Heroes of Might and Magic VI

[Morty]

HoM&M VI has been officially announced several days ago. Age of Heroes (http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/) is carefully monitoring all news about it. Some fans are enthusiastic and some reacted with outrage, as is usual.
As far as I'm concerned, as a fan of the series since HoMM2, it doesn't look bad so far. It seems that stuff is being added rather than changed, which is good. "Focus points" instead of capturing each mine and dwelling separately is a novelty, but perhaps a good one. Being able to change a town into your own faction at the cost of having to build it from groud up sounds convenient.
However, one thing I'm not too hot about is that on the screenshots, we can only see 4 resources - gold, wood, ore and crystals. It's not a big deal, but the 7 types of resources have been in Heroes since the beginning and doing away with them not only reduces variety and depth of the gameplay but also runs contary to the developers' claims of "sticking to the tradition". I hope it's just an early version thing.
So, anyway, what do you think about the newest installment of the series? Discuss.

[Cubey]

Only 4 resources? Sure, why not. Such a simplification can only work for the better. No longer will we face situations such as "I started this game as Castle, but the map assumes I'd be playing as Dungeon so there's a sulfur mine here when I needed crystal caverns. Awesome".

[MrPig]

Only 4 resources? Sure, why not. Such a simplification can only work for the better. No longer will we face situations such as "I started this game as Castle, but the map assumes I'd be playing as Dungeon so there's a sulfur mine here when I needed crystal caverns. Awesome".

I disagree. Lack of resources added to the challenge as well as a certain handicap. At least in Heroes 3. In IV, everything was overpriced. In V, you swam in resources.

[Terraoblivion]

It could, MrPig, but that doesn't mean it necessarily did. In some cases it was very clearly just that the map was set up for you to pick random, but without an easy way to ensure that you got the right kind of mine. In those cases it was just annoying.

Also not everyone wants that kind of challenge. I don't. Challenge from an arbitrary handicap isn't the kind i enjoy dealing with, not that i really love dealing with steep challenge at all.

In any case departing from the resource question, what little has been revealed sounds relatively promising. Especially the focus points eliminating the awkwardness of mine poaching and repoaching with wimpy little level 1 heroes with a token army.

[MrPig]

Perhaps, but it wasn't that particularly crippling. Only the tier 7 units required the castle specific resource, and for the most part the resource silo produced it. Heroes 3 threw so much Gold at you, that buying resources from the Marketplace was fairly viable too, especially in early game when you lack a particular resources needed for certain dwelling, but it still didn't cripple you.

Heroes 2, yes, I agree it was an unecessary handicap. 4 and 5, like I said, had other resourcing problems.

As far as the rest of 6, I haven't particularly researched into it but I certainly hope it's more like Heroes 3, than 4 and 5.

[Cespenar]

I hope that a change of resource types will be our greatest issue with the game.

[factotum]

All that I ask is that they remove the blatant cheating the AI did in HoMM5. I mean, I have all his cities pinned down and yet somehow he's still throwing wandering armies at me?

[Asheram]

As long as they don't put a limit on raisng undeads as they did for necromancers, then I'll be happy...

Oh, and please, please, PLEASE make the game use hardware resources better so we don't have to wait 2-3 minutes for the computer to do its turn on a large map

[Castaras]

Ooo another game I can wait and make cynical comments about!

I'ma not betting on anything atm tho. If they're sensible they'll have got over the "ooo shiny 3d graphics" problem that 5 had and have a game that is both graphically pretty and easy to see what's going on in.

Not too struck on the less resources front... I liked having 7 resources. Gave a little more challenge and motivation to attack the AI or other players - "Ooo, I need a gem mine for my angels... green has gem mine... yoink!"

But eh. I'll see what it's like when it actually comes out.

[J.Gellert]

The art is one of the most important things about any game to me, and so far VI looks a lot less cartoony than V. Which is awesome. A little less shiny could work, too.

Oh who am I kidding... Just use the art from heroes III. Who needs 3d? It's turn-based grid combat, for crying out loud. It's like 3d chess or checkers.

[Cespenar]

The art is one of the most important things about any game to me, and so far VI looks a lot less cartoony than V. Which is awesome. A little less shiny could work, too.

Oh who am I kidding... Just use the art from heroes III. Who needs 3d? It's turn-based grid combat, for crying out loud. It's like 3d chess or checkers.

