|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted June 30, 2018 05:23 PM |
|
|
Well, that's exactly the thing. They webt back to what was supposedly "safe and sound" - except that it wasn't, because, as mentioned, H3 is seriously flawed, and H5 found a very specific solution for ONE of the glaring problems of H3 design, by giving each faction one hero only and linking them in ways to their rspective faction that allows better balancing, while on the other hand creating new problems and deepening others.
The end result of H7 turned out to be very similar to H3/H5, but there is no concept behind it. It's like someone had randomly picked game elements of those games, then randomly decided to adjust/modify them - come on, let's try this, why not? -, and then went on to randomly and mechanically determine basic game values, then putting things together - and then start scratching heads because things don't fit smoothly. I mean, why have SEVEN magic schools when you have only a minimum of spells for each and can work only with a few? They could have scrapped mage guilds altogether, the way that worked out.
So, of course, H7 is not a good game.
But the main thing here is, that even if you WANT to build a game based on H3 and H5, you STILL have to analyze their flaws first and their LIMITATIONS. And when you want to bring the game to the next level, you will quite probably explore new avenues and find unique and new solutions, which in turn may force you to deviate from those games.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 05:29 PM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 17:45, 30 Jun 2018.
|
I see no problems breaking limits if it's not at the detriment of established features. A change feels natural if it enrichs the experience, but is hit or miss if you turn everything upside down.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 05:50 PM |
|
|
There are no "established features". Sure, if you become broad enough, you will find them. There will be Heroes. "Factions" (which has no established meaning, other than a specific assortment of creatures). An adventure map and a combat map. (Same) creatures stacking. Spells. "Skills" (whatever they may look and whatever subskills may be involved). "Town building". Artefacts.
But the specifics? Nothing much established there I see.
Which is the crux here. There are no SPECIFIC established features, which makes debating "established features" pretty useless.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 05:54 PM |
|
|
Turning in circles, I am telling you can find a coherent evolution following H1-H2-H3 and H5. H4 and H6 broke that. H7 like you said had no concept so features thrown in without thought will not work, how could it. I don't see what's so hard.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 06:06 PM |
|
|
|
Name one "established feature".
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 06:58 PM |
|
|
Let me answer that, JJ.
Traditional turn-based combat! Oh wait, Heroes 5 took the proverbial 180 from that angle and implemented ACTIVE time battles. Quite the drastic change to be deemed a natural evolution from Heroes 3, right? But people loved it, despite being different, because it was a great change. This is like the ultimate argument of a feature in a Heroes game that was not an intuitive transition from a past game and was still well received.
Then let's say, secondary skills! But wait, again, where's the natural evolution from Heroes 3 to Heroes 5? Because, if anything, the feature takes after Heroes 4's system at best, a game oftentimes quoted as a spin-off from the original "formula". So what? It ended up being a great addition, one later frantically requested for Heroes 7 as well.
What about... caravans? Wait, the holy grail Heroes 3 didn't have caravans while the unpopular Heroes 4 had them? Must've been a really bad feature in Heroes 5 as well I reckon. But if it wasn't, then I guess it was just an intuitive progression from Heroes 3 because that's just how our logic works.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 07:15 PM |
|
|
This is really becoming fallacious. I've already said everything I am not going to start quoting myself from previous page, also the present tone does not engage particularly to further the conversation.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 08:23 PM |
|
|
|
If you cannot name an established feature, you have no point. Simple as that.
|
|
hahakocka
Known Hero
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 08:55 PM |
|
|
|
Do you believe after the signs, that at Gamescom we can see Heroes 8?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 08:57 PM |
|
|
|
What signs? No. No Heroes 8.
|
|
PandaTar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 10:26 PM |
|
|
I wouldn't expect another Heroes game, ever again. Not from the current sources. Should move on with other games and maybe sniff the air if, and only if, the franchise is kicked somewhere else to someone else. Although, from my part, I would be much more interested on a RPG MM game instead.
Revisiting currently HoMM overall mechanics feels so shallow to expect another game coming in a similar shape, specially because the frame is not really well-defined.
____________
"Okay. Look. We both said a lot of things that you're going to regret. But I think we can put our differences behind us. For science. You monster."
GlaDOS – Portal 2
|
|
verriker
Honorable
Legendary Hero
We don't need another 'eroes
|
|
posted June 30, 2018 10:39 PM |
|
|
hahakocka said:
Do you believe after the signs, that at Gamescom we can see Heroes 8?
if you are not just a troll or a comedian like some posters then I think you have started off with a nearly Pavlovian premise that you would love Tencent Holdings to publish a product called Heroes 8 so you can buy it, without pausing to wonder what does that mean and what's in it for you,
after all why are you gagging for Heroes 8, are you not satisfied with Heroes 5, 6 or 7 lol
____________
|
|
hahakocka
Known Hero
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 12:05 AM |
|
|
|
I wroted down before that i would like to se a balanced Heroes 4 like heroes on battlefield system! Also i wrote about what was Heroes 3-s weaknesses yes even compared to H5-6-7.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 12:49 AM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
If you cannot name an established feature, you have no point. Simple as that.
