|
| Thread: Good points of H4 | |
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
posted April 12, 2010 09:35 PM |
|
|
Good points of H4
Copied from the "Announcements" thread, because it was too off topic there^^
Quote:
If you guys read my original post you will notice that I never said the idea would be a plain copy of heroes 3, but much like Heroes V, they will probably go with a game that is based on the same dinamics but with lots of improvements and execandy. My second point was: they are going to avoid any similarities with Heroes IV as if it was hellfire.
I just can't agree on that. I mean Heroes 4 was crap but it DEFINITELY HAD great ideas!!!
for example:
-alternate units: I love this concept in itself, though it was poorly developed for H4 and poorly done. It just gives a bit more of choice into the game and choice means variation. A bad move was to leave out upgrades, though.
-Skills&Perks: THis idea, again, was great but not done as great as possible. HV perfectionated it.
-Aligned Magic School System: I mean that each town is aligned to one magic, school, that again has two opposite schools and two aligned schools. Arguable, but nevertheless great imo. Yet again, done poorly. I, for instance, don't really like the schools themself. And I don't like the "One school for one type of things the magic does" thingy. You know: Life/Light heals & blesses, Death/Dark curses and poisons, Summoning/Nature Summons, etc. Bad they didn't just take it into H5, but they strengthened it. BAH
-More detailed & varied Battlefield: OK, I confess I'm not sure about it and it was, maybe, too much, but adding things as height, etc. is definitely interesting. Also the size of the squares allowed things like the pikemans ability which was great, wasn't it.
-Striking at the same time: well, I don'T feel it's better or worse than the old "Strike and strike back", but it makes a great deal for strategy, strengthens the defender greatly, AND is more realistic.
-Ranged Retaliation: Also arguable, but I think I like it. It makes the slowness of soem shooters less bad.
so far so good...aren'T that quite some points? 
|
|
Kraken
Famous Hero
I just love being elemental
|
|
posted April 12, 2010 09:42 PM |
|
|
WHat about choosing to have a male or a female character?
____________
Vini Vidi Vici
|
|
mamgaeater
Legendary Hero
Shroud, Flying, Trample, Haste
|
|
posted April 12, 2010 10:25 PM |
|
|
The magic section is nigh ripped straight out of what is perhaps the best card game worldwide. I'm wondering why they thought it was a bad idea...
____________
Protection From Everything.
dota
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted April 13, 2010 12:49 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The magic section is nigh ripped straight out of what is perhaps the best card game worldwide. I'm wondering why they thought it was a bad idea...
? what did they thought was a bad idea? You mean why they changed the magic system?!? Also, do you by, the card game, mean MTG?
@kraken: hmmm wasn't the greatest feature, imo. Didn't make up for the lack of a special for each hero and the other bad points of the game, and especially the hero system, which was not too likeable imo.
|
|
Kraken
Famous Hero
I just love being elemental
|
|
posted April 13, 2010 01:01 AM |
|
|
I just thought that there could be a male/female system like in Heroes 4 in Heroes 6 and have Special abilities! Just, they don't have anything like that in the other games.
____________
Vini Vidi Vici
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted April 13, 2010 01:14 AM |
|
|
that's right. Yet you can'T even choose between many heroes in teh other games, but only two...
hmmm I like the idea, but I'm still unsure. A system likein H4 wouldn't be good with heroes specials because you could allways choose the best special for you, which, assuming same castles, gives a high advantage to the first player...
|
|
Kraken
Famous Hero
I just love being elemental
|
|
posted April 13, 2010 02:48 AM |
|
|
Just if you could have the same abilities, not for each castle, but for the same sex!
____________
Vini Vidi Vici
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted April 13, 2010 03:40 AM |
|
|
...? Now I don't understand what you mean, sorry, kraken 
I thought of individual hero specialties, not racial specialties. What thought of was something like the creature bonuses etc. that each individual hero has in H3 & 5...
|
|
don_komandorr
Known Hero
|
|
posted April 13, 2010 04:12 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I mean Heroes 4 was crap
Was not
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted April 13, 2010 10:01 AM |
|
|
compared to 3 and 4, it was, et of COURSE that'S an opinion.
the main thing is that it just was not really HOMM anymore.
...the Death faction for instance... ooooh I found it painfully.
^^yet this thread should be 'bout good things on H4 so, have you some more?
