|
|
somi
Known Hero
|
posted January 31, 2012 10:37 PM |
|
|
Convert option is OK, if it's done like in WoG.
Make it so it cost a lot, destroys all building in town, and for some time you can't do anything in it, so when you get a town, you'll need to think is it beneficial to convert it or not.
At the moment there's no such choice, because you'll always convert it, and that is lame.
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted January 31, 2012 11:09 PM |
|
Edited by B0rsuk at 23:10, 31 Jan 2012.
|
Quote:
Convert option is OK, if it's done like in WoG.
Make it so it cost a lot, destroys all building in town, and for some time you can't do anything in it, so when you get a town, you'll need to think is it beneficial to convert it or not.
At the moment there's no such choice, because you'll always convert it, and that is lame.
Perhaps their intent was to create a choice-free strategy game ? Heroes IV taught them HOMM players don't like choice.
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2012 02:04 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Perhaps their intent was to create a choice-free strategy game ? Heroes IV taught them HOMM players don't like choice.
...which is really kind of a shame.
On first playing HOMM IV, I hated that you couldn't recruit all of your creatures, but then I came to really appreciate that decision. It gave more replay value to playing the same faction because you could try out different combinations of units and it gave your army a different flavor or style each time.
Granted, most of the time, people simply selected the units that they perceived to be the most powerful over and over, but I really liked mixing it up once in a while and taking White Tigers over Elves, for example, or (gasp!!) Dragon Golems over Titans.
Moreover, I actually appreciated the simplification to 4 tiers in HOMM IV: it made it much easier to gauge the strength of various creatures relative to one another. The 7-tier 7-creature system of HOMM III & V is a great system, but it made it occasionally difficult or complicated to determine, say, how your stack of level 5 creatures might fare against this level 6 stack, etc. Indeed, there were cases in which, for example, a really excellent level 5 creature might be nipping at the heels of, or even surpassing, a subpar level 6 creature in terms of overall quality.
The 4 tiers (or perhaps I should say IV tiers) had a rather large and pronounced power difference between them, making it easy and satisfying to gauge relative stack strength and additionally making it extremely rewarding to unlock the next tier in your town. (And once you had Black Dragons, game over everything else).
It's quite bizarre that MMH6 ostensibly has the fewest tiers (3), but also the least apparent difference in power between the tiers. It makes it all seem like kind of a wash. It feels quite cheesy and unsatisfying to creep a map with your Cores and own scores of neutral Elites without even a great population difference.
I actually somewhat like the overall simplification (e.g. the fact that it "groups" your units seems to encourage a more involved usage of unit tactics and synergy), but wish they would overhaul the damage mechanics so that there was a greater difference between the tiers.
Cores should not have so little trouble wiping the floor with Elites (and even Champions, for that matter).
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 01, 2012 07:58 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Perhaps their intent was to create a choice-free strategy game ? Heroes IV taught them HOMM players don't like choice.
Meh, don't be so stereotypical. Choice is fine, but in HIV it came at the cost of some features that imo. were much more important and it was poorly implemented. I think the strategic decisions in when to build upgrades - as discussed previously in this thread - was much more important than the choice between two units, that not rarely were no-brainers anyway. Plus, the fact that AI always chose the same - and often the worse - option in their towns and you couldn't revert their choices was the cherry on the cake to make a horrible system for me.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
seingeist
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted February 01, 2012 02:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I think the strategic decisions in when to build upgrades - as discussed previously in this thread - was much more important than the choice between two units, that not rarely were no-brainers anyway.
Very possibly, but these need not to have been mutually exclusive elements. I think that it would be nice to see both implemented: choose your units, and choose when to upgrade them. To say that I enjoyed certain elements of having to choose exclusive units is not to say that I didn't sorely miss the upgrades (I did).
Quote:
Plus, the fact that AI always chose the same - and often the worse - option in their towns and you couldn't revert their choices was the cherry on the cake to make a horrible system for me.
Yes, a creature building conversion option there would have been highly preferable, in addition to more variety in AI building orders.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 01, 2012 03:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Perhaps their intent was to create a choice-free strategy game ? Heroes IV taught them HOMM players don't like choice.
