|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
posted September 19, 2010 09:23 PM |
|
|
there is a thread for it, I think, but it ahs not been mentioned here sor far, I think. I'Ll add it 
btw, would you mind telling us which proposed wishes/changes did you like and which not? Thx
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 19, 2010 09:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Dont you all agree thats what made homm3 the best ?
No, what made H3 the best was that it had better graphics than H2, and more variety, and unlike the last two games, it actually works out of the box, with few imbalances and bugs.
Quote:
Even civ5 is going for hexagon tiles coz they know its the best.
Except that Civ5 is using them in a strategic, not a tactical sense, and they're only doing that because they can't figure out how to write a decent 'diagonal distance' program like Nival managed to.
|
|
Hakkology
Hired Hero
|
|
posted September 20, 2010 11:25 AM |
|
|
Certainly, i apologise i was kinda in a hurry yesterday, i just have joined the forum but i couldnt write comments about it. But i read'em all .
Quote:
Bigger Battlefields
I couldnt agree more, what we need is bigger and more complex battlefields. More obstacles and more tactical thinking in a battle i agreed top on this.
Quote:
many options when starting a battle
I'm sorry when u said options , what kind of options do you mean exactly ?
Quote:
each tavern has different heroes for hire,
Different Hero direct attack options,
2 hero classes by faction
Awesome points , couldnt agree more
Quote:
Hero on Battlefield
I'm not sure i liked this on heroes IV , my chaos hero dying with the first turn of the siege with some archers on towers. It could be a good idea but dont know how.
Quote:
More skills, and make the perks more logical,
a skill to improve the spellcasting prowess of creatures
Again excellent points, chaining some skills and perks would be great, as long as races balance each other .
Quote:
multiple different tech & research paths
Okay the fact is, i didnt understand what you meant for tech& research paths. But i remember the unit system in heroes IV i didnt like it, building only one type of unit. What can i say, i want to use both nagas and genies in my battlefield they complemented each other in heroes 3. Anyway, maybe i misunderstood sorry about that .
Unit initiative is good but;
Quote:
use the linear formula for spell damage from creatures like in H4
I'm sorry i dont remember the formula in the game and i dont have it right now, but i was thinking archmage fireball damage in H5 linearly increasing, that would seriously break the balance of the game. Maybe druid Lightning bolt could increase linearly though. Not sure
Quote:
-more complex sieges
-more diplomatic options - changing allies, etc. during scenario
-more diplomatic options - shared armies
-more diplomatic options - increased tradeing
-ambushs
-more naval elements in the game, different boat types
-stepping in and out of boats -> movement costs + reminder instead of loosing the turn
-weather
-heroes operating on day or night
-AM-movements determinates daytime
I agree with all of them but not "Heroes can fortify their armies"
It'd be no fun fortifying ur hero in a one-path-valley and prevent the expansion of a nation. Im not sure though maybe it would have good results.
Quote:
more peaceful visuals, less "shiny" art
This, i:
Great thread, thanks for sharing .
Edit :Quote:
Dont you all agree thats what made homm3 the best ?
"No, what made H3 the best was that it had better graphics than H2, and more variety, and unlike the last two games, it actually works out of the box, with few imbalances and bugs."
Your totally right, just wanted to emphasize my point .
Quote:
Even civ5 is going for hexagon tiles coz they know its the best.
Except that Civ5 is using them in a strategic, not a tactical sense, and they're only doing that because they can't figure out how to write a decent 'diagonal distance' program like Nival managed to.
Maybe thats true, i believe they should have moved to hexagonal tile system a long time ago. It makes the game more fair , since you always move one hexagon at a time but with square tiles, u move 1.4 tiles at a time.
And isnt it easier to calculate the movement ?
Thank you .
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 20, 2010 11:39 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I disagree with this one, i believe they should have moved to hexagonal tile system a long time ago. It makes the game more fair , since you always move one hexagon at a time but with square tiles, u move 1.4 tiles at a time.
My guess is you've never played H5 then, because Nival managed to solve the problem right off the bat.
|
|
Hakkology
Hired Hero
|
|
posted September 20, 2010 11:47 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I disagree with this one, i believe they should have moved to hexagonal tile system a long time ago. It makes the game more fair , since you always move one hexagon at a time but with square tiles, u move 1.4 tiles at a time.
My guess is you've never played H5 then, because Nival [url=http://uk.pc.ign.com/dor/objects/736187/heroes-of-might-and-magic-v/images/heroes-of-might-and-magic-v-20060414034105574.html;jsessionid=c38phkl43oqc5]managed to solve the problem[/url] right off the bat.
That was for civ1-2-3-4.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 20, 2010 12:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That was for civ1-2-3-4.
Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding. But yeah, anyway, Nival managed to solve the diagonal movement issue.
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted September 20, 2010 06:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I'm sorry when u said options , what kind of options do you mean exactly ?
The "many options" when starting a battle is for ingame options. It would be like you can send scouts out, or prepare a defensive position,etc. or do nothing. If you choose such (and many only appear with some prerequesites) you will get an advantage and an disadvantage. F.e. Sending scout could cost you starting initiative, but allows you to place your troops after the enemy, seeing how he has placed his. (or she hers)
Quote:
I'm not sure i liked this on heroes IV , my chaos hero dying with the first turn of the siege with some archers on towers. It could be a good idea but dont know how.
This refers to "hero on battlefield" ... which of the two optiosn of that do you mean? the H4 like one, or the reduced second one.
Quote:
Okay the fact is, i didnt understand what you meant for tech& research paths. But i remember the unit system in heroes IV i didnt like it, building only one type of unit. What can i say, i want to use both nagas and genies in my battlefield they complemented each other in heroes 3. Anyway, maybe i misunderstood sorry about that .
You did, but no prob IT was more meant that you can research different tech paths, granting your units advances and such. Sicne this thread is for general features, not details, it could also mean paths improving mine income and such...
Quote:
I'm sorry i dont remember the formula in the game and i dont have it right now, but i was thinking archmage fireball damage in H5 linearly increasing, that would seriously break the balance of the game. Maybe druid Lightning bolt could increase linearly though. Not sure
As I have in mind, it jsut means, if two druids would deal 100 damage with a spell, 4 would deal 200^^ doubel units = double spell damage...
Quote:
It'd be no fun fortifying ur hero in a one-path-valley and prevent the expansion of a nation. Im not sure though maybe it would have good results.
So you're against it?^^ ...the fortifications won't be too strong, mind you. Just, maybe 2 minor obstacles placeable for the hero or such, maybe a small moat, thigns liek that...
Thanks for contributing to many of the points here
...it are quite much by now, aren't they?^^
|
|
Fool
Hired Hero
|
|
posted September 25, 2010 03:39 PM |
|
Edited by Fool at 18:46, 25 Sep 2010.
|
(Not responding to the posts above me, but to the original post)
(Also, please note that I didn't read the rest of the thread at the time of this post -- it's meant to be my initial thoughts on the ideas)
Intriguing. I have to admit that I haven't played H5 yet, but I've read tons of data about it and played around with the skill wheel as well to get a feel for all the perks and skills. I'll express my opinions on the suggestions:
Quote:
various ultimate artifacts instead of just "the grail"/"tear of asha"
Yes, definitely. The H3 campaigns always felt weird because there was no grail, and the grail itself isn't a very interesting artifact in my opinion.
Quote:
underground more distinct from aboveground
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. 
Quote:
sometimes underground on aboveground-level
You mean subterranean landscape in aboveground? That doesn't really make sense... 
Quote:
AM-buildings improving hero skills
At the risk of looking like a moron, I'm going to ask what "AM" stands for. I'm afraid I can't propose an opinion until then.
Quote:
uncrossable rivers with crossing options (bridges&fords)
YES YES YES. I hate it when I need to get to the other end of a tiny river, and have to expend two days on a boat to do so.
Quote:
Bigger Battlefields
I am impartial about this. Current size seems fine although I wouldn't mind a bigger field. Isn't the development team doing this anyway, though?
Quote:
Option to retreat without losing the whole army
Perhaps. The entire point of retreating though is that you know you're going to lose the creatures anyway, so you can at least keep your hero. Allowing you to take a quarter of your troops or so with you would defeat the purpose, I think.
Quote:
war machines can be controlled without skill
No. It would decrease the effectiveness of the individual war machine skills. Also, just because your hero is a renowned general that can command the respect of any creature doesn't mean they're tech-savvy enough to operate a balista or perform first aid.
Quote:
Battles taking time, possibly even lasting day (with a certain rate of turns=>day Heroes, unless surrendering, are stuck in the battle. Reinforcements can be sent.
Eh, maybe... This would make battling even more of an inconvenience than it is now, though. I do admit that being able to send reinforcements would be useful if your hero was one step away from the castle or something, but I know I'd be really frustrated if the computer did that, so I'd rather this wasn't included.
Quote:
simultaneous retaliation
An okay idea in concept, but I doubt it would work out well in practice. Also, I like being able to attack enemy troops that I know are doomed to negate their retaliation.
Quote:
combats with more than one hero on one side
Possible...but might become a little over-complicated. (or overpowered)
Quote:
Castle and obstacle Penalties for shooters.
Doesn't this exist already?
Quote:
simple options when starting a battle, like quick combat button
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this.
Quote:
many options when starting a battle
Or this.
Quote:
infinite (weak) retaliation for most creatures
I'm going to have to say no to this. Using up a powerful creature's retaliation with weak fodder then ganging up on it is a viable and age-old strategy. The fact that the griffin can retaliate infinite times should actually be a unique ability, too, not just a powered-up version of what everyone else can already do.
Quote:
progressive retaliation=ret. not capped by a number of strikes, but an amount of damage done.
I don't really understand what this is referring to...
Quote:
Chess-like Battle (Hero as King)
Do you mean that the hero is on the battlefield and, if defeated, the battle is won instantly? Or a more literal chess-like battle? I'm going to have to say to the former and to the latter.
Quote:
Active Morale (morale changing through battle, see whiteriders thread)
Realism is not always the best thing to go for in video games. Though it would make sense if morale was dampened by losing troops, that would just be unfair to the enemy, as they get worse and worse as they lose the battle. Vicious loop. Not sure about the other changes mentioned. I'd prefer to wait until there's more development on this.
Quote:
morale has different effect than another/quicker turn
Maybe, but morale isn't meant to be overly complex. Morale affects your turns, luck affects how much damage you do. Works fine as-is, doesn't really need to be made any more complex in my opinion.
Quote:
Hexagons-BAttlefield (H3) isntead of Squares-Battlefield (H5)
*shrug* I'm really rather impartial about this.
Quote:
Can split unit stacks on battlefield
I don't really like this idea... Sounds confusing and I doubt it would work out well in execution.
(I don't play multiplayer so I can't form an opinion on the next two suggestions...)
Quote:
Faction Editor
If it's not too much work for the development team, definitely.
Quote:
Creature Editor
Again, definitely.
Quote:
each tavern has different heroes for hire
Again, realism isn't always a good thing. Hero hiring already relies heavily on luck, having to worry about which castle they appear in would just cause headaches. I think a better idea would be to have a larger selection of heroes to choose from in the tavern. (Or perhaps limit it to only heroes of the castle's faction, since, as people have said before, other heroes are useless due to racials)
Quote:
Advanced classes
I haven't played H4, so I don't know how well those worked out in practice. I'll stay neutral on the subject for now.
Quote:
Different Hero direct attack options
Yes. I always felt like heroes were rather useless since they could only cast spells while the creatures did all the actual fighting. Allowing the hero to be more involved in the battle would be a good idea, I believe.
Quote:
2 hero classes by faction
No. The entire point of certain factions is that some are more oriented towards magic or might. Some of the alternate hero classes felt really forced and didn't make that much sense. Having only one hero class is a better idea for factions as a whole and makes things less complicated, in my opinion.
