|
| Thread: Game Mechanics Changes |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
posted September 11, 2008 06:26 PM |
|
|
No, I think the idea is fine - actually, I suggested something similar myself once - minus the exponential thing. 
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 11, 2008 06:43 PM |
|
|
Wow I didn't know someone else had this idea
Well, in your thread it's a great system
Only thing I would like is to be like mine regarding the each-tile-closer-thing. That means, there has to be a formula with the Range property and the Distance, so that each tile you get farther away, the damage will be modified. Of course, the exponential formula may not be best...
____________
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted September 11, 2008 08:28 PM |
|
|
Deffinitely, I think it can be included in a lot of different ways. Like you say, it can be a decrease for each tile beyond range (either fixed, -10 % per tile, or exponential) and one could add other features like max range and point-blank range.
On a related note to this discussion, albeit on a slightly different note than above, I have an old thread discussing the spell systematics - the focus of that one was mostly Light/Dark Magic, but you might find it interesting in this context - it's certainly something I would like to get back at discussing.
|
|
VokialBG
Honorable
Legendary Hero
First in line
|
|
posted September 11, 2008 08:34 PM |
|
|
imo...
About the spells, we just need different spells and abilities for every single hero class in the game...
____________
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 11, 2008 08:38 PM |
|
|
@Alc: The suggestions in that thread are excellent, I always wanted something like that
Only that I would calculate the effective size from stack power instead of weekly growth, because there may be stronger creatures than others (not to mention upgraded creatures!)
The Hit Points based one also is flawed because creatures with high HP will be considered "stronger" than others (like Treant vs Paladin  )
____________
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 11, 2008 10:39 PM |
|
|
Another innovative change to Luck this time
What I want to avoid with my system is that luck can happen to trigger ALL the time, since it's completely random (not even like misses, which are capped at 2 times in a row!). So even a Luck of 1 can trigger on all strikes, and even more than Luck 5! This is what I try to "balance". Of course, my system won't remove the "random" factor completely, it is LUCK after all
Complex Luck Mechanics
Every stack under Hero's command has "luck points". All creatures start with 10 luck points per Luck value (the luck property).
To score a lucky strike, the creature must pass a chance test of x%, where x is the luck points it currently has.
When the creature scores a Lucky strike, its Luck Points are reduced by 10. When the creature scores a normal, non-Lucky strike, its Luck Points are increased by the luck value (you know, the luck we have now)
Note that the luck points can get above 100 and below 0, but the chance will still be in the range 0% to 100%
If you're wondering from where I got that 10 number, it is because I think this is a "fair" number: because, when you have luck 1, for example, you start with 10 luck points. If you score a lucky strike immediately, then your points will be reduced to 0, and only after 10 non-lucky shots will your points be restored to 10%. That's logical, since fairly you have to score 1 lucky shot out of ten. It works with other Luck values as well. Take 5, for example. You start with 50 Lucky points. Then, if you score a lucky strike, they will be reduced to 40. It takes two non-lucky shots to gain a 50% chance again, and it's perfectly logical, since you have to score one in two shots lucky fairly.
With this system, if you would score FIVE times lucky shots with luck 5, you won't be able to score one immediately next, and the next shots will have a LOW chance to get lucky (5% per non-lucky shot increase), not to mention that scoring 5 shots lucky in a row will be a lot harder, because each time you score a lucky shot your chances get lower (so for the 5th shot to be lucky you'll have only a 10% chance)
At least it would provide more "balance" on lucky shots
The same with Morale, btw ^^
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 02:15 PM |
|
|
Hey now that's an awesome thinking Ash, I was always thinking of something similar 
It's a very fair system that will actually really hit on average, no more "I was very lucky" or "I was very unlucky" -- the only place where luck is random is WHICH hit actually is lucky. But with luck 1 now in your system you can't be overly lucky
It's a lot better than the stupid Ghost 3-misses-in-a-row 'solution' by Nival. This one is mathematically correct.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 02:19 PM |
|
|
Well, the Ghost 2 (yes, it has been changed) max misses-in-a-row is not very "bad", but it works well only because there's a fixed 50% chance...