Not at all. H4 taught them that HoMM players don't like unfinished games. Truthfully, I thought the branched development tree was one of H4's finest innovations and argued strongly for either H5 or H6 to take it even further. I even envisioned a HoMM game where there were no discrete factions, or where each faction started out the same. The town identity would be defined by what build and hero development choices you made.
Sadly, my advice fell on deaf ears.
|
|
hobo2
Promising
Known Hero
|
|
posted February 02, 2012 02:14 PM |
|
|
The problem with Conversion is that the game doesn't have a Leadership cap the way King's Bounty does. The issue is that in Heroes 6 there is no choice about what units you will put into your army. Your army will have the seven units in your faction in it, and it will not have other things.
Conversely, in Heroes 3, if you're a Castle force and you conquer a Tower, chances are pretty good that you're going to make room in your final army for Titans. Because Titans are awesome. And what precisely it is that you're going to cut for that is something of an open question (probably Pikemen/Halberdiers). That choice exists because you have these extra towns sitting around generating creatures that you can't convert. So you end up with more creatures to choose from than your main army has slots. And because there are more potential stacks to choose from than you have slots, there is actual strategic decisions to be made.
For Conversion to be an option that makes sense, it has to be something that you might choose to not do. And for that to happen, you need limits to how many of each troop you can actually put into your final army. Having more cities of your faction would let you replace your losses more easily, having a foreign city would give you the option of replacing one of your stacks with one from a different faction (at the cost of army morale, as normal).
As long as there are no stack limits, then conversion is always the thing you want to do. Because even if you're Inferno and you have several wasted slots that you'd rather replace with something (anything) else, the fact of the matter is that converting still makes your good stacks bigger by as much as it would generate of non-converted units. So you always convert and you never have any real choices about what stacks to put in your army.
____________
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted February 02, 2012 02:24 PM |
|
|
Yeah ... I think that's a good point.
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Dave_Jame
Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
|
|
posted February 03, 2012 10:19 AM |
|
|
100% agree.
I woudl personaly alowe conversion, only for Forts and dwelings. Towns woudl be only an option in capaignes or scenarios.
The curent designe discurages players to combine armies, and lovers the potentional number of combinations
Alongside with this, the fact that there are no recruitable neutrals. which Is spoke about some time ago.
____________
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.
|
|
whiterider
Known Hero
death walks with me
|
|
posted February 03, 2012 01:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Perhaps their intent was to create a choice-free strategy game ? Heroes IV taught them HOMM players don't like choice.
...which is really kind of a shame.
On first playing HOMM IV, I hated that you couldn't recruit all of your creatures, but then I came to really appreciate that decision. It gave more replay value to playing the same faction because you could try out different combinations of units and it gave your army a different flavor or style each time.
Granted, most of the time, people simply selected the units that they perceived to be the most powerful over and over, but I really liked mixing it up once in a while and taking White Tigers over Elves, for example, or (gasp!!) Dragon Golems over Titans.
Moreover, I actually appreciated the simplification to 4 tiers in HOMM IV: it made it much easier to gauge the strength of various creatures relative to one another. The 7-tier 7-creature system of HOMM III & V is a great system, but it made it occasionally difficult or complicated to determine, say, how your stack of level 5 creatures might fare against this level 6 stack, etc. Indeed, there were cases in which, for example, a really excellent level 5 creature might be nipping at the heels of, or even surpassing, a subpar level 6 creature in terms of overall quality.
The 4 tiers (or perhaps I should say IV tiers) had a rather large and pronounced power difference between them, making it easy and satisfying to gauge relative stack strength and additionally making it extremely rewarding to unlock the next tier in your town. (And once you had Black Dragons, game over everything else).
It's quite bizarre that MMH6 ostensibly has the fewest tiers (3), but also the least apparent difference in power between the tiers. It makes it all seem like kind of a wash. It feels quite cheesy and unsatisfying to creep a map with your Cores and own scores of neutral Elites without even a great population difference.
I actually somewhat like the overall simplification (e.g. the fact that it "groups" your units seems to encourage a more involved usage of unit tactics and synergy), but wish they would overhaul the damage mechanics so that there was a greater difference between the tiers.