Quote:
New hero classes unconnected to towns
Perhaps. How would they work though? Elaboration is needed, I believe.
Quote:
hero classes can't learn certain spells
Eh... I'm kind of opposed to this, especially since spells are grouped according to their use in battle now. Denying light magic to demon lords would make sense from a story standpoint, but preventing them from casting bless spells (which are some of the most useful in the game) is kind of unfair. There are only four schools anyway, that's not a lot to pick and choose from.
Edit: Whoops, apparently I need to be more up-to-date on my H6 info. If there are 7 schools then that would allow for much more wiggle room and make this easier to implement.
Quote:
Hero on Battlefield
Mmh, no. I'm not really fond of H4's idea of making the hero its own unit.
Quote:
Heroes on Battlefield, but with infinite HP & can't fight without army
?
How would this work, exactly? If it's like H4 but with invincibility, then they that sounds like it could be exploited easily -- use the invincible unit to distract the enemy from your vulnerable units. Sounds too overpowered.
Quote:
switchable mounts with different benefits
Maybe, but I feel like this is a very superficial idea that doesn't need to be tacked on...we already have the stables in Haven after all.
Quote:
your style of play varies Hero Stats
I'm honestly rather fond of this concept, but there are certain games that it's good for and certain games it isn't. I suppose it would work if what actions you take in battle affect what primary skill you gain upon a level up, especially if there's no split between might/magic heroes. It has pros and cons, so my opinion is a resounding "maybe".
Quote:
no ultimate skill/perk
D: I know the ultimate skills are hard to get, but I do like the concept. Do you generalize and ignore it, or meticulously specialize your hero to gain that sweet, sweet reward that may turn out to be awesome but impractical or a game breaker? I think they should be kept, just made more balanced (as in, no skills should be clearly better than any other -- no useless Unstoppable Charge-level skills), especially since secondary skills don't rely on luck anymore, so they'll be easier to obtain.
Quote:
no cross-skill prerequesites
No... I do kind of like the cross-skill prerequisites, (especially since we won't have to rely on luck for secondary skills anymore) as long as they aren't the key to an ultimate skill and are actually good.
(It seems like common suggestions are "This thing has some issues, let's nuke it without weighing the pros and cons". Many of these are perfectly reasonable concepts that can sidestep some of their issues with a little tweaking.)
Quote:
choose racial skill for any hero (thus quasi making him the hero class of your like) instead of hero belonging to one class, having it's racial
The entire point of racial skills is that they're supposed to be unique to the faction. I think if there were maybe two heroes of the castle faction and one hero from another one every week it would fix it, since you'd always have same-faction heroes to grab, which is important considering the racials.
Quote:
game should hide Navigation as an option if there is no or very little water on the map
Yes, definitely, although this is moot now since learning skills isn't determined by random chance anymore.
Quote:
more skills that are used outside combat, like ambushing skill or construction skill.
Yes, as long as we get more skill slots to accommodate for the addition of new secondary skills.
Quote:
diplomacy skill should work like in H4.
I don't use diplomacy anyway so I don't really have an opinion either way.
Quote:
a skill to improve the spellcasting prowess of creatures
Yes. Perhaps as a side-effect or perk of sorcery?
Quote:
More skills, and make the perks more logical
I need more elaboration before I can come to a conclusion on this.
Quote:
Spell schools by effect
Basically, like in H5? Yes.
Quote:
more spells
Definitely. 2 per level per school is too few.
Quote:
More Adventure Spells
Other than a Town Portal spell that works like it did in H3, I think we have enough for now. And of course, we don't know if the development team will add anything new or change the spells from H5.
Quote:
multiple different tech & research paths
With more non-linearity in unit production I can see this working. Perhaps this can be the prerequisite for building core/elite units instead of just another creature dwelling.
Quote:
Spies available in thieves guild, capable of watching an area
Yes, this would be very useful.
Quote:
2 creatures per level.
No, seven units total (plus upgrades!) is enough.
Quote:
possible to build several capitoles
Um, why? The whole point of a capitol building is that it's the center of government and, therefore, there can only be one. That's like saying there should be multiple capital cities within one country. Doesn't make sense.
Quote:
unlock special features as you gain more castles
Elaboration needed.
Quote:
many options in the tavern
Such as...? Again, elaboration needed.
Quote:
Mini-towns
What? Again, elaboration needed. What do you even mean?
Quote:
Creature Experience, but only stat boost, no new abilities.
You know, I like the concept of game mods. I really do. But WoG really fell short. Too many people made too many scripts that were all just piled in instead of some kind of filtering system to say "okay, no, this is too much". I felt that creature experience was one such thing that just made the game needlessly complicated, and hard to maintain since hiring new troops dilutes the experience. So no, I don't like this. If this does get added, I would prefer if it was just statistics increased and not abilities.
Quote:
creature Experience, including new skills&abilities
See above.
Quote:
unit counters - abilities making unit stronger against certain types of other units (like, f.e., mounted units)
Possibly... I don't really like rocks-paper-scissors tactics in strategy games though.
Quote:
Unit initiative (as in H5)
Yes. Movement = initiative can lead to problems.
Quote:
higher chance for creatures joining your army when they have the same faction as the hero
Yes, definitely.
Quote:
use the linear formula for spell damage from creatures like in H4
I don't know what this is and can therefore form no opinion about it.
Quote:
some creatures have adventure spells and abilities
Yes, I can see this being useful.
Quote:
Mercenary Creatures fighting for a daily amount of gold
I don't know... Could be very financially draining. They'd only be useful in the late game when you're overflowing with gold.
Quote:
Creature Spellbook variable
What do you mean? That they could learn spells from mage guilds? I don't know... Creature spells are generally picked specifically for them, adding more could cause game-breakery and needless over-complication. (Would it even be possible, coding-wise?)
Quote:
more naval elements in the game, different boat types
No. Naval elements are forced enough as-is, and are really annoying in my opinion. (Incredibly draining on your movement points, might not even be that much out there either, takes at least two days to sail to an opposite shore, etc.) I think that making sea travel a bit easier and less time-consuming would be a better idea.
Quote:
stepping in and out of boats -> movement costs + reminder instead of loosing the turn
Unnecessary, I've never done this accidentally and it's really hard to make this mistake since you need to specifically click on the spot you want to travel to.
Quote:
weather
Like many other things on this page, badly needs elaboration. How would this work? (From the interviews I can presume the developers are doing something like this anyway though, since they apparently really like the concept of dynamic battlefields)
Quote:
heroes operating on day or night
No. Heroes is a complex game as-is, adding day/night systems would just make things confusing. How would this even work? (Again, elaboration...)
Quote:
AM-movements determinates daytime
Again, I don't know what AM stands for so I can't express an opinion.
Quote:
Heroes can fortify their armies
What do you mean?
Quote:
Mini-factions
What? Again, elaboration.
Quote:
more peaceful visuals, less "shiny" art
Yes.
Quote:
realistic visuals
The "realism is not always a good thing" applies here more than anything else. ([url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealIsBrown]Read this[/url] to see what I mean)
Quote:
Whack-a-baby-seal minigame in taverns
I sincerely hope this is a joke.
Quote:
Random Events:
I'd really like to have some random events, maybe turned off for campaign maps, which could have minor to major effects. Diseases, catastrophes, perosnal effects on heroes, finds, etc. There are billions of options to this and it can bring much variation into the game, that's why i want it in.
I'll support this I suppose. It adds a little variety to the scenario. Maybe they shouldn't be in campaigns, though.
Quote:
More complex sieges
What I mean by that is to make a siege more complex, give (more) defensive and ofensice siege weapons such as rams, boiling oil, portcullis (when the main gate broken they serve as "another" weaker main gate, defensive catapults, entunneling for the dwarves, wall-climbing for some units, ladders, etc.etc.etc. Also there cold be options to lay sieges which last soem time, days, even weeks, etc.
Could be nice, but remember not to fall into the trap of swamping yourself in tons of features. As long as it's not too complicated though, I wouldn't mind this.
Quote:
more diplomatic options:
Since those are really low by now, I think this quite an obvious suggestion. I'd like alliances&peace, variable inside a scenario, more and mroe variable trading options (trading mines&dwellings&artifacts&such) and more like this. Also, a "shared army" could be nice, giving troops of yours to a weekened ally, which you still control in combat.
...Maybe? Since I'm a pacifist I always want to see a more diplomacy-oriented scenario. Maybe have diplomacy do more things in general. (Changing allies during campaigns might not make sense, though)
-shared armies:
No. I can see this having the end result of being a bad idea and I bet it would be difficult to code as well.
Quote:
Ambushs:
I would like the option to lay an ambush, with a different battlefield, the ambusher in a better position and quicker start, and such things. Of course, there could also be neutral ambushs and such things.
Yes. I like this. It would add to the tactical nature of the game and allow for heroes to use stealth rather than brute strength.
Quote:
variable campaign structure:
Like we had in H2&3. I find gradial campaigns not so great and I'd like things like:
-choices between scenarios. coudl effect later scenarios
-optional scenarios (the option can be taken only at a time)
-multiple preferences in campaigns. Like H3 campaigns: Not a gradual lineup of scenarios, but you have a map or such and can at first choose between 2 scenarios and when you did them you get the next one/s.
-multiple preferences in the super-campaign-screen (like in H3: You have to finish Campaign one and two to get to campaign 3,4,5 and finish those three to get to campaign 6, such things.
-choices in scenarios which effect the rest of the campaign/s (not too major though. Maybe a change like wether a neutral creature type becomes your favored ally or archenemy. THis also applies to the first point)
Yes. I really liked the non-linearity of H3 campaigns, although non-linearity can hurt the overall storytelling if there are too many paths.
I have a suggestion of my own: More slots for perks/secondary skills. I don't know how they've changed the secondary skills yet, but just from playing around with the skill wheel I noticed how limiting everything is. Logistics, Enlightenment (for the stat boosts), War Machines (for Brimstone Rain and a resurrecting first aid tent), and Light Magic (for Resurrection) are all pretty essential. However, that only leaves one other skill slot available, and you can almost certainly kiss your chances of getting the ultimate skill goodbye at that point. It also feels weird when there are like 10 tertiary skills, but only three can be chosen per skill. Perhaps raising the cap a bit could be helpful? Or would that be too overpowered?
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted September 25, 2010 11:18 PM |
|
|
Wow, thank you for judging and commenting on all these feats
WHich HoMMs btw, have you played so far? I wonder since you didnÄt play H5 yet^^
Quote:
Quote:
underground more distinct from aboveground
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this.
I think it was meant in a way that being udnerground and not above would have more gameplay effects, though I don'T remember which in detail...
Quote:
You mean subterranean landscape in aboveground? That doesn't really make sense...
actually, it can make sense. A well-known example is moria: the gate doesn't go directly down, but sideways into the mountain, and at least a good part is on the same level as the "aboveground". I think such places were meant.
Quote:
At the risk of looking like a moron, I'm going to ask what "AM" stands for. I'm afraid I can't propose an opinion until then.
you don't!  I change it in the list. It simply means "Adventure Map".
Quote:
I am impartial about this. Current size seems fine although I wouldn't mind a bigger field. Isn't the development team doing this anyway, though?
?all H6 battlefields I've seen so far are no bigger than H5s and these are, imo, a bit small. Though that may depend on favour..
Quote:
Perhaps. The entire point of retreating though is that you know you're going to lose the creatures anyway, so you can at least keep your hero. Allowing you to take a quarter of your troops or so with you would defeat the purpose, I think.
Depends. You would still loose a significant part of your army.
Quote:
No. It would decrease the effectiveness of the individual war machine skills. Also, just because your hero is a renowned general that can command the respect of any creature doesn't mean they're tech-savvy enough to operate a balista or perform first aid.
