|
| Thread: New resource/building for H5 |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
posted July 21, 2003 06:00 AM |
|
|
Maybe there could be a combination of the two systems. You build the structures like normal, but to increase the output of creatures you get every week they must be trained in a unique structure for every town. Only the creatures that can be recruited can be trained separately.
btw, I already explained earlier that their weren't many choices, also I considered the old system of building to be annoying, it takes a month to build up a town. And you always build in the same order. creatures castle, capitol, and by that time it's week 2 or 3 and now you get to start upgrading your creature structures and you haven't even got all your mage guilds. 
I considered this micromanagement, since you could never miss one day of building or you'd lose 2 level 7 creatures. The thing I like about this game is the battles. I really enjoyed town management until it became the same old thing every game.
btw, Age of Empires is basically a bunch of micromanagement followed by attacking with whatever you have at the time. Warcraft would be a great game if it wasn't real time. It's just total chaos and it's impossible to stick with any kind of battle plan without knowing every hotkey and having a 25" screen so you can click faster.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
LordTitan
Famous Hero
Hit Dice: 76d12+608 HP
|
|
posted July 21, 2003 05:06 PM |
|
|
Um... no? WarCraft does not belong in HOMM. Besides, you hire monsters and/or warriers to fight for you. the food thing doesn't realy work. Example:
If a peasant required something like 5 food to hire, then think of how much a dragon would eat? Somewhere around 450 no? And other creatures like wyvrens and griffens would eat somewhere about 125 each. And I do belive this argument has been made 2 times befor.
____________
Spaek the Titan
|
|
vladpopescu79
Promising
Famous Hero
a vampire of taste
|
posted July 26, 2003 11:30 PM |
|
|
RedSoxFan3:
As I said, on higher levels of dificulty, I oftenly change the way I build my towns. So I don't agree that it always the same old thing.
Lord Titan:
What has a peasant got to do with the dragon? Yes, the raport is 5 : 450... what does it mean?
What argument are you talking about?
____________
MANE, TEKEL, FARES
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted July 28, 2003 06:49 AM |
|
|
You make a good point. I will agree that the building is not micromanagement when played on impossible. I didn't remember you saying this. Although I do think that when on 100% or easier it is boring to build a town unless you have several towns, which is then much more fun. However with more choices and fewer restrictions there can be additional strategy when playing at the easier levels. But this may be unnecessary as playing at more difficult levels can bring out the strategy in building.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted July 28, 2003 02:33 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Um... no? WarCraft does not belong in HOMM. Besides, you hire monsters and/or warriers to fight for you. the food thing doesn't realy work. Example:
If a peasant required something like 5 food to hire, then think of how much a dragon would eat? Somewhere around 450 no? And other creatures like wyvrens and griffens would eat somewhere about 125 each. And I do belive this argument has been made 2 times befor.
oh, i always thought that the price of the food or whatever is included in the hireing cost.
imho if food has any point at all, then it should be upkeep. upkeep food could also be implemented as upkeep in money. the trick should be the different price of food on some terrain then. maybe the hero should carry some money with him to buy food for his troops. or maybe you cannot feed a large army in the local farm, or maybe the army is travelling in wilderness of even in the desert, so you would have to carry some food with you instead of money.
is this getting boring?
|
|
Lordskeleton
Adventuring Hero
The really REALLY bad guy
|
|
posted July 28, 2003 04:15 PM |
|
|
Well, in Heroes2 and 3 there was this logistic skill...
____________
Vad gagnar det en människa om han vinner hela världen men förlorar sin själ?
|
|
UncleJR
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted July 29, 2003 01:39 AM |
|
|
Why not go back to the beginning?
Way back when, (in the days of Kings Bounty) when you hired an army, you were expected to actually PAY them every week! This certainly kept you from having thousands and thousands of arch angels, or black dragons, or whatever. I can still remember getting the "so and so deserted due to lack of funds" or whatever it was.
Perhaps the logistics skill, or even the leadership or diplomancy skills could be used to affect how much you have to pay your units every week.
____________
Huh?
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted July 29, 2003 04:27 PM |
|
|
also tryed kings bounty, a great game.
but
Quote:
Perhaps the logistics skill, or even the leadership or diplomancy skills could be used to affect how much you have to pay your units every week.
would be scary imho. why not just have it as a constant?
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted July 29, 2003 05:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Way back when, (in the days of Kings Bounty) when you hired an army, you were expected to actually PAY them every week! This certainly kept you from having thousands and thousands of arch angels, or black dragons, or whatever. I can still remember getting the "so and so deserted due to lack of funds" or whatever it was.
Perhaps the logistics skill, or even the leadership or diplomancy skills could be used to affect how much you have to pay your units every week.
