|
| Thread: Heroes in combat in H5 - how to make everyone happy :) |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
posted November 13, 2002 02:59 AM |
|
|
Heroes in combat in H5 - how to make everyone happy :)
I think that the participation of the Heroes in combat can work, and there is elegant solution to this problem. They didn’t have to go that far to look for the answer how to do it in H4. The answer was already there.
The batlle should start in H1,2,3 fashion with Heroes on horses alongside the battlefield. With an option included that they can join the fray at any given time, no matter if the hero have or don’t have Combat skill.
This way, the player can judge when is the best time for the hero to engage his enemies and this way help his troops in the battle. There should be exceptions when a hero will join the battle without order from the player to do so. And that is in the following two cases: First - if he travel alone, and is attacked, he is automatically on the battlefield and can be targeted. Second - if the hero has an army and is out of the battle, and all of his army is dead, he automaticaly joins the battle, because logicaly he can be reached by the enemy as there are no troops to defend him. Of course, that once the hero join the battle ha cannot get back on his horse on the side of the battlefield, all he can do is flee the battle as well as his army, or surrender.
Now, this way, heroes shouldn’t be made powerful as in H4 when in battle (I’m talking of the combat heroes here). And the role of the heroes in the direct combat will be somewhere at the end of the battle when there is smaller danger for them.
Also, the old hexagonal grid from Heroes 1,2,3 will do great job when one want to protect his hero. You can put your hero in one corner and make a wall around him with one creature that takes up one hexagon in front of him, and another one that takes two hexagons below him (just like we used to protect our ranged units in Heroes 1-3. This way the enemy will have to break the creature wall in order to attack the hero.
But why would a spellcaster hero want to join the battle you would as now. Well have we forgot about the special abilities. The way I suggest them to be incorporated in the hero system is this: Heroes shouldn’t start with special ability, but when they reach certain levels they will unlock special abilities.
Mainly this special abilities will be available in combat, but only and only when the hero joins the battle. So this way, let’s say the Wizard that reach level 20 will unlock unique spell that is available only trough this process (cannot be learned in mage guild nor any other way) but can cast it only on the battlefield. Or a Paladin that reach level 20 can get Mass Prayer Passive Spell, and this means that when he is on the battlefield each turn the Mass Prayer Spell is automaticaly casted and he haven’t spent his spell casting ability for that turn. Also he can access some other special powers, like he can get Mass Holy Word on Level 15 (but this is active spell, meaning he has to cast it), that is alos unavailable trough any other learning method. At level 10 he can get Holy Strike, ability that grants him 200% damage when fighting undead, at level 5 double strike, and so on.
Keep in mind that this is only scetch to show the idea. Maybe they can get special powers on every 3rd or 2nd level. Or maybe even every level they can get special power or improve one that has been already taken. But certain special powers will require certain level in order to be unlocked. The better the power the bigger the level. I know that this is really hard to balance. But that’s why I’ll propose lower number of hero classes. I think that it's better to have 2 heroes per town that are unique and well developed, than lots anemic advanced classes options.
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
|
UncleJR
Adventuring Hero
|
posted November 14, 2002 06:08 PM |
|
|
You Can't Please Everybody
Did you ever hear the story about the old man and his son who were taking their mule to market?
It aptly illustrates that when you try to please everybody you end up making a mess out of things. 3DO needs to decide whether having heroes in battle or not is a mistake, and then go with their decision.
As it stands now, I would say that heroes will not be a part of the battle in H5.
|
|
Ancubis
![Ancubis]()
Disgraceful
|
|
posted November 18, 2002 10:50 AM |
|
|
You can't please me with stupid heroes in combat they should leave the battlefield and so double the amount of creatures.
____________
|
|
Titan_888
Known Hero
Wind of Change
|
|
posted November 20, 2002 10:28 AM |
|
|
i think ...
in heroes 3... the Hero is supporting his/her army with spells and also with his skills his support his army.
What more you want?
A rambo type of hero that steps down from his horse and pulls up this uzi-machinegun and eleminate opponent necro army in splitsecond.
hmmm
Homm3 forever 
|
|
hobgoblin
Known Hero
captain hobgoblin
|
|
posted November 20, 2002 06:22 PM |
|
|
One question Svetac, in your idea, would the hero, when he's on his horse, support his army by adding some skills to those of his creatures, or would he just be able to cast spells?
