|
| Thread: Heroes V: A New Beginning |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
whinie_the_b...
Adventuring Hero
grrrrr!
|
posted May 16, 2003 08:39 PM |
|
|
hi again
I`m very sad to hear that the heroes won`t make it on the battlefield. Whether it makes the game "pure strategy" or not, I`m sure there many people who loved the rpg element, especially since heroes were introduced into the battlefield. And unfortunately, it might be a sign that the people at 3do haven`t really realised the fans needs, imho.
gerdash:
"anyway, to me it seems that whinie is not suggesting separate creatures, he is just suggesting a formal representation of a stack that acts like the old stack in every way except a large stack takes more room on the battlefield as if it was a very large creature (i hope i understood him correctly). the point about this kind of stack moving through a tight space betwen map obstacles or other stacks, is interesting, though (assuming the stack is in battle formation)."
and hydra:
"Sorry, I think I may have been referring to something else. Not sure what happened there. I would certainly agree with you that single stack perspective is certainly the best for strategic purposes, not having to manage 30 separate Hydras. It allows for maximum strategy, and still portrays a sense of mathematical realism at least."
no no no, I wouldn`t even think about controlling dozens of creatures separetly! I think I made that clear in a previous thread, and I shall repeat it agaai. Gerdash got me correctly, that`s what I had in mind. Actually, after looking at his pictures, I quite like the idea of tighly packed groups of creatures, actually I probably like it more than my own thoughts of realistic looking stacks. It gives a nice medieval feel, especially if combined with "cardboard animation" like in Monty Pythons "Holy Grail"  Though I tried to reproduce it, it`s impossible with the map editor. Still it`s a good compromise between single creature stacks and scattered creatures on the battlefield.
hydra
"I see…. I don’t know if that would work too well, even though it does seem more real, I think we should stick with the current method, because there would be too many variables if the size of the creature were to increase with the number of creatures. Variables such as how much would it get bigger by? When will it do so? How big can they grow? What is the starting size? Too many needless complications, in my opinion."
and draco
"This way your castle would for no reason have additional people in your castle. you would have a constant supply of men, and if you wanted to there could be a way to incorporate a way to transfer your low level men into stronger men. (of course upon thinking about it after all this writing is it would only work for a castle ARGH!) oh well think about it "
Stronger creatures would take more space and of course would be fewer in number than weaker ones. Imagine a number of possibilities that looks like draco`s suggestion about creature growth. For example, assume an army has total available space of 100 squares or hexes [5(horizontaly)x20(vertically]. A level 1 creature takes 1 hex, a level 2 two and so on.
So you could fit 100 squires, 50 pikemen, 25 monks, or other variations like 50 squires and 12 monks, 25 pikemen and 5 champions etc.. Creatures of the same level could vary in size balanced by other statistics. That would make you consider size before creating your army, a plus point to me. Do you think it would be too complicated? It would also result to a limit in the creatures you can keep in your army, ending up with fewer creatures. I would like that, but what do you think of it? The result in the gameplay would be counting less in the number of creatures and more in upgrading them (using xp maybe? what about a building upgrading creature`s statistics?) or hiring more than one armies. I would like it if creatures got upgraded more than once, if you visit another castle with the same upgrade building. It`s a role play element though, and I doubt 3do woul ever consider to put it in the game.
I also think it would work nice with draco`s suggestion. The problem with non human creatures upgrading to beasts is easily solved: orcs are needed to train and feed hydras, goblins train and ride beasts to become nomads, monks pray for angels, magi call black dragons and so on.
nasty:
"so you would see how a mansion would look inside."
I don`t know if you should fight every creature in dwellings after capturing a city, but fighting IN the city is something I would like. Being able to fight in a mansion would be cool.
|
|
Draco
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 16, 2003 09:39 PM |
|
|
Thank you whinie_the_b... you sumed up what i was trying to say...
I didnt want to give out too much information on my idea without knowing how the public would respond like i had done on the heroes 4 alter of wishes with my engineering skill.
http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=620
(note some of the things we talked about in that forum actually ended up on H4 (probably had nothing to do with us) like the mining skill.
my idea was to complexe at the biggining allowing for a few drastic errors in my approach, leaving little but complaints.
however with a little explanation i think this worked out considerably beter, i thank you for accepting my idea..