Cores should not have so little trouble wiping the floor with Elites (and even Champions, for that matter).
One of the best posts in this topic  Totally agree. The things about tiers in H4 and the choices was the first thing that has drawn me to this game and I gave it a try just to find out that the game is my favorite of the whole series and I spend thousands of hours playing with friends and replaying the campaigns (editing before that to much higher dificulty) - with Equilibris later. The one thing I didnt liked about H3 was the tier system, 7 creatures not at all balanced but me and fans in general got used to it and took this as a standart. Not much difference in power, sometimes higher level creature was weaker than previous.
With the calculation system H4 used it was 90% balanced but people are stuck to only one tactics and refused to see that Dragon Golems i.e. are as good or even better than Titans, or Hydras could rule over Black Dragons or Champions over Archangels.
Attack of Attacker*Damage of Attacker/Defence of Defender (*week growth for both of them), if you take the time to go through over all creatures shows that with few exceptions like Vampires or Ogres or Genies, everything else is fits very good. Some creatures that seem much more stronger than their cousin from the same tier in the same town, when you make the math, look much or less the same power and you only have to choose over speed and initiative (and with the retaliation system H4 used this is not so much of significance as in H3 where Speed rules or H5 where initiative is the most important stat) and the special abilities.
It is a pity that H4 wasnt valued as much as it deserves but this only shows that even teens can be as conservative and stuck to their preconceived ideas as their grandparents Changes and inovations when good and amusing are not taken as light as it should be. But H3 was turned into a standart for the whole series and placed on a pedestal for a very long time.
H6 tried but failed for the same reasons SeinGeist shared - the tiers are not clear defined, they have very close power and everything looks much or less equal - just look at the many discussions what to build - cores, elite or champions - as if a real battle could only be led by generals and not soldiers. Cores have so much and many special abilities and offer more tactics to be used than elites or champions - actually the cores - the simple soldiers should have only mass growth, one or max two skills and to be used because of the numbers and the larger numbers. Elites should have much powerful special abilities to help the cores do their stuff, and bigger power difference and even one champion should have much more effect and significance over the battlefield, like special aura and influence over the fight - Heroes is designed to be played in a sertain way by the devs, they had some ideas that looked great only in their heads and I could think about some of them, but people tend to invent hundreds of different tactics that differ so much from the official game-line and this is why H6 fails to prove itself as a good game .
Even the way you should play the campaing scenarious - if their is a official way, then why giving the option to choose the campaing order? I was laughing so much when I read about that. The same applies with the skill system - no choices at all, only the illusion of choice - fans needed only a week to invent the perfect skill to be taken and than no one really makes choices when level-up. The only small choices are made when building and this is because of the random resources on the map, a pile of ore instead of pile of wood in this scenario or that and this is only to put an accent on the weak resource system.
Devs had some vast ideas and maybe when discussing between themselves these ideas someone with good retoric skills could persuade the rest of them why this idea should be implemented but when looking outside of this box the picture is much more different. I will be not so far from the truth if I say that this is a game that should be played only in one way prooved from the devs if you want everything to be as it should be, but this is impossible.
Take a look at KB - you could play the game with infinite number of different tactics and it is still replayable and fun. How it is so that you can have three kinds of heroes balanced between eachother, 5 tiers balanced and there is not a single creature to be used over another - you can always replace a stack with another and still have options to win (or if you lack skills to lose with seeming stronger army). Me and my friends created a mod to control the enemy army and to make moves instead of the AI (it didnt work all the time so it wasnt published) so this is not a situation to win over the computer, one is controlling the human player another is controlling (on the same PC) the computer player during battles.
I still think that Leadership stat (max possible size of the army depedning on hero level and items) should be implemented for better balance between mage and warrior classes. And this can work in multiplayer as well, it is not only limited to single-player. I really hope that Katauri decide to allow people to build castles in KB2 or KB3 as in Heroes series and than it will be the perfect game (but keep the single-campaign as it is at the moment).
I spent a week playing this game and I couldnt see any depth in the game. It wasnt fun and I just turned to another series of duels with my friends in H4 (skirmish maps) and it was a lot of fun.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 03, 2012 02:21 PM |
|
|
Well, I... disagree.