I tried to find an idea to make balanced the fact that he could add skills to his creatures, but I've not found for now.
____________
Take me down to a pardise city where the girls are green and the grass is pretty
|
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
|
posted November 20, 2002 10:16 PM |
|
|
Hobgoblin, I imagin that they will add stats to their creatures. There will be non-spellcasters, non-warriors but Genereals also in the game. So if they stand aside, their role will be only to add skills, right?
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
|
Kujo
Known Hero
who loves to script.
|
|
posted November 20, 2002 11:59 PM |
|
Edited By: Kujo on 23 Nov 2002
|
my opinion
I vote that heroes should be allowed in combat. If they were removed, then we couldn't do the majorly fun 1 hero level, where you go around with only a hero and kill monsters. I think Svetac has a very good idea, and it would probably work with a little tweaking.
Edit: Hah i killed the thread!!
____________
guten tag
du bist schwul.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted November 23, 2002 08:42 PM |
|
|
One thing your missing about heroes off the battle field is the number of skills available.
my 2 cents
____________
What are you up to
|
|
Xenophanes
Promising
Famous Hero
Chief Consul to Queen Mutare
|
|
posted November 24, 2002 07:04 AM |
|
|
Hexagon grid bad! Very bad! Eeeeeevil!
In Heroes IV, without the hexagons, you have a much greater differentiation in troop size--while still not perfectly proportioned, it's a great leap forward from previous Heroes games with one space and two space troops.
____________
<Dragons rule, Titans drool!>
|
|
shaowei
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted November 24, 2002 08:55 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Hexagon grid bad! Very bad! Eeeeeevil!
In Heroes IV, without the hexagons, you have a much greater differentiation in troop size--while still not perfectly proportioned, it's a great leap forward from previous Heroes games with one space and two space troops.
Yes, but it is not a leap forward in functionality, considering you can't cover up your hero/shooters as well as in previous versions.
Excuse me, but I don't jump with joy if the dragon golem takes three squares instead of two but all that sums up to more frustrating gameplay...
____________
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted November 24, 2002 11:10 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes, but it is not a leap forward in functionality, considering you can't cover up your hero/shooters as well as in previous versions.
It's the other way around. There is no way for you to protect your units (shooters, walkers etcetea) against enemy shooters in Heroes 3. (line of sight rule doesn't apply).
Furthermore, there is no way to protect your units from hero spells in h3. In h4 you can also get protection from line of sight spells (and this includes for instance direct damage spells.)
When it comes to heroes, then yes but this is only because the hero was not a fighting unit at all in H3, and so needed no protection.
If you had placed the hero on the battlefield then that hero would have probably been far worse of in H3 than in H4.
One thing which went wrong in H4 is that they should have placed the units in the back at the far back of the field. Not leaving a lot of squares behind them so the units can be attacked from the rear. And a few more standard formations would also have been a good idea.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
Thunder
Responsible
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 24, 2002 09:35 PM |
|
|
I like that heroes are on the battlefield. It just adds much more to the game. And, like someone said, you can't have as many skills without heroes on the battlefield. IMO, Heroes 4 combat system is better. Simultaneous retalition, luck/morale mechanics and LoS are all great.
Here are my arrogant answers for two common statements:
"Heroes are too powerful!", not my problem if you can't kill them.
"Heroes are too weak!", not my problem if you can't protect them.
One thing which went wrong in H4 is that they should have placed the units in the back at the far back of the field. Not leaving a lot of squares behind them so the units can be attacked from the rear. And a few more standard formations would also have been a good idea.
I agree partially, however, there may have been some placement problems when considering the bigger creatures.
|
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
|
posted November 24, 2002 10:55 PM |
|
|
Xenophanes:
Quote:
In Heroes IV, without the hexagons, you have a much greater differentiation in troop size--while still not perfectly proportioned, it's a great leap forward from previous Heroes games with one space and two space troops.
Disagree! This change was first meant to be more functional. But it turned out to be only cosmetical. And the game lost the functionality when it comes to protecting troops/heroes.
