posted after me: No need to be that personal in the discussion, it does not really add anything constructive.)Quote:
Whoa, I wish I saw it. Could you reveal the person who wrote after you, and maybe give a brief description of what he said? Kinda just really curious, especially if it was against me, or my side of the argument. If you don't wanna write it on these forums could u send me a message plz? I u can't, then whatever, I'm just really curious. The person who I thought it would be doesn't appear to have another QP deducted so I guess he wasn't him.
|
|
A5ado
Tavern Dweller
Master of Logic
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 05:59 AM |
|
Edited by A5ado at 06:30, 13 Jul 2008.
|
When Zazu1 said 'abilities aside' he didn't mean that they didn't matter. He just meant that in this discussion they don't come into play because we agree with having lots of variated abilites. Heroes 3 was good because of the variation of creatures, but lacked in the amount of special abilities. It makes the game better with the many unique abilites of all the creatures.
About the marksman and grand elf, I agree that you could say they are a repeat due to their abilites - but we all want varation in abilites. I just looked at them, and I think they look completely different. But even if you think they are a repeat, the important thing is that they are in different castles. We didn't say repeats like that were bad, just that we didn't want to see one castle of repeats. Surely you will agree that it would be astronomically worse for the marksman and grand elf to be in the same castle. And I don't mean that in the sense that they wouldn't make sense together - I mean that having two such similar creatures would not make a good line-up.
Also, I realize that the different dwarves play very different roles in combat which makes them sort of different. But what we are looking at with the variation does have to do with the lore and the overall make-up of the castle. They are both dwarves, which just makes them uninteresting (in my opinion of course). Lets say there was a demon dwarf in inferno, that would be a repeat but it would be cool and intersting and easily distinguishable. I would prefer that over them being in the same castle.
Cepheus, you aren't one of the people who I thought were picking and choosing, especially since you seem to be somewhere in the middle on this whole debate. I agree with your analysis of all the casltes (except inferno, but I don't need to go into that). About the "ahem. Page 12. . ." I'm not really sure what you mean, that quote by zazu1 one doesn't really relate to what I said in my quote. I said that we don't want a castle with dwarf ______ and dwarf ______ or elf _______ and elf ______. (Even if these aren't the names that would be used its the same idea.) So I don't see how that quote on page 12 relates?
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 07:59 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
(And note to the person who posted after me: No need to be that personal in the discussion, it does not really add anything constructive.)
Whoa, I wish I saw it. Could you reveal the person who wrote after you, and maybe give a brief description of what he said? Kinda just really curious, especially if it was against me, or my side of the argument.
No, I don't see any point in that. The comment didn't contribute anything constructive to the discussion, hence I deleted it. If things get really ugly, I will hand out penalties, but for now, the case is closed.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 08:12 AM |
|
|
Quote:
About the marksman and grand elf, I agree that you could say they are a repeat due to their abilites - but we all want varation in abilites. I just looked at them, and I think they look completely different. But even if you think they are a repeat, the important thing is that they are in different castles. We didn't say repeats like that were bad, just that we didn't want to see one castle of repeats. Surely you will agree that it would be astronomically worse for the marksman and grand elf to be in the same castle. And I don't mean that in the sense that they wouldn't make sense together - I mean that having two such similar creatures would not make a good line-up.
Also, I realize that the different dwarves play very different roles in combat which makes them sort of different. But what we are looking at with the variation does have to do with the lore and the overall make-up of the castle. They are both dwarves, which just makes them uninteresting (in my opinion of course). Lets say there was a demon dwarf in inferno, that would be a repeat but it would be cool and intersting and easily distinguishable. I would prefer that over them being in the same castle.
Good post, this one actually hits the nail pretty well with where our oppinion diverge. It is true that the Marksmen vs. Grandelf comparison varies from the Defender vs. Brawler comparison in that the two Dwarves are in the same castles whereas the others are not. Whether one likes that or not is, like you very truely say, a matter of personal oppinion.