While a person, if hard enough pressed to name a single feature, will doubtlessly find something attracting them to a game or disencourage them to play it, in the end it's not the feature, but the actual composition of features to merge into a seamless whole. PACE of the game is, for example, an extremely important thing.
H4 had a lot of interesting features, but they didn't combine to form a seamless game. Town building sucked badly, for example, because most of the time, your choice wasn't a free one between units, but would depend on prerequisites (and your ability to fulfill them). (Which means, if prerequisites differed vastly, then they were part of the balancing process - or should have been part.)
In any case, I'm pretty sure, that maybe with the exception of the question what role the hero(es) would play, off or on battlefield, every feature isn't a question of the feature as such, but of its actual implementation.
Take, for example, town conversion. We know that from AoW, where it takes time AND BINDS FORCES.
Also, the price obviously plays a role in determining how easy or even advisable a conversion in any given situation is.
So I think it's fairly obvious that, well, let's say MOST features are not as such good or bad, but instead a question of the actual implementation and the way they combine and add to the gaming experience.
|
|
whiterider
Known Hero
death walks with me
|
posted February 03, 2012 04:08 PM |
|
|
First of all, of course you disagree, you are JJ, but on second hand as usual you are saying almost the same things as me or the people above but in your all-disagreeing way  No offence, just I am reading you long years here and there 
I said and you said that H6 has ideas that are designed to work only in the perspective of the devs and only in a fixed way. But fans invent new tactics all the time and this is why H6 has many ideas that should be re-worked. Many aspects as
tier system - more gaps between tiers and less skills for lower tiers, more skills for higher tiers
resource system - where is the promised competition over mines? Less resources with area points leads to "no attention" over the mines and empahasis over the towns. If you have enough army to attack an enemy town than you have had enough resources to build your own town. If you lack some resources you cannot take over enemy town - what about that situation? I have seen this when playing multi with my friends and some of them just are stuck on some point with poor armies and no way to trade resources on the marketplace since all resources are VERY valuable - even wood and ore. In the way the building system now works all towns are in a state of permanent crisis until mid-game. I would really like the idea of at least one or two more resources. Or at best three common resources, two of them valuable for one town and the third not so significant, three rare resources in the same way. The current resource system is a mirroring process from the lack-thinking of the people invented it - for the poor people in live everything even the most common ware is as valuable and unachievable as the most valuable. Wood and Ore are as rare in some maps as gems and gold.
skill system - whats the point of so many schools if they dont work together - i.e. Sanctuary and water-air effects, some spells, some skills that you never pick. I tried to pick different skills in different solo-games just to replay the whole map. Dozens of times.
town converse - right, just snap fingers and you have instantly double growth for almost no money. Does it make sence that the population that was your enemy just a day ago will change everything just to please you. No destruction, no need to bribe them, no need to destroy some buildings because the creatures in them are going guerilla. Town converse should be so much more difficult and with losses for you since it leads to so much power increase in the future for your side. Let it destroy at least one or two max tier buildings for you - if your enemy has 3d tier buildings, only tier 2 or 1 are left after conversion, if he had 2nd tier buildings either 1st stays or you have nothing. Or make it how it was in WOG, start from scratch - which is again a huge disatvantage for your enemy - because he is left with one town less and has no chance to take it back. The best way as I see it, is when town conversion starts, the process gives both sides some time. For a week all old buildings are left deserved, so no creature population there, if the enemy takes his town back, than he is not so much crippled and this process is ended. In the second week, every day some building is destroyed and at the end of the second week, the town is yours - some buildings are converted, most are destroyed. And it should cost much more than now. This makes so much more sence - you have build your own town for months and now you have a new town just in a day with finger snap and some gold.
even campaing scenario order (make it fixed so there is no need to look all the time which scenario after which to play since in order to take the maximum from the story you have to follow the plan - another idea that went in the devs box of thinking.