Gasp! Art... from... Heroes III? But that's... 2D! And 2D is bad! More so if it's quality 2D!

[Caustic Soda]

I think that the concept of a 'hub' that controls resources will make it necessary to go raiding in force. In my opinion, it takes very little effort to raid someone in heroes 1-3&5, so long as you can avoid enemy heroes. That makes raiding a no-brainer, so it isn't much of a strategic choice, really.

Regarding the reduction in resources, I hope that will mean that the factionshave a more balanced resource requirement. my experience with Heroes 3&5 is that many towns need a pile of one or two resources, and little-to-nothing of the other ones. Again, it is a no-brainer that a H5 barbarian will go for mercury, just like a H3 warlock would go for sulfur.

I do hope they retain/improve the skill system of Heroes 5, especially the concept of 'racial' skills. It was quite effective in making the factions distinctive, even if some of the skills were rather boring (Haven + Dungeon).

same thing with might/magic heroes. Allowing any town to have both might and magic heroes made H3&4 more bland, IMO, which wasn't an improvement on the previous games.


The art iI think that the new setup will make attacking the enemy s one of the most important things about any game to me, and so far VI looks a lot less cartoony than V. Which is awesome. A little less shiny could work, too.

Oh who am I kidding... Just use the art from heroes III. Who needs 3d? It's turn-based grid combat, for crying out loud. It's like 3d chess or checkers.

While I can't say that I like the art style of Heroes 5, I find the Heroes 3 art ludicrously bland-looking. I think the developers would be better off starting from scratch, art wise. H3 was bland, H4 was ugly, H5 had a silly warhammer-esque style, and I doubt the art style of the first two games will carry over well to 3D.

[Sindriss]

Just stop with ruining the series already. Homm2+3 was nearly perfect games, these new ones are just waste of time.

/old grumpy mode off

[lord_khaine]

Your not old enough to be grumpy yet, Sindriss :smalltongue:

That aside, i have personaly liked each Heroes game so far, and found the innovation in the skills that they made in HoMM5 interesting.

I still hope they dont get rid of allmost ½ the resources though.

[Cespenar]

Your not old enough to be grumpy yet, Sindriss :smalltongue:

That aside, i have personaly liked each Heroes game so far, and found the innovation in the skills that they made in HoMM5 interesting.

I still hope they dont get rid of allmost ½ the resources though.

Almost the same here. For me, H2 was great, H3 was epic, H4 was different but good, and H5 was... tolerable, if only because of its new skill and combat mechanics.

[Eldan]

Yeah. I don't know why, but Heroes V got boring after about half an hour or so. Don't know why. I also never got past the first three missions in the campaign, they were just too boring.

[Cespenar]

Yeah. I don't know why, but Heroes V got boring after about half an hour or so. Don't know why. I also never got past the first three missions in the campaign, they were just too boring.

I might know why :smalltongue:. Lack of any writing in the campaign, horrible map screen, bad musics, etc.

The list can go much further depending on your personal taste.

[Morty]

I like Heroes V. I used to claim it's a travesty, but I changed my mind. However, it does get much better in Tribes of the East - at this point, I think it's a good idea to just buy ToE, since it's standalone if someone wants to play Multiplayer and random maps. Heroes 3 is still better, though. It just has this unquantifable something that makes a game great. Heroes IV... it had some good ideas, most of which were incorporated by Heroes V and its expansions but it was undone by clunky execution and bad design. Still fun, but not as good as H3, H2 and H5.

[Cespenar]

Best part of H4 was, in my opinion, and this is probably something that no one else cares, that it had pages upon pages of good writing in their campaigns.

[Winthur]

I never really got into anything that was after the 3rd game (4th wasn't that bad as everyone says, though), and I can still play that, so I don't bother.

[MrPig]

Best part of H4 was, in my opinion, and this is probably something that no one else cares, that it had pages upon pages of good writing in their campaigns.

I would say the caravan feature was the best part of Heroes 4.


I would pay good money for another Heroes 3 expansion. With more castles. And units. On a totally unrelated note, this is just awesome (http://mightandmagic.wikia.com/wiki/Heroes_of_Might_and_Magic_III:_In_the_Wake_of_Gods ). And download link (http://www.maps4heroes.com/heroes3/in_the_wake_of_gods.php)

[Spiryt]

If they cut 7 resources out, they would go full retard.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/15/Never_go_full_retard.jpg


Other than that, it looks very promising.

