|
|
Storm-Giant
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
On the Other Side!
|
posted March 05, 2015 10:39 PM |
|
|
Nice screenshots 
____________
|
|
Pawek_13
Supreme Hero
Maths, maths everywhere!
|
|
posted March 05, 2015 10:46 PM |
|
|
Storm-Giant said:
Nice screenshots
I juast ove when there are some serious discussions taking place on this threat and some piece of news pops out and there are comments like yours. It is quite funny.
|
|
Storm-Giant
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
On the Other Side!
|
|
posted March 05, 2015 11:14 PM |
|
|
Well, it's the discussion thread after all xD
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 05, 2015 11:43 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 23:46, 05 Mar 2015.
|
@JJ,
I have serious doubts that you understand your own system. Legitimately. But debating you on your fantasy Heroes game would take me some kilometrical post which I do not have the time or the nerves to make.
Rather, I'll just resume at the points we were debating up until then:
- In your example, Attack and Defense are EVEN MORE superior to Spellpower and Knowledge, because with your Power/5 you get less turns for more Spellpower (when stacking buffs is the only way Magic heroes can overcome Might attributes, so good luck now that they last even shorter), and no matter how much Knowledge you have your mana replenishing from external sources is not 100% (percentage based) but 50 mana max (fixed number). So do you RESOLVE the problem of Attack and Defense being superior passives? - NO! Now it's even WORSE!
- Tying Primary Attributes to Skills choice removes the necessity of Might and Magic categorization altogether, and most importantly - it DICTATES what you pick. You yourself admit it at one point when you say "Since he's determined to pick a Power School", which does away with the concept of free choice entirely. Now I can't get 2 schools of the same attribute because I'd either get only Spellpower and no Knowledge or vice versa. And then I'm COMPELLED to either take Enlightenment (free pick? really? how do you divide that into mastery levels? note: you didn't say PERK; can you even comprehend what that would mean? 50 20 0 0? 0 0 50 20?), Prime or at the very least another Spell School of the opposite attribute to fix a problem that wasn't ever present before.
Oh, fun question for you JJ. Since you said "As a special bonus, the first TWO skills you'd reach a certain level with would determine your advanced Hero class.", could you tell me what class would the Squire and Monk advance to if they both reach the threshold with Defense and Light? What about the combinations of the other ~20 skills? Tell me how many classes would you have to invent names and bonuses for?
And I almost forgot, if you say that there is no differentiation between Might and Magic, why do you start with a Squire and Monk class which heavily imply it? Why don't you go to its logical extent where you have just one Hero with 0 0 0 0 primary attributes and 0 Skills? And since you said that Attributes and Magic schools condition each other to offer more of their kind, wouldn't that essentially mean that in the case of the Monk with 0 0 1 2 and Light magic he would never be able to get anything but more Magic Skills and Spellpower and Knowledge attributes?
As I said, I'm seriously doubting you understand your own ideas. Plus, that doesn't even seem like Heroes of Might and Magic anymore. That seems more like another generic RPG game with a mainstream approach. Monsters...
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 05, 2015 11:52 PM |
|
|
artu said:
Nice leveling up system, JJ. Slightly reminds me Diablo 2 at the phase when you decide to become a cold casting Sorceress or a fire casting Sorceress after the synergy updates.
Thanks. Yeah, well, I believe in free will, so I hate the idea of hero's career is determined.
I mean, imagine you make a map. And there is this youngyedi hero, a humble Cleric. And then she stumbles onto a War Academy where they teach her Novice Offense for free - and there and then Cleric decides that she'll become a Vindicator (or Justicar), who will avenge the sufferings of the innocent with Sword and Light.
That's what stories are made of.
Not "She couldn't even walk when it was clear to her that she would become a Vindicator - and although she knew nothing, everyone acknowledged her being one right from when she left school."
Free Will, I say!
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 05, 2015 11:58 PM |
|
|
Seriously, Stevie, by now you should have understood that the problem isn't the superiority of the passive might stats, but the fact that a might hero can (must be able to) cast spells as well, so that they can maintain their passive advantage.
Even you should realize that if the magic hero could cast "mass blind" or "mass berserk" and the might hero had no comparable or dispelling magic power no passive stat advantage would be enough to win a battle.
