|
| Thread: one thing that bothers me (because Heroes now can be part of your army) |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
malkia
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted May 17, 2001 07:22 PM |
|
|
one thing that bothers me (because Heroes now can be part of your army)
Well.. Well...
Imagine your castle is out of troops - you bought everything and you sent them to fight somewhere. But then the enemy is coming - so you have to recruit something even some small troops - with the little hope that you gonna protect and save your town - and if you succeed with this little troop - against some bigger from computer - you feel kind of excited - like - "Wow - that was hard one - but I've made it". Like many times - playing with Fortress and having no troops left - I've got some Beastmaster with 4 basilisks in tavern to recruit + some gnolls and lizardmen - and they saved the castle - even against 4 behemoths, 15 orcs and 4 ogres. And i felt very xcited about that.
Now in Heroes4 you can recruit heroes - so instead of trying to get real army troops from tavern - i can rely on my heroes - And buy now 6 or 7 heroes - and go protect your town. They must succeed because allowing heroes to fight in game probably means that now heroes are strong creatures. like 8 level or somethin. Did you have that ability to buy even 7 level creature from tavern in heroes3?
And finally, where's the fun in all this?
____________
|
|
malkia
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted May 17, 2001 07:27 PM |
|
|
and one more thing...
And what about for begining of the game - Instead of trying to collect an army in the begining - I buy all heroes from tavern (even If i don't have enough money - i can collect enough for 3-4 days). And play with them...
okay... anyway... I'll catch these days on the expo to see the game (as gamespot told so that 3DO/NWC will be there) - and give some feedback soon - hope they've made the game to be more fun... 
____________
|
|
Mojo
Hired Hero
|
posted May 18, 2001 12:14 AM |
|
|
I don't see your point...
Yeah, heroes are going to be able to fight (and I think that is the best!). First off, your hero will be able to die! 2nd its not going to be like you grab a hero from the tavern and they are lvl 13 or something. I think having heroes fight adds more dimensions to the game, as well as some interest.
____________
|
|
raZor_X
Promising
Known Hero
The mysterious Warlock
|
posted May 18, 2001 09:55 AM |
|
|
Or mazbe you are able to recruit onlz one hero per day (turn), who knows ???
raZor_X
|
|
lovedoc
Hired Hero
|
posted May 18, 2001 10:41 AM |
|
|
???
One thing I canīt understand is that IF your heroes are a part of your force now which I think SOUNDS good, how the hell would that work out, because the AI and most human players would probably target them first with magic or with monsters thus maybe not ending the battle but at least canceling all chances for the opponent to cast spells. And of course then all + the hero had on att. and def. has to be lost to reducing their units to their basic strenghts.
Will the heroes be immortals who cannot get hurt just fight and go like 50 damage or something?
Problems: You could take out all neutral monsters on the map with one hero.
Would the hero then have like 10 000 HPs or something making them harder to kill?
Problems: Same as above, too powerfull.
Conclucion: If they canīt be hurt hiring them will be a long but effective cheat to beat the game easily.
If they are weak they would always be targeted and die and you wouldnīt be able to fight any battle without them dying. Where the f*ck is the brilliant idea I ask? How do they plan to make this work out. Their troops resurrect them after the battle. How will they then gain experience. Who will cast spells. Will their troops get weaker when they die? There are too many questions and just not enough answers. What going on 3do?
____________
Lifeīs a snow and then you marry one...
|
|
malkia
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2001 12:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Or mazbe you are able to recruit onlz one hero per day (turn), who knows ???
raZor_X
hope not - after I capture new town - and area was not well exploited - i recruit two or more heroes from it - and start exploring with them - then main hero (mostly) - who took this castle moves.
Also computer does likes this a lot - if you can't recruit more than two heroes per turn (or per castle/per turn?) then he can't explore well.
____________
|
|
Ironied
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted May 18, 2001 02:57 PM |
|
|
Dont let Heroes fight in battle
I don't like the idea that heroes should fight in battle. How should this work? This doesn't fit in the heroes gameplay. Doesn't the hero effect the creatures attack, defense, moral and luck attributes anymore. If he does, what happens when the heroe dies in battle? Do the creatures then loose their bonus. If that would be the case everyone only attacks the hero until he is dead. If not what then about magic. If the hero is dead can you still cast spells then. If not there is no balance anymore betweeen magic and might. the hero is dead and attribute bonus are still guilty but spell casting is gone? where should this all end? or is the battle lost if the hero dies, like in age of wonders (a big reason why this game is bad). but on the other hand if the battle still goes on and you win without your hereo what happens then?
|
|
Jarrett
Adventuring Hero
|
posted May 18, 2001 03:04 PM |
|
|
heroes
You can only recruit 2 heroes to fight in your stack. You can have other heroes in other stacks.