...which are no longer existent in H5. Which makes the WM-skill almost a MUSThave skill, which i do not like too much...also, it's not just respect that makes a hero/general...
Quote:
Eh, maybe... This would make battling even more of an inconvenience than it is now, though. I do admit that being able to send reinforcements would be useful if your hero was one step away from the castle or something, but I know I'd be really frustrated if the computer did that, so I'd rather this wasn't included.
I found this point was more about th etime-taking of battle, the reonforcement thing coudl eb considered a step further.
Quote:
An okay idea in concept, but I doubt it would work out well in practice. Also, I like being able to attack enemy troops that I know are doomed to negate their retaliation.
Found it was one of the less bad parts of H4, though I don't care much. I think it's jsut a matter of preference. simultaneous retaliation supports defensive tactics a bit more.
Quote:
Doesn't this exist already?
It's not explicitely about new features here.
...you asked for the simple/many options buttons.
Simple options would be mainly like you have things like: "quick battle" (computer calculation) "quick battle without spells" "normal battle" and such.
Many optiosn would be more ingame effecting options, like sending spies or such, either with pro's and cons for each option or for a cost or or or^^
Quote:
I'm going to have to say no to this. Using up a powerful creature's retaliation with weak fodder then ganging up on it is a viable and age-old strategy. The fact that the griffin can retaliate infinite times should actually be a unique ability, too, not just a powered-up version of what everyone else can already do.
I also don't want this but I think your reason a bit...well...not-fitting. Just being traditional doesn't maek anything good or bad^^ I don't want itthis way, but a reworking of soem kind would be good for the retaliation system imo...thsi way it's just like this: attack, whenever you can. A greater influence of defensive strategies should be taken in, imO!
Quote:
Quote:
progressive retaliation=ret. not capped by a number of strikes, but an amount of damage done.
I don't really understand what this is referring to...
It was discussed here. teh idea is to balance things a bit more. The retaliations would be capped by damage (each turn?), rather than strikes. F.e. if 5 angels coudl deal a 500 damage of retaliation in a round. Then a creature with 100 hp would come, attack the angels, killing none, and the angels strike back, they kill the creature and have 400 retaliation-damage left for the next attackign creatures. Just example stats, nowhere to real...
Quote:
Do you mean that the hero is on the battlefield and, if defeated, the battle is won instantly? Or a more literal chess-like battle? I'm going to have to say to the former and to the latter.
the former, I think^^
Quote:
Maybe, but morale isn't meant to be overly complex. Morale affects your turns, luck affects how much damage you do. Works fine as-is, doesn't really need to be made any more complex in my opinion.
quite some traditionalist on homm you are ain't you?
Quote:
I don't really like this idea... Sounds confusing and I doubt it would work out well in execution.
Split stacks?!? It is used in Heroes 3.5 wog and works quite fine, be assured
Quote:
(I don't play multiplayer so I can't form an opinion on the next two suggestions...)
are you referring to the campaign variants? but they are not only for multiplayer!!! they are just also playable in multiplayer, but you can easily play them alone, too
Quote:
Again, realism isn't always a good thing. Hero hiring already relies heavily on luck, having to worry about which castle they appear in would just cause headaches. I think a better idea would be to have a larger selection of heroes to choose from in the tavern. (Or perhaps limit it to only heroes of the castle's faction, since, as people have said before, other heroes are useless due to racials)
I though tyou said you didn't play H5? Also this is a thing I personally dislike. I'd like LESS "racism" in Heroes, not more!!! More faction-merging, more use of foreign heroes and units in your army, etc. etc.
Quote:
I haven't played H4, so I don't know how well those worked out in practice. I'll stay neutral on the subject for now.
Did you play H3, at least?
Quote:
No. The entire point of certain factions is that some are more oriented towards magic or might. Some of the alternate hero classes felt really forced and didn't make that much sense. Having only one hero class is a better idea for factions as a whole and makes things less complicated, in my opinion.
I donÄt think so at all. (btw, can it be that you are originally a H1 or H2 player?) The point of the faction is the setting it gives. I think it makes thing smore complex, not complicated. also, 2 hero classes does not necessarily mean 1 might and 1 magic class.
Quote:
Perhaps. How would they work though? Elaboration is needed, I believe.
If there are racials, they could be without. would be available for everyone. Would not affect morale negative or positive. Maybe neutral classes focus on 1 skill each class? Such things...
Quote:
Edit: Whoops, apparently I need to be more up-to-date on my H6 info. If there are 7 schools then that would allow for much more wiggle room and make this easier to implement.
Since this is about wishes, it's not that important what is allready certain for H6 It adds diversity to the game, and I personally, don't want to have purpose-based schools, anyway^^
Quote:
How would this work, exactly? If it's like H4 but with invincibility, then they that sounds like it could be exploited easily -- use the invincible unit to distract the enemy from your vulnerable units. Sounds too overpowered.
No, quite not! It's more that the hero gains a position on a battlefield. He can not block enemy creatures, or be attack, but he himself ahs a range for his attacks, and maybe for his spells. It makes the hero more weaker than stronger^^
Quote:
Maybe, but I feel like this is a very superficial idea that doesn't need to be tacked on...we already have the stables in Haven after all.
...which have nothign to do with this idea It's just cool to choose a mount, imo. Also, they could have different speeds, grant the hero with abttle abilities, maybe. A majestiv aura for a dragon-rider. SUch things.
Quote:
I know the ultimate skills are hard to get, but I do like the concept. Do you generalize and ignore it, or meticulously specialize your hero to gain that sweet, sweet reward that may turn out to be awesome but impractical or a game breaker? I think they should be kept, just made more balanced (as in, no skills should be clearly better than any other -- no useless Unstoppable Charge-level skills), especially since secondary skills don't rely on luck anymore, so they'll be easier to obtain.
I have to say an honest thing here, and I hope you don't get offended - but how can you speak of balancing issues so often for aspects which are in games which you haven't played?! Because people tell things imbalanced? It don't mean they are, ou know...
So, sorry, I really don't want to offend you!
for the ultimate skills, I personally do not care^^ I liekd the idea, but never really went for the ultimates...
Quote:
(It seems like common suggestions are "This thing has some issues, let's nuke it without weighing the pros and cons". Many of these are perfectly reasonable concepts that can sidestep some of their issues with a little tweaking.)
I agree. This is what happened after H4 too, didn't it? Instead of maybe making balanced attempts on the H4 concepts, everyone jsut said: they suck totally and they all were scrapped -.-
Quote:
Yes, definitely, although this is moot now since learning skills isn't determined by random chance anymore.
weren'T aware of that when we began. ...also, this are general wishes for HoMM, so it's not to be considered too much^^
Quote:
Yes, as long as we get more skill slots to accommodate for the addition of new secondary skills.
that's important, anyway!
Quote:
Yes. Perhaps as a side-effect or perk of sorcery?
An option. With a leadership perk as prerequesite, maybe..
Quote:
Basically, like in H5? Yes.
more pure even. How I dislike it It feels to synthetic mechanical for me. Too much focus on gameplay. MAgic schools shoudl be determined by setting for me. I don't think in a world with amgic the mages would gather by either being blessers or cursers or damagers...
Quote:
Other than a Town Portal spell that works like it did in H3, I think we have enough for now. And of course, we don't know if the development team will add anything new or change the spells from H5.
but we can wish for it anyway  Alsom I think there could and should be much more...the several vison spells, deceive, maybe a ressource boost spell or a "hard terrain" spell. THe options are so marvellous great!!!
Quote:
No, seven units total (plus upgrades!) is enough.
why? also, this is quite meaningless anyway with the core, elite, champion system, or not?
Quote:
Um, why? The whole point of a capitol building is that it's the center of government and, therefore, there can only be one. That's like saying there should be multiple capital cities within one country. Doesn't make sense.
An interesting social idea...I think I'd like to see a state like that
Quote:
Such as...? Again, elaboration needed.
many options in a tavern wasn't suggested by me. But I think it was quite a whole lot of things. sending spies from here. Doing quests. ...this should nto go into details, yet...
mini-towns are mentioned on page 6, post 7 and explained in the posts below, I think.
Quote:
I don't know what this is and can therefore form no opinion about it.
LINEAR formular. 1 mage deals 50 damage with a spell -> 2 mages deal 100 damage with a spell, etc. Or so I understood it^^
Quote:
What do you mean? That they could learn spells from mage guilds? I don't know... Creature spells are generally picked specifically for them, adding more could cause game-breakery and needless over-complication. (Would it even be possible, coding-wise?)
I think pretty much that. I think it could be possible.
Quote:
No. Naval elements are forced enough as-is, and are really annoying in my opinion. (Incredibly draining on your movement points, might not even be that much out there either, takes at least two days to sail to an opposite shore, etc.) I think that making sea travel a bit easier and less time-consuming would be a better idea.
that does not exclude each other you knwo. There have here and there been discussions on the navigation skill which could come to more use on sea maps this way.
Quote:
Unnecessary, I've never done this accidentally and it's really hard to make this mistake since you need to specifically click on the spot you want to travel to.
It's not about that at all. Movement reminder means you can only step in/out a boat once per day. This is about your hero being able to travel on instead of loosing his whole day for stepping onto a boat.
Quote:
Like many other things on this page, badly needs elaboration. How would this work? (From the interviews I can presume the developers are doing something like this anyway though, since they apparently really like the concept of dynamic battlefields)
They really do? then H6 isn't hopeless for me...
THis page is not about deep elaboration, but about if the general ideas are wanted. If one can't say if he likes or dislike a point without going too deep, the point imo is irrelevant for him -> s/he s it. For general information, the weather should mainly effect the battle, but in quite some ways. Factions woudl probably have favourite weather. Storm could alter movement. Fog could add qutie a new effect, etc.etc.
Quote:
Again, I don't know what AM stands for so I can't express an opinion.
See above
Quote:
Heroes can fortify their armies
It means they take a defense position for the cost of their last movement points, having a better stand when attacked.
"Realistic Visuals" here meant not at all high 3D visuals! it means unit portraits looking realistic in opposite to a more comic-style look or such. A human face lookin glike a uman face etc...
 We never joke...don't you be so serious, friend
Quote:
I'll support this I suppose. It adds a little variety to the scenario. Maybe they shouldn't be in campaigns, though.
Some could be, but I also think, if occurin in campaigns, they should rather be determined than random...
Quote:
I have a suggestion of my own: More slots for perks/secondary skills. I don't know how they've changed the secondary skills yet, but just from playing around with the skill wheel I noticed how limiting everything is. Logistics, Enlightenment (for the stat boosts), War Machines (for Brimstone Rain and a resurrecting first aid tent), and Light Magic (for Resurrection) are all pretty essential. However, that only leaves one other skill slot available, and you can almost certainly kiss your chances of getting the ultimate skill goodbye at that point. It also feels weird when there are like 10 tertiary skills, but only three can be chosen per skill. Perhaps raising the cap a bit could be helpful? Or would that be too overpowered?
I think it falls under the "more skills and more logical perks" category...but maybe it's seperate, will probably add it. Personally I would like the capped being raised a bit (in a proposal of myne, you can choose 5 perks per skill). The point is that each skill level allows one perk...
so, after the lot you gave me to think, thank you very much for contibuting so deep to this thread!!!
|
|
Nelgirith
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 25, 2010 11:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
?all H6 battlefields I've seen so far are no bigger than H5s and these are, imo, a bit small. Though that may depend on favour..
"All" ????
If you had read well through all the previews, you'd know that on the videos we've seen there was only ONE battlefield. The Gamescon demo was only featuring ONE SINGLE battle which was actually a placeholder battlefield (since siege battles weren't implemented yet).
|
|
Fool
Hired Hero
|
|
posted September 26, 2010 03:13 AM |
|
Edited by Fool at 17:25, 26 Sep 2010.
|
Thanks for replying... Let me clear up a few misunderstandings.