Quote:
And since you said that Attributes and Magic schools condition each other to offer more of their kind, wouldn't that essentially mean that in the case of the Monk with 0 0 1 2 and Light magic he would never be able to get anything but more Magic Skills and Spellpower and Knowledge attributes?
Jesus, you still haven*t understood a word.
|
|
TD
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 12:33 AM |
|
Edited by TD at 00:41, 06 Mar 2015.
|
Dies_Irae said:
Stevie said:
Submitting doesn't work on Chrome, apparently.
I have the same problem, it's quite annoying. I tried posting but it doesn't respond. Let's hope it won't all spawn after the bug is fixed...
10.000 comments under one post because I kept trying without success...
So what's up with the blog? I can't post/reply there on Chrome, Firefox or IE. IE even warned that the site is dangerous trying to block access to it...
Edit: Opera doesn't work either
Edit2: Maybe they finally black booked me since I wasn't supportive enough for their work
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 12:35 AM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 00:39, 06 Mar 2015.
|
Works fine with Firefox to me, try Opera maybe?
Quote:
IE even warned that the site is dangerous trying to block access to it...
Bwahaha IE is so silly
Edit: Just read some comments on the blog, seems you're not alone.
____________
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 12:41 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 00:44, 06 Mar 2015.
|
JollyJoker said:
Seriously, Stevie, by now you should have understood that the problem isn't the superiority of the passive might stats, but the fact that a might hero can (must be able to) cast spells as well, so that they can maintain their passive advantage.
And you think your system provides a solution? Might Heroes would get Light, get 11 Spellpower through some artifacts (because wasting another skill just to be able to get Spellpower is just simply out of the question, lol), and a 3 turns interval would be enough of an advantage to wipe the floor with any magic hero.
JollyJoker said:
Even you should realize that if the magic hero could cast "mass blind" or "mass berserk" and the might hero had no comparable or dispelling magic power no passive stat advantage would be enough to win a battle.
Except that such an incredibly bullsnow scenario that it's not even an argument. And usually Cleanse/Dispel is a spell any hero could take, at least that's how it's been in most Heroes games. Otherwise mind controlling abilities would be incredibly OP.
JollyJoker said:
Quote:
And since you said that Attributes and Magic schools condition each other to offer more of their kind, wouldn't that essentially mean that in the case of the Monk with 0 0 1 2 and Light magic he would never be able to get anything but more Magic Skills and Spellpower and Knowledge attributes?
Jesus, you still haven*t understood a word.
Granted I might've understood it wrong, then what do you base your chance of getting new Skills on? Or... or is it free pick? That'd be like the cherry on top, lol. There would be no difference between the builds people would make. There'll always be THE Might build and THE Magic build, would those be objectively the best or only preference based.
But don't do away with the rest just because you've spotted one mistake. That's no different from someone writing a long post and someone else just partly addressing it, if that would remind you of anything.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Sir_Godspeed
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 01:02 AM |
|
|
Sorry for a post that is *way belated*, but I read through the highly lengthy discussion on fantasy/scifi (as much as I could get through anyway), and I think the connection y'all is looking for is "Speculative Fiction".
It's genre of fiction that is generally regarded as encompassing fantasy and science fiction, as well as horror in many forms.
As with all fiction, it's a nebulous term, created more for convenience and less for any kind of rigid structure. Writing is a creative process that in many cases will actively seek to transgress against established delineation (to a degree), so establishing bombastic definition of genres and subgenres generally work against the purpose of fiction. I'm sure the music fans here can relate; music genres are more or less "guidelines" more than categorical divisions.
Still, I personally find Speculative Fiction to be a good term to work with. That's how we can have stories that follow the story tropes of a classical fantasy story but in space with laser guns and tanks (Star Wars), or have stories about Wizards whose spells are actually highly complex mathematical equations embodied through the channeling of particular fundamental forces of physics (Wheel of Time).