That's the best idea I've heard yet. It will definately limit the amount of creatures you can have. Not only that but poor maps will still keep creatures low in long games. This is a great idea and will completely change the whole strategy of building and recruiting creatures. You can now just have stacks that you recruit as suicide attackers that you don't need, because the upkeep will be too high. It would be great for demon/skeleton raising.
|
|
vladpopescu79
Promising
Famous Hero
a vampire of taste
|
posted July 29, 2003 11:57 PM |
|
|
Paying troops every week sound very reasonable and realistic. But I don't see how you could implement this into the heroes games.
First of all, what happens if you don't have the money? There should be dozens of options, to ask you which creatures you want to disband, or relinquish them for a while, or who knows what else?
Secondly, it's too much RPG, some won't like it.
But if you have ideas about that, post them, and we'll discuss them and see what can and cannot be done.
____________
MANE, TEKEL, FARES
|
|
UncleJR
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted July 30, 2003 12:23 AM |
|
|
I Agree With Vlad
I think the player should have some choice as to who to dismiss should the need arise. That way you don't start the week short on cash and find out that you've lost 5 titans and still have 200 halflings or something.
____________
Huh?
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted July 30, 2003 11:10 PM |
|
|
In the game Lords of Magic there is something similar to this. If you can't pay your troops then, you lose fame. When you run out of fame all your creatures abandon you. I think these two games are very similar in a sense and it seems that Heroes 4 has taken a change very similar to this game such as movement points for creatures, etc.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
posted August 12, 2003 10:42 AM |
|
|
I will tell you what happened to Warcraft after implementing food limit.
Everyone creates one laaarge army and leaves no defence at all
Leaving base defence severely weakens your attack force. It's not worth it.
Do you want to see it in Heroes5 ?
More than that, what would every _sane_ player do after reaching food limit ? That's right, disband weaker creatures to make place for those precious Hydras.
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
|
vladpopescu79
Promising
Famous Hero
a vampire of taste
|
|
posted August 15, 2003 11:39 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I will tell you what happened to Warcraft after implementing food limit.
Everyone creates one laaarge army and leaves no defence at all
Leaving base defence severely weakens your attack force. It's not worth it.
Do you want to see it in Heroes5 ?
More than that, what would every _sane_ player do after reaching food limit ? That's right, disband weaker creatures to make place for those precious Hydras.
Your strong point is that you are right about those Warkraft strategies.
Your weak point is that we're not talking about RPG here.
There is no food limit, only a food allowance, if you want to call it a name... the food buildings only tell you what level of dwellings you can build, not how many troops you can have.
____________
MANE, TEKEL, FARES
|
|
Gerdash
Responsible
Famous Hero
from the Animated Peace
|
|
posted August 15, 2003 11:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
There is no food limit, only a food allowance, if you want to call it a name... the food buildings only tell you what level of dwellings you can build, not how many troops you can have.
sorry for the stupid question, but what good is the food building then (except being another building that you would have to build)?
____________
what is the safest way to pass your time? heroes community -- your posts won't affect almost anything
|
|
chansey4me
Adventuring Hero
Lovely Miss
|
|
posted August 16, 2003 03:36 AM |
|
|
It would be one more building to build! XD
Maybe hiring your monsters to build your town up, and you can only build certain things in certain terrain...? I dunno. 
____________
LA!
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted August 16, 2003 05:09 PM |
|
Edited By: B0rsuk on 16 Aug 2003
|
Quote:
Your strong point is that you are right about those Warkraft strategies.
Your weak point is that we're not talking about RPG here.
There is no food limit, only a food allowance, if you want to call it a name... the food buildings only tell you what level of dwellings you can build, not how many troops you can have.
Neither do I. Warcraft is NOT a RPG.
Diablo is NOT a RPG.
They aren't even cRPG's.
People with opinion like yours make me sad.
Warcraft - RTS
Diablo - Arcade
You are free to discuss if you want.
So what's your point about RPG's ?
-------
Ok, so you want to implement food system as a replacement of "castle = more creatures". You claim it's not logical. I'll show you it is. It is one of basics of feudalism.
In medieval ages, people with no army and no servants were constantly in danger of being robbed, raped or killed by bands of dumb, filthy and arrogant bandits, called "knights" by some people. So they MOVED to closest ruler with good reputation. They were creating villages next to castles, forts etc. In case of attack, they could hide inside castle wall until invader is repelled. In exchange, they performed various services for their rulers - crated food, clothes and other good; or were becoming ruler's soldiers.
What does it have to do with Heroes ? You can clearly see that when you build Fort/Citadel/Castle, NEW COTTAGES AND HOUSES APPEAR . This is because new people are coming to settle and benefit from castle defense. You see ? Everything is VERY logical, and makes lots of sense.