____________
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted May 17, 2003 10:29 AM |
|
|
about dwellings being conquered instead of built.
so you start the game in a fully built town as the leader of level 1 creatures. you then conquer the level 2 dwelling with your level 1 creatures and then level 3 dwelling, etc.
maybe while you are away or have too weak garrison troops the higher level creatures would conquer your lower level dwellings.
or when you already have the stronger creatures, you just conquer the high level dwelling or any dwelling of your choice in an independent town and leave the other dwellings independent.
hmm.. i would like to see how this system could work without looking even more unrealistic than the present one. the bonus of the present system is that it's the standard system in almost any game, so there will be less people who think about it. another system would be intriguing.
ususally the position of a king was inherited, and rebellions starting from low level creatures were not successful.
a town was usually a relatively independent unit, and that was achieved by being a bunch of closely knit people, one for all -- all for one, rather than a quarreling bunch of landlords. so imho they should fight together when attacked. this is just my impression though, if somebody has facts that things were genrally different, please tell us.
if you own all the town, the builders could be the "unseen peasants," so if you own only the hydra dwelling, the buildes would be the "unseen hydras?" how good is a hydra at building? where would you build the wall if you own only a few dwellings in the town, and who would be the builders?
having to conquer every dwelling separately might be called 'micromanagement.'
another idea might be to bribe the creatures in the town to join, but many problems would remain.
well, imho the situation looks rather grim with this idea. nevertheless, different ways of recruiting and conquering have succeeded in some games. e.g. there is a game called 'seven kingdoms' that did utilize a recruiting and conquering method that was differnt from the standard, and the outcome was not bad (it was an interesting game in some respects, and with a nice sense of humor, but also some flaws. whatever.. if interested, 7kingdoms and 7kingdoms ii demos should still be available if you search the net).
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
whinie_the_b...
Adventuring Hero
grrrrr!
|
|
posted May 17, 2003 03:09 PM |
|
|
|
I don`t think that you would own a town with hostile creatures. To capture a town you will have to fight a number of creatures that live in the dwellings, more like that.
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted May 17, 2003 03:32 PM |
|
|
btw made a picture of stacks more less the way i would see them if they were not represented by one creature.
http://www.hot.ee/homunculus/pic/battle.html
the skeletons look great imho, the pikemen look ok, and the knights look bad. not that it would matter, because if the knights were drawn in a different way, they would probably look better.
now that i can see what this would look like on the screen (the single skeleton is there for comparison), the concepts are very much different indeed. even making my personal choice of preference between those two representations is too difficult atm. the single creature representation would be a bit easier for the computer and for the programmer/artist though.
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
whinie_the_b...
Adventuring Hero
grrrrr!
|
|
posted May 17, 2003 04:53 PM |
|
|
i think it`s spot on
I`m curious, did you pick a backround and paste pics of creatures?
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted May 17, 2003 05:49 PM |
|
|
i took a piece of screenshot from net, copy-pasted grass on the monsters, took picrures of monsters from net and just brutally pasted them. also made some resizing to get larger monsters for the front and smaller ones for the back edge of the stack to get a better perspective distortion effect (like every stack has its own perspective). the skeleton stack in the back is composed of same size skeletons for comparison, and i think the other stacks look a bit better.
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
GhostWriter
Adventuring Hero
EtherLight
|
|
posted May 17, 2003 10:52 PM |
|
|
The Jon Van Caheghem interview from E3 has now been transcribed for those who had a hard time hearing or understanding the audio files. You can read what was said in the first part of this two part interview right here. There will be more of this interview later, as well as an interview with Rick Reynolds, 3DO's Marketing Manager.