Ultimately, genre denominations shouldn't be seen as straightjackets.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 01:10 AM |
|
|
Granted, they shouldnt be straightjackets but rather guidlines, that is still mainly about the structure and cosmology, not the decor. I wouldnt have any problem calling a fantasy story, fantasy, only because it takes place in space. So, I wouldnt feel the need to call it speculative fiction instead of fantasy.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Sir_Godspeed
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 02:41 AM |
|
|
|
Me neither (Isn't Spelljammer basically Dungeons and Dragons with magical space ships?) but some people here seemed pretty intent on pigeonholing stuff somewhere, and Speculative fiction is a nice umbrella term for all those weird stories that deal with stuff we don't have in real life.
|
|
alcibiades
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
of Gold Dragons
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 07:41 AM |
|
|
Elvin said:
While I initially found the idea of magic attack and defense interesting, I have grown to be against it. Makes balancing a nightmare, diminishes the gameplay difference between might and magic heroes and introduces a number of other issues that I won't go into. Too much trouble for what it's worth. I am not against magical damage but I'd rather see it affected by elemental resistance/weakness to keep things simple.
I mostly agree, I think it's a bit of the same I feel about Warcries as a general ability for Might heroes. I mean, in H5, warcries was an interesting gimmick for the Barbarians to make up for the fact that they didn't have access to normal magic, but when it becomes something all might heroes has access to, it sort of kills the entire purpose of having might heroes - after all, what's the point of having a set of classes that are defined by not being magic except you then give them access to a range of abilities that are, on the bottom line, spells, just with a different name?
____________
What will happen now?
|
|
Avirosb
Promising
Legendary Hero
No longer on vacation
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 09:51 AM |
|
|
|
Is the red stuff in the first image lava or burning coal?
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 10:22 AM |
|
|
kiryu133 said:
agree to disagree, yeah. i can understand where you're coming from, i just don't want might-heroes to turn into magic-heroes with a different name. some indication that they actually order their troops more efficiently would be nice but i don't want them getting active skills. that's for magic-heroes is all  .
Well, one of the key differences (and something the system should capitalize on) is that Magic Heroes have a resource - Mana - which Might Heroes don't have. Furthermore, Magic Heroes have only one attribute that indicates their strength, namely Spell Power. Might Heroes have two, Attack and Defense. So in concept, the Combat Techniques that I suggested should work differently. One thing I could imagine is that Combat Techniques give a build-up, where the total effect of a Technique depends on the one(s) used directly preceding it. By properly chaining them, you can get an overall greater result, the synergy would boost them considerably. At the same time, you might also get Combat Techniques which reduce the synergy result of what the opponent is doing, providing tactical choices. Spread across the various factions, Stronghold Combat Techniques would focus on charging and berserking, Haven Combat Techniques would focus troop synergy in a defensive style, while Dungeon Combat Techniques would primarily be aimed at frustrating those of the enemy.
The challenge lies in designing various synergy chains that are worthwhile to pursue (where the order of Techniques is also important for the eventual outcome), while also making each Combat Technique valuable in its own right.
The biggest common point between Might Heroes and Magic Heroes would be that both of them get an active role during combat, but how they are active should differ.
|
|
kiryu133
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Highly illogical
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 10:30 AM |
|
|
Maurice said:
Well, one of the key differences (and something the system should capitalize on) is that Magic Heroes have a resource - Mana - which Might Heroes don't have. Furthermore, Magic Heroes have only one attribute that indicates their strength, namely Spell Power. Might Heroes have two, Attack and Defense. So in concept, the Combat Techniques that I suggested should work differently. One thing I could imagine is that Combat Techniques give a build-up, where the total effect of a Technique depends on the one(s) used directly preceding it. By properly chaining them, you can get an overall greater result, the synergy would boost them considerably. At the same time, you might also get Combat Techniques which reduce the synergy result of what the opponent is doing, providing tactical choices. Spread across the various factions, Stronghold Combat Techniques would focus on charging and berserking, Haven Combat Techniques would focus troop synergy in a defensive style, while Dungeon Combat Techniques would primarily be aimed at frustrating those of the enemy.
The challenge lies in designing various synergy chains that are worthwhile to pursue (where the order of Techniques is also important for the eventual outcome), while also making each Combat Technique valuable in its own right.
The biggest common point between Might Heroes and Magic Heroes would be that both of them get an active role during combat, but how they are active should differ.
mind giving some examples? i'm intrigued by this.
h5 had a couple of cool ideas similar to this i think, like how fortress heroes had access to skills that made their troops stronger if they were placed close together and got a bonus as long as they didn't move. i want things more like that.
If i understand your suggestion (i'm not sure i do though) you're saying the might "spells" are more like sudden orders, like maybe having the might-hero ordering a certain troop to move then and there instead of waiting for its turn? or maybe having someone retreat next time its attacked or something? that seems kind of reasonable as long as its based on his/her troops exclusively rather than just casting a spell of some kind.
please do elaborate, i'm very interested in this.
|
|
Zombi_Wizzard
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 11:51 AM |
|
|
... 