____________
|
|
tommy
|
|
posted May 18, 2001 06:35 PM |
|
|
heroes in your army
I think its a ok idea having heroes fighting in your army. But what happens when you have build a massive army get loads of experience and someone wipes out your hero. The only way i can see it working is if your hero gains hit points every level, but still what happens to luck, morale and spell casting?
____________
|
|
Nebuka
Promising
Supreme Hero
Save me Jebus!
|
|
posted May 19, 2001 05:02 AM |
|
|
I don`t think that heroes will fight. It is just a little trick from 3Do to make our minds busy thinking how will this work. It can`t work. I can`t imagine that one hero could kill behemont or dragon. He`ll be dead in the first turn. If his HP progress by levels - how many could he have?100 ( again dead ),300 (again dead ), 500...If he is invincible? Then who is the winner when two heroes are fighting? That will just screw up game.
____________
|
|
pluvious
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2001 09:24 AM |
|
|
Lol. You guys are funny. I'm sure 3do has a much different idea on heroes fighting in battles than any listed here. It will probably come hand in hand with some new changes in gameplay as well. But we'll see.
Personally I think it makes the game much more interesting to have the heroes actually in the battles, but of course the tactical aspects of this are what people seem to be concerned about.
Some "possibilities" for how to handle heroes in battle could be the heroes simply being reduced to 0 hit points during a battle and fleing home when they lose. And keep in mind the army can now fight on without heroes so you wouldn't just lose when your hero dies. Oh yeah!
Or heroes being less important. Just mercenary spellcasters and warriors. They come in and fight and earn skills and are powerful. Like one of these is comparable to the best troop but gets even better as he/she advances levels. But even if they die you can get more heroes or more troops. Remember you no longer need heroes to move troops...and you even have caravans.
Or a hero could simply be knocked unconscious or into some other state when he is defeated on the battlefield...and if army flees he can be revived somehow. This way you can defeat the hero and the skills he/she has won't be used but unless you take out the whole army you still havn't won.
Anyway, those are just a couple off the top of my head. It really depends on what the whole game is like. There will likely be many changes that are not anticipated that will help explain heroes in combat. Myself, I love the game but having a hero just sit out there and lob spells is a bit old. Time to change.
____________
...Pluvious...
-The Storm Before the Calm-
|
|
Ironied
Tavern Dweller
|
posted May 21, 2001 10:53 PM |
|
|
to pluvious
why should adding a hero to battle make the game much more interesting? its just another creature more on the field called hero. wow!
unfortanatly 3do implements this new gameplay in heroes4. i have played age of wonders which already had this concept where heroes fight in battle, you can have more than one hero in an army and also creatures can walk around without a hero and get experience points and so on. so its no new concept but a boring one. as i said befoe just another creature on the battle field called hero.
but on the other hand many things that made heroes3 so good could be gone. as i mentioned in my statement before there are many questions open now?
do the creatues still get more attack, defense, moral, luck from the hero.
if thats still so -> what happens if the hero dies.
it it not -> why should i find artifacts then?
other questions what happens if my hero dies and i defeat the other army and only my creatures survive -> who gets the artifacts?
my fears are that 3do makes the same mistakes many of the software producers made. they copy things from games which are top selling products and forget that they already had a good product (like battle isle4).
when i look at the heroes4 screenshots always microsofts : age of empires gets into my mind. and the direction that now also heroes can fight and each creature can wonder around makes this feeling not going away. maybe they want heroes X to become are real-time strategy game cause they thing only real-time games can make money not knowing that
NO REAL-TIME game should have the right to call himself a strategy game and that the heroes community likes the gameplay as it is.
they can change the grafik-engine, add new creatures, remove some bugs, change something on magery, skills but leave the gameplay as it is!!!!!!
by the way i don't think that anything of this writing here will ever be realised by 3do. they have their marketing experts who tell them the world needs that and that couse this game sold so many times and that game so many time so we want also a piece of that cake and so we produce a very similar game.
maybe in a few years there are no turned-bases games anymore.
viva-la comand & conquer 36 and age of empires 43
|
|
pluvious
Promising
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 22, 2001 10:29 AM |
|
|
I tend to agree that all real time games I have played should not be called "strategy games". And I hope this trend towards all real-time games blows over, or they improve the technology and hook up the computer to your brain and you play a real-time game the only way it would be good...virtually (with what you do taking place immediately all over). But I think that might be down the road a bit still.
