|
| Thread: More RPG or more strategy? | |
|
LionoftheNorth
Disgraceful
Adventuring Hero
|
posted February 06, 2011 06:32 PM |
|
|
Poll Question:
More RPG or more strategy?
I wonder in what direction most of you would like the HoMM series to go in terms of gaming-style? I know Nival had plans to make a pure strategy game out of HoMM VI and leaving the series tradition of RPG-elements, but luckily we never have to experience that since Ubisoft made the wise decision to throw Nival out of the window. 
Myself, I would prefer if the games adopted more RPG-elements. I would like the game to be more like King's bounty, except that it should be turn based and one should be able to control a kingdom, a realm with many heroes and towns at once, and just not one hero. I would like a hero-centred game, with many side-quests in every scenario, and many random side-quests, events or intrigues. Like advisors and governors plotting, intrigue, revolts, marriages, schisms, instability, divine interventions, random raids and such. I applaud the decision to create a reputation system and that a player will now be able to really control a territory by owning a town there, and not a safe haven in endless wilderness. However I would go beyond that. I would like to see peasants travelling to the markets with their harvest, and workers (or slaves) working at the mines, belonging to a certain guild or a certain class in their society, and all have their own wills. I would like notable characters living inside the towns, like in King's bounty, that the ruler and his/her heroes can bargain with and do quests for. I would like factions to fight for power inside ones kingdom, and rebel if too uncontent with the current situation, or heroes having to do quests to fight bandit guilds and organised crime inside their own realm, but getting handsomely rewarded for it. I would like to introduce the leadership-system from King's bounty too, and give the creatures their own wishes and wills that the hero must take note of outside and inside the battlefield, and not just controlling swarms of puppets. Such things would add some more fantasy-flavour to the game, and make each game more than “conquering another wilderness again”. And I would like to introduce an alignment-system similar to the old DnD one.
What's your vision of the series future?
|
|
DarkLord
Supreme Hero
Fear me..
|
posted February 06, 2011 06:38 PM |
|
|
i would like more PRG , but not they way you see it..
i think it's a bit too much.. sounds like turn based Elder-Scrolls..
PRG in HoMM should have reasonable limits..
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted February 06, 2011 09:40 PM |
|
|
Its a real dilemma.
RPG enriches single player experience, but in turn, hampers down multiplayer (most of the times).
I think rpg levels in heroes 3/4 were ideal. H5 already had too complicated (RPish) hero development for my taste.
It all boils down to whether you want enjoyable and fast multiplayer, or lots of options in singleplayer.
____________
|
|
Sleeping_Sun
Promising
Famous Hero
Townscreen Architect
|
|
posted February 06, 2011 09:56 PM |
|
|
More RPG elements in Heroes wouldn't be bad at all, but not too much either. It still needs to be more strategy than RPG.
Probably:
60% strategy - 40% RPG
or
70% strategy - 30% RPG
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 06, 2011 10:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
H5 already had too complicated (RPish) hero development for my taste.
I don't understand that at all?
I'm for Strategy myself. If I wanted to play RPG, I'd buy a RPG, and I don't think it's wise to try to ride on both horses, it'll just make the game half-good at both parts.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 12:06 AM |
|
|
I voted "more or less like it was in Heroes V" but I have no idea what does this mean. The TBS/RTS balance in Heroes V was practically the same as in Heroes I-III and that's why I chose the said option.
I'm for strategy over RPG when it comes to Heroes, the game isn't called "king of TBS" for nothing. Even though I like the RPG genre a lot (and detest the MMORPGs even more), Heroes has always been strategy-orientated and should stay strategy-orientated.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 12:43 AM |
|
|
Heroes still has a small part of RPG in which can be exploited and improved. All those objects you visit have always a custom text with some generic dialog, but aiming for a RPG interpretation. So, instead of visiting a learning stone and getting a generic text, a quest could be started from the object. And this does not affects in anyway the strategic part of the game, which is about fast expanding and well fighting.
I think that giving a personal touch to this RPG dimension would be enough to change the game from "very good" to "genius".