I've already explained to you why I think H5 kept consistent with the H1-H2-H3 continuity gameplay-wise and if you cannot see it and start to enter such rhetoric instead I am not interested to debate further with you.
____________
|
|
NimoStar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Modding the Unmoddable
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 03:06 AM |
|
Edited by NimoStar at 03:08, 01 Jul 2018.
|
Quote:
Turning in circles, I am telling you can find a coherent evolution following H1-H2-H3 and H5. H4 and H6 broke that. H7 like you said had no concept so features thrown in without thought will not work, how could it. I don't see what's so hard.
Whjat is to say "h3 has concept" of gameplay, balance etc.? It is so hilariously unbalanced two entire towns, several spells, some skills such as diplo and necro, several artifacts, and several heroes have to be BANNED from MEMORY to even make it competitively viable.
And others are completely useless. Mysticism, really?
Don't take me wrong, H3 is a beautiful game and I love it.
But "just coipy h3 and everything will be fine" is no recipe for a game.
Plus that is just stalling and not searching a way out for the franchise to evolve.
H4 was the vision of the original creators, H7 is just a rehearsal, a copy. Carbon-Copying and screeds about a suppossed "traditon" willnever lead to anything good. H4 is still more alive after 14 years than H7 is after 2 years.
Even H5 had many changes from H3, such as making a distinction between main and non-main heroes, having faction skills, skillwheel, alternative upgrades... off the top of my tongue. Fundamental changes to gameplay. And warcraft based creatures and graphics :V
And tell me, did H3 not add and change things from H2? Did H2 not add and change things from H1?
If "tradition" was all, not even H3 would have had its features.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 03:53 AM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 03:54, 01 Jul 2018.
|
It's impossible to have a healthy dialogue if you reply to things I didn't say.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 09:47 AM |
|
|
Galaad said:
JollyJoker said:
If you cannot name an established feature, you have no point. Simple as that.
I've already explained to you why I think H5 kept consistent with the H1-H2-H3 continuity gameplay-wise and if you cannot see it and start to enter such rhetoric instead I am not interested to debate further with you.
Well ... no. Sorry, you have not EXPLAINED anything. You have CLAIMED such a continuity (and denied it "100%" for H7).
I, on the other hand, don't see any RELEVANT continuity there, for a ton of reasons, actually, not the least of those is the fact, that "gameplay" isn't something you can sketch with broad strikes - the devil is in the detail, as they say, and I cited H7 to demonstrate, because if you claim continuity between H1-H2-H3-H5 but exclude H4 and H6, then H7 is in as well, making this continuity rather meaningless, because it doesn't guarantee a good game, while being out of it doesn't mean, they are bad. H4 and H6 are both better than H7 (and I personally think that while I didn't rate H4 that high 15 years ago, I also think it has aged quite well).
H4 is an example of a game that wanted to add something new and increase the RP part, and to do that one thing they had to rethink the whole game and change what was necessary to do that - and succeeded.
H6 on the other hand is an example of a game that wanted to add/change a couple of things, but they FAILED to rethink the whole game and change what was necessary - which means, they didn't succeed.
If I would follow you, then I'd rule out "Heroes on the BF" once and for all - but that is not what H5 did, isn't it? Heroes in H5 have a "personal attack", which can even be influenced by abilities. The reason for this is the fact, that H5 did something new as well, giving combat a real-time aspect and Heroes a specific place to act (and not at any time in a combat round). It would have been boring, if it was a hero's turn, if they didn't have anything to do, then.
That is a feature I totally dislike. I wouldn't have had a problem with a Combat skill, but an INTRINSIC attack? Horrible. That's what skills an spells are for.
Anyway - what I want to say is, Heroes are part of the game, and there is nothing wrong with rethinking their role. You might, for example, still have Heroes off the battlefield - but more than one hero in an army. Or you might have heroes on the battlefield, but not as single units but as part of a creature stack. WoG has commanders - Heroes ON the battlefield, are they not? Or you may have something like a separate BF for heroes - that only heroes can attack each other.
In other words, these things are not binary. It's not as simple as Heroes on or off the BF, there are many options in between H1 and H4 in that regard. If you separate Initiative and Speed, something H4 started with and H5 continued, the question whether Heroes should have an Initiative or not (that is, be part of the turn order or able to act any time a friendly creature is eligible to act) is valid. But if you give them their own Initiative, can they influence their initiative with spells?
So small things can have very far-reaching consequences, and change the gameplay subtly, but importantly.
Take H1. In H1, Knowledge doesn't give you spell points. Instead, the Knowledge value shows how often a spell will be available for casting. It's like, when you visit a mage guild you get as many scrolls for all available spells there as your Knowledge attriute allows. That's kind of interesting, because it means, you can't spam a specific spell. Once you have used up your scrolls for a specific spell, you need to go back to the mage guild that offers it to replenish your scrolls.