JJ, your stat observations are so true - luck and morale, attack and defence, they dont have the same weight in battle and they should be re-worked. High morale was so overpowered always - in H3 and some luck Haven/Castle literally has double army power, attacking everything twice. This ability should be not so mass-available. In KB only one spell and three creatures had the skill to make another stack attack again in the same turn and it was live-saving all the time, it is so much overpowered. And morale gives you this all the time, when you are lucky. The same is with the healing skills. It is overused and in the same time very helpfull to the degree that battles become tedious just to resurrect everything you have lost. Again in KB I have played this style in the whole weeks-long campaign because there is a final-score bonus if you didnt have a single unit lost in battle - yes it is achievable but tireing from some point on and many become fixed by this idea - and in KB only a bunch of spells and few creatures could do this, H6 has this healing skill all around.
Inferno should be mass re-worked, starting from their racial skill and finishing with the stat numbers. They lack backbone creatures, meat-shields, everything. Yes, you can play with them (as with H3 Inferno which was my favorite) but I am wondering why they are positioned always as the step-children of the Heroes family, always in some kind of weakness or disadvantage.
An interesting ability for them could be the Damage Reduction - many infernal creatures in other games and even movies have this - since their origin is not from this world, they absorb some part of the damage done to them - One of the hero racial skills in Warlords Battlecry for demons is this, many D&D games have this. So in this perspective this has its logic. If the devs give this ability (balanced in numbers of course), this is the easiest way to just leave them like that - with damage reduction the lack of synergy and the fact that all demons are single-players on the battlefield could be taken - their role is to just create more havoc, no matter complex army tactics and cooperation. Initially Gating was designed to absorb damage, but it is not significant when you compare this with the same effect Haven racial in H6 has - you can choose every round which creature to make invulnarable and Gating is used with the same idea, to protect the rest of your army soaking damage and dealing damage of course, but this is much less flexible. Or you can make the demons dominate over weaker tiers dealing more damage to them - another idea that follows the logic of the race - unfair game-style, just destruction and torture. Gating is fun but not so usefull as it is now - if they want to keep it, it should be dependant on other rules - like the number of killed creatures on the battlefield and the luck, and when the gauge is filled a stack starts to be summoned starting from tier 1, than another, next tier, when enough blood is spilled, and again with tier 3 creatures, but this in combination with either some damage reduction or damage increase bonus.
When you take a look on what is H6 at the moment, a sad thing to say, but I see so many possibilities missed and so much lack of imagination. Everything seems so mathematical and like rows and columns of a table and if this was an Excel table, many cells would show "error message"...
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 03, 2012 04:40 PM |
|
|
Well, what I wanted to say is, that it's generally not right to blame a dislike of a feature to the feature as such, but more to either the implementation of the feature or its interaction with other game features.
I'm sure you can virtually make every feature work, provided you do it right and consider the effects on the game as a whole.
Your example about the resource reduction is one. Correct: if the ratio of towns(dwellings)/mines isn't right (if there are too many towns), then you will just use your resources to convert towns, thereby deciding the game with tons of Core units.
But isn't that a problem of MAP DESIGN? The game doesn't come with so many maps, and two of them are reworked old maps.
I'm simply going to say that the PACE of the game is not right. You spend too much time picking up 2 Ore and 1 Crystal here and 2 Wood and 400 Gold there, and there are not enough MINES on the maps (after all, it's supposed to be a strategic game, and strategy needs planning).
So in nmy opinion most maps have the game wrong. The resource income for regular town building should come via mines while the extras should be picked up via piles (and not the other way round).
I mean, different game mechanics need a different style of map-making.
So it's not the feature that is bad - it's just that it doesn't have the right environment to present itself the way it could.
With other features it's just the same. The free picking of skills would have been a feature to test anyway, just to see how that will work. But there are too many "filler" skills, and the whole system might have been quite different and just doesn't look right. It looks basicaally like an unreflected first draft, even though I know for fact that it isn't.
And so on.
|
|
hobo2
Promising
Known Hero
|
|
posted February 03, 2012 08:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Well, what I wanted to say is, that it's generally not right to blame a dislike of a feature to the feature as such, but more to either the implementation of the feature or its interaction with other game features.
I'm sure you can virtually make every feature work, provided you do it right and consider the effects on the game as a whole.