____________
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 02:30 PM |
|
|
|
Wow that's very complex. Just to check I get it right, there's still a 10 % chance for each point for Luck to actually trigger, right?
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 02:32 PM |
|
|
Yes, in average. That's how it starts, BUT if it triggers too much (meaning, not a 10% average for Luck 1), the chances will get lower and lower... but then, if it triggers to less, the chances will increase.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 02:34 PM |
|
|
|
Think of it like this: you will get EXACTLY one lucky shot in 10 attacks if you have Luck 1 (10%), but where exactly (in what hit) is RANDOM. This means the luck is always on average, but randomly chosen.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 02:35 PM |
|
|
Not really exactly, since a 1% chance can still trigger, but it's more towards that path
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 02:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Not really exactly, since a 1% chance can still trigger, but it's more towards that path
But after that, you'll wait a LOOONG time for it to trigger again, since it'll have 0% chance of triggering
The system is perfect
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 10:46 PM |
|
|
Hmm, thinking more about this, that 10 magical number is not "fair" at all. For example, when having Luck 5, and the 50% chance triggers first shot, then your chances will be reduced to 40%. Then it will need TWO non-lucky shots to come to the original 50% chance. This is WRONG: it is not 1 out of 2 shots lucky, it's 1 out of three.
To fix this, that number won't be a fixed 10 anymore, but calculated as 10-Luck_Value. So, for Luck 1, you'll lose 9% chance for each lucky strike, and for Luck 5, you'll lose 5% chance... this is perfect.
Now, if you didn't understand it yet, Alc, I'll give some practical examples of how it works:
When you have Luck 1, you start with a 10% chance. Each lucky strike you score reduces your chances by 9%. Each non-lucky strike increases your chances by 1%. Note that these chances can go below 0, but it will still be considered as 0% (or above 100, but still considered as 100%)
When you have Luck 2, you start with a 20% chance. Each lucky strike you score reduces your chances by 8%. Each non-lucky strike increases your chances by 2%.
And so on...
Until you reach Luck 5. When you have Luck 5, you start with a 50% chance. Each lucky strike you score reduces your chances by 5%. Each non-lucky strike increases your chances by 5%.
I hope it's clear and understandable now
btw, I have some interesting ideas for Speed (and how attacking opponents works) as well - to get rid of the "stack of 1 peasant" abuse. I'll explain this tomorrow (it's late here now)
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 12, 2008 11:47 PM |
|
|
A thought somewhat related to the original idea: isn't it stupid that it takes so much more experience to level up from 39 to 40 than it does from 1 to 2, considering that the early levels matter much more than the late ones? (Unless you're going for the ultimate.) Maybe it'd be best to have some sort of flat thing - 1000 EXP for every level. Maybe it'd stop people from running around with over 9000 heroes.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted September 13, 2008 09:46 AM |
|
|
I think I get how the system works - I would like to do some proper statistical calculatios on how it actually affects your chance for a lucky hit, because I think it's actually more complex than you probably even appreciate.
That aside, however, I can't help but wonder: Do we really need this? I mean, is it really a serious issue in the game that an army with Luck 1 gets overly many lucky strikes - or overly few? I know sometimes it can be a pain that your enemy with Luck 1 seems to score good luck all the time, but is that actually the case - or is it just something we imagine? Personally, I don't think it's that much of a problem.
|
|
Warmonger
Promising
Legendary Hero
fallen artist
|
|
posted September 13, 2008 10:22 AM |
|
|
Quote:
isn't it stupid that it takes so much more experience to level up from 39 to 40 than it does from 1 to 2
Didn't you notice that high-level heroes with powerful armies are able to get way more experience in the lategame?
Of course current level curve is ridiculous, luckily we already have BAD's fast leveling mod which fixes that. Hopefully soon we'll be able to get higher levels just like in H3 or H4.