But as to why I do think the game will be more interesting if heroes participate in the battles. I feel it will be more exciting simply because the heroes can now use more than their spells in combat and you can combine a group of heroes to add multiple bonuses to the stacks. That's pretty cool I would say! Plus you have to protect your hero, which should add new gameplay elements. Its just more interesting all around. Just other units? No, that is incorrect altogether.
But yes I am concerned that 3do will make a mistake and change too much of what is a unique and brilliant game. The strategy elements of the heroes game are second to none in the fantasy genre. But right now I see no reason to panic. The changes seem solid as long as the designers consider how gameplay elements will be affected. To this point they have done well, and the fact that they have kept the game turn-based and not changed many of the really important parts of the game (creature stacks, the town-building process, etc) there is reason to believe they still know what they are doing. If not then oh well. Its their fault for being stupid.
____________
...Pluvious...
-The Storm Before the Calm-
|
|
arachnid
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted May 22, 2001 11:54 AM |
|
|
Shogun is a superb real time strategy game! Dont even try and say its not! This also uses heroes in battle but these are given a unit of horsemen to control. Maybe heroes 4 could work like this your leader is put in with a unit of creatures (you can choose the creatures) then they have to be destroyed for the enemy to be able to try and kill the hero.
____________
|
|
ironied
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted May 22, 2001 08:01 PM |
|
|
what heroes makes best
i find the best of heroes3 is that you can play it in mulitplayer with an odd number of players. and i dont mean the technical aspect. many games have the problem if e.g 3 players play and to fight the third one who hordes armies can easily after the batlle of the others has finished kill the survivor of the battle.
in heroes after a final battle you get a lot of experience and artifacts and you can also beat the other players with half of the army cause attack, defense, power and other things makes your army stronger although you have less creatures.
but now when heroes can fight and be attacked this can be dangerous.
some examples: i see that i am loosing the game and now concentrate all to kill the enemy hero so the other player looses also against the remaining players. and i cant believe that if one player has the only goal to kill my hero not concerning about how much he looses of his army that i can protect my hero. i played AOW and if the opponnent wants to kill the hero you cant protect him except of running out of the field immediately after battle starts.
then i heard rumors that now high level heros can be recruited in tavern. this is more worse, cause if high level heroes can be recruited the player with most creatures in his army wins and player who fight a lot maybe have a good hero but what can one good hero do against thounds of other creatures and a lot of maybe 5 - 10 level lower heroes.
i say Heroes3 had an excellent gameplay. Make a better grafik engine, maybe new creatures, correct the bugs (as i sayd in the topic improvements which should be done) and that is it.
or does anyone come to the idea to change chess rules. lets say now the king should walk two fields more. maybe this makes the game more interessting and sure adds new gameplay elements.
and think about this last thing. maybe the concept heroes in battle is cool but on the other hand if the programmers forget only one of the problems i mentioned before it can destroy the whole h4 gameplay and all the other things like new creatures and new engine are useless if their can be so easy strategies to ruin a player.
a good example is battle isle. battle isle 1 - 3 had an excellent gameplay, factories and deposits to conquer which made exploring important and now in battle isle 4 they made a ressource and buildings part like in real-time-games as warcraft and command & conquer. now 3 player games is impossible and defense and building building building is the only way to win. and also the ressource part is boring.
also there are romours that in heroes4 the battle fields are much larger. but thing about the consequences if you want to play the game with friends over the internet and now a bigger battle takes more than 1 hours. are you sure your friends wait so long???
|
|
thunderknight
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 23, 2001 11:15 AM |
bonus applied. |
|
Just Some Thoughts
Hi, all,
I personally like the idea of heroes involving in fighting. One of the sad thing in h3 (or maybe even in h1 and h2) is that heroes lose their "personality", there are just :main, scout, resources heroes etc.
Based on the info. available, in h4, heroes can take different classes (or "career") and 3do tries to put some RPG feel into h4 and now hero development would be a "true" part of the game and would enrich the gameplay.(In h3, you just try to get log, earth, wisdom, tac.......) Hero is more than a creature.
IMO, heroes should get into fighting and they can also get other roles. e.g. maybe a thief (a hero with stealth specialty) can open a guard without visiting a keymaster's tent.
Ironied, I can see your worries, I myself share the same worries too. (The odd-player problem makes me quit playing Age of Empire coz people just keep rush on resources and building up armies). Nevertheless, I think these are just problems to be solved by 3do. If everything is kept similar to h3, with only addition of creatures, structures, enhanced graphics.... Then why not just h3 expansion ?