____________
~Celestial Heavens~
|
|
ThE_HyDrA
Admirable
Famous Hero
The Leader of all Hydras
|
posted May 18, 2003 06:42 AM |
|
|
Further Analysis of Ideas/Information
It appears as though most changes are being perceived as beneficial towards the Heroes Series. Some decisions I laud are the Random Terrain Generator (I remember Christian saying that there will be no Random Map Generator, as it was too difficult to execute, considering the inclusion of scripts and quests, and the detailed adventure map. I am also in favour of the decision to go back to Heroes II and III for some aspects, as well as the whole Heroes IV engine being scrapped, and a new engine engineered from scratch – A New Beginning. Six towns is a mixed issue, for it depends on how many creatures are dwelling within these towns. If it is around 12 creatures for each town – then there are fairly sufficient numbers, and this would also mean the Heroes IV upgrade system. However, with my design, there would be 18 creatures in the town, equalling 108 creatures in towns, with 72 being able to be built. ( I take it all of you understand the system – if you don’t just post.  )
Some ideas that I believe are unnecessary are the exclusion of the Underground. The reason I believe the decision and his reasoning are unwarranted are because everyone may not feel the same way he does. He may find it confusing, we may find it challenging. JVC may find that the underground idea did not live up to his beliefs and intentions, however, it may have surpassed them in our opinions. With those points absorbed, I believe that it should be the mapmaker’s choice if he would like to have the underground or not, so he can decide if it is confusing or not. It just gives the freedom of choice, which is needed, given that the rest of the game is quite structured.
Planeswalker
“IMO the underground made the maps bigger, more exciting and funny to play since you had to explore 2 worlds instead of just one.”
Quite true. It in fact another extra dimension that could be used as a refuge for an army, and it just contributes to the strategy in the game, in my view. By making a map larger, one can only increase the possibilities that a game may have. As well as this, unpredictability becomes apparent, since there are so many options…..
“I think that system was better. e.g. if the hero had expert fire magic, he could cast expert curse. Earth, Wind, Fire and Water magic was better than the magic available only to specific alignments.”
Hmmmm. I believe the major reason why the same spell system is going to be used for heroes V is to give the towns some structure. In Heroes IV, the main reason would be to have the Heroes assume all these different classes, etc. But since they’re not going to be in combat, that reason has vanished, and there is not as much reasoning to keep it the same. Also, keeping the same magic system contradicts Christian’s earlier statement “Each kingdom will have their own ‘theme’ rather than being built around a kind of magic”. This is quite enthralling, because they signify the opposite, and it is a very sizeable change. JVC goes on to say that “Heroes V planning is almost complete, all we need to do is implement it.” This is interesting, since it hasn’t been in that stage for too long, and there are contradicting statements like the one above…..
“Since I think they're going to use the same skill system as in H4?”
No, actually, the plan is to totally re-develop, and that job has been assigned to Jon Van Canegham himself. I had stated previously that I thought the Heroes IV skill system was almost perfect. Perhaps the reason behind altering the formula is that Heroes will no longer be involved in combat, and therefore the concentration of skills concerning combat won’t be needed.
“That's OK. Hope that they split the death alignment into "Necropolis" and "Inferno" towns, but this isn't very likely with only 6 towns, is it?”
No, its not looking bright at all. I have a feeling that the inferno will be scrapped altogether, as in Heroes II. Come to think of it, I believe the towns will be divided in a fashion very similar to Heroes II. The castles and creatures there were very clear-cut, no mixture of unit types, unlike Heroes IV. As an example, Knight town had only knight creatures, Necropolis had only undead creatures, Sorceress only forest creatures. They were very organised.
“Maybe they can cancel the upgrade system and provide a few more towns and a bunch of neutral creatures instead?”
It is possible that two towns will be added in an expansion pack. I really don’t like too many neutral creatures – there were too many present in Heroes IV, and they were hardly ever used. I loved it in Heroes II when there were 7 or 8 neutral creatures – Elementals, Genie, Ghost, Nomad. A small amount of neutrals means more creatures in the town. I am hoping for around 110 – 120 creatures in total for Heroes V. However, I am not sure how likely that dream is to come true…..
“That the random map generator is coming is great news. Maybe this could prevent the flow of "great" expansion packs shortly after the release.”
From my knowledge, it is the Random Terrain Generator that is being worked on, I had explained why at the head of my posts. But either will indeed create longer playability/lastability.
“BTW, have you heard anything about the campaigns. Will there be more campaigns than 6?”
Not on campaigns directly, however, what I can tell you, is that JVC is planning for a true strategy game, and this, in his eyes means a shorter storyline, so if anything, there will most likely be less than 6 campaigns, or possibly the number will remain as it is, but the chances for it to escalate are looking quite grim.
