|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
posted October 10, 2014 07:38 AM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 07:43, 10 Oct 2014.
|
AlexSpl said:
No one should be allowed to attack twice in a row. This is the issue with H5's ATB. White begins and wins. Battle is turn-based, that means whoever attacks first, does it with the full stack's strength, while the defender retaliates with its survived troops only (if there are any survivors at all). ATB makes things even worse.
When two stacks are fighting it can be a problem, but Heroes is a "strategic" game so troop positioning, type of units (ranged, tanks) etc all make a difference. Which unit strikes first has an impact on the battle (like Black Dragons that usually move before the rest), but you have other troops to retaliate. The ATB bar is a problem cause it makes "cannon fodder" units even less useful... and is overall plain irritating in H5 (especially when you fight Inferno). Remember fights with Zombies? In H3 they could pack a punch when they finally reached your troops, or they were good in defending against sieges. In H4 they were hard to kill. Whereas in H5 they were totally useless...
I'm really interested in the devs idea to make battlefields more "meaty". Maybe it'll make spells like "Remove obstacle" useful?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 08:24 AM |
bonus applied by alcibiades on 10 Oct 2014. |
|
While I completely disagree especially with Elvin, that the system was interesting in HoMM 5 - it just wasn't; or if it was, then because of it's incomprehensible mess -, Luc's somewhat cryptic post had one good: it reminded me of the fact that MORALE did work perfectly within the system: Morale trigger -> lose only 50% of your accumulated initiative for the turn. (And this was the only thing that worked perfectly.)
Since there is a tried and solid system to fall back to, I change my opinion into having no problem to give the system another try, provided it could be significantly improved (and Elvin's list is just the start).
First of all, the boundaries of the system are wrong; the small numbers support massive differences. We also have to face the fact that this is actually an RTS element.
Anyway.
Let's define a "turn" as 100 units of Initiative, units "producing" Initiative each turn, acting on reaching 100, an act costing ...
and here is the first thing to consider: while we can say, an action costs 100 Init, Waiting costs 50, Morale trigger cuts on the costs (it was half), we also have a chance to give unit special actions that may cost less and even MORE init than that (the unit going into negative initiative, taking longer to replenish its Init pool).
Example: Piercing Shot; since this needs a lot of concentration, you might say, ok, it costs 120 Init, so after piercing shot, the Marksman will be on -20, so it will fall back in the bar behind other, actually slower units.
On the other hand, Archer ability in HoMM 5 could be viewed as an unaimed rapid fire, that might cost only 80 Init ... you get the drift.
So this would actually mean that all unit initiative values would be CLOSELY centered around the 100. I could imagine, something like 120 as the best basic unit initiative - Phoenixes, and so on; most undead might have a small handicap with values of 90-95, except for Vampires, with the lowest init probably being 80.
Initiative changing spells, abilities and arties should be toned town, not percentages, but simply values: Mass Haste might give +10, flat.
Randomisation at start, yes, but kept to a minimum: units might start with +2 - +5 Init randomly.
Question would be about the heroes, though. They don't necessarily have to be part of the bar, the way it was in HoMM 5. They might simply be able to act when one of their stacks were due, then lose a certain amount of initiative depending on their action (casting a spell might cost different Initative depending on the spell level and the level of mastery in the magic ability), so that they would be eligible for an action again, starting with a certain creature of theirs. (Their could also be a hero skill that would reduce the amount of initative needed for actions.)
Also, the actual DISPLAY of things would and should probably have to be changed, since a simple bar just sucks due to missing information; in my opinion, the "bar" would have to be much bigger, and make a serious effort to actually display the process, so players could better grasp how things continue and why. The "bar" should be based on a turn structure for better orientation. This would actually be rather important.
Which means, whether I'd be in favor or against it would depend on what the devs would come up with, since such a system will indeed stand and fall with its implementation, and I'll rather have a bland, but working system, but a flashy, interesting one, that they didn't get right.
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 09:29 AM |
|
Edited by AlexSpl at 09:36, 10 Oct 2014.
|
Quote:
When two stacks are fighting it can be a problem, but Heroes is a "strategic" game so troop positioning, type of units (ranged, tanks) etc all make a difference. Which unit strikes first has an impact on the battle (like Black Dragons that usually move before the rest), but you have other troops to retaliate.