Quote:
the early levels matter much more than the late ones
Most likely because game does not support high-level heroes as it sucks deeply in basics. So Just think about LOGICAL system, not try to cure headache with decapitation.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 13, 2008 01:07 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That aside, however, I can't help but wonder: Do we really need this? I mean, is it really a serious issue in the game that an army with Luck 1 gets overly many lucky strikes - or overly few? I know sometimes it can be a pain that your enemy with Luck 1 seems to score good luck all the time, but is that actually the case - or is it just something we imagine? Personally, I don't think it's that much of a problem.
Well, it would be nice to make Luck a little more "balanced" don't you think?
I agree it's not such a big change, but isn't this sub-forum about innovative ideas that we'd like to see in the next Heroes, however small they are?
It is small, but then I ask the question: why not? It's not like it has downfalls. I mean, every step in the good direction, however small it is, is a good idea for the next heroes, isn't it?
____________
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted September 13, 2008 02:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
That aside, however, I can't help but wonder: Do we really need this? I mean, is it really a serious issue in the game that an army with Luck 1 gets overly many lucky strikes - or overly few? I know sometimes it can be a pain that your enemy with Luck 1 seems to score good luck all the time, but is that actually the case - or is it just something we imagine? Personally, I don't think it's that much of a problem.
Well, it would be nice to make Luck a little more "balanced" don't you think?
I agree it's not such a big change, but isn't this sub-forum about innovative ideas that we'd like to see in the next Heroes, however small they are?
It is small, but then I ask the question: why not? It's not like it has downfalls. I mean, every step in the good direction, however small it is, is a good idea for the next heroes, isn't it?
I deffinitely agree, we should always strive to make the game better - big and small changes alike. I also agree that Luck could need some tweaking - I'm just not convinced that luck triggering many times in a row is the biggest issue.
For one, Luck skills adds too much effective damage, i.e. calculated on average: Expert Luck offers an average +30 % damage, whereas Expert Attack offers only a puny +15 % damage. This is only a half valid argument, because Luck may offer too much damage but on the other hand, Attack must in fact rank among the worst skills in the game - 3 skillpoints offers you what corresponds to a puny +3 Attack points. Luckily Attack has some excellent perks to make up for it.
Anyway, back to the subject of Luck. Luck has always been unreliable, in fact that's one of the very characteristics of Luck, and I'm just not sure if we need to take that away. For one thing, making it happen less happen, or removing the possibility for having a "lucky streak" simply seems to make less fun to me. Personally, I think a better - and simpler - solution would be to reduce the chance of luck to trigger per Luck point and/or the added damage on a lucky attack a bit, but that's just my oppinion.
I've also played around with the idea of making Luck a bit more random like this: Each point of Luck adds a 10 % chance for good luck (like now). A creature which performs a lucky attack will do extra damage corresponding to a random amount between L*10 % and 100 % of the normal attack, where L is the creatures Luck modifier. Thus, a creature with L = 1 will have 10 % chance of doing between 10 % and 100 % extra damage (average 55 % extra damage). A creature with L = 3 (expert Luck) will have 30 % chance of doing between 30 % and 100 % extra damage (average 65 % extra damage), and a creature with L >= 5 will have 50 % chance of doing between 50 % and 100 % extra damage (average 75 % extra damage). In this model, Luck actually becomes better and better the higher modifier you have: Basic Luck corresponds to 5.5 % extra damage whereas Expert Luck corresponds to 19.5 % extra damage. Max luck corresponds to 37.5 % extra damage (compared to presently 50 %!).
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 13, 2008 02:25 PM |
|
|
Ok now about that Speed & Attacking change to overcome abuses with stacks of 1 Peasant:
In my system, Speed is very important. It not only allows you to move on the battlefield, but also attack.
So, each creature has "Speed points", that is reset at each of its turns and is equal to the Speed property. Each tile you move you lose 1 speed point (1.41 for a diagonal). This is exactly how it is now.
However, in my system, in order to attack an enemy, you lose 1 speed point (or 1.41 if you attack diagonally). Therefore, in order to attack someone, you must have a speed point left after moving!
Now, IF you kill the stack in one blow after you attack, you are allowed to move with your remaining speed points (which were reduced not only by moving, but also by attacking). This system gets rid of abuses with stacks of 1 tier 1 creature to guard something stronger.
What do you think?
____________
|
| |
|
|