The place where your reasoning seems somewhat inconsequent to me is when we come down to the Haven example: I don't see why Haven is good (we have a similar repeat here: Peasant and Squire, we even had the same repeat in Heroes 3: Pikeman and Crusader!) while the other towns are bad. I've seen the argument that "Haven has always been like that" tossed about a couple of times, but that's just a really poor argument to me - just because things are in a certain way, doesn't mean that's the best way.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Cepheus
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Far-flung Keeper
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 12:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Cepheus, you aren't one of the people who I thought were picking and choosing, especially since you seem to be somewhere in the middle on this whole debate.
Okay my apologies, I did sort of fill the criteria for your post right down to the Necropolis / Inferno debate (don't think you addressed it to anyone, plus I had addressed mine to you so I interpreted it as a response). Sorries. 
Quote:
About the "ahem. Page 12. . ." I'm not really sure what you mean, that quote by zazu1 one doesn't really relate to what I said in my quote.
Well you say you would not want a castle with dwarf {insert word}, while zazu1 who is part of "we" is complaining there about the opposite (i.e. minus "dwarf" in this example).
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 01:15 PM |
|
Edited by MattII at 13:17, 13 Jul 2008.
|
Quote:
The place where your reasoning seems somewhat inconsequent to me is when we come down to the Haven example: I don't see why Haven is good (we have a similar repeat here: Peasant and Squire, we even had the same repeat in Heroes 3: Pikeman and Crusader!) while the other towns are bad.
Agreed, and Zazu, Humans are perhaps the most mythical beings of all. We're the reason Perseus was chained to the rock, the reason Valhalla was created, the reason New Zealand is. If you remove humans most myths and legends wouldn't exist.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 01:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
umm.. NO, this whole argument has been about what the creatures are, not what the creatures do.
Well, it's the abilities that add to the gameplay, and it's what the "fun" factor is about. In fact, even a logical and good lineup can add (in my case) so like someone else said, if you like the Humans, you should like the others as well -- why should they be different? You have no argument there except that "it's always been that way" which doesn't say anything really. 
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 01:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Humans are perhaps the most mythical beings of all. We're the reason Perseus was chained to the rock, the reason Valhalla was created, the reason New Zealand is. If you remove humans most myths and legends wouldn't exist.
Sorry but that's false. A mythical creature DOESN'T exist today, and the humans do so the humans are NOT mythical creatures.
@Zazu/A5ado:
Your arguments are pretty weak:
First, when you make up an argument, you should NOT make any exceptions, yet you did with Haven ("Haven doesn't count!"). Second, when you say Haven has a theme (holy/medieval) that's just plain false. I mean, I can also say Sylvan in H5 has a nature/harmony theme, Dungeon a Dark theme (since Dark Elves are also dark), etc... The thing is, you want a THEME with DIFFERENT creatures, yet you accept Haven as an exception. Third, humans are not mythological creatures, and as I understand you want as many different mythological creatures in this game as possible. So where this argument leads is to the total elimination of humans, since they are not mythological creatures, and are also MANY ("REPEATS") in the Haven castle, not just one.
Sorry, I just can't understand you (those that want variety of creatures) and your arguments. The fact that you accept Haven and not the others is just unexplainable (at least with your current arguments). So you better come up with other arguments or delete the Haven castle (but you didn't seem to want this)
____________
|
|
a5ado
Tavern Dweller
Master of Logic
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 09:36 PM |
|
|
Asheera, I compeletely agree that the 'exception' of haven makes the theme argument weaker. Personally, I don't really like haven that much, and I have found that it is annoying to distinguish between the squire, peasant, pikeman, etc. Although, I don't think it should not be a part of heroes.
The difference between haven and the other castles is that humans are actually real. Because of this it is much harder to come up with creatuers that would make sense in that castle. I mean, what mythical beasts could you label 'holy' ? The griffins I think are a great addtion, but maybe there could be more beasts.