[lord_khaine]

Best part of H4 was, in my opinion, and this is probably something that no one else cares, that it had pages upon pages of good writing in their campaigns.

Hmm, yeah, i actualy liked the storylines in H4 as well, they were pretty good.

[toasty]

Heroes 4 had freaking epic storylines and I really enjoyed it for that reason. Some of the singleplayer maps though, they did get awfully frustrating and horribly boring. But I thought it had some great features and after playing Heroes 3 a bit, I'm not sure why exactly the game got bashed so much.

Heroes 5 was bad. The campaign was bland and boring and I couldn't beat the 2nd level on the Demon Campaign. It also didn't have caravan. The designers, in their desire to make a game "better than 4" removed the single greatest feature of Heroes 4 and replaced it with a bland story line, shiny, unnecessary (I liked the Heroes 3 and Heroes 4 graphics, thankyouverymuch) graphics engine. Sure, combat was still fun and cool, but I would have taken heroes 4's combat system if it meant I got caravans. :smallsigh:

Resources... meh I don't really care about that kind of stuff. I guess it might be well... not such a good thing if don't have to many resources, but I also see the benefit and simplification, from a game design point, fo chopping out a bunch of "useless" resources.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, eh?

[Spiryt]

Resources... meh I don't really care about that kind of stuff. I guess it might be well... not such a good thing if don't have to many resources, but I also see the benefit and simplification, from a game design point, fo chopping out a bunch of "useless" resources.



I really don't get the point of simplification of things that aren't too complicated...

Those 6 resources + gold were always simple, yet great part of playing, from searching the one you need quickly, to strategical saving and general management, trading in trade post, finding it in different places, gathering different stuff for different buildings or buying different stuff - as Trees of Knowledge for example.

If they want to streamline something, they should better make sure that Computer turns last shorter, stuff is easier to spot on detailed map, etc.

[Caustic Soda]

Best part of H4 was, in my opinion, and this is probably something that no one else cares, that it had pages upon pages of good writing in their campaigns.

This is very true. The H4 campaigns were one of those rare games with good writing, and to be savored. Too bad the AI couldn't play its way out of a wet paper bag :smallfrown:.

***

In my experience, Heroes 5 oly really came into its own with Tribes of the East. The alternate upgrades are interesting, and gave Inferno a much-needed boost to their units durability. Now, they're only plexiglass cannons :smalltongue:.

Caravans ought to have been in the base game, but at least they were reintroduced in the expansions.

Campaign-wise, Tribes of the east made the leap from painfully bad to bland. a marked improvement, which IMO brought them above the Armageddons Blade campaigns storywise, not that that's much of an achievement.

***

One thing I would like to see is a changed formula for damage spells. Having damage spells be linear while buffs/debuffs are force multipliers makes them much less viable in the short-term. At least it is a little harder for Might heroes to gain a ton of mass buffs/debuffs than it was in Heroes 3.

[J.Gellert]

I like the new way to handle resources. I've always found it silly, that as, for example, Necropolis, I'd pile up huge amounts of crystal, gems, and sulfur, when all I really wanted was mercury.

Is it good gameplay if you have resources you don't need, except for that one mage guild? They'd almost always go down the drain in a marketplace.

Now that you can convert cities to your main one, you won't even need them that badly for a secondary level 7 creature.

[Rion]

:smalleek: How many interesting games can be in production at one time? I was already waiting for Civ 5, Stronghold 3, Dragon Age 2, The Witcher 2 and Crusader Kings 2.

Also anyone else found this link (http://www.acidcave.net/kronika_2010_515.html#515)? Near the bottom there are three pdfs explaining the Haven, Inferno and Necropolis factions. I really like the new version of Haven, my alltime favorite faction. Also this picture (http://www.celestialheavens.com/show_big_potd.php?id=397) suggests that while going for fantasy armour, they aren't going for the cartoony proportions of Heroes 5 (Genies :smallyuk:).

[Morty]

Also anyone else found this link (http://www.acidcave.net/kronika_2010_515.html#515)? Near the bottom there are three pdfs explaining the Haven, Inferno and Necropolis factions. I really like the new version of Haven, my alltime favorite faction. Also this picture (http://www.celestialheavens.com/show_big_potd.php?id=397) suggests that while going for fantasy armour, they aren't going for the cartoony proportions of Heroes 5 (Genies :smallyuk:).

