|
| Thread: Elvin's Guide To Making a Good Heroes Game! |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
posted April 18, 2016 02:02 PM |
|
|
bloodsucker said:
Mmm? I would expect this from someone else but I have you as a quite skilled player from some commments I read.
Not yet but he'll get there eventually 
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 02:09 PM |
|
|
bloodsucker said:
"Metataxer's Revenge" you don't want to wait a minute for every reload, you will pass half of the time watching a waiting screen.
half of time? I had to reload every battle at least 50 times until find the solution, and each early battle length was about 2 minutes. First turn took me 1 week of real time. Now think about: having to stare at screen 50 minutes for 2 minutes play time, sound decent?
Not that all maps are like Metataxer, far from that and FORTUNATELY, but also Metataxer is a great example that greatly innovating in an old H game is still possible, after so many years. But anyway, you agree with this or not is not the point. The point is that no game should penalize the loading times, as when you do that, you lower the difficulty.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 02:22 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
@JJ
I don't see your point. What you call arduous maps are those allowing the player to improve and learn, not a walk in the park, there would be no point to design a new map if it didn't confront the player with new challenges.
When I was playing chess vs computer I was always reloading before the loss point, and see if I can come up with a better strategy. Some call it cheating, I call it improving your skill by focusing on a specific puzzle. Maybe you should, for once, play some good Heroes maps, instead of constantly theorizing about.
@Stevie, same + we will see if Civ5 is still intensively played and modded 15 years from here, as Heroes 3 is.
Playing a game against an AI via reloading and restarting isn't about improving as such, but only about exploiting - or actually learning - the weaknesses, because the AI isn't actually reacting "cleverly" on what you do, but follows a certain pattern in behavior.
For example, playing hOMM 5 DUELS against another human and repeating the same battle all over again - or reloading at the point where the loser "lost it", would be ACTUAL improvement, because your opponent would react differently and not pre-programmed.
In my opinion, treating the AI of a game like Heroes as a puzzle may be necessary to excel in MP games, because you play against the AI most of the time, and knowing how to beat lots of a specific monster with a handful of units is obviously important, but it is also killing the game, because it dismantles the AI as an opponent.
In AoW 3, the overwhelming majority uses autocombat in Live MP, so you cannot actively exploit the AI (except that it obviously helps to know the AI, because then you know what you need to deploy and how to be successful in a battle) - and only PvP combat.
Actually, the main reason I stopped playing H4 (which I played like a berserker when it was released) is the very fact that you have so much exploitation potential in the game that you can beat seemingly insane odds - the flipside being that the AI OF COURSE isn't capable of doing that, so you can't actually play against the AI, because either the whole game is too easy for a human player or too difficult for AI players.
Which means, I'm actually not interested in playing your so-called "good" heroes maps because I'm not interested in the extremes of what you can actually do when you know all the blindsides.
I'm only interested in what you can do assuming your AI opponents are worth a go.
That's why I rate a couple of games quite high, for example the Original Master of Orion and Spaceward Ho! by NWC.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 02:33 PM |
|
|
Studying the possible exploits and micromanagements and training into mastering them IS what makes the difference in a game tournaments rankings. This is what motivated people to play games one vs another, not the fact that battles are only a matter of better army and HP sum. This is why some people almost never lose, while others will constantly lose. Each game has its exploits, after a time it is ineluctable you find them. But if an exploit allow winning EACH time if using it, then is a game lethal flaw.
Or this didn't exist in Heroes 3. You can't tell me now how to win any battle in Heroes 3. But in Heroes 2 I can tell you how to win any battle: get genies or have the higher speed then use hit and run. There is NO counter to that. Thats why that game was a complete failure in MP.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 02:38 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 14:43, 18 Apr 2016.
|
Salamandre said:
@Stevie, same + we will see if Civ5 is still intensively played and modded 15 years from here, as Heroes 3 is.