The only HoMM game I have played is III, due to lack of time and money. However, this does not mean I am completely ignorant about all the other games. I have extensively studied pretty much all the information Age of Heroes has to offer about both IV and V (except for the campaigns, since I am planning on getting V once I'm done with III and I don't want to be spoiler'd). I have also spent a lot of time playing with Celestial Heaven's TotE skill wheel to get a feel for the perks, since those were the things that intrigued and confused me the most. Obviously it's no substitute for actually playing the game, but I feel I have a decent grasp on it, and from what I saw the ultimate skills don't seem that unreasonable. (Of course, this is on paper; in execution, especially with a luck-based skill system, I can see how badly it can backfire. There also just isn't enough time to get them except in a large map or a campaign due to the minimum level for attaining them being in the mid-20s...)
Also, although I had not read the majority of the thread at the time of my previous post, I've read all of it now and some of the points have been made more clear. You may want to add further explanations and the conclusions of any discussions to the first page to summarize things for newcomers.
With that out of the way...
Quote:
I think it was meant in a way that being udnerground and not above would have more gameplay effects, though I don't remember which in detail...
Yes, I saw this. I'm changing my vote to a since I think that making the underground more unique instead of just "another map with a different landscape" is a good idea.
Quote:
actually, it can make sense. A well-known example is moria: the gate doesn't go directly down, but sideways into the mountain, and at least a good part is on the same level as the "aboveground". I think such places were meant.
Picture how this would actually work though. If you want to have a tunnel you can just put a subterranean gate in front of a mountain and have it transport you to a narrow underground passage. Just say it isn't very deep or something. (Although I admit that I'm thinking in H3 terms here -- with fully 3D graphics it might be different)
Quote:
Quote:
At the risk of looking like a moron, I'm going to ask what "AM" stands for. I'm afraid I can't propose an opinion until then.
you don't! I change it in the list. It simply means "Adventure Map".
Ohhhh. I see. But why is that even a suggestion then? Don't we already have those? (Marletto towers, crystals of revelation, etc.)
Quote:
?all H6 battlefields I've seen so far are no bigger than H5s and these are, imo, a bit small. Though that may depend on favour..
I read in two interviews that the dev team said that they were making the battlefield size larger. They are rather obsessed with the idea of dynamic arenas though, so maybe the one you saw was shrunk because of something special. (Or they may not have finished making the arenas yet...)
Quote:
Quote:
Perhaps. The entire point of retreating though is that you know you're going to lose the creatures anyway, so you can at least keep your hero. Allowing you to take a quarter of your troops or so with you would defeat the purpose, I think.
Depends. You would still loose a significant part of your army.
Well, yes, obviously, but I can still see it being too overpowered. The whole point is that if you're going to lose your troops anyway, you might as well save your hero. Being able to save troops, even a small percentage, regardless feels a bit cheap. Especially since you probably don't have many creatures anyway if you're on the losing side, so I don't see it as much of a loss.
Quote:
...which are no longer existent in H5. Which makes the WM-skill almost a MUSThave skill, which i do not like too much...also, it's not just respect that makes a hero/general...
Um, yes, I know? I meant the tertiary skills, not the all-encompassing War Machines secondary. And what I mean is that just because you're good at one thing doesn't mean you're good at everything. Being able to effectively command and lead an army does not necessarily mean you can operate complex machines. (Performing first aid, in particular, would require a lot of training) I see it as the hero handing control over to experts who are trained in those areas since they don't know how. Once the hero gains experience in those fields, they become capable of controlling it themselves.
Quote:
I found this point was more about th etime-taking of battle, the reonforcement thing coudl eb considered a step further.
Still, and I repeat, realism is not always a good thing. Having an epic battle that takes multiple days to beat is certainly realistic, but would completely cripple you. Think about it; while your strongest hero is tied up in the battle, the enemy is hiring secondary heroes to snag all of your mines and might even take a few towns if you're in a really bad position. In many maps every movement point counts, and you simply cannot afford to waste turns like this. Even if sending reinforcements is not included, I'm still going to vote
Quote:
Found it was one of the less bad parts of H4, though I don't care much. I think it's jsut a matter of preference. simultaneous retaliation supports defensive tactics a bit more.
Hm, I suppose. Just as long as there's nothing that allows you to retaliate before being attacked like in H4, that's just really overpowered. I guess I'm just not used to it since I've never seen it in practice, but it still sounds like a bad idea to me.
Quote:
It's not explicitely about new features here.
Yes it is. The title of the thread is "Wishes: New Features". Besides, I thought the whole point of this is to make suggestions? If you want to write down all the existing elements of Heroes and vote on whether or not people like them that's fine, but it really has no place in a suggestion thread.
Quote:
...you asked for the simple/many options buttons.
Simple options would be mainly like you have things like: "quick battle" (computer calculation) "quick battle without spells" "normal battle" and such.
Many optiosn would be more ingame effecting options, like sending spies or such, either with pro's and cons for each option or for a cost or or or^^
Again, the first few already exist, and I'm not sure how the other effects would work, exactly, or if they'd be a good idea in the first place. I'm changing my vote to
Quote:
Quote:
I'm going to have to say no to this. Using up a powerful creature's retaliation with weak fodder then ganging up on it is a viable and age-old strategy. The fact that the griffin can retaliate infinite times should actually be a unique ability, too, not just a powered-up version of what everyone else can already do.
I also don't want this but I think your reason a bit...well...not-fitting. Just being traditional doesn't maek anything good or bad^^ I don't want itthis way, but a reworking of soem kind would be good for the retaliation system imo...thsi way it's just like this: attack, whenever you can. A greater influence of defensive strategies should be taken in, imO!
I don't mean "It's traditional, therefore it must stay FOREVER!", that's silly. What I meant by "age-old strategy" is that it's an effective strategy that people have been using for a long time. If people have used it repeatedly and it works, that's usually a sign that it's a good thing.
Quote:
It was discussed here. teh idea is to balance things a bit more. The retaliations would be capped by damage (each turn?), rather than strikes. F.e. if 5 angels coudl deal a 500 damage of retaliation in a round. Then a creature with 100 hp would come, attack the angels, killing none, and the angels strike back, they kill the creature and have 400 retaliation-damage left for the next attackign creatures. Just example stats, nowhere to real...
This sounds like it could work.
Quote:
Quote:
Do you mean that the hero is on the battlefield and, if defeated, the battle is won instantly? Or a more literal chess-like battle? I'm going to have to say to the former and to the latter.
the former, I think^^
On second thought I'm changing my vote to for that. Everyone would just go for the hero at the first opportunity, even if he has lots of health. [url=http://www.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InstantWinCondition]Instant Win Conditions[/url] are bad ideas with this engine. It would really detract from the troops themselves since everything revolves around the hero. The reason the king in chess works is because he's heavily guarded at the start to prevent blitzing and tends to remain guarded because you have a lot of pieces and can afford to do that. The Heroes engine offers no such benefits; it would take over half your army to protect the hero, and he's wide-open from the get-go.
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe, but morale isn't meant to be overly complex. Morale affects your turns, luck affects how much damage you do. Works fine as-is, doesn't really need to be made any more complex in my opinion.
quite some traditionalist on homm you are ain't you?
My apologies, I hadn't read the rest of the thread when I posted this. After reading the discussion, I'll change my vote to a slight
Quote:
Split stacks?!? It is used in Heroes 3.5 wog and works quite fine, be assured
Mmh, WoG... I can still see it being abused or working out badly, though. If you say it works though, I suppose I'll change my vote to
Quote:
Quote:
(I don't play multiplayer so I can't form an opinion on the next two suggestions...)
are you referring to the campaign variants? but they are not only for multiplayer!!! they are just also playable in multiplayer, but you can easily play them alone, too
No, the two things I was referring to were right after it on the list, and were both multiplayer features, which I don't care about.
Quote:
I though tyou said you didn't play H5? Also this is a thing I personally dislike. I'd like LESS "racism" in Heroes, not more!!! More faction-merging, more use of foreign heroes and units in your army, etc. etc.
From what I've read about them, the racial skills were some of the best changes to H5 in my opinion. Helps balance out necromancy since it's no longer unique. Anyway, what exactly would faction-merging do or consist of? How would it have any value? Heroes appears to be hard-coded to discourage the player from mixing factions due to the fact that you can only carry one full town of troops at a time, not to mention the morale penalties. (Plus we now have town conversion, which is honestly the most anti-faction-mixing thing you can do, implying that the dev team wants to work towards faction uniqueness, not away) The factions are meant to be unique, all with a different focus, as can be seen through their unit lineups. Having racial skills emphasizes that and makes the game more fun overall, in my opinion. It appears that we just have different ideas of what we like best.
Quote:
Quote:
No. The entire point of certain factions is that some are more oriented towards magic or might. Some of the alternate hero classes felt really forced and didn't make that much sense. Having only one hero class is a better idea for factions as a whole and makes things less complicated, in my opinion.
I donÄt think so at all. (btw, can it be that you are originally a H1 or H2 player?) The point of the faction is the setting it gives. I think it makes thing smore complex, not complicated. also, 2 hero classes does not necessarily mean 1 might and 1 magic class.
I believe that this whole thing is now moot since it's been confirmed there will be 2 heroes per faction in H6. And if the heroes weren't 1 magic/1 might, what would the distinction be?
Quote:
If there are racials, they could be without. would be available for everyone. Would not affect morale negative or positive. Maybe neutral classes focus on 1 skill each class? Such things...
Eh... The entire point of the racials is that they're supposed to be unique to the faction... I do think that the idea of being able to train a hero in a certain racial skill could work, and would reduce the uselessness of heroes that aren't from your home faction.
Quote:
Since this is about wishes, it's not that important what is allready certain for H6 It adds diversity to the game, and I personally, don't want to have purpose-based schools, anyway^^
Purpose-based schools have both pros and cons. On one hand they allow for you to know exactly what you're getting if you choose to specialize, but it can also cripple you if you only invest in, say, destructive magic and, as such, are then unable to use any buff or debuff spells. I'll see how this new spell system works when it comes out. (Oh, and also, this is the Heroes 6 Altar of Wishes, so yes, these suggestions are supposed to relate to Heroes 6 in particular)
Quote:
No, quite not! It's more that the hero gains a position on a battlefield. He can not block enemy creatures, or be attack, but he himself ahs a range for his attacks, and maybe for his spells. It makes the hero more weaker than stronger^^
You mean they can't move but can still be a target, sort of like war machines? Hm... I'm still against heroes on the battlefield in general, but whatever.
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe, but I feel like this is a very superficial idea that doesn't need to be tacked on...we already have the stables in Haven after all.
...which have nothign to do with this idea It's just cool to choose a mount, imo. Also, they could have different speeds, grant the hero with abttle abilities, maybe. A majestiv aura for a dragon-rider. SUch things.
How in the world does a special building that has the sole purpose of giving you a better mount and therefore increasing your movement range have nothing to do with this? (especially since you say they could have different speeds) This might be a good idea for a pure RPG, but seems unnecessary for a strategy game where you already have enough things to worry about. And seriously, don't get carried away. "Hey, I thought this up on a whim and it sounds really cool!" ideas are very common but don't always hold enough water to be plausible.
Quote:
I have to say an honest thing here, and I hope you don't get offended - but how can you speak of balancing issues so often for aspects which are in games which you haven't played?! Because people tell things imbalanced? It don't mean they are, ou know...
So, sorry, I really don't want to offend you!
for the ultimate skills, I personally do not care^^ I liekd the idea, but never really went for the ultimates...
No offense taken, and I admit that I haven't played the games so I don't really know how it works in practice (though many other people have said that it worked out terribly), but from what I've seen on Age of Heroes and the skill wheel they seem reasonable and a good concept. I always like having something far-off that I can try to reach for, even if it requires that I give up some other skills along the way. (You can only have three perks per skill anyway) I do admit that that was on paper though -- again, once I finally finish all the H3 campaigns and play H5 I'll probably see it in practice and can make a more accurate conclusion.