Hm, interesting. I haven't been to Acid's Cave in ages. It also says there and on the friendly site that the screenshots are indeed missing quite a lot of elements. So the resources might not be cut after all.
BTW, I had no idea so many people disliked Heroes V.

[TheSummoner]

I'm pretty excited... I loved 3. I thought 5 was pretty good (I really liked the skill system and though it greatly improved over 3... Crucify me if you have to, but before 5, I never would've though of Logistics as a useful skill to take... Not when you can teleport all around with ease and its only benefit is extra movement), especially once ToE rolled around and gave alternate promotions (Though for the most part I did stick to the original promotions... Necropolis really didn't have many good alternate promotions). Graphics look pretty good, though thats really the least of my concerns...

I'd be upset if they ditched the traditional 7 resources. By all means, rebalance it a bit so they still have a use even in the late game (Instead of the typical one is useful for each army and the rest are junk), but don't abandon something thats existed since the beginning.

Being able to rebuild captured towns sounds like a good idea to me... Even if you can't hold it permanatly, it'd be a good way to screw over an enemy... Your opponent is doing slightly better than you are. His army is a fair bit bigger than you and would probably crush you in a direct confrontation (though not without losses). His main hero and the bulk of his army are going for a Dragon Utopia. He sees you approaching his capitol, but figures hes got enough time to take the Utopia and then Town Portal back before you get there (alternately, he simply can't make it back in time because he either doesnt have Town Portal or there is a closer town than the Capitol). You capture the capitol without much trouble since the defending force is fairly small compared to either side's main army and his defending hero is rather weak. Unfortunately for you, hes only two or three days away now and even if you're hidden behind walls, hes still got a strong enough force that he'd probably beat you. So here are your choices... You could...

A) Try to get reenforcements from your capitol, buffing your army up enough to even the odds
B) Recruit the few units that are left in his dwellings and try to hold out.
C) Convert his town to a weak, defenseless version of your main town with no dwellings, walls, and almost no income.

Well A would take too long and with B you have issues involving creature slots. With C, you can cripple him and get the hell out of there. For a while, his armies are facing stagnation while yours continue to swell. At worst, you've brought him closer to your level for the final confrontation and at best, you'll soon have a larger army to crush him beneath your heel.

[Gamerlord]

Looks OK, but not spending mah monies till I hear reviews. I thing the focus point idea is nice, always frustrated how in the previous games I was always going "Where is a freaking sulfur mine, LOOK! THERE IS ONE! Just going to bring my hero- OH GOD MASSIVE ARMY!"

[Terraoblivion]

Hmmm, seems like they are going for the tried and true approach of making nobody the good guys by making them all rather unpleasant, it seems. Though Haven still seems better than Necropolis and Inferno morally speaking.

[TheSummoner]

I've got no problems with black and gray morality ^_^.

Much more realistic if the "good guys" and "bad guys" are defined more on an individual basis than based on what group they're a part of.

[J.Gellert]

I've got no problems with black and gray morality ^_^.

Much more realistic if the "good guys" and "bad guys" are defined more on an individual basis than based on what group they're a part of.

I like Black and Gray too, but I think the whole "knights templar of ORDER, not shining knights of good" is being overdone.

Not that the Heroes series has ever gotten any medals for originality, but still. :smallsmile:

[Cespenar]

I like Black and Gray too, but I think the whole "knights templar of ORDER, not shining knights of good" is being overdone.

Not that the Heroes series has ever gotten any medals for originality, but still. :smallsmile:

Meh. Black and White morality is overdone. Black and Gray morality is overdone. Order vs. Chaos is overdone. Good vs. Evil is already overdone. Overdone-ness isn't really a factor in quality anymore.

[Terraoblivion]

I'll be honest, black and grey morality bugs me more than black and white. Partly because of the whole "it's realistic" thing, when it's not really since the black part tends to be just as cartoonish as in black and white morality and the grey part tends to be more arbitrary than grounded in any particular logic for why those people don't behave better. Mostly though its because it is just unsatisfying to root for a bunch of ***** that you don't like since their enemies are complete monsters. I much prefer grey and grey morality, where just about everyone has some kind of a point. It makes it much more interesting to engage in judging the morality and wisdom of either path. Also it is ultimate more realistic than black and grey morality.

[J.Gellert]

Also it is ultimate more realistic than black and grey morality.

