|
| Thread: Should they keep heroes in battles in Homm5 or not ? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
valkyrica
Supreme Hero
|
posted March 22, 2003 07:22 PM |
|
|
you talk about vets, xarfax, but can't you go beyond your "zone", you think that if some haven't been in toh, or met you on the zone that doesn't give them a right to talk, i bet I have much more heroes 1,2,3 hours than you have had, that doesn't make me necessarily a good or bad player, but doesn't have to be on the ZONE to know what he's talking about ... get my point, VETERAN ?
i'm sick and tired of you h3 "vets" speaking with your air of superiority like we are some fools playing with matchbox cars ...
____________
I'm Guybrush Threepwood, mighty pirate 
|
|
AzureDragonTM
Known Hero
|
|
posted March 22, 2003 09:13 PM |
|
|
Yes Xarfax...valkyrica is right !! I played homm3 at least 10 times more than u play it, but never on the internet...only LAN games. So leave us with this stupid arrogance.
____________
Evil Ghost Pirate LeChuck
|
|
vesuvius
Hero of Order
Honor Above all Else
|
|
posted March 22, 2003 10:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
...best example for this is Vesuvisus himself... if u see how many time he has played H4 in the first months and how often he did play H3 in the first months, u know that H4 only sucks.
One important point: I do enjoy homm4; but my time for playing a 4-8 hour game has changed from the days I was in dental school to my life right now. I do not even have the time to play a 2 hour game straight right now. In fact, I have been playing homm4 campaigns and single player (with small bits of hot seat with my wife) throughout the year.
Important point 2: I would not be running ToH for homm4 if I did not like the game.
____________
|
|
melissa_X
Adventuring Hero
Tiffany Taylor
|
posted March 22, 2003 10:50 PM |
|
|
vesuvius
and ur point is?
____________
|
|
mklthrkngl
Known Hero
|
posted March 25, 2003 05:38 PM |
|
|
To keep or not to keep, that is the question?
setting all the crap about vets versus non vets aside,and the constraints on Ves's time to play homm  , I personally would like heroes to stay on the field. Noy sure if the present format is the way to go though. The problem is that the heroe now supplants the creation of troops and town building. It was of equal importance in the older homms to build all 3. The idea of attaching heroes to troop groups as in those old games from KOEI like romance of the 3 kingdoms, hmmmm, not sure if that's the way to go. I used to love those games The way i see it, they need to figure a way to make the town building and troop creation important again. The way it is now it is a fun game but it's not like for really heroes anymore. The only way to do this is to again marginalise the heroe on the battle field. not sure how to make it work, I just cann't see the point of balance where it all works. I'm sure that's the reason heroes were not originally on the battle field. The original game creators couldn't figure out a good way of doing it either Maybe the way to go is to have different types of heroes who do very different things and help your army in very different ways? Like you can have a general who's a strategist and from off the field lends his strategic influence to his troops but doesn't actually fight on the field, and then you have the hero unit who fights directly or maybe attached to a specific troop stack?
Then lastly the mage who would be on the field as well? or off and unassailable? Maybe have them also work from a group of troops just like the heroe? this way they get a spell round or the troops they're in could attack but not both? and like the heroe they would be dead if the group they are part of is wiped out. the heroe and mage unit could acribe some bonuses to there guard troops. they could gain direct experience from what ever they do in the actual combat screen while the overall general would gain from the outcome of the outcome of the fight. the three classes of heroe would have completely different skills and stats. Seeing as your general would be such a powerful character maybe limit each side to only one but allow any number of the other 2 classes? I think it would be better to leave it a fluid system like it is now where you can have any 1 or all three types of hero involved with your army or none at all. This would put more emphasis back into building the right creatures and town building again as the heroes would compliment your main troops instead of being them
____________
OK!! So i cann't spell well! So shoot me!!
|
|
mklthrkngl
Known Hero
|
posted March 25, 2003 05:49 PM |
|
|
more thoughts on the subject
would like to apoligise for my bad spelling in the last post another way of going about this is to maybe limit the amount of heroes ? if you used the three classesd as purposed by my last post why not limit the number to 1 of each? really the only reason for multiple heroes in the old games were for scouting purposes, but this is gone now that troops can move on there own anyways. also was thinking, what if 2 unit groups that both had heroes in them clashed? maybe you could have a second duel screen popup and the heroes could fight a duel? the loser of the duel wouldn't be killed but his troop would lose moral or maybe a percentage of whatever bonus they got from there hero? Some very cool posibilities here. Like you could have a whole group of arts that do nothing but increase dueling stats and dueling skills? Yeah and specific dueling skills for the the field heroes? what you all think ?
____________
OK!! So i cann't spell well! So shoot me!!
|
| |
|
|