People. JJ. Look. In H7 there will be 3 might classes and 3 magic classes per faction. Each of them will have diferent version of skill-wheel. Might heroes will not be able to cast spells, unless they are basic spells. We will not have H3 might heroes with blind here. This is because it'll probably be a system similar to H6, where might heroes are unable to get magic stuff further down the (magic) tree. OR magic skills might not even appear on "might hero" skill-wheel, making them inaccessible to them.
I belive this is the point Stevie is making also.
Ofc. this is speculation, but given the info we have, it's only logical way to balance things. If you play might hero, you will not take light magic, because you will only get basic version, and will therefore waste the skill slot.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 01:03 PM |
|
|
Zombi_Wizzard said:
...
Might heroes will not be able to cast spells, unless they are basic spells.
I'm really, really curious where you got that from.
I would also be rather thankful if anyone could share their knowledge about what "might hero" and "magic hero" will MEAN exactly, in H7.
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 01:10 PM |
|
Edited by Maurice at 13:11, 06 Mar 2015.
|
kiryu133 said:
If i understand your suggestion (i'm not sure i do though) you're saying the might "spells" are more like sudden orders, like maybe having the might-hero ordering a certain troop to move then and there instead of waiting for its turn? or maybe having someone retreat next time its attacked or something? that seems kind of reasonable as long as its based on his/her troops exclusively rather than just casting a spell of some kind.
please do elaborate, i'm very interested in this.
Well, not out of turn, per se, but rather issue a command that gives a troop some benefit right when it acts. Let's assume the following three commands as Combat Techniques:
- Defensive Coverscreen (defensive): Increases defense of the targeted stack by X %, while increasing defense of directly adjacent stacks by X/2 %, as long as that stack is Defending;
- Charge Forward (offensive, melee): Increases attack of the targeted stack by Y/2 % against the next enemy stack attacked this turn, at the expense of X/2 % defense. Units with a scatter debuff receive Y % extra damage from the Charge Forward;
- Focussed Fire (offensive, ranged): Increases Ranged damage of targeted stack against a pinned enemy stack by Y*2 % (pinned enemy stacks are stacks that are unable to move for whatever reason); unpinned stacks receive Y % extra damage and a scatter debuff for one turn;
X and Y are derived from respectively the Defense and Attack scores of the Hero using those Combat Techniques.
Now, let's assume the following synergy bonus:
Charge Forward of a unit that previously received the Defensive Coverscreen bonus from a nearby unit allows them to forego the defense penalty on their charge, increase their attack to Y%, while also pinning the enemy stack in place. Obviously, having a sure way to pin an enemy stack will then open it up for a Focussed Fire barrage in the next turn.
Switching the followup order of those Combat Techniques around, shooting first and then charging yields a different synergy: an enemy unit that falls under the barrage of Focussed Fire will get the scatter debuff, to give the idea of their lines breaking open somewhat under the hail of arrows - opening them up for a devastating Charge in the next turn by another stack.
Like I wrote before, I can see four, maybe five fields in which Combat Techniques can be designed: Offense (melee), Offense (ranged), Defense and Artillery/Siege (perhaps a better name is "Warmachines"). The fifth one may be Warcries, which in effect come close to spells. Not every faction has equal access to all Combat Technique fields. It's unlikely that Undead will benefit much from Warcries, while Orcs have little use of defensive tactics - but moreso for Offense techniques. And where Orc Offensive Techniques are mainly aimed at brute force, those of Dark Elves should be mainly aimed at disrupting enemy Combat Technique chains.
Not every chain of Combat Techniques should yield a synergy bonus, it should make some sense to combine them in succession to deploy a battlefield tactic spanning multiple turns.
I hope this is a better explanation of what I meant with Combat Techniques?
|
|
Dave_Jame
Promising
Legendary Hero
I'm Faceless, not Brainless.
|
|
posted March 06, 2015 02:50 PM |
|
|
|
Looking at the new Screenshots I have to say the layout of the vulcano map looks really familier.. Hot Spot From H2. Smaller, with the lack of the northen part but I see the map in it.
|
| |
|
|
This MEGA THREAD is pages long: 