Gerdash I
“i am not a firm supporter of totally planar map though, if the alternative has a medieval feel. e.g. the color painting (in the post about map view) that i thought might suit homm well was not planar.”
The perspective seems to me like a chess view. A totally vertical landscape won’t really suit Heroes too well; instead the Heroes IV battlefield was basically perfect. The isometric view gave a more 3-D perspective to battle, which in turn, created the illusion that the screen could fit more of the field on it. The battlefield certainly was given a size increase, and more space to manoeuvre you creatures around it. The vertical view is better than the horizontal view, but not as good as the isometric perspective.
“i believe that most likely they deliberately ruined the atmosphere of the game for a player like me!”
The atmosphere of the Heroes Series to you was a pure strategy game without Heroes in Combat, etc? If this was the case, it appears that NWC are no longer continuing with their Strategy/RPG style, as in Heroes IV, instead, full strategy, like the grandeur of Heroes II. Taking into account that Heroes have been taken out of the battlefield, it is a step towards Heroes II, and also towards strategy. However, I would like them to be involved in the game in such a fashion that they could be important. To retain the true meaning of the title: Heroes of Might and Magic
“and thanks for helping me out with the 'aerial view,' lol.”
No problem.
Whinie_the_Behemoth:
“I`m sure there many people who loved the rpg element, especially since heroes were introduced into the battlefield. And unfortunately, it might be a sign that the people at 3do haven`t really realised the fans needs, imho.”
Well, in my opinion, the RPG element was advantageous for the Heroes series since it made the name of Heroes of Might and Magic ring true. Since they have been removed from combat, they need to play another significant role to make their skill development more worthwhile.
“Still it`s a good compromise between single creature stacks and scattered creatures on the battlefield.”
I think the stacks should stay as they are at the moment, it prevents the battlefield from becoming crowded and thus as a side-effect, limited movement around a battlefield that was enlarged for such purposes. A compromise isn’t needed, since the stacks are sufficient to the strategy needs of the Heroes Series. I will go into more detail about the clusters of creatures later.
“Variables such as how much would it get bigger by? When will it do so? How big can they grow? What is the starting size? Too many needless complications, in my opinion."
I was referring to another post with this excerpt - Nasty's Idea for creatures' size growing with their numbers.
On to the topic of Draco’s upgrade system, I had said there are increased possibilities, and creature growth rates would be abolished except for the base creature’s. This also means you can choose whether you want 100 Orcs or 1 Black Dragon. It does have some great freedom of choice options, and is a commendable upgrade system, but I doubt it will be used in Heroes of Might and Magic, because it suits other games more fittingly, as you go on to say.
“I would like it if creatures got upgraded more than once, if you visit another castle with the same upgrade building.”
I don’t like it, given that it provides too much of a bonus for the creature set that is being upgraded twice. Also, it could almost cross over a few levels, such as in Heroes II. A green dragon, almost a level 5 creature, then a Red Dragon, a suitable level 6 creature, then a Black Dragon, the most powerful creature in the game. The main problem is that it is too unbalanced, and they would most likely have to do it with the majority of the creatures.
“The problem with non human creatures upgrading to beasts is easily solved:”
Hmmmm. Just because they need each other, how does this mean a goblin can turn into a Hydra? Or is this not how the system works?
Draco
The idea you have is quite praiseworthy, and could actually be well implemented into another strategy game, but it is unlikely that NWC will alter their winning formula to such an extent.
Gerdash II
“ususally the position of a king was inherited, and rebellions starting from low level creatures were not successful.”
Quite correct, usually, lower level dwellers wouldn’t question the new ruling of a position as high as the kings, and wouldn’t make an effort to reform the old ways they used to possess. As you say, it is just slightly too unrealistic, but the idea is certainly captivating, but probably a superfluous impediment.
Your impression on the town being quite close in terms of rules, and acting as an individual entity is probably correct here. The town would pretty much do the biddings of the king, and very rarely would a group of people revolt because they liked the previous king better. If there was a reason for a mutiny, it would be because they despise the current king’s actions, which doesn’t have any relation to the previous ruler.
“the buildes would be the "unseen hydras?" how good is a hydra at building?”