Quote:
more pure even. How I dislike it It feels to synthetic mechanical for me. Too much focus on gameplay. MAgic schools shoudl be determined by setting for me. I don't think in a world with amgic the mages would gather by either being blessers or cursers or damagers...
So you mean like in H4? You have to be careful not to go too far in either direction -- there was a lot of overlap between spells in H4 and having magic be tied to factions can cause specialization that is too narrow. Like I said before, everything has pros and cons, but I do think that it's generally safest to stay closer to the middle ground.
Quote:
mini-towns are mentioned on page 6, post 7 and explained in the posts below, I think.
Ah yes, I believe I read about that. Sounded superfluous and unnecessary, besides can't you do that anyway by directly limiting which buildings you can build in that town? H3 had tons of towns that were pretty much nothing but a town hall and maybe a creature dwelling if you were lucky, and also disallowed the ability to build anything.
Quote:
LINEAR formular. 1 mage deals 50 damage with a spell -> 2 mages deal 100 damage with a spell, etc. Or so I understood it^^
Ah, okay. then, although I think that this might require some balancing tweaks still.
Quote:
Quote:
What do you mean? That they could learn spells from mage guilds? I don't know... Creature spells are generally picked specifically for them, adding more could cause game-breakery and needless over-complication. (Would it even be possible, coding-wise?)
I think pretty much that. I think it could be possible.
My vote is still then.
Quote:
Quote:
Unnecessary, I've never done this accidentally and it's really hard to make this mistake since you need to specifically click on the spot you want to travel to.
It's not about that at all. Movement reminder means you can only step in/out a boat once per day. This is about your hero being able to travel on instead of loosing his whole day for stepping onto a boat.
What are you referring to then? You seem to be saying that if you click on a boat and are about to board, you'll get a warning message saying "if you board this boat you will end your turn, are you sure you want to do this?" to prevent people from accidentally wasting all their movement. What I mean is that I have never had such a problem, and I doubt anyone else has either since interacting with an object is not really something you can do accidentally.
Quote:
THis page is not about deep elaboration, but about if the general ideas are wanted. If one can't say if he likes or dislike a point without going too deep, the point imo is irrelevant for him -> s/he s it. For general information, the weather should mainly effect the battle, but in quite some ways. Factions woudl probably have favourite weather. Storm could alter movement. Fog could add qutie a new effect, etc.etc.
If the ideas are too vague then people won't know whether or not to vote on them, though. If you just say, "should weather be included", I don't know whether to vote yea or nay, since it doesn't explain what weather will actually do or how it will work. Elaboration is very important with things like this and should definitely be included here so people don't get confused. (Seriously, some of the suggestions are really vague)
Quote:
Quote:
Again, I don't know what AM stands for so I can't express an opinion.
See above
Ah, I see. I'll change my vote to then.
Quote:
It means they take a defense position for the cost of their last movement points, having a better stand when attacked.
Ah, okay.
Quote:
"Realistic Visuals" here meant not at all high 3D visuals! it means unit portraits looking realistic in opposite to a more comic-style look or such. A human face lookin glike a uman face etc...
Oh, I see. TV Tropes has ruined my life. ;_; (also, my vote is now )
Quote:
We never joke...don't you be so serious, friend
Eheh...I get that a lot.
Quote:
Quote:
I'll support this I suppose. It adds a little variety to the scenario. Maybe they shouldn't be in campaigns, though.
Some could be, but I also think, if occurin in campaigns, they should rather be determined than random...
Many campaigns already have determined events like this though.
Quote:
I think it falls under the "more skills and more logical perks" category...but maybe it's seperate, will probably add it. Personally I would like the capped being raised a bit (in a proposal of myne, you can choose 5 perks per skill). The point is that each skill level allows one perk...
I don't necessarily want more skills, I just want to be able to choose more instead of feeling like I have to stretch a one-meter tablecloth across a two-meter table. More skills is probably going to happen, though.
(What do you mean by "logical perks", by the way?)
Anyway, uh, another problem I see arising in this thread that I have seen before: Think your suggestions through, people. I don't mean this in a mocking or scathing way, but do try to actually think about what your suggestions would be like if they were actually implemented into the game. Think about their consequences, how they would work, etc. If you think about it and it doesn't sound like it'll work, revamp it and try to sort out the pitfalls to make it more plausible. I have seen many, many people post their ideas immediately, without doing this, and it causes things to get bogged down in unnecessary suggestions that just won't work. I feel like this is what WoG suffered heavily from when I played it a few years ago -- there were just far, far too many scripts and additions that varied wildly in practicality. The end result was far too complex and over-busy, and I feel like it detracted from the overall Heroes spirit... (Again, though, that was a few years ago. Things may have changed)
Just my humble opinion though. I'm not trying to order anyone around or insult people here, so please don't take this that way.
Edit: Another suggestion: make experience requirements more reasonable. They rise exponentially with every level, leading to absurd numbers like requiring 1 million exp just for a single level up. Experience requirements should be less exponential and more linear, especially since the importance of level ups actually decrease as time goes on. Perhaps the experience bonuses from Enlightenment could double (to 10/20/30%) to make it more practical, because right now even a 15% experience boost is quite worthless.
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted September 26, 2010 09:00 PM |
|
|
Anything that I do not quote will be that hurricane symbol
Adventure Map:
Q-Random Events
R=  I really miss that Blue 'Event' Ball from HoMM3ME!
-various ultimate artifacts instead of just "the grail"/"tear of asha"
R=I like this, something akin to the Turbo-artys where many make something rad? Although I could see it also be another grail-like thing that makes this week and every week a creature of yours week like the old Inferno-grail
Q-uncrossable rivers with crossing options (bridges&fords)
R= Excellent idea and long overdue! It would be nice to get away from having to make 'sand-bar's on each side of a bridge to still nav. the river.
QBattle:
-Bigger Battlefields
R= If you mean the combat-screen...
Q-war machines can be controlled without skill
R= Don't like that one, why have the skill? Makes me think of the ME always putting tons of Luck/Moral boosters on the map, Heroes with Leadership and/or Luck skills are <imo>...sent packing.
Q-Battles taking time, possibly even lasting day (with a certain rate of turns=>day Heroes, unless surrendering, are stuck in the battle. Reinforcements can be sent.
R= Not sure how this would work. You mean something like Total-War's battles?
Q-Castle and obstacle Penalties for shooters.
R= they already are pretty lame at seiging. 200-300 hundred skeleton-archers and I can kill 1 or 2 level 5s or 6s?
Q-many options when starting a battle
R= As in?
Q-Chess-like Battle (Hero as King)
R= Probably a mental-block, but doesn't sound good at alland I liked Battle-Chess
-Active Morale (morale changing through battle, see whiteriders thread
R=
-morale has different effect than another/quicker turn
R= This merits some thought. Could have hit-points or attack increased duing the battle. Moral has always been huge in real combat.
-Hexagons-BAttlefield (H3) isntead of Squares-Battlefield (H5
R= I'm still lost on this one.
-Can split unit stacks on battlefield:
R= I try to do that before the battle, if I remmber. I saw your post (I think it was yours) about 'overkill' and agree with you. Using 100 Arcanes to knock off 5 Liches? This could be a prebattle option, just like the pre-battle-tactics-bit.
Editor(s):
-Faction Editor:
R= Anything that we can edit for ourselves is good stuff 4me.
Heroes:
-Hero on Battlefield (as in H4)
R=Did not even play 4 (due to Son's disgust). 2,3 and 5. Does not sound good but can you explain the concept, if you've not already?
-switchable mounts with different benefits
R= Better horses and better ships (to buy or steal) along with movement skills and bonuses? Fine idea for Huge/Imp. maps!
-game should hide Navigation as an option if there is no or very little water on the map
R= We used to be able to be practical when map-building
-more skills that are used outside combat, like ambushing skill or construction skill.
R= Sounds interesting
-a skill to improve the spellcasting prowess of creatures
R= Like it.
-More skills, and make the perks more logical:
R= Who wouldn't want some more skills to choose from?
Spells&Magic:
-Spell schools by effect
R=
-more spells:
R=
-More Adventure Spells
R=
Units:
-higher chance for creatures joining your army when they have the same faction as the hero
R= Agree but isn't it already True?
-some creatures have adventure spells and abilities
-Mercenary Creatures fighting for a daily amount of gold
R= Like both of these at first glance
...miscallaneous:
-more diplomatic options - changing allies, etc. during scenario
R= I've had the same idea. The concept played-out awesome in Age of Empires years back. I would guess that some of the PC=Gurus here can do this but it sure would be nice to have some tabs and clicks for old-dogs like me, so endless thread-searches are not needed.
-more diplomatic options - increased trading
R= I also wrote in another post that we should at least be able to visit an allies' castle and learn the spells there.
-ambushs
R= Map Events
-more naval elements in the game, different boat types
-stepping in and out of boats -> movement costs + reminder instead of loosing the turn
R= Yes to these and also the Admirals hat, or...a way to dial up Navigation w/skills that progress from Cabin-Boy to Captain to Admiral. Boat types, cost etc. Idea: This just popped in; We have differnt teraign, shouldn't we have different waters and weathers that we sail on? So, an Admiral=level Hero can sail the North-Sea w/o penalty to movement/sailing, and also have attack and defence skills dialed up during sea battles?
-weather
R Someone posted the idea of 'region-specific' and that Roxx! Rain or snow on the mountain and sunshine on the sandy beach.
II - Ambiance Issues:
-more peaceful visuals, less "shiny" art -realistic visuals
R= How about a lot larger selection of nature/structure sets and items? Snow is a dismal area to work with. Three ground covers and 1 road type. The 'snow-buildings don't even have all the possible buildings available. Kinda off-track here, I know but it's important.
III - fun and miscallaneous:
-Whack-a-baby-seal minigame in taverns
R= Darts man!Toss a bulls-eye and your archers fire w/o penalty for a week<LOL>
Qb]Random Events
R=I posted a lot about this too. 'Random' and 'Timed' as in H3.
Ambushes
R= We're back to the NEED for 'Events' placement on the map.
My centandhalf, Thanks for posting this. Made me work a bit You may have answered a lot of this already, I've got some wicked-pain so I breeze through threads. Apologies in advance if needed.
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted October 03, 2010 12:41 PM |
|
|
Ah, I'll browse through that a bit again
First, for Fool
As you may see, it's quite a lot of ideas here. I'll nevertheless try to add explanations, too, but not now, and not soon, that will take me some time.
Quote:
Picture how this would actually work though. If you want to have a tunnel you can just put a subterranean gate in front of a mountain and have it transport you to a narrow underground passage. Just say it isn't very deep or something. (Although I admit that I'm thinking in H3 terms here -- with fully 3D graphics it might be different)
I jsut see no reason why it should NOT work...and it emphasizes the mountains' height
Quote:
Ohhhh. I see. But why is that even a suggestion then? Don't we already have those? (Marletto towers, crystals of revelation, etc.)
You are referring to the "skill enhancing Adventure Map buildings". First, Marletto Towers enhance, what most people here, as far as I'Ve read, would concern a "stat", not a "skill" (though I think in the early homms they were called primary skills?!). What is meant by here is buildings that enhance a certain skill, like the town building from necropolis in H3, which enhances your necromancy. A lighthouse nehancing navigation, a Scouts' Camp enhancing Scouting, etc. All in an certain area, of course (unliek the H3 lighthouse, which was working for the whole map.
Quote:
Well, yes, obviously, but I can still see it being too overpowered. The whole point is that if you're going to lose your troops anyway, you might as well save your hero. Being able to save troops, even a small percentage, regardless feels a bit cheap. Especially since you probably don't have many creatures anyway if you're on the losing side, so I don't see it as much of a loss.