Djive:
Quote:
It's the other way around. There is no way for you to protect your units (shooters, walkers etcetea) against enemy shooters in Heroes 3. (line of sight rule doesn't apply).
Furthermore, there is no way to protect your units from hero spells in h3. In h4 you can also get protection from line of sight spells (and this includes for instance direct damage spells.)
I think that Shaowei was refering to troop/hero defending from melee attacks. As for the line of sight defending method from ranged/spell attacks, I think that it can work even better and be more clearer with the hexagon system.
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted November 24, 2002 11:43 PM |
|
|
"I think that Shaowei was refering to troop/hero defending from melee attacks."
Even in that case this is easier in H4 against normal walkers. It's not difficult to block them off and force them to face your own walkers.
For flyers I believe it is pronounced advantage with the flyer that it can attack the opponents creature early. (All flyers except the Evil Eye are also very fast and can reach the opponent in the first round or latest round 2).
"I think that it can work even better and be more clearer with the hexagon system."
I don't think it matters if they have squares or hexagons here. It matters more how broad the "path" must be for you to have line of sight, and the size of the saquares / hexagons.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
shaowei
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted November 25, 2002 10:02 AM |
|
|
Svetac, thanks, I was referring to protection from melee attacks.
What I want from a combat system in HOMM5, if it incorporates hero combat, is functionality.
Djive, you are right about melee/spell attacks in HOMM3 engine.
I agree that in HOMM4 sometimes it is easier to block the path for enemy melee, but that is solely due to the combat map (narrow passes). If the field is reasonably barren, the enemy melee creatures in HOMM4 have ~33% better possibilities to take a stance beside you hero and punch away (due to 8 possible attacking positions instead of 6).
Also, I am really happy about the line of sight for shooters introduced in HOMM4. I see no problem with implementing it in hexes either, so whatever system is more functional can be chosen.
Flyers should be better balanced. If they have the unfair advantage of flying, they should also get penalties. Like being weaker in attack/defense/damage. It is ok to block enemy shooters, but killing enemy heroes in one turn is a bit too much. As a sidenote, how come nobody really addresses the ability of black dragons to breath through defenses. Is that not a problem in a multiplayer game? Position as brilliantly as you want, and your hero will still be reached...
An interesting solution for hero defense would be borrowing from AOW and D&D systems the concept of "attacks of opportunity". For example, adjacent minotaurs should get a fairly large chance (maybe even 100%) of landing an attack of opportunity, if the enemy crusaders are trying to move away/adjacently to them. That would give a possibility to "tie" enemy melee into combat and give breathing room for your heroes. In short, introduce a penalty for changing targets. Now, to eliminate the same effects on heroes, the heroes should neither get targeted by attacks of opportunity nor get opportunities for such attacks. Maybe grandmaster melee could add a ~20% chance of opp attacks (balancing should show).
Or all of this could be hero skill dependant. Call it some nice name (placeholder "melee theory") or smth else increasing the chance for commanded creature opportunity attacks. Also adds to the nice set of skills.
If they included this system, I would be happy with the tactical tools available for hero protection.
____________
|
|
DonGio
Promising
Famous Hero
of Clear Water Mountain Clan
|
|
posted November 25, 2002 01:21 PM |
|
|
I agree that heroes should stay in the battlefield. William Wallace was not, after all, famous for standing at the back, encouraging his footmen to sacrifice themselves while he stood and watched (by the way, I know this is a crappy and totally irrelevant argument). I like it when your hero is mighty and can slay dragons and such. The world needs heroes like that.
I also agree that the combat system in AOW functions better than the HOMMIV one, and it would indeed be interesting to see some of it's facets incorporated into the next HOMM game. Both the adjacent thingy and the line of sight, which increases precision "rate" the more space there is between the protectant and the protectee.
Heroticize well
DonGio
____________
There are 10 types of people: Those who read binary, and those who don't.
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted November 25, 2002 06:14 PM |
|
|
"I agree that in HOMM4 sometimes it is easier to block the path for enemy melee, but that is solely due to the combat map (narrow passes). If the field is reasonably barren, the enemy melee creatures in HOMM4 have ~33% better possibilities to take a stance beside you hero and punch away (due to 8 possible attacking positions instead of 6)."