You're comparing a blazing phoenix with a sustained campfire. Civ5 has already proven itself now and the passing of 15 years won't take anything away from that. But I do believe it will be played for a very long time still. Modded? It's already been modded more than any Heroes game has ever been, there's literally thousands of mods in the workshop. And it's still burning bright hot.
But that's more or less besides the point - which was that a game can be more than decent in spite of terrible loading times.
bloodsucker said:
Mmm? I would expect this from someone else but I have you as a quite skilled player from some commments I read.
If game is 'strategically' great then Loading time gets way, way more frustrating. If you do most battles without even thinking loading time is not that important, now if you are playing "Metataxer's Revenge" you don't want to wait a minute for every reload, you will pass half of the time watching a waiting screen.
Of course, but what you're proving is that loading times tend to be more annoying than not depending on the context, which is exactly my point. Metataxer's Revenge is a great map which I would NEVER play because it's simply not my style. I would never enjoy a map that forced me to play a turn and load 50 times instead of playing 50 turns and loading once. It's fine that Heroes showcases such puzzle solving potential, but that headache is not for me.
And let's be clear about one thing, no one's defending long loading times here. The faster, the better. I just find it hasty to judge a game based on that aspect alone (or maybe even at all).
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 02:40 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 14:42, 18 Apr 2016.
|
JJ said:
I'm actually not interested in playing your so-called "good" heroes maps because I'm not interested in the extremes of what you can actually do when you know all the blindsides.
They are not so-called good maps, they are really interesting maps indeed. But they are not your standard H3 experience and I also don't see them as my usual Heroes experience.
Sal's own maps and ones he prefers as a player are the ones that transform H3 almost into a puzzle game. They take one aspect of the game and expand it further than what the original game intended. It's a challenging experience, it takes skill, intelligence and innovation to design such maps. But I also wouldn't prefer that to be my every day Heroes game. For that, there are actual puzzle games out there and instead of playing the same "battle" (puzzle) 50 times, I'd rather take my Heroes as a TBS the way it was intended.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 02:57 PM |
|
|
Well I am sorry, but when I get a little time and want to have fun, I still download some map then start playing. If during first 3 days nothing surprises me, if nothing requires from me to stop a while and ask "what now, how this, wow this is smart" then I put it down as soon. Is like when you like reading and a book simply says nothing you already didn't hear. Time is valuable, and gaming experience should be worth every second, as that time is a sacrificed time. Then is fun that you talk about my maps while you never tried them. In my maps you reload very few because making them difficult wasn't my purpose, but expending the game possibilities.
Maps where you reload a lot, are paradoxically still maps designed in 2001-2002, thus saying that the game original intention was distorted so early is a bit undocumented.
And anyway, I am not dumb to the point of claiming more you reload, better is the map. Just saying that huge loading times will instantly lower your creativity, as mapmaker you will less create or test new solutions, if they will penalize player time, instead of his brain only.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 03:09 PM |
|
|
If you're talking about me, I did play your maps and liked them. I didn't play them constantly though. They are a very small portion of my H3 time. I prefer playing random maps against the AI without saving most of the time.
Let me expand your book analogy. Most literature is to some degree, innovative about language, right? Intellectually executed linguistic experiments is a very valid aspect of literature. Now, Joyce takes that to a further level, tweaking the structure of language becomes his priority in his quest to create something new. And to some people, that is not what literature's main focus should be about, so it is a nightmare for them to read a Joyce novel.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 03:14 PM |
|
|
Well, my point is that, no matter how good is the game, if it is not optimized I won't dare to play it -starting and reloading time, loading areas time, broken saves, crashes on huge maps etc. Which is an oxymoron anyway, as good games are usually optimized, only the lack of time in development prohibits optimization. With the collateral damages we know.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 05:44 PM |
|
|
|
Not all "on-the-looks-of-it-impossible-battle" versus the AI is based on exploits. When the AI sits in its town because it thinks you're too weak to bother coming out and take care of and then gets shot into pieces, that is in my opinion an exploit of stupid AI. If you defeat 20 Rust Dragons with ridiculous inferior army by blinding the dragons and filling your siege defense with Water Elementals so there's no room for a 2-hex creature to land, that's not an exploit in my opinion, that is very clever.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 06:37 PM |
|
|
I didn't say, exploits (or making use of boundaries or game limitations) were not CLEVER.