No it isn't, unfortunately, there's extreme, spotless badness in the real world... But I don't have a personal preference. It's just that I prefer some types of moral ambiguity over others.

Strongly emphasizing LAW over good isn't really "gray" either, because gray equals "middle ground, and that's pure, 100% LAW.

I don't know what color LAW is. Judging from the HoMM VI screenshots, it's probably... gold?

[Cespenar]

No it isn't, unfortunately, there's extreme, spotless badness in the real world...

That's your view. I, for example, don't believe that one bit. Grey&grey is what I'd call the most realistic as well, but you must understand that grey doesn't mean %100 neutral. It means ambiguous. Shades of grey would be a better description than grey&grey, by the way.

[Caustic Soda]

@ the morality debate:

I though the morality of Heroes 5 was already Black and Grey. Godric (and possibly Wulfstan and Zehir) is the only one who does anything more upstanding than fight for his/her country. And Markal and the Demons were cheerfully psychopathic.

Regardless, I agree with Terraoblivion that attempts at Black and Grey morality often ends as Warhammer 40k-esque "this guy kills babies, but he's still better than the other guy, he tortures babies to death and then eats them".

That kind of thing can be funny when done right, as in the Dungeon Keeper games, but it doesn't make it more believable, for me at least.

As an aside, I've never really understood why the opposite of black and white should be shades of gray. Wouldn't be more appropriate for the opposites to be in color :smallconfused:? When someone says Black&White morality, I always picture it like old movies without color. Possibly silent, to boot.

[TheSummoner]

Meh. Black and White morality is overdone. Black and Gray morality is overdone. Order vs. Chaos is overdone. Good vs. Evil is already overdone. Overdone-ness isn't really a factor in quality anymore.

EVERYTHING has been done. Its nearly impossible to have an original idea anymore. You could come up with something amazing... you may not know of anything similar and you might think its original. Theres probably something just like it out there somewhere that you haven't heard of.

Really, the best anyone can do is put their own spin on a collection of interconnected things that have been done a million times in the past and will be done a million more times in the future and hope for the best.


@ the morality debate:

I though the morality of Heroes 5 was already Black and Grey. Godric (and possibly Wulfstan and Zehir) is the only one who does anything more upstanding than fight for his/her country. And Markal and the Demons were cheerfully psychopathic.

Markal was an evil bastard, but he had his reasons atleast. I haven't completed the campaigns for HoF or TotE, so I don't know if they talk about him having a puppy-kicking past. If either of the expansions do go into more detail about him, feel free to disregard what I say as uninformed ramblings.

Markal was in a cozy seat of power for the previous queen. From his personality, its doubtful that he was a nice guy, but we don't know that he was actively causing problems and making people's lives worse. Once the previous queen died, he was exiled. He had reason to be pissed at both the Griffin empire and Cyrus, who killed his master, Sandro (and really, shouldn't ALL Necropolis players be pissed ad Cyrus for that?). While his actions were undoubtably evil, you can atleast understand his motivation for doing so.

Demons on the other hand... well... they're demons ^_^.


That kind of thing can be funny when done right, as in the Dungeon Keeper games, but it doesn't make it more believable, for me at least.

As an aside, I've never really understood why the opposite of black and white should be shades of gray. Wouldn't be more appropriate for the opposites to be in color :smallconfused:? When someone says Black&White morality, I always picture it like old movies without color. Possibly silent, to boot.

See... I wasn't talking about a rediculously over the top grimdark Warhammer 40k style black and gray morality... I was talking about a more "As a whole, even the 'good guys' aren't spotless. There are heroic knights but there are also those motivated purely by personal interests and those who really don't care about making life better for anyone. Its pretty hard to make a sympathetic necromancer or demon (especially demon), but it can be done. I'd be fine with it if those two were pure evil and the other sides had their share of real heroes and others ranging from anti-hero to anti-villain to sociopath.

[king.com]

Markal was an evil bastard, but he had his reasons atleast. I haven't completed the campaigns for HoF or TotE, so I don't know if they talk about him having a puppy-kicking past. If either of the expansions do go into more detail about him, feel free to disregard what I say as uninformed ramblings.

Markal was in a cozy seat of power for the previous queen. From his personality, its doubtful that he was a nice guy, but we don't know that he was actively causing problems and making people's lives worse. Once the previous queen died, he was exiled. He had reason to be pissed at both the Griffin empire and Cyrus, who killed his master, Sandro (and really, shouldn't ALL Necropolis players be pissed ad Cyrus for that?). While his actions were undoubtably evil, you can atleast understand his motivation for doing so.