H2 introduced spell points and the concept of "learning" spells once and for all. This "smoothed" gameplay (moving around the map, because an important spell being only available in a far away town), but it was also a subtle change of the gameplay as such. See, in H1 you always face the decision to use second-rate spells or to go back and "refuel" the better ones. In H2 and following the division between useful and useless is a lot more pronounced. "Useless spells" started to become a problem in H2 and the problem was increased in H3. It wasn't a problem in H1, though.
So this is an example of a subtle change in a game mechanic that should have led to a rethinking and rebalancing of available spells, but didn't. That happened only, when they made H4.
Anyway. Things are not as simple as, "just leave the H3/H5 gameplay and build a new game around that".
|
|
hahakocka
Known Hero
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 10:28 AM |
|
|
I played for a really long time with Heroes 3! But there were many many unbalanced things, mainly if we compare to H5, H6 H7.
(H5 was one unbalance things the iniative system was not in balance if you have 15 the enemy has 16 all of his craetures became firstly than yours it was not scaling well with the iniative points ony one better but still all of your units moved back..... )
So H3 unbalanced things :
-Many towns for example Stronghold can build the 7. and greatest unit
really fast on the 3-4. day!
- Too few useful skill and you get it all randomly so many times you get garbage and its effected the result (at 1v1) at the end.
- Too randomly magic guilds. Many time i built 2 level 5 one and i got no really useful spells for my wisdom and magic type level skills. In H7 they streamlined to a more better one. In H6 you choose.
- Many many creatures are just garbage or bullet proof. Not in H6-7 and mainly in H5.
- Some artifacts were way too powerful sometimes we must banish them in some maps.
- Also the Dragon utopias was really randomly. You didnt know how many dragons will be in it. LOevel 1-2-3-4 utopias. Also the rewards were way randomly! Many times i fought a maxed level one utopia and got nothing!! I loose soem units of course here but got nothing. my enemy got good artifacts at level 2 utopia...
- The conmputer AI at battles is the worst one in the series! The best one is in H6 after patches. I saw it on the Tournamewnt at Pécs 2 weeks ago i analyse it. A way more tricky and more celver than H3-H4-H7. H5 AI was the second best after patches!
On H3 tournaments the players just use the clunky AI at battles againts the computer. The stupid comp. only moves for the 1 gnolls or etc, in H5 and mainly in H6 the enemy does it only once or no time. IN H3 he moves to a 1 numbered group for a dozen tiems in one battle. 
And H3 is on the most real torunaments at the whole world! Strange to mye because the randomisation is the main problem! In H5-6-7 i can turn the tides at peril at battles. With less man with good tactics and skill spells i can mek a win position from the almost impossible situtation!
So now mainly these are my problems. May be there are more to think about but no time for more now!
|
|
hahakocka
Known Hero
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 10:35 AM |
|
|
|
Oh of course if forgot to mention the necro skill OP! From H3. They scaled it down in H5-H6-H7. But still you can level up with it greatly well!
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted July 01, 2018 11:44 AM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 11:46, 01 Jul 2018.
|
JollyJoker said:
Well ... no. Sorry, you have not EXPLAINED anything. You have CLAIMED such a continuity (and denied it "100%" for H7).
You refused my arguments but I did explain. Then I gave you examples on how I think H7 was built heavily on H6 which you also refuse. You have a right to disagree but not to engage in polemic.
In the absolute, you can do anything is basically what you tell me. You also tell me H4 succeeded in its goals. Well no, unless you’re a genius you cannot do anything you want. There is a general design that you have to follow if you want to do a faithful sequel (IMO). And H4 did not succeed, even if H6 and H7 gave it some little popularity back fifteen years later. H4 did not succeed because a lot of players hated it, with battlefield heroes first place. This doesn’t mean H4 doesn’t have qualities (as I said before but you like to ignore what I say), it means it failed as a whole. This doesn’t mean either in the absolute and in theory battlefields heroes can never work, only that when it was done it failed. In theory you can defend anything, I use facts to tell you my points: which games succeeded and which didn’t. I then try to tell you the correlation between the games that worked but you refuse to see it. And H5 does not have battlefield heroes nor RTS combat, this is an absurd thing to say.
Quote:
Anyway. Things are not as simple as, "just leave the H3/H5 gameplay and build a new game around that".
No it’s not as simple as that. But in my opinion it makes more sense to build and expand from the popular games than from the black sheeps of the series.
hahahocka said:
Too randomly
The random element is arguably one of the most fun part of these games. Players wanting to turn it into some e-sport, rebalancing everything and banning half the features in MP are a minority.
hahahocka said:
imba
Well that is not specific to H3, all titles are imba and I never saw it as an issue.
____________
|
| |
|
|
This MEGA THREAD is pages long: 