It's just that I want to play a different game to solve puzzles, say, Sokoban.
A strategy game that involves a dependancy of force and economy and relies on a tactical battlefield is supposed to build on decisions and prioritizing - not on finding clever "shortcuts" to bypass the needs.
It is true that you CAN make puzzle-like maps that will be based on clever solutions of problems or explore what happens in extreme situations, but that is transcending the game to a different kind of game. It may be somewhat part of the game world, but it's just a part.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 06:55 PM |
|
|
No, you said they were plain stupid, if I recall.
But why argue, the kind of play which is strategically challenging is clearly not your style, so you try to get around by saying "this is NOT Heroes", like artu did. While this statement is obviously only your opinion, as only casual players will find fun playing random maps and dealing with a boring AI.
I can not talk for all heroes games, but for having played a lot H2 and H3, I can say that those "exploits" as you call them, are damnt hard to put in practice, as there are a dozen of parameters which can go wrong. So it takes a lot of skill, practice and dedication to master them, and THIS is why is fun for a lot of people. For example, making a correct chain of heroes and deliver army instantly on the other side of the map is a thing which a lot of casual players consider an exploit and a flaw, while in reality they are just not capable of putting it in practice. So they want to win, they can't, so is certainly bad tactic. How many times I heard that.
You have to know perfectly every speed pattern affecting your moves, you have to consider stables bonuses, obstacles on map, monsters range, bonuses of your logistic skill, artefacts you wear, terrains you travel on, and all this while having to do daily tasks with your heroes, as you don't have 7 days for making your chain. And this is only an example among others which demonstrate that winning online vs experienced people is not explained in the manual, but has to be improvised.
I like this kind of game. But as I said, no matter what you despise or like as style, loading times exceeding 1-5 seconds are indecent to me, as they provoke the superficial style, where you don't search for deeper tactics and challenges. Is not only a matter of wasted time, but it goes deeper, it affects the game quality.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
EnergyZ
Legendary Hero
President of MM Wiki
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 08:38 PM |
|
|
It's just going to extreme to reload the same thing over and over (even 50 times), even if Heroes was all about randomness. It sounds too picky to be going on to find the winning combination. I could respect such maps, but that certainly is an extreme thing to do, something that deviates too much from normal gameplay.
Besides, isn't it a contradiction to want a better Heroes game, yet complain how the loading time is too much? Gameplay evolves and requires more codes, data and files, all which increase the said loading time - probably the best thing is to buy a supercomputer or somesuch thing. And one more thing - if some of such tactics require usage of multiple heroes, then reloading after every defeat in multiplayer, wouldn't you get annoyed by how much time you'd have to wait until finishing the turn.
Just pointing out that for a good (Heroes) game requires normal gameplay, which uses normal tactics. For if you use those expert tactics on normal maps, one would be missing out on much if the reason not to play the game is just loading time. This is what I believe in.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 08:51 PM |
|
|
@ Sal
It's great that you are so great and everyone else has no idea, but it would help if you would less fantasize and more read what other people are actually writing.
I seem to remember quite clearly that I said, exploiting is finding the blindsides of the AI (on the BF, mostly) and "exploiting" them, because the AI doesn't learn. I even gave an example: when the AI attacks single Goblins instead of the "danger stack", because its damage/loss calculation isn't taking into account a single Behemoth stack and 6 single Goblins nor the fact that ganging up on the Behemoths would win the battle, while wasting time with single (or small stacks of) Goblins will lose it.
Chaining is definitely not in that category, so you could have spared yourself the trouble to explain what could be called the intricacies of the logistics part of the game.