This brigns me to an idea. Why not making it the other way round and taking exp, including levels!, from the hero when he retreats, but keeping some troops instead?
Quote:
Um, yes, I know? I meant the tertiary skills, not the all-encompassing War Machines secondary. And what I mean is that just because you're good at one thing doesn't mean you're good at everything. Being able to effectively command and lead an army does not necessarily mean you can operate complex machines. (Performing first aid, in particular, would require a lot of training) I see it as the hero handing control over to experts who are trained in those areas since they don't know how. Once the hero gains experience in those fields, they become capable of controlling it themselves.
I'm not sure, wether it's only on HC; or even only me, but for me, what oyu call secondary is primary. I know it was different in H3, but I believe attack etc. are STATS while Skills are War Machines etc. and I've learned the smallers her ein HC to be called "perks" That was probably leading to some confusion between us^^
You have a point. I'm not for or against this point anyway. Just wanted to clearify the other side. ...what still is the issue that WM is to good not to take it in most cases...
Quote:
Having an epic battle that takes multiple days to beat is certainly realistic, but would completely cripple you. Think about it; while your strongest hero is tied up in the battle, the enemy is hiring secondary heroes to snag all of your mines and might even take a few towns if you're in a really bad position. In many maps every movement point counts, and you simply cannot afford to waste turns like this. Even if sending reinforcements is not included, I'm still going to vote
You are binding the enemy, too! And this would drive players to play battles in a more aggressive style. It's probably a choice of liking...
Quote:
Yes it is. The title of the thread is "Wishes: New Features". Besides, I thought the whole point of this is to make suggestions? If you want to write down all the existing elements of Heroes and vote on whether or not people like them that's fine, but it really has no place in a suggestion thread.
Well, I'm sorry, btu I'm just not that strictly rule-bound...hmmm no that'S the wrong word. Sorry, I don't know how to express what I mena in english, since I'm not native. I think, exceptiosn in some cases are quite okay. For the title of the thread: can't change it. And yes, the main purpose is to make suggestions, and new ones, but for example the return of old ones is a suggestion too (I mean those not in H5, for example) and I'm fine when some things like initiative or not appear here. Any suggestion here is at least based on the games anyway.
Quote:
Again, the first few already exist, and I'm not sure how the other effects would work, exactly, or if they'd be a good idea in the first place. I'm changing my vote to
?they do? Only in wog, as far as I knwo, and didn't you hate wog?^^ Ah, I think it was also in H4, but as far as I know, there's now such button in H5.
Quote:
I don't mean "It's traditional, therefore it must stay FOREVER!", that's silly. What I meant by "age-old strategy" is that it's an effective strategy that people have been using for a long time. If people have used it repeatedly and it works, that's usually a sign that it's a good thing.
unfortunately, it's not. Also, usefullness isn'T all^^ OF COURSE it's a useful tactic, that most will use if they can.^^ I think I was neutral to this point, anyway...
Quote:
No, the two things I was referring to were right after it on the list, and were both multiplayer features, which I don't care about.
Can't fidn them^^ there are no multiplayer-only suggestiosn here so far, as far as I know...Sur you don't mean this:
Quote:
-Include Tournament "Campaigns" (incl. Multiplayer)
-Include World-Campaigns with region conquering (incl. Multiplayer)
'cause these are jst campaign variants which can also be played as multiplayer...
Quote:
From what I've read about them, the racial skills were some of the best changes to H5 in my opinion. Helps balance out necromancy since it's no longer unique. Anyway, what exactly would faction-merging do or consist of? How would it have any value? Heroes appears to be hard-coded to discourage the player from mixing factions due to the fact that you can only carry one full town of troops at a time, not to mention the morale penalties. (Plus we now have town conversion, which is honestly the most anti-faction-mixing thing you can do, implying that the dev team wants to work towards faction uniqueness, not away) The factions are meant to be unique, all with a different focus, as can be seen through their unit lineups. Having racial skills emphasizes that and makes the game more fun overall, in my opinion. It appears that we just have different ideas of what we like best.
It's jsut waht I want, probably. Yes, I see the developers are probably going to an even more faction-bound way, but I dislike this quite much! Faction-merging in my mind would consist of things like a skill decreasing mali and giving boni for units of different factions, buildings only available when having towns of different factions, maybe units like that, too; it could mean heroes of two factions as well (f.e. Death Knight as Haven-Necropolis Hero or Demonologist for Acadamy-Inferno) adn many other things. Didn't make such suggestions here, yet, though...
Quote:
I believe that this whole thing is now moot since it's been confirmed there will be 2 heroes per faction in H6. And if the heroes weren't 1 magic/1 might, what would the distinction be?
this suggestion thread will, from my side, go on, anyway^^ it could be one might/magic one mixed or special class. Mixed class are equal in might and magic terms and special class focus on something different, special
Quote:
Quote:
If there are racials, they could be without. would be available for everyone. Would not affect morale negative or positive. Maybe neutral classes focus on 1 skill each class? Such things...
Eh... The entire point of the racials is that they're supposed to be unique to the faction... I do think that the idea of being able to train a hero in a certain racial skill could work, and would reduce the uselessness of heroes that aren't from your home faction.
eh, what? this was not about training racials at all, but about neutral/faction-unbound heroes, which ahve no racials, but instead maybe would focus on one of the skills, like for example a general would probably focus on leadership, a Sorceror on Sorcery, a Bard on Luck, etc...
Quote:
Purpose-based schools have both pros and cons. On one hand they allow for you to know exactly what you're getting if you choose to specialize, but it can also cripple you if you only invest in, say, destructive magic and, as such, are then unable to use any buff or debuff spells. I'll see how this new spell system works when it comes out. (Oh, and also, this is the Heroes 6 Altar of Wishes, so yes, these suggestions are supposed to relate to Heroes 6 in particular)
they are always related on H6 - AS WE WANT IT. As you said yourself it's an altar of WISHES. And if I wish things to be different than allready confirmed, I can suggest it.
Of cause it has pro's and con's. It's jsut too mechanical for me. I just htink: if there WAS magic in our world, by which would groups have built up themselves and got together to study spells. By the purpose? No, I think they would have a certain ideology, an idea, and follow that when studying spells, and such coudl magic schools be (all homms 'til 5 had that approach, anyway).
Quote:
You mean they can't move but can still be a target, sort of like war machines? Hm... I'm still against heroes on the battlefield in general, but whatever.
No, the opposite. They cannot be target, nro can they block enemies. They have no hp. But they have a range in which they can attack and cast spells, lie a unit (and also they can move, but you'll seldomly use that for a hero, probably). So from the point of the hero, the hero is on the battlefield, fighting like any unit, from the point of the other units, the hero is onyl existent as a potential danger/help.
Quote:
How in the world does a special building that has the sole purpose of giving you a better mount and therefore increasing your movement range have nothing to do with this? (especially since you say they could have different speeds) This might be a good idea for a pure RPG, but seems unnecessary for a strategy game where you already have enough things to worry about. And seriously, don't get carried away. "Hey, I thought this up on a whim and it sounds really cool!" ideas are very common but don't always hold enough water to be plausible.
1. this is permanent, not for a week.
2. this is mainly about different boni than Adventure Map Movement speed! (since a good horse for the hero would not make the army faster at all )
Also, I think you are quite...well, I have no word again, sorry. If I think of a thing "in a whim" and find it good, I amy suggest it here. And taht goes for everyone. Basta. If you don't liek the idea, you argue agaisnt it, and that's okay, maybe you convince the others that was a bad idea, but at least, it was thought and discussed. I think that is a good thing. Not speaking out htings, just because one has not thought in every detail of them is not a good idea, I think. Of course it's good to think about many aspects of it before, but the best ideas come from singular inspirations and such, anyway^^ The sense of the mount depends highly on the role of the hero. In H3, it indeed would have made not much sense. In H4, however, it would have made extreme much sense. It all depends...
Quote:
So you mean like in H4? You have to be careful not to go too far in either direction -- there was a lot of overlap between spells in H4 and having magic be tied to factions can cause specialization that is too narrow. Like I said before, everything has pros and cons, but I do think that it's generally safest to stay closer to the middle ground.
like in all HoMMs except 5^^
Quote:
Ah yes, I believe I read about that. Sounded superfluous and unnecessary, besides can't you do that anyway by directly limiting which buildings you can build in that town? H3 had tons of towns that were pretty much nothing but a town hall and maybe a creature dwelling if you were lucky, and also disallowed the ability to build anything.
I think it was about including soem factiosn for which havin gmuch units would result in making up units on force. A halflings faction, f.e. coudl have at msot 3-4 units, probably, or else it owuld be quite a made-up one.
Quote:
What are you referring to then? You seem to be saying that if you click on a boat and are about to board, you'll get a warning message saying "if you board this boat you will end your turn, are you sure you want to do this?" to prevent people from accidentally wasting all their movement. What I mean is that I have never had such a problem, and I doubt anyone else has either since interacting with an object is not really something you can do accidentally.
as I allready said, it's, as far as I udnerstood, NOT AT ALL about that kidn of reminder. The "reminder" is more an ingame not for the game, telling: this hero has allready stepped on/off a ship this round, therefore he/she can not step off/on a ship again. So you can still moove on the water/land, after stepping on aship, but you can do it only once per round.
Quote:
If the ideas are too vague then people won't know whether or not to vote on them, though. If you just say, "should weather be included", I don't know whether to vote yea or nay, since it doesn't explain what weather will actually do or how it will work. Elaboration is very important with things like this and should definitely be included here so people don't get confused. (Seriously, some of the suggestions are really vague)
The reason for that is we are open how the things are included. It's jsut about the main idea. F.e. I don't care wether (if native weather is existent) HAven has "cloudy" or "sunshine" as native weather or how much movement reduction a storm wind brings. I also allready split some apects into more detailed ones.
also, I gave you examples for weather^^ do you like it?
Quote:
Many campaigns already have determined events like this though.
Indeed. And for scenarios, such events hsould also come, but randomly here...
Quote:
I don't necessarily want more skills, I just want to be able to choose more instead of feeling like I have to stretch a one-meter tablecloth across a two-meter table. More skills is probably going to happen, though.
That's probably a liking issue. I like, in games, to have to choose which way to take, excludign the other.
...got a call, will finsih this later...
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted October 03, 2010 02:02 PM |
|
|
|
You know, I find it amazing that there are still people around who equate control of war-machines with war-machine effectiveness. The catapult would, without the war-machines skill, still only do 150-200 damage and would have less than 1/3 chance of hitting the intended target, The FATent would still be flimsy as hell and only heal 10hp, and the ballista would still do pathetic damage. Really, control plays only a meagre roll in how effective they'd be.
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted October 03, 2010 04:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
R=I like this, something akin to the Turbo-artys where many make something rad? Although I could see it also be another grail-like thing that makes this week and every week a creature of yours week like the old Inferno-grail
I don't really udnerstand what you mean?! You'd find this artifacts liek the grail, yet their effect would be quite variable
Quote:
R= If you mean the combat-screen...
Of course. What else could the battlefield be?
Quote:
R= Don't like that one, why have the skill? Makes me think of the ME always putting tons of Luck/Moral boosters on the map, Heroes with Leadership and/or Luck skills are <imo>...sent packing.
to enhance the effect of war machines and grant them additional one. Like with the other skills
Quote:
Q-Battles taking time, possibly even lasting day (with a certain rate of turns=>day Heroes, unless surrendering, are stuck in the battle. Reinforcements can be sent.
R= Not sure how this would work. You mean something like Total-War's battles?
?I'm kinda shocked that this statement could be interpreted like that...no! We mean a battle takes time on the adventure map. Every round costs a minimum on movement costs for the hero(es) and if long enough, the battle halts for a moment and is continued the next day...nothing to do with TW^^
Quote:
Q-Castle and obstacle Penalties for shooters.