No, the unseen Hydras will be the ones that reproduce. The towns people would probably build the dwelling, or the Hydras may make it themselves, its not like they have to build something intricate, it is just a swamp.
“having to conquer every dwelling separately might be called 'micromanagement.'”
Indeed, and it is something I don’t intend on facing in Heroes V, because of its complicated nature.
Gerdash III
“btw made a picture of stacks more less the way i would see them if they were not represented by one creature.”
Thanks for the illustration, however, this is certainly not the way I want the Heroes V battlefield to turn out. By having so many creatures bunched together as they are, it would ruin the strategy, since the creatures would take up so much room, even more so with an isometric battlefield. As a by-product, the there would be less creatures on the battlefield, and it would be extremely difficult to manoeuvre them around the battlefield. This type of format should only be utilised in an RTS game, where the battle takes place on the adventure map, since there is ample room. The current system, where stacks are present is without doubt, the best there is.
“the single creature representation would be a bit easier for the computer and for the programmer/artist though.”
It would be a whole lot easier on an isometric battlefield. The realistic graphical representation of the creatures is too space - consuming, and detracts greatly from the strategy of the separate battlefield. As graphics are concerned, the single stacks look much better.
I praise the initiative you have, Gerdash, it seems that (judging by the process) creating that screenshot was a time – consuming event.
GhostWriter
Thanks for transcribing it for the fans, GhostWriter, as well as doing the actual interview. Was the Rick Reynolds interview also done at E3?
Thankyou again, for keeping everyone informed, for those who weren’t at E3 (like me)
I am hoping that, with this new information, discussion is also kept at a consistent level. It has been a pleasure reading all your posts and ideas – even looking at the ideas.
____________
"Dragons may breathe fire, but Hydras have many heads." - The Creed of Hydras
"As the Dragon drew its breath, the Hydra pounced, swiftly but powerfully, and the Dragon was defeated.”
|
|
Dingo
Responsible
Legendary Hero
God of Dark SPAM
|
posted May 18, 2003 08:03 AM |
|
|
I hope that their will be more towns than six. Their probably will be in the expansion pack. How many different levels of creatures will their be? I hope at least 6 because in HOMM4 the 4 levels was makin me mad, and what about the town system? Are they gonna be like HOMM4 where you pick the structor only to forfiet another one . Or like Heroes 3 where there is alot of structors. More like Heroes 3 is good
____________
The Above Post/Thread/Idea Is CopyRighted by, The Dingo Corp.
|
|
van
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted May 18, 2003 08:55 AM |
|
|
"I`m sure there many people who loved the rpg element, especially since heroes were introduced into the battlefield. And unfortunately, it might be a sign that the people at 3do haven`t really realised the fans needs, imho"
True. Take a look at pools around the net and you will find allways the same results - 70+ % of voters like and want heroes on the battlefield.
____________
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted May 18, 2003 12:20 PM |
|
|
i would rather be happy with heroes not being in the battlefield, at least they way they are in homm4, i.e. as a separate stack. if the heroes would be incorporated into stacks of creatures instead of being a separate unit on the battlefield, i would be less skeptical about letting them take part in the fighting.
single heroes attacking a large stack of creatures brings into mind a picture that was called 'death of ...' (not a nice phrase to look for in the net) where ... was some duke, i guess. he charged into the enemy stack too much ahead of his troops and ended up alone in the middle of enemies. the picture was so miserable i wish i could find it. a hundred rats is a force to reckon with, even if you are a hero.
attacking a stack of 100 creatures alone makes me think the hero is a fool. and to help this fool to do his thing, we give them extra health and protect him with other stacks. these resources could be more wisely spent elsewhere.
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
whinie_the_b...