Also, since humans are real, it is a cool idea that the humans are standing against the hordes of creatures and beings. And about the theme thing, we are saying it has a holy pseudo-christian theme. There aren't many mythical creatures in christianity, but there are 7 levels of angels (not that I want an angel castle, but if maybe another kind of angel like a cherubim was worked in it would be cool). And sylvan has a forest/harmony theme, but since there are more creatures that could fit that theme, I'd rather see those then just more of the same.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 10:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Also, since humans are real, it is a cool idea that the humans are standing against the hordes of creatures and beings.
Not really, since like alcibiades said, it's not a "human vs everything else" game because we don't have only 2 factions. Why should ALL the other towns be different than a human town? In fact, I'm not saying they should be humanoid, but why not have the same reasonable relationships between lineup and culture?
Exceptions (like Haven) are always a good candidate for a flawed argument -- flawed arguments need exceptions to cover the holes 
|
|
a5ado
Tavern Dweller
Master of Logic
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 10:13 PM |
|
|
I know how you can see it as an exception, but I really don't think it is. Your side is not without its shaky exceptions, so don't try to make it seem like we have a flawed argument.
And truthfully, you may be right that Haven is a race castle and just has too many humans, in which case I think there should be less to make it more interesting. FYI, I don't play with haven for this reason.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 10:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
it's not a "human vs everything else" game because we don't have only 2 factions
No, it's not. But we could have several "themes" i.e. medieval humans and angels vs. early industrial humans with steam-powered machines (but no guns) vs. underground beasts vs. elves and forest creatures, etc. We can have towns with one race but with different themes, but we can't have towns with the same theme but with different races: i.e. a human Necropolis and an Elven Necropolis wouldn't work unless the theme differed.
It makes sense for Haven to be an exception, sort of. I mean, Elves can ally with forest animals and trees, Dark Elves with underground creatures, and so on, but Haven humans can't really ally with anybody except for Angels, and you wouldn't want a lineup with creatures like "Angel Minion", "Angel Archmage", and "Angel Archer" along with creatures like "Pikeman". Now, if it was a Forge-themed town, then humans could "ally" with their machines, but that sort of thing really isn't possible with Haven.
Quote:
Exceptions (like Haven) are always a good candidate for a flawed argument -- flawed arguments need exceptions to cover the holes
Is that a shot at me?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 10:40 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It makes sense for Haven to be an exception, sort of. I mean, Elves can ally with forest animals and trees, Dark Elves with underground creatures, and so on, but Haven humans can't really ally with anybody except for Angels, and you wouldn't want a lineup with creatures like "Angel Minion", "Angel Archmage", and "Angel Archer" along with creatures like "Pikeman". Now, if it was a Forge-themed town, then humans could "ally" with their machines, but that sort of thing really isn't possible with Haven.
Ally does not mean that it has to be in the same town! Allies happen between towns/empires/cities/whatever
Quote:
Quote:
Exceptions (like Haven) are always a good candidate for a flawed argument -- flawed arguments need exceptions to cover the holes
Is that a shot at me?
Why would it be? It was in general, you didn't even post before in this regard.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Geny
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted July 13, 2008 10:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
but Haven humans can't really ally with anybody except for Angels
Why not?
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 14, 2008 12:20 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Ally does not mean that it has to be in the same town!
Well, I mean in the sense "allied" in the sense that Haven humans are allied with griffins, and how Elves are allied with Unicorns, and so on.
Quote:
Why would it be?
In reference to our OSM debates, of course.
Quote:
Why not?
Except for Griffins, which Nival has gone to great pains to justify story-wise, and who are tamed, you can't really have allies for Haven humans that way. I mean, who can they ally with? Not creatures of the forest or desert. Not constructs. Not Undead. With whom, then?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Daystar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Back from the Dead
|
|
posted July 14, 2008 02:01 AM |
|
|
Angels? Air creatures?
____________
How exactly is luck a skill?
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 14, 2008 02:30 AM |
|
|
Humans are sons of Sylath and Angels from Elrath so why would Angels be air creatures?
They are just like dragons ( champions of elemental gods) except that they are not dragons ;P
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