What if you don't have any other troops, and your only power stack has just been annihilated? The attacker got away with it without a scratch. The defender lost his only hope. If the attacker and defender changed their roles, perhaps it is the latter who would have rejoiced with a brilliant victory.
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 10:59 AM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 11:07, 10 Oct 2014.
|
AlexSpl said:
What if you don't have any other troops, and your only power stack has just been annihilated? The attacker got away with it without a scratch. The defender lost his only hope.
If I would have it recorded somewhere I would show you a movie from one of my most memorable battles, where one Ogre, with the help of Towers, defended the city from a full weeks worth in size Stronghold's army. The enemy hero didn't have Cyclops and spells though, but he even had 1 Behemoth. I don't remember it correctly, but Towers first hit the Roc (which was the most problematic, but somehow my Ogre withstood his attacks), followed by Orcs, and the rest was easy. My Ogre was in defense mode the whole time. Simply put, without strategy, and unit placement (especially when he destroyed my gate) this would be an insta KO battle...
So don't tell me about chances in Heroes III 
|
|
NACHOOOO
Known Hero
Pessimistically optimistic
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 11:51 AM |
|
|
So Blob I agree with you that the system as it was set up in H5 was far from perfect, but the H6 system isn't great either. Read my previous post, the initiative system doesn't just affect battle gameplay as you see it. It affects creature design as well.
I believe the H5 model can be improved upon. If in H5 the initiative values of creatures ranged from the single digits up to the 50 odds like was suggested to be somewhere near the hypothetical max by Jollyjoker, and is instead made into something more realistic, such as having a creature average of 40 for a middle of the rung initiative, minimum of 20 and max of 60 (those limits only reached from buffs and debuffs), this would limit the ridiculous percentages seen from H5. Those numbers are a shot in the dark by the way and I have not put serious consideration into their affect. My point though is that you can take the model and make it better. Eliminate the 3 to 1 attack ratios, but still give greater freedom to creature stats. This then allows devs more range when working out a creatures stats which in turn helps make them feel more individual.
The more I read and the more I think about it, the more potential I think the H5 model has if implemented correctly
____________
Magic Bird, only a working
title. Phew
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 12:07 PM |
|
Edited by AlexSpl at 12:14, 10 Oct 2014.
|
Quote:
The more I read and the more I think about it, the more potential I think the H5 model has if implemented correctly
ATB is just a system that allows some creatures to act twice in a round, so does Morale in the classic H1-3 system. Other than that, I don't see any major differencies. Let's say we stick with the '1 turn - 1 action' rule. How ATB can be better than the classic system then? For me it looks confusing, you can't even predict turn order without an ATB bar! 
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 12:27 PM |
|
|
That's why the system does use an atb bar you know.
The advantage over the classic turn system is that the flow of the battle becomes more unpredictable as initiative or atb effects will rearrange not just the order of units but the frequency at which they act. If a unit gets morale, its next action will come sooner than expected and you will have to respond to that whereas in turns it simply gets to act twice. You have to take into account the momentum of units, how the battle will unfold in a few or several 'turns' and act accordingly. It makes it harder to 'read' the flow of the battle and calculate the amount of damage each unit can deliver or withstand in the short or long-term. In turns things are more predictable. If you cast haste, you know the exact order of units until it is countered or its duration expires. This is not so with a dynamic initiative as the rate at which units move will change and not just the order of their turn in every round. This creates a lot of interesting possibilities and many diverse situations that you will have to adapt to.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 12:31 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It makes it harder to 'read' the flow of the battle and calculate the amount of damage each unit can deliver or withstand in the short or long-term. In turns things are more predictable.
This is exactly what I call 'confusing' A player should be able to predict as many aspects of a battle as possible to plan his strategy in a wise way.
|
|
NACHOOOO
Known Hero
Pessimistically optimistic
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 12:39 PM |
|
Edited by NACHOOOO at 12:40, 10 Oct 2014.
|
But battles are dynamic, things change, momentum shifts, not everything should be spelled out for you ahead of time. Elvin makes a great point. The problem with it of course is ensuring that it doesn't become the mess that H5 was
____________
Magic Bird, only a working
title. Phew
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 12:43 PM |
|
|
|
The only variable in this equation should be the tactical thought of my opponent, everything else should be simple and clear.
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:17 PM |
|
|
NACHOOOO said:
But battles are dynamic, things change, momentum shifts, not everything should be spelled out for you ahead of time. Elvin makes a great point. The problem with it of course is ensuring that it doesn't become the mess that H5 was
And that is precisely why I hate this system. You want a fast an unpredictable game? Play an RTS. You want a chess-like strategic game? Play TBS. It's as simple as that.