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
|
vladpopescu79
Promising
Famous Hero
a vampire of taste
|
posted August 16, 2003 11:53 PM |
|
|
"Neither do I. Warcraft is NOT a RPG.
Diablo is NOT a RPG.
They aren't even cRPG's.
People with opinion like yours make me sad.
Warcraft - RTS
Diablo - Arcade
You are free to discuss if you want.
So what's your point about RPG's ?"
I don't have a POINT about RPG's,... it's just that I don't play them.
You may clasify the games into rpg, crpg, rts, arcade and other hundreds of classes, since you can always find a difference between two given games. What I'm talking about is the real time playing involved, and this is what those games have in common. Sorry to make you sad, I didn't mean to.
"Ok, so you want to implement food system as a replacement of "castle = more creatures". You claim it's not logical. I'll show you it is. It is one of basics of feudalism.
In medieval ages, people with no army and no servants were constantly in danger of being robbed, raped or killed by bands of dumb, filthy and arrogant bandits, called "knights" by some people. So they MOVED to closest ruler with good reputation. They were creating villages next to castles, forts etc. In case of attack, they could hide inside castle wall until invader is repelled. In exchange, they performed various services for their rulers - crated food, clothes and other good; or were becoming ruler's soldiers.
What does it have to do with Heroes ? You can clearly see that when you build Fort/Citadel/Castle, NEW COTTAGES AND HOUSES APPEAR . This is because new people are coming to settle and benefit from castle defense. You see ? Everything is VERY logical, and makes lots of sense."
But this is far from the truth...
In medieval ages, first of all, there was not such an idea as "do ut des" between lords and peasants/townsfolk. there is a lot to be said about this, perhaps I'll put it down the next time. The important thing is that in order to live you need to eat, and food doesn't grow on castle walls. Is this logical enough? If not, here's the logical stream: the lord doesn't build castles by himself, but by peasants put to work (not free peasants) -> he doesn't employ them, he puts them to work; in order to build you need men; in order to have men, you must feed them; in order to feed them you must have farmlands; as you can see it's crystal clear that first you have food, then walls. Don't mix logics with history, and don't bring out historical facts out of the context. Not to mention details like the one that sais most of the times the castles are small and cannot comprise a large number of people, so the peasants were most of the time on their own; (the INVADER is the Knight? Really?)
____________
MANE, TEKEL, FARES
|
|
B0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted August 17, 2003 12:22 PM |
|
|
I was learning lots of history. You are welcome to show me how wrong I am. Those facts are simply related.
More people cominmg = more people to work = more food.
I was talking about _genesis_ of medieval ages. And yes, at first FREE people were EMPLOYED, but they eventually became more and more dependant on their ruler. Eventually they became slaves, but not instantly.
In small villages there's (I mean was) much less specialization. Same people were producing food, clothes etc. In towns and cities people can specialize: create only one kind of goods, which results in *more efficient* production.
So, in fact, you'd need even LESS people (by percentage) to work on food. Anyway, as I said before, better city walls = better defense = more people attracted because they feel more secure = more people to work. So you can recruit more creatures because there are more creatures and more food. It's not like new people are coming but you have same amount of food, sorry.
I know that castles are mostly small and ugly, same goes for knights, monks and about everything in that ages: overrated. It makes me sick when I see "knights" like those on King Arthur movie.
By the way, there were ocassionaly groups of *monks* acting as bandits, and they were not uncommon.
But what should I expect if pope Leon VIII...
...was hunting animals, walking with sword and armor, drinking wine, playing dice, loudly asking for help of Wenera and Jupiter and others, "playing with women", selling bishop titles... he also made 10yr old boy a bishop.
Funny ages indeed :-).
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
|
vladpopescu79
Promising
Famous Hero
a vampire of taste
|
|
posted August 17, 2003 10:53 PM |
|
|
I do not have a diploma in history, but neither am I unaware of some facts...
"In small villages there's (I mean was) much less specialization. Same people were producing food, clothes etc. In towns and cities people can specialize: create only one kind of goods, which results in *more efficient* production.
So, in fact, you'd need even LESS people (by percentage) to work on food."
Perfectly agree, but that's got nothing to do with our discussion. Unless you try to argue that evolution comes in small numbers, that's fine.
"Anyway, as I said before, better city walls = better defense = more people attracted because they feel more secure = more people to work."
That's exactly what you've said, but the realistic stream is this one (my opinion only, of course):
more people to work (good conditions)-> more people are attracted -> better defense desire and capability -> better city walls
And no, good conditions do not imply necesarily that sense of security. Towns and villages were positioned as they have been due to good economical, travel and geographical conditions, not military purposes.
____________
MANE, TEKEL, FARES
|
| |
|
|