Not really. Most creatures defend more than 1 position, whereas in H3 most creatures took up just one hex. Also notice that the distance a walker can travel is greatly reduced if the enemy passes close to one of your allied troops.
It is also possible to make a solid wall of 4-5 creatures which blocks of any attempt to reach the creatures behind them from enemy walkers.
Flyers: These alredy pay for the flying ability with reduced stats. The reason they are dangerous lies more in the fact that many level 4s are flyers, and level 4s are dangerous.
"As a sidenote, how come nobody really addresses the ability of black dragons to breath through defenses."
Probably because they've always had this ability. You also have the area attack ability which has also been around for a while.
"Is that not a problem in a multiplayer game? Position as brilliantly as you want, and your hero will still be reached..."
Probably not. I'd guess that in most multiplayer games, you won't get more than say 1-3 Blackies (assuming you get to build them at all) and with some combat skill the hero might just be able to survive that attack.
My guess would be that Cyclops area attack is a much bigger threat for an early hero kill.
For hero defence: use the "martyr" idea for mount, followers and war machines. That way you can't elimiate the hero all that easily.
Oppurtunity attacks would be a nice addition to the options available.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
hobgoblin
Known Hero
captain hobgoblin
|
|
posted November 25, 2002 06:24 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I vote that heroes should be allowed in combat. If they were removed, then we couldn't do the majorly fun 1 hero level, where you go around with only a hero and kill monsters.
It's exactly what I don't like. Sometimes I feel that heroes is turning to a stupid adventure game where you are one warrior who kills everybody from the beginning to the end of the game.
____________
Take me down to a pardise city where the girls are green and the grass is pretty
|
|
shaowei
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted November 26, 2002 08:40 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Not really... Also notice that the distance a walker can travel is greatly reduced if the enemy passes close to one of your allied troops.
Didn't know that. Sounds like a light interpretation of opportunity attacks. Add some more penalty for changing targets and that's ok.
Quote:
Flyers: The reason they are dangerous lies more in the fact that many level 4s are flyers, and level 4s are dangerous.
Ok, then for these really dangerous level 4's there should be some "martyr" solution. So that next turn the hero can cast sanctuary, guardian angel, etc or send some melee to tie the dragon with opportunity attacks and move away from danger. The followers/mount should always take the damage first though, even from area-effect attacks that reach the hero AND the followers/mount.
Looks like balanced hero participation in battle is possible With balanced, I mean that creatures should be the main damage dealers and backbone of the armies late game, with heroes contributing a fair share of support and having a fair chance to survive. And instead of feeling like a small hunted mouse on the battlefield, the hero (player behind him) can feel like a general commanding his forces that will protect him in case of danger.
Turning the topic slightly, I believe that before-mentioned functionality of combat can be achieved both on hex-grid based and on square battlefield. So the main factor in choosing between those should be superior graphics. If they can achieve the level of consistency that was in HOMM2/3, go ahead and keep the isometric view. If they can't, they should scrap that and go back to side view. I really don't believe NWC can come up with reasonable fully-3D battle with the time they have and I wouldn't want them to concentrate on that either.
____________
|
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
|
posted November 26, 2002 08:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I agree that heroes should stay in the battlefield. William Wallace was not, after all, famous for standing at the back, encouraging his footmen to sacrifice themselves while he stood and watched (by the way, I know this is a crappy and totally irrelevant argument). I like it when your hero is mighty and can slay dragons and such. The world needs heroes like that.
Napoleon was famous for standing at the back and commanding his troops. And he's one of the greates war generals of all times (by the way, I know this is a crappy and totally irrelevant argument) But I like it when your hero is mighty leader and can inspire troops and such The world also needs leaders like that Don't get me wrong, I think that I want to see the both options in H5
Quote:
I also agree that the combat system in AOW functions better than the HOMMIV one, and it would indeed be interesting to see some of it's facets incorporated into the next HOMM game. Both the adjacent thingy and the line of sight, which increases precision "rate" the more space there is between the protectant and the protectee.
Agree on the functionality of the AoW-Heroes/Combat system. But I think that it should be left in AoW, and they should incorporate something new in H5. I don't want all the strategy games to start looking same.
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
| |
|
|