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 01:01 PM |
|
|
About the alternative units - it was an idea that looked good on paper, but in reality didn't work. I mean, who ever build Ogre Mages or Naga - except for the AI? The H5 alternative upgrade system has some of the same flaws, but at least then you can still choose - and redecide if circumstances called for it! Adaptivity = more strategy. Heroes 4 = wanting to smash PC when you got into town and AI had made idiotic building decisions.
Quote:
-Aligned Magic School System: I mean that each town is aligned to one magic, school, that again has two opposite schools and two aligned schools. Arguable, but nevertheless great imo. Yet again, done poorly. I, for instance, don't really like the schools themself. And I don't like the "One school for one type of things the magic does" thingy. You know: Life/Light heals & blesses, Death/Dark curses and poisons, Summoning/Nature Summons, etc. Bad they didn't just take it into H5, but they strengthened it. BAH
I don't think the H4 Magic system worked very well. Death ALWAYS had Death Magic etc. - i.e. no strategy in choosing, and you always knew what you would be up against.
Quote:
-More detailed & varied Battlefield: OK, I confess I'm not sure about it and it was, maybe, too much, but adding things as height, etc. is definitely interesting. Also the size of the squares allowed things like the pikemans ability which was great, wasn't it.
This was something that on paper looked good, but was executed extremely bad. The reach and cover idea was good, but the battlefield was a complete mess and it was impossible to plan your moves. Sometimes you wanted you unit to move and attack something - and when you clicked, it walked in the complete opposite direction because there was some invisible barrier.
It was also impossible to PLAN things, because you couldn't say how far your units could move from a target square, which completely killed tactics.
Quote:
-Striking at the same time: well, I don'T feel it's better or worse than the old "Strike and strike back", but it makes a great deal for strategy, strengthens the defender greatly, AND is more realistic.
More realistic, perhaps, but again it killed the tactical element of the game: As it is now, you can minimize your losses by targeting enemy units before they get their turn, thus killing them before they kill you. Not so in Heroes 4 - it didn't matter in what order the battle was executed, the result would be the same no matter who attacked first. And then, what's the point of a strategy game, if you can't affect the outcome by using strategy?
The good points in Heroes 4 for me was:
- Skill system worked well (but I like Heroes 5 better)
- Innovative map objects - I loved the skill altars
- Advanced classes
- ...
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
War-overlord
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Presidente of Isla del Tropico
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 02:11 PM |
|
|
I have to agree with Alcibades here. Many of the ideas looked good on paper but they were let down by impractical application.
Also think that regarding many of the inovations they wanted to bring were quite uncalled for anyway. They seemed to have forgotten the old addage: "If it isn't broke, don't fix it."
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not against inovation. HoMMV brought many inovations I liked a lot. I think HoMMIV took a left turn where they were supposed to go right. Ergo they meant well, but it worked out in the opposite way.
____________
Vote El Presidente! Or Else!
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 02:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
About the alternative units - it was an idea that looked good on paper, but in reality didn't work. I mean, who ever build Ogre Mages or Naga - except for the AI? The H5 alternative upgrade system has some of the same flaws, but at least then you can still choose - and redecide if circumstances called for it! Adaptivity = more strategy. Heroes 4 = wanting to smash PC when you got into town and AI had made idiotic building decisions.
Well, but that's, again, not making the ystem itself bad - I never neglected it was done very very poorly in HC. Perhaps it's also a matter of preferance. I prefer the unpredictability of this system - well, and in H4 it wasn't really, I know! You have to balance the whole thing VERY carefully. The re-decide thing isn't bad.
Quote:
Quote:
-Aligned Magic School System: I mean that each town is aligned to one magic, school, that again has two opposite schools and two aligned schools. Arguable, but nevertheless great imo. Yet again, done poorly. I, for instance, don't really like the schools themself. And I don't like the "One school for one type of things the magic does" thingy. You know: Life/Light heals & blesses, Death/Dark curses and poisons, Summoning/Nature Summons, etc. Bad they didn't just take it into H5, but they strengthened it. BAH
I don't think the H4 Magic system worked very well. Death ALWAYS had Death Magic etc. - i.e. no strategy in choosing, and you always knew what you would be up against.
So on magic you find bad, what you find fine with creatures?!?
Yet I see your point. But that also coems from the bad part of the magic system, that one school for one purpose (mainly). As I mentioned I HATE that.
Quote:
Quote:
-More detailed & varied Battlefield: OK, I confess I'm not sure about it and it was, maybe, too much, but adding things as height, etc. is definitely interesting. Also the size of the squares allowed things like the pikemans ability which was great, wasn't it.