You can argue whether it makes sense to change the rules like H4 did or to keep it like in H3, but it's basically a rule question, and a question of making good use of them or not.
Exploiting the limits of the BF AI to ridiculous amounts, however, is just looking for a SHORTCOMING of the AI. The AI SHOULDN'T have these obvious flaws. It could be avoided, for example by mixed stacks and/or additional rules or programming, and having a competetive battle AI is obviously important for everyone as the complaints in that regard show.
The important thing is - no matter how CLEVER the find is, every AI blindside is a FLAW. For example, if someone would find out that casting Slayer, Mirth and Protection from Water on a stack makes the AI keel over and die, then you could give the person cudos for trying out that spell combo, but the keel-over-and-die part would still something to patch with AI behavior.
Sure, you still have to get the combo, and sure, you need to have a stack that can survive 3 rounds - but the important thing is that once you go for fulfilling the conditions for the exploit you actually stop playing the game and start playing a different game; you stop thinking in terms of "how many and which of the troops I can reasonably get will allow taking that with acceptable losses and what do I need for that". Instead you start thinking in termns of "what do I have to do to maximitze my chances to get those spells ASAP"
It's a different game and while you can't say it has nothing to do with strategy it's something based on flaws.
Chaining? Well, where is the exploit? For human players, the idea of it is obvious. You CAN transfer units - that's a very important part of the game - from hero to hero, and units don't move on their own and don't have their own MA, they are, in that regard, like artifacts, and no one calls it an exploit that you can have two heroes (and in fact even more) sharing one and the same artifact in the same turn. The AI isn't able to? Well, the adventure AI cheats, though.
The battle AI doesn't, however. If you ever played Etherlords (which is fun, by the way), when you increase difficulty, you also increase the probability that AI creature/hero specials/abilities trigger, and those specials are pretty hard. Imagine, you'd play Heroes, and Unicorn Blind ability would increase from 50% to 60, 75 and 90% probability with each difficulty level - of course only those led by the AI. Or Stoning probability. And so on.
In my opinion, beating a computer game is nothing to be proud of. You beat a simple blue-print. Try to imagine a 4-year-old that has no idea about the game, but can read and follow simple instructions. Now write an instruction for how to battle. What you meet in the game is the 4-year-old following your instructions. Are you proud of finding the holes in your piece?
So PART of the the competetive game is based on who is screwing the 4-year-old over more competently - or in less polemic words, who knows the script better. PART of it. The question is, whether all this is FUN, and tastes differ.
The "clever" thing is, as a rule, that you exploit things the AI programmers didn't think of, which is somewhat clear, because their gaming experience with the AI is limited. IDEALLY(!) the AI would be "moddable" so that it could learn.
There is in fact a very old game that is based on that, in a sense. It's called Omega.
You start with a limited budget and your task is to program an artificial tank so that it can beat (I think) two simple tanks. This is actually based on writing a behavior pattern. Beating those, you have to beat YOUR OWN design, so the AI is actually "learning" by simply picking up your designs (you get more money.
The programming is actually fun and easy.
Anyway. Doing silly things that get you a result is something that should be fixed. Of course it isn't, because AI programming is awkward. But exploiting omissions and blindsides isn't "strategy" when you can repeat it and will always gain the same result.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 08:52 PM |
|
|
EnergyZ said:
Gameplay evolves and requires more codes, data and files, all which increase the said loading time - probably the best thing is to buy a supercomputer or somesuch thing.
I don't think a supercomputer should be required to play a turn-based strategy game. Anyway loading times are a matter of optimization, on another example compare AI turns time from original H5 vs QAI, it's all in the code.
____________
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 08:53 PM |
|
|
Having a better or correctly running game is not a matter of how many codes are inside, but how are those codes done. When starting, a game does not have to run ALL scripts, but only those requiring to load the options. Processing scripts is the faster thing, it is the graphics which take a lot to load. For example, Civ game goes from 10 seconds start to 3 minutes if I use graphical mods > 300 mo. I can accept that a heavy graphical mod, which adds 300 creatures as in Civ, slows the game, but having the game itself, without any addition, last for ever just for starting, thats a weird thing.