R= they already are pretty lame at seiging. 200-300 hundred skeleton-archers and I can kill 1 or 2 level 5s or 6s?
But that's a balancing issue, not one of the effect in general^^
Quote:
Q-many options when starting a battle
R= As in?
As in nowhere, thoguht of it by myself as explained before that would be ingame options. Sending scouts, using tiome&ressource to take a more defensive position, such things. Some would be enahnced, or require, units, skills, and such. Each would have advantage and disadvantage.
Quote:
-Hexagons-BAttlefield (H3) isntead of Squares-Battlefield (H5
R= I'm still lost on this one.
?
Quote:
-Can split unit stacks on battlefield:
R= I try to do that before the battle, if I remmber. I saw your post (I think it was yours) about 'overkill' and agree with you. Using 100 Arcanes to knock off 5 Liches? This could be a prebattle option, just like the pre-battle-tactics-bit.
It was meant as in-battle option, I think...also, the thread wasn't by me, I think.
Quote:
-Hero on Battlefield (as in H4)
R=Did not even play 4 (due to Son's disgust). 2,3 and 5. Does not sound good but can you explain the concept, if you've not already?
The H4 Concept? THere are infos on the official sites and such, but basically the heroes fight in abttles pretty much as if they were creatures, but they aren't stacked. When levelling up, they get stronger, though the skills determine in which area. Killed heroes can be revived at towns, if you still win the battle nevertheless. Enemy eroes are captured and imprisoned.
For our own idea: It was more about hero taking a position on battlefield, instead of standing behind the lines, but else being quite much like in the other games (except 4)
Quote:
-switchable mounts with different benefits
R= Better horses and better ships (to buy or steal) along with movement skills and bonuses? Fine idea for Huge/Imp. maps!
Also an option, but not quite what was menat here.it's more about hero mounts giving somehting in battle. Would be of more use, when heroes participate in battle in any way.
Quote:
-More skills, and make the perks more logical:
R= Who wouldn't want some more skills to choose from?
You'd be surprised
Quote:
-higher chance for creatures joining your army when they have the same faction as the hero
R= Agree but isn't it already True?
I'm not sure. I think it was liek that in 3&4, but in 5?
Quote:
-more diplomatic options - increased trading
R= I also wrote in another post that we should at least be able to visit an allies' castle and learn the spells there.
Htat's a bit of a new suggestion, imo. And an interesting one!
Quote:
-ambushs
R= Map Events
No, this is about more. THis is about an option to lay an ambush ingame with your army. Also it ahs quite some effect on the ambnush-battle!
Quote:
We have differnt teraign, shouldn't we have different waters and weathers that we sail on? So, an Admiral=level Hero can sail the North-Sea w/o penalty to movement/sailing, and also have attack and defence skills dialed up during sea battles?
Different sea terrains added to the list as AM-thingy...
Quote:
weather
R Someone posted the idea of 'region-specific' and that Roxx! Rain or snow on the mountain and sunshine on the sandy beach.
Not quite what was suggested in this thread. THe weather differs for the whole map but don't effect each terrain equally, is what I think. Also, the weather has increased effect on you, midn that!
Quote:
R= How about a lot larger selection of nature/structure sets and items? Snow is a dismal area to work with. Three ground covers and 1 road type. The 'snow-buildings don't even have all the possible buildings available. Kinda off-track here, I know but it's important.
That IS a different point
btw, which homm are yxou talking about here?^^
Quote:
My centandhalf, Thanks for posting this. Made me work a bit You may have answered a lot of this already, I've got some wicked-pain so I breeze through threads. Apologies in advance if needed.
We all put soem work in this, by now Glad you joined here, too!
One of your points brought me to other suggestions, I miss here: Terrain defines look of towns (intown)
and terrain defines look of AM buildings.
added that to ambiance...
|
|
Agent_00_BLeRD
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2010 01:32 PM |
|
|
I'll be commenting on how I feel about each idea. At the end, are my own ideas in a separate paragraph so that it's easier to add them to the first page.
---
I - Gameplay,etc. Issues:
Adventure Map:
-Random Events
(Love it, love it, love it! If you've played H3:WOG, expert scouting gives you a 2% chance to have a random encounter every step. Strolling around became a real treat! :-D )
-various ultimate artifacts instead of just "the grail"/"tear of asha"
-underground more distinct from aboveground
-sometimes underground on aboveground-level
-Adventure Map-buildings improving hero skills
-uncrossable rivers with crossing options (bridges&fords)
(I think this can already be done in H5 with scripts. Not sure if it's needed so strongly.)
-Different water terrains
Battle:
-Bigger Battlefields
-Option to retreat without losing the whole army
-war machines can be controlled without skill
-Battles taking time, possibly even lasting day (with a certain rate of turns=>day Heroes, unless surrendering, are stuck in the battle. Reinforcements can be sent.
(In disciples 3, whenever you fight a battle, you lose a major chunk of your movement points for the day - you can't do more than 2 or 3 battles per day. Sort of makes sense how the time you spent travelling has now been taken up by a battle. It would also be possible to stall an enemy hero by throwing newly recruited heroes in his path forcing him to spend movement points to battle them. I guess
a balance needs to be achieved regarding the amount of movement lost because it is way too annoying in disciples.)
-simultaneous retaliation:
-combats with more than one hero on one side
-Castle and obstacle Penalties for shooters.
-simple options when starting a battle, like quick combat button
-many options when starting a battle
-infinite (weak) retaliation for most creatures
-progressive retaliation=ret. not capped by a number of strikes, but an amount of damage done.
-Chess-like Battle (Hero as King)
-Active Morale (morale changing through battle, see whiteriders thread)
-morale has different effect than another/quicker turn
-Hexagons-BAttlefield (H3) isntead of Squares-Battlefield (H5)
(Makes it much easier to calculate where the enemy can reach. Especially when you're up against a slow but powerful stack and are planning a few turns in advance.)
-Can split unit stacks on battlefield
Campaign:
-variable campaign structure
(I'm good either way. However if they implement alternative paths, there should be an option to play the alternate path whenever you want instead of having to restart the campaign all over again.)
Editor(s):
-Faction Editor
-Creature Editor
Heroes:
-each tavern has different heroes for hire
(Greater number of offered heroes instead of just two.)
-Advanced classes (as in H4)
-Different Hero direct attack options
-2 hero classes by faction
-New hero classes unconnected to towns
-hero classes can't learn certain spells
-Hero on Battlefield (as in H4)
-Heroes on Battlefield, but with infinite HP & can't fight without army
-switchable mounts with different benefits
-your style of play varies Hero Stats
Skills&Racials:
-no ultimate skill/perk
-no cross-skill prerequesites
-choose racial skill for any hero (thus quasi making him the hero class of your like) instead of hero belonging to one class, having it's racial
-game should hide Navigation as an option if there is no or very little water on the map
-more skills that are used outside combat, like ambushing skill or construction skill.
-diplomacy skill should work like in H4.
-a skill to improve the spellcasting prowess of creatures
-More skills, and make the perks more logical
Spells&Magic:
-More Adventure Spells
-Can learn spells in mage guilds of allied castles
Towns:
-Spies available in thieves guild, capable of watching an area
-2 creatures per level.
-possible to build several capitols
-unlock special features as you gain more castles
-many options in the tavern
-Mini-towns
Units:
-Creature Experience, but only stat boost, no new abilities.
-creature Experience, including new skills&abilities
(I found this idea in WOG very interesting though it would be very confusing for the new players to understand the concept of stack experience and how to not add more troops because you risk losing the newly gained abilities. If they can implement a simpler version of it, I'd be very happy.)
-unit counters - abilities making unit stronger against certain types of other units (like, f.e., mounted units)
-Unit initiative (as in H5)
-higher chance for creatures joining your army when they have the same faction as the hero
-use the linear formula for spell damage from creatures like in H4
-some creatures have adventure spells and abilities
-Mercenary Creatures fighting for a daily amount of gold
-Creature Spellbook variable
...miscallaneous:
-more complex sieges
-more diplomatic options - changing allies, etc. during scenario
-more diplomatic options - shared armies
-more diplomatic options - increased trading
-ambushes
-more naval elements in the game, different boat types
-stepping in and out of boats -> movement costs + reminder instead of loosing the turn
-weather
-heroes operating on day or night
-AM-movements determinates daytime
-Heroes can fortify their armies
-Mini-factions
II - Ambiance Issues:
-more peaceful visuals, less "shiny" art
-realistic visuals
(I'd like the game to retain its fantasy feel. Making things too realistic would rob it of some of its charm.)
-Terrain defines look of towns (intown, too)
-and terrain defines look of AM buildings
III - fun and miscallaneous:
-Whack-a-baby-seal minigame in taverns
-Darts in taverns
Now my own suggestions:
--Allow us to have multiple ultimate artifacts per map; the way it was seen in H4 with different colored oracles.
--A reason to play on water.
Since Heroes 2, I have always viewed water traveling as an expensive venture, only to be taken with scouting heroes at the beginning of the game to pick up loose treasure chests and flotsam. I rarely ever traveled with my main hero on water if I could avoid it. Whirlpools were avoided as a rule of thumb (I'd rather travel all the way across the map than lose my hard-earned creatures). The only difference I saw was in H4 Chaos campaign with the pirate's daughter where seamanship skill actually showed its potential.
So there should be a reason when a player would like to use water instead of land. Perhaps removing the boarding/unboarding penalty entirely, making some creatures have a drastic advantage on the sea (not just stats, something that changes their tactics) etc.
--Racial skills should be workable without needing a town.
Remember some of the campaigns in H5 where you had an elven hero who specializes in having favoured enemies but the map has no Sylvan town so you can't really select or change your favored enemies. Similarly for the warlock who doesn't have the elemental spire and his creatures lose the ability to perform elemental strikes. Or a wizard who can't put artifacts on his naturally weak academy creatures because he doesn't have an academy. There should be a way to use racial skills without towns on maps like these.
--Ability to move more quickly between towns.
On large maps where the map creator hasn't placed convenient monoliths, going back to your base to learn new spells, get new creatures and artifacts etc. can easily take 5+ turns. Town portal with selectable town makes the hero way too powerful. Something in between should be available. Perhaps the ability to create a portal between two castles. Or perhaps the teleportation isn't instantaneous but instead takes a few turns (not 5+ or else walking is a simpler alternative). Perhaps you can make a "pipeline" (not literally :-P ) between castles that takes time to be built but allows you to move from one castle to another far more quickly.
--Upgrading troops that have joined you on the map.
I believe most of you have encountered this. You're running around with a sizeable army and attack throng of archers. Oh wow! "A group of archers with a desire for greater glory wish to join you. Do you accept?" Unfortunately, you have marksmen and can't add archers since all 7 slots are full. In H4, this problem didn't exist because you have armies without heroes and no upgrades. But in H5, you'd end up screaming because you'd be losing all those valuable troops because you can't upgrade them and add to your army. Something should be done about this. Either allow us to spend more-than-normal resources to upgrade the joining troops on the field, or let us send those troops wishing to join us to the nearest castle or something. Just don't waste good food...errr...troops! :-P
--Fluid animations
Those who have played King's Bounty series will know what I mean. I found it really impressive how most combat animations were so fluid and natural. For example, the horseman's charge in KB seemed like an actual charge instead of run, stop, strike that is seen in Heroes series. And not only for the horseman; almost every creature in KB combines the last step of its movement into its attack animation. Looks very impressive when a Knight swings his sword overhead on his second last step and brings it down with the force of his stack size. :-D
--Better charging bonus
In KB, if the horseman was standing next to an opponent and was ordered to attack it, it would ride backwards, turn around and charge at it provided the entire movement was within his range. In Heroes, the only time we ever get to see the charge bonus take effect is when you strike a new target instead of the one you've struck in the previous round. KB's type of charging would be much appreciated.