What can I change in my strategy, when a Hell Steed (I bring it out a lot, but it's my perfect example of how bad the system is) moves three times in a row, bashing my archer, tanker and archer for the second time, whereas I don't even have a chance to move. What element of this can you call a strategy? What can you react for when the battle is practically finished?
Fine, we had our "fun" with H5 initiative system, but please let it stay a one-time experiment...
Just to make things clear, I know some of you guys like faster gameplay. For instance I dislike Tales of... battle system because I prefer the traditional and archaic TB system in JRPG's (or active pause in western RPG's) then it's action oriented one. I know that those games are cult classics, they have great plots, but it's the battle system that keeps me away from them (I tried a couple of them already). The case is the same with Heroes. If I want a traditional to the core TBS game I pick HoM&M. If I want sth different I look elswhere. So please, let the franchise stay this way, no more H5 experiments...
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:22 PM |
|
Edited by Minion at 13:23, 10 Oct 2014.
|
Storm-Giant said:
The problem here is the same than "purple Dungeon" : They overdid it, the difference between slow and fast units was excessive.
I agree with Elvin & you on the rest though.
I'll agree that with Haste/Slow it became excessive difference, meet you half way
____________
"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
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:31 PM |
|
|
Turns initiative translates into first move only.
ATB initiative translates into first move AND turn frequency.
Just conceptually, ATB is superior. The rest is just juggling with numbers and implementation.
|
|
NACHOOOO
Known Hero
Pessimistically optimistic
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:39 PM |
|
Edited by NACHOOOO at 13:40, 10 Oct 2014.
|
|
Again Blob2 read my previous posts, and the previous posts of everyone else. You can change how the system works to remove the 3 to 1 attack ratios. Just because this is a tbs doesn't mean that everything has to be predetermined
|
|
Storm-Giant
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
On the Other Side!
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:44 PM |
|
|
Just because something sounds better in theory doesn't mean it'll be better in practice. Turn based combat has been proven successfully several times in the series, the same can't be said about ATB.
____________
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:50 PM |
|
|
Storm-Giant said:
Just because something sounds better in theory doesn't mean it'll be better in practice. Turn based combat has been proven successfully several times in the series, the same can't be said about ATB.
My point exactly. Traditional TBS battles in H6 is one of those few things I'm really stingy about in the franchise... When I say I hate the ATB bar concept, I won't change my mind even if it's tweaked...
|
|
NACHOOOO
Known Hero
Pessimistically optimistic
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:51 PM |
|
|
Storm-Giant said:
Just because something sounds better in theory doesn't mean it'll be better in practice. Turn based combat has been proven successfully several times in the series, the same can't be said about ATB.
That is no lie SG. But just because we know something works to an acceptable level doesn't mean that it can't be improved upon. From your previous posts I got the impression that you were moving over to the H5 side of the house? Look I'm not completely opposed to the H6 initiative system, and if someone has an argument that is convincing enough I'd change my opinion, but I haven't seen anything on here that has convinced me that it is the better system. Not only that but it is far from faultless as I've previously mentioned
____________
Magic Bird, only a working
title. Phew
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:54 PM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 13:55, 10 Oct 2014.
|
|
That's why I voted neither. While H6 system is similar to H3, it has a big flaw imo: squares instead of hexes...
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:57 PM |
|
|
One important aspect that's being overlooked with regards to the ATB is the influence of battle length. If a battle is short, the difference in initiative is relatively small; every unit gets about roughly the same amount of turns. But as battles get drawn out longer, the initiative differences start to pile up and some stacks will act a lot more often than other stacks.
The problem here will be to find the sweet spot; make the difference too small and you could easily forego the ATB altogether, as it will be fairly close to the H3 and H6 systems. If you make the difference too large, it will completely skew the longer, late-game battles.
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 10, 2014 01:58 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Just because this is a tbs doesn't mean that everything has to be predetermined
Then why HoMM is a TBS in the first place? Let's make a RTS one! The faster you click, the more damage you do Only imagine! Battles in real time, both players click anytime they want. Fun 
HoMM is a TBS to give you time to think about your next move, which you, of course, want to be optimal; and how can you do that if you can't plan your strategy well because so many things are undetermined?
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