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
yasmiel
Supreme Hero
Former Chessmaster
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 12:50 AM |
|
Edited by yasmiel at 00:51, 07 Feb 2011.
|
Quote:
Quote:
H5 already had too complicated (RPish) hero development for my taste.
I don't understand that at all?
Well what i wanted to say is that skill development of hero was moving towards similar things that often happens in rpg games. As in i prefered h2-h4 skills (either of them) to H5 ones.
Basic skill choices would work better for TBS game in my opinion, detailed talent trees with zounds of paths (like H5 where you needed skillwheel to know what you were doing) simply work against the tbs part.
Ideally, there should be good ratio of tbs and rpg, but I'm afraid that whenever developers think of improving the RPG parts of the game it almost always comes with diminishing the TBS part. It might not be obvious at first (it isn't as clear in h5), but even the simplest slowing down of a pace as a result of improved RPG hampers the multi-player aspect of strategy game for me.
It always comes down to basics though - in single player RPG parts only improve the game. In multiplayer however, they can kill it.
____________
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 01:30 AM |
|
|
|
More strategy overall, but I wouldn't say no to a few RPG touches like heroes in combat H4 style (but a bit weaker) and not losing a game just because you go a week without a town.
|
|
paulemile
Known Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 01:41 AM |
|
|
Definitely more strategy for me.
Something awesome can be done on several points, IMO.
Like dynamic alliances, relationships with neutral creatures clans...
This could give the game another dimension, something I'd love to see. But I guess there won't be such features, at least in the upcoming HoMM6.
|
|
Nelgirith
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 09:11 AM |
|
|
More strategy, because it's the essence of the game, but more RPG elements add more flavor and fun to the game. So I'm with Sleeping Sun, 70% strategy /30% RPG to 60% strategy /40% RPG 
|
|
Tomash
Hired Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 09:48 AM |
|
|
In my opinion balance between strategy and rpg was very good in H5. You've got your Hero, with racial skill for each faction and I think wisely choosing skills is strategy too. But you didn't have to come and go delivering things and engaging in long dialogues and I think it was good.
____________
[url=http://dragcave.net/view/pbl4] [/url][url=http://dragcave.net/view/DQ1K] [/url]
|
|
kodial79
Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 10:24 AM |
|
|
I wouldn't want to have one at the expense of the other. I would like to have both of them! 
____________
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature!
|
|
Dave_Jame
Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 10:32 AM |
|
|
I personaly loved the H5 skill system.
I sae it as an natura evolution to the system in H3(H2), and thought it was simple but complex.
But I would rather not see more use of the RPG features. The heroes 5 system blus the Might and Magic orientation like in heroes 3. skill trees like we are odd to expect are personaly not a good move.
They were nice in Dark Messiah, but I think they dont belong in a heroes game.
____________
I'm just a Mirror of your self.
We see, we look, we gather, we store, we teach.
We are many, and you can be one of us.
|
|
Zekic
Tavern Dweller
Student of Titans.
|
|
posted February 07, 2011 07:40 PM |
|
|
|
Leave strategy elements dominant but improve heroes development.I think thats would be the best.Armys and world are strategy elements and they should be developed as ones,while heroes are RPG element and they should be developed that way.I really loved the step they made in heroes 5 considering heroes development and i wish for them to continue.
|
|
vicheron
Known Hero
|
|
posted February 09, 2011 01:28 AM |
|
|
|
I would prefer a balance between RPG, strategy, and exploration/adventure elements. I think that one of the main reasons why Heroes 3 is still the most popular game is because there's just so much to explore. You have these huge maps where you find something new every turn. In fact, in a lot of games, you spend more time exploring the map, finding treasures, and beating neutral monsters than fighting other players.
|
|
Adrius
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Stand and fight!
|
|
posted February 09, 2011 01:46 AM |
|
|
Keep the multiplayer balanced in the RPG/Strategy department.
For singleplayer though... go all out on the RPG part. More character development, more artifacts, more choices, more everything. Include massively powerful perks and artifacts that aren't present in the multiplayer version, just to get that really awesome feel of "Holy **** what did I just find?"
Hell, introduce random artifacts gained from killing creatures and looting chests. Would make every playthrough unique. (I'd exlude the more epic level loot from the random loot list though)
____________
|
|
|
|