--Lots, horde, throng
Lots is 6-9? Throng 100-299? What about pack, dozen, pairs, zounds, swarms, three-of-a-kind, full house? One of the first mods that I added for H5 was one that showed you the number range represented by the term being used. It would say "Several Titans (5-9)" or "Few Black Dragons (1-4)". Makes it much easier for those of us who can't keep track of these terms which have been known to change from one installment to another (Band and Dozens in H4, for example).
--loan option like in h3wog
H3:WOG allows you to borrow gold from your town hall and pay it back over the next few turns with additional interest. This becomes very handy when you need to load up your main hero and send him on his way but are slightly short on funds to make the required upgrades, hire creatures etc. You take a loan, load up your hero, send him on his way and pay the loan back over the next few turns. The upper limit for loan is capped based on the number of buildings in your town and on the subsequent turns, half of your daily income is used to pay back the loan. Very, very handy.
--Day and night like disciples 3
In disciples 3, when you end your turn, morning becomes afternoon, then evening on the next turn and then night (I think there were 4 cycles). While it would need some logical explanation to fit it into the game's lore, this could be a way to implement day/night cycles in Heroes with some creatures excelling at night combat and some heroes having skills to that effect.
|
|
Markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted October 10, 2010 09:00 PM |
|
Edited by Markkur at 21:07, 10 Oct 2010.
|
Sorry Jiriki9, Did not see this earlier.
Quote:
Quote:
R=I like this, something akin to the Turbo-artys where many make something rad? Although I could see it also be another grail-like thing that makes this week and every week a creature of yours week like the old Inferno-grail
Quote:
I don't really udnerstand what you mean?! You'd find this artifacts liek the grail, yet their effect would be quite variable
I was actually running with your idea. I meant, like in H3 where 5 different artifacts made one surpreme-artifact. And also, that I liked your idea of 'more than one Grail-artefact'. Remember the Inferno-Grail made each week "The week of the Imp"? Maybe something like that also available but in a new form.
Quote:
Quote:
-switchable mounts with different benefits
R= Better horses and better ships (to buy or steal) along with movement skills and bonuses? Fine idea for Huge/Imp. maps!
Quote:
Also an option, but not quite what was menat here.it's more about hero mounts giving somehting in battle. Would be of more use, when heroes participate in battle in any way.
OK, I think I follow you now.
Quote:
Quote:
-More skills, and make the perks more logical:
R= Who wouldn't want some more skills to choose from?
Quote:
You'd be surprised
You're right, I am.
Quote:
Quote:
-higher chance for creatures joining your army when they have the same faction as the hero
R= Agree but isn't it already True?
Quote:
I'm not sure. I think it was liek that in 3&4, but in 5?
I think it is in H5, but the odds must not very good or they'd join more often.
Quote:
Quote:
-more diplomatic options - increased trading
R= I also wrote in another post that we should at least be able to visit an allies' castle and learn the spells there.
Quote:
that's a bit of a new suggestion, imo. And an interesting one!
HoMM3 was set up that way.
Quote:
Quote:
-ambushs
R= Map Events
Quote:
No, this is about more. THis is about an option to lay an ambush ingame with your army. Also it ahs quite some effect on the ambnush-battle!
Sorry, I still don't understand. Can you explain a little further?
Quote:
Also, the weather has increased effect on you, midn that!
I am and I like it I think the weather should matter. But I imagine that many others might not agree.
Quote:
Quote:
R= How about a lot larger selection of nature/structure sets and items? Snow is a dismal area to work with. Three ground covers and 1 road type. The 'snow-buildings don't even have all the possible buildings available. Kinda off-track here, I know but it's important.
Quote:
That IS a different point btw, which homm are yxou talking about here?^^
The Map-Editor of H5. I probably should not have included it.
Quote:
We all put soem work in this, by now Glad you joined here, too!. One of your points brought me to other suggestions, I miss here: Terrain defines look of towns (intown)
and terrain defines look of AM buildings.
added that to ambiance...
Good approach.
Thanks for joining in with me too
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted October 11, 2010 09:00 AM |
|
Edited by Jiriki9 at 09:36, 11 Oct 2010.
|
Quote:
(I think this can already be done in H5 with scripts. Not sure if it's needed so strongly.)
Even if it can be done with scripts, not anyone can do scripts (me, for example can't.^^) Also I thik it would be a nioce option anyway, to have rivers with crossing options. Would make good defense points, probably.
Quote:
-each tavern has different heroes for hire
(Greater number of offered heroes instead of just two.)
no that'S not what this means. It means that EACH tavern on the map has 2 heroes to hire - and any other tavern has two other heroes to hire. A bit mroe of the realistic point, since a hero can hardly be in 2 places^^ also, it can give more sense/usefulness to AM taverns.
Quote:
-Heroes on Battlefield, but with infinite HP & can't fight without army
may I ask you why? This means jsut that the hero has a POSITION on the battlefield, mostly. So for example, he jsut can't attack everywhere he lieks, but within it's movement range. Such things.
Quote:
-Creature Experience, but only stat boost, no new abilities.
-creature Experience, including new skills&abilities
Since you're for the second, why are you against the first
Quote:
-realistic visuals
(I'd like the game to retain its fantasy feel. Making things too realistic would rob it of some of its charm.)
Aigain: This is not about a "realistic" look in the way of High Definition, 3D and such, but that the figures in the game look rather...well, realistic, in opposite to f.e. a comic style. H3, in that case, had a quite realistic look.
Quote:
--Allow us to have multiple ultimate artifacts per map; the way it was seen in H4 with different colored oracles.
Not sure, but I like the option at least.
Quote:
--A reason to play on water.
Since Heroes 2, I have always viewed water traveling as an expensive venture, only to be taken with scouting heroes at the beginning of the game to pick up loose treasure chests and flotsam. I rarely ever traveled with my main hero on water if I could avoid it. Whirlpools were avoided as a rule of thumb (I'd rather travel all the way across the map than lose my hard-earned creatures). The only difference I saw was in H4 Chaos campaign with the pirate's daughter where seamanship skill actually showed its potential.
So there should be a reason when a player would like to use water instead of land. Perhaps removing the boarding/unboarding penalty entirely, making some creatures have a drastic advantage on the sea (not just stats, something that changes their tactics) etc.
As long as you give no certain mechanic or at least idea for one, it's not a feature, really. Yet, I agree with you! Also, Quote:
-stepping in and out of boats -> movement costs + reminder instead of loosing the turn
would provide some more reason, yet you voted neutral...
Quote:
--Racial skills should be workable without needing a town.
Remember some of the campaigns in H5 where you had an elven hero who specializes in having favoured enemies but the map has no Sylvan town so you can't really select or change your favored enemies. Similarly for the warlock who doesn't have the elemental spire and his creatures lose the ability to perform elemental strikes. Or a wizard who can't put artifacts on his naturally weak academy creatures because he doesn't have an academy. There should be a way to use racial skills without towns on maps like these.
Indeed they should. Surprised we didn't list it yet...
Quote:
-Ability to move more quickly between towns.
On large maps where the map creator hasn't placed convenient monoliths, going back to your base to learn new spells, get new creatures and artifacts etc. can easily take 5+ turns. Town portal with selectable town makes the hero way too powerful. Something in between should be available. Perhaps the ability to create a portal between two castles. Or perhaps the teleportation isn't instantaneous but instead takes a few turns (not 5+ or else walking is a simpler alternative). Perhaps you can make a "pipeline" (not literally :-P ) between castles that takes time to be built but allows you to move from one castle to another far more quickly.
I like that Especially the tunnel idea. Coudl be a town building for each faction...like "Escape Tunnel" for Haven, "Infernal Road" for Inferno, "Path of the Dead" for Necros....for example.
Quote:
-Upgrading troops that have joined you on the map.
aaah, not sure
Quote:
-Fluid animations
Would be nice, but for me it's a quite unimportant issues, there is more at hand, so
Quote:
-Better charging bonus
1st. This is to detailed, to certain for one single unit, to be included as game feature in this thread...
2nd I don't like it. IN fact, I'D prefer if charging would only work in a line. It's unrealistic this turning around thing...
Quote:
-Lots, horde, throng
Quote:
--loan option like in h3wog
Quote:
-Day and night like disciples 3
Hard to implement into heroes!!!
Quote:
I was actually running with your idea. I meant, like in H3 where 5 different artifacts made one surpreme-artifact. And also, that I liked your idea of 'more than one Grail-artefact'. Remember the Inferno-Grail made each week "The week of the Imp"? Maybe something like that also available but in a new form.
Taht's an option. I, too, liked the combined artifacts, by the way!!!
Quote:
Sorry, I still don't understand. Can you explain a little further?
*sigh*
Okay. On the Adventure Map, you can let your army lay an ambush. For the other players, it's normally not seen than. When an enemy hero steps into your ambush, you can snap the trap and attack him in an ambush attack. In an Ambush attack, you can position your troops AROUND the enemy (like in many H3 buidling battles, f.e. GRaveyard) and get an initiative bonus. Also the enemy can't place his troops (no time, due to surprise). So it'S an ingame thing, though of course it will also be able to set ambushs on the map editor. Skills&Perks may have influence on ambushs (f.e. a perk making you detect an ambush easier or, on the other hand, help you set it.), as well as units being good in ambushing (rogues).
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted October 11, 2010 05:21 PM |
|
Edited by markkur at 17:23, 11 Oct 2010.
|
These last two topics were from me. Did you intend to put different posters responses together?
Quote:
Quote:
I was actually running with your idea. I meant, like in H3 where 5 different artifacts made one surpreme-artifact. And also, that I liked your idea of 'more than one Grail-artefact'. Remember the Inferno-Grail made each week "The week of the Imp"? Maybe something like that also available but in a new form.{/quote]
Quote:
Taht's an option. I, too, liked the combined artifacts, by the way!!!
Yeah, I couldn't believe they were not a part of H5 at all. Crazy! That's a 'mission' possiblity right there in map-making. Just like the Campaigns of H3. I enjoyed having to find 3,5 or 7 different pieces to make the ONE thing I needed to win.
Quote:
Quote:
Sorry, I still don't understand. Can you explain a little further?
Quote:
*sigh* Okay. On the Adventure Map, you can let your army lay an ambush. For the other players, it's normally not seen than. When an enemy hero steps into your ambush, you can snap the trap and attack him in an ambush attack. In an Ambush attack, you can position your troops AROUND the enemy (like in many H3 buidling battles, f.e. GRaveyard) and get an initiative bonus. Also the enemy can't place his troops (no time, due to surprise). So it'S an ingame thing, though of course it will also be able to set ambushs on the map editor. Skills&Perks may have influence on ambushs (f.e. a perk making you detect an ambush easier or, on the other hand, help you set it.), as well as units being good in ambushing (rogues).
Thanks for the sigh and explanation Ok, I follow you now. My only experience with ambushes was with the Map-Editor in HoMM3, using the 'Event' placement during map-making,. while you were talking about an in-game option.
Make it great!
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
fulano
Known Hero
Can I link to my own avatar?
|
|
posted October 11, 2010 08:06 PM |
|
|
Just my two cents
I really hope they make this game mod friendly! That would make me interested in buying it. Otherwise I'd probably wait until you can buy the game for $5 like I did with H5. I hope it won't be another game where you have to hack the data files to change anything.
I would use a game like Civilization IV for a good example. Everything is kept in very organized XML data files (NOT like the H5 files, holy cow!) and the game mechanics are run by simple C++ scripts so you can change just about every aspect of the game.
Mods are kept in a mod folder that can be switched in game. The mod folder is identical to the original game data folder and you just include files you want changed in your mod, kind of like H5 except the ability to specify which mod is helpful instead of including every mod in every file :/
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