I'll agree with that, your specific examples I would quibble with (I don't think that making the game more mine dependent would change the basic frustration of the way Conversion is handled), but yes I believe there are very few features that couldn't be implemented in a way that was positive. The Conflux Internet Connection DRM is a feature that cannot possibly be anything other than a giant middle finger pointed directly at paying customers, but everything else about Heroes VI could probably be placed into a game in such a way as to be good.
But the changes required are not subtle. It's not something as simple as map design to make the game's creeping system be something other than boring. Yes, you can go edit /Users/user/My Documents/Might & Magic Heroes VI/user/ProfileData to increase the unit speed in combat so that combats are less frustrating, but that doesn't change the core problem that combat tactics are actually really shallow because the battlefield is small compared to the movement of any unit but still too large for any unit to actually shut down enemy archers and units don't take up enough space to really block anything. The thing where "blockers" just doesn't exist as a concept is a really huge problem and it has to do with the fact that squares connect to 8 other squares and there's no zones of control. But the feature of slow creatures "having a move of 4" is something that you could work with.
The thing is that implementing only a single special resource would require a lot of other changes to make it not be a boring piece of crap. You'd have to be able to make choices of what to do with your crystals and be able to invest them in things and stuff. The thing where everything costs crystal and it all costs the same amount is just not remotely acceptable.
____________
|
|
Simpelicity
Promising
Famous Hero
Video maker
|
|
posted February 04, 2012 07:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The thing where "blockers" just doesn't exist as a concept is a really huge problem and it has to do with the fact that squares connect to 8 other squares and there's no zones of control.
They could create a spell that allows you to more effectively control space though, that could be an improvement. There's already an earth spell doing that, the earth barrier thing, but it's not very effective at doing it, if they could only get something better at it in there it would be grand.
|
|
sir_manreg
Hired Hero
Sharp dressed knight.
|
|
posted February 23, 2013 05:27 PM |
|
|
|
omg, how can you guys be discussing this. For me it is pretty clear, HommVI might be bugged but it is not complete, there's going to be a new expansion and new patches, apart from that i find some things of this game quite interesting, i have to say that at the moment it is obviously not the best but haven't you played homm1? it was ok for its time, but now it can't be compared to the others both for the graphics and the game itself. And you say that hommVI is imbalanced? have to remember you what happened with the human faction,wich is my favorite in all the other games,? It was obviously the worst(Morglin Ironfist must be a great commander!)(all what I said can be also aplied to homm2 but i think it is a little bit better).
|
|
sir_manreg
Hired Hero
Sharp dressed knight.
|
|
posted February 23, 2013 05:36 PM |
|
|
about heroesIV what I have to say is that there was a great amount of improvements but not enough well made. the most obvious was the fighting heroes, something I still miss and makes me impossible to hate this game.
PD:about HIII the only thing I can tell you is that it was a lovely and intemporal game but most of you over rate it.
well that's my opinion and I may be wrong but I need no replies since I know what would you say.
|
|
Storm-Giant
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
On the Other Side!
|
|
posted February 23, 2013 06:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
omg, how can you guys be discussing this. For me it is pretty clear, HommVI might be bugged but it is not complete, there's going to be a new expansion and new patches, apart from that i find some things of this game quite interesting, i have to say that at the moment it is obviously not the best but haven't you played homm1? it was ok for its time, but now it can't be compared to the others both for the graphics and the game itself.
Don't forget to have in mind the how and the when - H1 was the first Heroes game, and while it lacks a lot of stuff, it's a great start nonetheless.
Quote:
And you say that hommVI is imbalanced? have to remember you what happened with the human faction,wich is my favorite in all the other games,? It was obviously the worst(Morglin Ironfist must be a great commander!)(all what I said can be also aplied to homm2 but i think it is a little bit better).
Archangels in Heroes III and Cavalier/Paladin HV training were bad, sure.
____________
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 23, 2013 06:22 PM |
|
|
I suddenly have the urge to play Heroes 2 with the Knight faction ^^
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted February 23, 2013 07:46 PM |
|
|
|
I remember playing the Archibald campaign and trashing Knight armies with Chain Lightning. Good times.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