For example, is not normal that in Skyrim, you enter a town: loading screen, then you enter a house from that town: second loading screen, then exit from that house: again loading screen and so on. Town and its houses should be charged together, thats simply botched code.
|
|
EnergyZ
Legendary Hero
President of MM Wiki
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 08:55 PM |
|
|
Galaad said:
EnergyZ said:
Gameplay evolves and requires more codes, data and files, all which increase the said loading time - probably the best thing is to buy a supercomputer or somesuch thing.
I don't think a supercomputer should be required to play a turn-based strategy game. Anyway loading times are a matter of optimization, on another example compare AI turns time from original H5 vs QAI, it's all in the code.
No, they won't. But just know how large Ubi-limbic patches are, and remember how the game is in terms of content. Just saying that with a larger game requires better computers, as it is the case nowadays.
____________
Come and visit the Might and Magic Wikia!
|
|
PandaTar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Celestial Heavens Mascot
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 09:18 PM |
|
|
Elvin said:
For years ...
- There you go, make a decent H8 
- BRIN' MAH LA-ZORS! AND LAMASSU-TANK!
____________
"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
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 09:32 PM |
|
|
EnergyZ said:
It's just going to extreme to reload the same thing over and over (even 50 times), even if Heroes was all about randomness.
It's not about getting extreme RNG advantage when reloading a battle. If you're forced to get e.g. 5 times morale the first round to win, then it's not a very satisfactory way to win said battle, when alternatively you could do it with no morale only one week later.
It's about figuring out how to accomplish the objective, which takes practice. Use the opponents units against him, take advantage if e.g. has no flyers, use the terrain on the battle ground.. drain him for shots, etc. A battle can open up a huge amount of interesting possibilities, spells thought to be useless that may be the only solution, etc.
EnergyZ said:
And one more thing - if some of such tactics require usage of multiple heroes, then reloading after every defeat in multiplayer, wouldn't you get annoyed by how much time you'd have to wait until finishing the turn.
One of the beautiful things about creeping in multiplayer is that you get punished if you estimate incorrect, especially if you underestimate the neutral stacks.
The better you are at judging, the better you'll be at taking down strong stacks with minimal army, but if you get it wrong you'll either get destroyed or take too heavy losses to stand a chance, alternatively you'll wait longer than you have to, but hopefully not so long that it becomes game deciding.
Battles you redo aren't doing multiplayer, it's when you play maps, either because you're getting experiences with standard maps or because you've ventured yourself into the lion's den and takes on challenges that you wouldn't have thought possible to overcome. You can then take some of this experience with you to multiplayer games and improve your ability to creep, but in my opinion it's only a small part of it, conservatives, hives, topia's, crypts, etc. are more important and we've seen cunning solutions to these for 10-15 years.
Edit: In other words, if you have a fight you know there's a really high probability you'd have to reload to win and otherwise you'd lose the game, it's not a fight you would take in multiplayer.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 18, 2016 10:14 PM |
|
|
Exploiting and having fun from AI flaws is not like beating a 4 yo kid. Battle is about doing it BETTER than your opponent, which doesn't necessarily means you know by heart the tricks then play them like a robot, but that you have the guts to take the risks he doesn't. That you are able to improvise beyond the rules, that you own the game it its RNG core, that you can prevail against all odds.
When exposed on paper, the army split or the 1 unit lure tactics can indeed sound rubbish and simple, but if they were so simple, everyone would have been a good player, or it is not. There are way too many parameters to take care of, so planing and applying same strategy battle after battle, game after game, from one map to another, is simply impossible. It amazes me how some people here can believe and loudly claim that Heroes III is full of cheap flaws and easily cloned tactics, while there are still several tournaments running right now, with hundreds of players enjoying and challenging each other.
Must be really crazy people then, to insist play same dumb and rubbish game.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
| |
|
|