I've played one great game: Masters of Magic many years ago. In that game, heroes can fight apart from the creatures. Yes heroes would die in battles and you would lose "fame" by letting your general die. It is fun to see the hero you develop get into fighting and win. It gives you more sense of participation and fun.
I think IF 3do can solve the following problems:-
a). balance of strength between heroes and creatures
b). death of heroes and its impact to game
c). effect of heroes on creatures
d). impact on on-line gaming e.g. time
then heroes take part in battles is a welcome idea.
(at least to me.....  )
After all, they are heroes, let them fight !
|
|
Flector
Tavern Dweller
|
posted May 23, 2001 11:39 AM |
|
|
Dammit,
why do i always post in the wrong threads ? In the thread: I don't think that HERO should get into battle i explained some very interesting idea regarding fighting heroes. Now it seems that that thread is dead (while it has the same topic as this thread). I would like some feedback on my 'escort hero' command idea. I am even willing to post it again here if you don't fancy searching for the other thread.
____________
|
|
Ironied
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted May 23, 2001 03:55 PM |
|
|
Escort Hero Questions
I don't really understand how the escort hero function should work. if i use the escort hero function on a creature what does the creature then? walk in front of the hero to protect him like i can do when i have tactics? if thats so how do i protect him against shooters, magic and blowing attacks.
or does this creature disappear and is in a way on the same field as my hero and when i attack the hero then this creature is attacked and it only can defend my hero? if that so ranged attackers get much more power cause creatures like fortress or stronghold have to attack in hand to hand they can't stand still and defend. but if they move away the hero can be attacked with magic or other creatures whereas i let my titans protect my hero but they also can shoot and attack.
another question is how do this escort function work. are the creatures immediatly at the hero or do they have to walk to him? i think they should have to walk cause otherwise speed and spells like slow, quicksand, forcefield loose their sense.
so please explain your idea more detailed maybe with some examples how you think it can work.
|
|
malkia
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 23, 2001 08:06 PM |
|
|
Hey Flector ;)
Don't be so angry with me
To Thunderknight: Yes in M&M you can play with heroes - but you can't play with HORDE of SKELETONS - got it? It's totally different design...
I'm sure it will not work the way 3DO will design it - I don't know why you think they are some kind of gods? - yes they are making my favourite game - but they can make errors of course - and If they read this board - this can help them to understand - what can go wrong if HEROE is included into army in a fight.
Summary why hero should not be included:
1. Because on Day 1, Month 1, Week 1 - I hire 2 heroes in one army - and I got all my MINES without problem.
2. Because i can't imagine how you gonna cast MAGIC SPELL and then you have to skip with your hero? or no?
3. Because I can't understand how ATTACK/DEFENSE modifiers will work when you have two heroes - and one goes dead. Also if second hero is made that he doesn't give any ATTACK/DEFENSE to the army he is enrolled in - then does he gets ATTACK/DEFENSE points from the main hero?
4. Because it's not scallable - even the strongest one hero (with probably great hitPoints) - can't scale to 10000 of first level creatures. Such creatures can be gathered much more faster than making hero to great level.
5. And many many other things
____________
|
|
thunderknight
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 24, 2001 09:20 AM |
|
|
Some other thoughts
Hi, all,
Malkia, to address your worries, just some thoughs:-
1. Just like most RPG, heroes you hire at day 1 week 1 month 1 are newbies and they would not be much stronger than those stack of low level creatures.
2. Maybe heroes can do two actions in a round (i.e. spell casting + att/def/.....). Or since heroes will have different specialties, just let those spell caster heroes cast spells and let your brave warrior heroes to fight.
3. Maybe no att/def modifiers any more. Heroes leading troops may only give them higher morale, better luck (if the hero is luck specialist). Yes, heroes will still want to get artifacts coz these artifacts will still help them.
4. I agree that to gather a huge force is easier than developing a great hero. Then, no one told you to fight that legion of skeleton with only one hero. Heroes are heroes, they are not gods.
I agree with you there are numerous problems by getting heroes into battles and 3do may screw up. But who knows, maybe they will do a great job and give us new surprise.
Getting hereos into battle will create a new dimension in tactical aspect. Maybe you can do more things with heroes e.g. you can open quest guard, transporting resources (see Ironied's idea of resources shuttle), increase production of mines.....etc etc. Maybe you can even try to bribe heroes(SirDunco's idea), or after you defeat a hero, you can choose to kill him, try to hire him or just put him into jail and ask for ransom from your opponent.
Every change will give rise to problems, and problems are there for us to solve them ! Let the discussion start !
|
|
|
|