Adventuring Hero
grrrrr!
|
|
posted May 19, 2003 02:53 PM |
|
|
|
Stacks consisting of multiple creatures could work fine if the barttlefield was larger. But this is beyond the point, anything can work if you really want it to, there were some nice suggestions here, but did 3do ever look up this forum? Even if not, I`m sure they have actually looked up some kind of forum about homm, which leaves me a bit dissapointed. The reason: it`s hard to repeat innovation through a series of games: if you think about it, the basic concept hasn`t changed much since heroes 1, except for version 4. In my opinion, whether homm4 was the best or not, those changes should be taken further instead of reverting to homm 2. Older fans would miss some elements, but then again,they might be tired of exploring the map, building creatures and armies in the same way again and again. And newer fans will (inevitably) compare the game with the best of the competition, so the game would have to show some innovation would the initial concept not be fresh enough. Both strategy and role playing have evolved dramatically and it`s not just the introduction of 3d: aoe and disciples have shown an alternative way to heroes, warlords battlecry had an interesting creature xp system, while there have been many interesting "army managment" games like black and white. Series that remain the same eventually die, as sooner or later, the rivals will catch up and become better. The only way to keep a series alive is through evolution. But the development team has shrunk so maybe 3do have realised that the trend is going elsewhere. Pitty, because homm was based on a stong concept which could be taken to new heights with todays technology, especially now that rpg and strategy are so popular. Sure, some people would get dissapointed if there were dramatical changes, but a lot of others would find an interesting new game that has learned from game evolution.
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
posted May 19, 2003 08:13 PM |
|
|
ok.. not that i'm suggesting that the landscape should look like that or anything, just asking a fun question: what do you think, what program did i use?
i am pretty sure you all have used that program. well, just experimented a little bit, and i must say i was very positively surprised with the result.
http://www.hot.ee/homunculus/pic/landscape.html
hmm.. i would say it's quite a nice tool for creating landscapes to illustrate your ideas and it should be easily available to anyone.
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
whinie_the_b...
Adventuring Hero
grrrrr!
|
|
posted May 20, 2003 03:32 PM |
|
|
|
I can`t really figure out this one, is it a sim city terain editor?
|
|
Draco
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 20, 2003 04:14 PM |
|
|
I dont know what program they used...
on a completely different matter, i would like to see HV give players on multi-player games something to do while there ally fights, or while there ennemy plays his/her turn. if your ally fights you should be able to watch the battle, when its not your turn you should be able to set your men to move, build up your castles, and when your turn starts it asks you "continue with plans my liege?" then if no ennemies entered your land or anything drastic happened then you would hit yes, and poof 3/4 of your turn is done, saving you precious minutes. when the ennemy is battleing you could have some sort of ghost unit where you cant tell the numbers or what unit they are or can you tell who is who. giving you something to do if they battle long battles.
Hell before starting a map there could be a option like wandering guards that said watch ennemy battles.
____________
|
|
TheSentinel
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted May 21, 2003 10:39 AM |
|
|
Caravans ...
I just got an small idea about an adventure map location. How about an inn or something like this, place you can use to send troups with caravans once you flaged it ?
The Sentinel
____________
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted May 21, 2003 10:46 AM |
|
|
Quote:
ok.. not that i'm suggesting that the landscape should look like that or anything, just asking a fun question: what do you think, what program did i use?
i am pretty sure you all have used that program. well, just experimented a little bit, and i must say i was very positively surprised with the result.
http://www.hot.ee/homunculus/pic/landscape.html
hmm.. i would say it's quite a nice tool for creating landscapes to illustrate your ideas and it should be easily available to anyone.
well, assuming that all heroes players are microsoft users, at least to some extent, i think i do have a reason to believe that you have used excel, and that landscape picture was an excel graph.
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
Nasty
Known Hero
castor nebun si orb pe cinste
|
|
posted May 22, 2003 09:23 PM |
bonus applied. |
|
i was thinking about the town screen...i posted something about the life in the towns...but many said that is too much...too much movement...but what if the town screen would actually be 2 town screens...one with the first three level creatures...with the town hall,the castle...the inn...
the blacksmith...and the second one with the other three level creatures...with bigger buildings...with the magic tower...and maybe an universaty...because i dont think the angels would stay near the pikemen...or the titans near some golems...in that way they could make the town more vivid...it would be a place for the simple creatures...and a place for more exquisite creatures.
____________
You can trick me with food.Possesions mean nothing to a navajo.
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted May 22, 2003 09:33 PM |
|
|
interesting idea! and you didn't even create a new thread for that?
it looks like a habit lately to start a thread while there's an order of magnitude of 10^3 post thread already on exactly the same topic.
wonderful!
========
ok.. so is it about having the high level creature dwellings inside the castle and the low level dwellings and the tavern and the blacksmith etc in the down-town?
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
| |
|
|
