|
| Thread: Future Heroes extra features |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV |
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
posted February 06, 2021 08:18 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
Annoying is, that you get your basic facts wrong. Heroes 4 didn't crash and burn and Heroes 7 did the exact opposite than trying to be completely different.
NWC and 3DO died with Heroes 4, so it did crash and burn. Heroes 7 tried to be part Heroes 5 and part Heroes 6, so still rather revolutionary.
Quote:
Apart from that, you can have your opinion, but you should be able to back it. You didn't even try.
Um an an opinion is a matter of personal choice, and therefore doesn't require 'backing'. Maybe you don't like the idea of creature experience, but you trying to argue us down all the time is getting annoying.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 06, 2021 08:52 PM |
|
|
3DO died in spite of Heroes 4 - all well-known, all public knowledge. Heroes 4 was rushed to save the mess, but couldn't. Heroes 7 didn't try to be part 5 and part 6 - it had to be part 6 due to the necessity to "reuse assets", but mechanically there is nothing of 6 in 7. Or of 4.
An opinion is a matter of personal choice, but it does require backing if you want people to take it seriously. Otherwise it's just like, hey, I think Heroes should be on the battlefield, spells should just be abilities and you should be able to pick stuff freely.
And I don't know you, so I don't care what you find annoying or whether you are annoyed.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 06, 2021 10:28 PM |
|
|
Yeah, no, you can't tell whether new mechanics (like heroes on the battlefield, or free choice of secondary skills) is going to work until you've tried it. Plus you've outright admitted you're not going to accept creature experience, so it's pointless even bothering to try.
Also, it's not just annoying that you treat your opinion as fact, it's downright arrogant.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2021 09:17 AM |
|
|
Instead of attacking me, don't you think it might make sense to try and find reasons, WHY creature XP would be a good thing and what it could give the game? Attacking me won't deliver that.
If you haven't got anything better, anything serious, yes, I'm arrogant enough to simply dismiss your opinion as just a whim. When you look at things to have in the 8th installment of a game, the last two of which were not exactly winners, throwing in whimsical ideas without any idea of what that might gain or achieve doesn't really help.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 07, 2021 10:27 AM |
|
|
XP gain during battles could replace the upgrade building/s by giving new form after xxx experience and so on. The problem with the standard upgrades, as they were designed until now, is that players simply built them from start or modified the templates to start with what is needed in every town in order to have the upgraded form the first day. Many low level creatures as archers, wood elves, pixies etc, are never recruited, nor used. How to get past that loophole other than forcing the player to use them, however in some pleasant and rewarding way, not just "you can't build that now". Look how artificially sound the Hota restrictions about upgrading magic lantern, now needs magic guild level 1 + magic university (12000 gold!). That isn't the solution.
This pattern would also keep creatures XP tied to hero XP, because harder battles you win, more XP for creatures -> new upgraded form sooner, so you will always use the best hero for optimal gain. It could also be parameterized to use hero level as XP gain multiplicator.
Saying XP is for only hero because "this or that", or "Heroes of... title" isn't like set in stone ; after all, in H1/H2/H3 creatures could be only carried by heroes and it would have sounded unthinkable another way. Then in next game, they did it.
Some problems may still arise, as when you mix creatures with different experience levels, that should instantly downgrade their form, but that could be part of a strategy.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2021 10:29 AM |
|
Edited by MattII at 10:30, 07 Feb 2021.
|
JollyJoker said:
Instead of attacking me, don't you think it might make sense to try and find reasons, WHY creature XP would be a good thing and what it could give the game? Attacking me won't deliver that.
If you haven't got anything better, anything serious, yes, I'm arrogant enough to simply dismiss your opinion as just a whim. When you look at things to have in the 8th installment of a game, the last two of which were not exactly winners, throwing in whimsical ideas without any idea of what that might gain or achieve doesn't really help.
Trying to come up with an argument for creature experience is a waste of time because you've admitted that you won't accept the idea, no matter what.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2021 01:30 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
XP gain during battles could replace the upgrade building/s by giving new form after xxx experience and so on. The problem with the standard upgrades, as they were designed until now, is that players simply built them from start or modified the templates to start with what is needed in every town in order to have the upgraded form the first day. Many low level creatures as archers, wood elves, pixies etc, are never recruited, nor used ...
Generally spoken, I don't think that "players starting with enough or manipulating the game in order to skip simple creatures" is a good point, but in this specific case it's part of a more general problem, which is that low level creatures are cheaply upgraded and upgrades bring a lot to the table - the investment is low and you can get it back by making use of the gained power.
However, when you drop town upgrades and force players to fight to get better heroes AND better creatures, you reward the successful battle doubly and triply.
When you look at the suggested Academy/Tower line-up I put in a page before as an example from a couple years ago, when H7 was still in development you will see that the level 1 creature isn't upgradable and the level 3 creature isn't upgradable either, while the Level 2 creature offers a choice between another one you can't upgrade and one you finally can. The choice is between a fast walking attacker (high attack and damage for a level 2, no upgrade) and a slower low damage flier with good defense and high HP, that can be upgraded to a fast flier with better defense and higher HP plus a special ability.
The actual reason for the problem you sketch is the fact that in H3 (and H5) there are "upgrades for upgrades sake". That is, either they or the basic creature serves no purpose (the upgrade is either generic or mandatory. Looking at the Tower in H3, the Gremlin upgrade is mandatory. H5 changed that somewhat, making the basic unit usable and the upgrade better, but this makes it only marginally better; while you can start play with unupgraded Gremlins (they shoot), the upgraded version is a lot better, and since Heroes start with a lot of them (while building new dwellings will give only a few stronger creatures), upgrading your level 1 will ALWAYS be a massive power gain.
The answer to this is, of course to not offer an upgrade for level 1 creatures and not offer a random pre-built level 2 dwelling either.
So all basic creatures should be usable. Upgrades should offer [EDIT: Sorry the post was cut off at this point; I continue]
a real improvement, but not a mandatory one.
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted February 07, 2021 03:18 PM |
|
|
|
I think a summary of all arguments for both sides would be in order now...maybe I'll do it within the next few days, if I manage it.
|
| |
|
|