This was something that on paper looked good, but was executed extremely bad. The reach and cover idea was good, but the battlefield was a complete mess and it was impossible to plan your moves. Sometimes you wanted you unit to move and attack something - and when you clicked, it walked in the complete opposite direction because there was some invisible barrier.
It was also impossible to PLAN things, because you couldn't say how far your units could move from a target square, which completely killed tactics.
As I said. It was not done good in H4, but the GENERAL idea is good, imo. PErhaps a mixture between H4&5 here? A battlefield that doesn't let you loose the good view of H5 and H3, but adds more strategic options. For example, more tiles (4 times as much, f.e.), would lead to more flexible positioning of units, which would be great. In H4, unfortunately, you had a lot of tiles, but not the exact idea how your creature would stand etc. Putting these concepts together could be ebst, imo.
Quote:
Quote:
-Striking at the same time: well, I don'T feel it's better or worse than the old "Strike and strike back", but it makes a great deal for strategy, strengthens the defender greatly, AND is more realistic.
More realistic, perhaps, but again it killed the tactical element of the game: As it is now, you can minimize your losses by targeting enemy units before they get their turn, thus killing them before they kill you. Not so in Heroes 4 - it didn't matter in what order the battle was executed, the result would be the same no matter who attacked first. And then, what's the point of a strategy game, if you can't affect the outcome by using strategy?
That's jsut not true! You just need to change your strategy. i mean, strategy is a thing that has been used in history, too. The system of striking one after another is clearly a pro-attack system. the other not.
Quote:
The good points in Heroes 4 for me was:
- Skill system worked well (but I like Heroes 5 better)
- Innovative map objects - I loved the skill altars
- Advanced classes
- ...
Skill system was good, indeed.
Well there were great objects, yes.
The problem for me ehre is that I can'T see how to combine it with Racials without making everything overly complex...or not having the racials effect the advanced class, which seems pretty wrong to me, somehow.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 02:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So on magic you find bad, what you find fine with creatures?!?
Yet I see your point. But that also coems from the bad part of the magic system, that one school for one purpose (mainly). As I mentioned I HATE that.
Yeah, I think there is a difference because when you boil things down to the real basics, all factions are (more or less) the same, just with different skins. True, some may have a stronger shooter, or a stronger flyer, or a stronger tank, but the idea is that all factions has something to offer on all parts.
Also, your faction is sort of what defines you, and then the skills and magic is what allows you to customize your strategy - at least to an extent, that's how I see it. Of course, multiple upgrades are good, because that allows you to pick your strategy there also.
Quote:
The problem for me ehre is that I can'T see how to combine it with Racials without making everything overly complex...or not having the racials effect the advanced class, which seems pretty wrong to me, somehow.
Well, as I see it, it should come in through the Ultimate Skills - which should be changed into something which is not race specific, but rather a synergy effect between skills. Thus, "Nature's Luck" should not be exclusive for Sylvan, but something everyone can obtain if he has the appropriate combination of skills (i.e. perhaps Luck + Light Magic + Logistics or whatever you find to make sense).
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 07:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yeah, I think there is a difference because when you boil things down to the real basics, all factions are (more or less) the same, just with different skins. True, some may have a stronger shooter, or a stronger flyer, or a stronger tank, but the idea is that all factions has something to offer on all parts.
I don't quite see why that would change with alternate units.
Quote:
Also, your faction is sort of what defines you, and then the skills and magic is what allows you to customize your strategy - at least to an extent, that's how I see it. Of course, multiple upgrades are good, because that allows you to pick your strategy there also.
I think, what we have here is more a matter of preference. I think a faction can be closed inside with multiple units. Also, isn'T that a strategical nice thing, to choose: Do you want one more shooter or one more melee unit? I do not really see why multiple upgrades are good, but units not^^
Quote:
Well, as I see it, it should come in through the Ultimate Skills - which should be changed into something which is not race specific, but rather a synergy effect between skills. Thus, "Nature's Luck" should not be exclusive for Sylvan, but something everyone can obtain if he has the appropriate combination of skills (i.e. perhaps Luck + Light Magic + Logistics or whatever you find to make sense).
That's not racials^^ But a nice idea, anyway.
I once thought of racials, to make them, for advanced class, a skill like others, but only for one hero class/faction...
...it's unpractical, but I liek the idea, I'll open a thread for it
|
| |
|
|