Well ironiclly the main Necropolis hero in the expansions is actually a good guy, he ends up help out the non-demon Haven and the Orks to take down the demons + demonworshiping Wizard faction. He has the logic of a, Asha is about life and death not corruption, so the demon invasion is the whole anthesis to how Necromanciers work. In fact one of the necromanciers does the whole "noble sacrifice" to plot smash the demon Havens.

[TheSummoner]

Its pretty hard to make a sympathetic necromancer or demon (especially demon), but it can be done.

Like I said, very much possible. Its just harder to do than say... a Human Knight or Elven Ranger

[king.com]

Like I said, very much possible. Its just harder to do than say... a Human Knight or Elven Ranger

The main character for the demon campaign was arguably a sympathetic demon...

[TheSummoner]

I dunno... Agrael/Raelag wasn't that good a guy...

He was essentially an obsessive stalker who murdered an innocent man because he lusted for the guy's wife. If he hadn't done this, all of the trouble Markal had caused would've been avoided. He's also the runner up for the gullability award (right after Queen "What could possibly go wrong if I trust a necromancer who openly says hes going to bring my husband back as an undead abomination" Isabel) considering the whole Shadya thing.

[J.Gellert]

Wait... Sandro is dead? Pfff, I knew there was a reason I didn't bother after Heroes III... I knew they changed the world completely, but I thought this meant "no Sandro" instead of "Sandro was killed off".

And yes that is all I picked up from your discussion above :smalltongue: Completely uneducated about Heroes V here.

[Caustic Soda]

Markal was an evil bastard, but he had his reasons atleast. I.

- Analysis of Markal's motivation -

Demons on the other hand... well... they're demons ^_^.

See... I wasn't talking about a rediculously over the top grimdark Warhammer 40k style black and gray morality... I was talking about a more "As a whole, even the 'good guys' aren't spotless. There are heroic knights but there are also those motivated purely by personal interests and those who really don't care about making life better for anyone..

Ah, then I think we've been posting past each other. When I say Black and White morality, i don't mean that the bad guys have to be one-dimensional cartoon supervillains, I just mean that they have few-to-none redeeming features, while the good guys are unambiguosly in the right.

I think your analysis of Markals motivation is pretty spot-on, and that makes him a more relatable villain, but he is still acting from complete self-interest. And somewhat more willing than Isabel and Raelag to have others suffer for his goals, even if those two were also insanely narcissistic, at best.

The HoF campaigns aren't really much better than the original ones, writing-wise. But at least they cut the random spellcasting in the middle of dialogue, that was just stupid.

I'm more positive about the TotE campaigns, but really the main benefit to those is that Isabel isn't present for most of them. She was just about the most unlikable character in all the Heroes games so far, IMO.


Wait... Sandro is dead? Pfff, I knew there was a reason I didn't bother after Heroes III... I knew they changed the world completely, but I thought this meant "no Sandro" instead of "Sandro was killed off".

And yes that is all I picked up from your discussion above :smalltongue: Completely uneducated about Heroes V here.

Well Heroes 5 is a completely different setting from Heroes 1-4, it just so happens that Markals tutor was named Sandro and was destroyed.

The coincidence staggers the imagination, wouldn't you say? :smalltongue::smallamused:

I think that Tribes of the East was a step forward from Heroes 3, gameplay-wise but the original heroes 5 wasn't, and the AI of Heroes 4 was brain-dead, incapable of even capturing the mines in its own backyard :smalleek:.

I especially like Heroes 5 new skill-system, where every type of hero has a unique skill to lend flavor, just like necromancers have had necromancy.

**

When it comes to writing, I would consider the original campaigns of Heroes 4 better than any other in the Heroes series. Some of the campaigns come close to Planescape: Torment levels of writing, IMO.

The original campaigns of heroes were ludicrously bad, though. The writing was awkward, people would cast spells in the middle of dialogue for no apparent reason, and many of the characters were moronically gullible.

**

When it comes to graphics, I think Heroes 2 has had the best so far. In my experience, the art of H3 is rather bland and 'washed-out' looking. H 4 looked like a bunch of plastic or latex action figures. And while H5 has plenty of detail, it has what I call the 'fantasy look'. Oversized weapons and shoulder pauldrons, Stripperriffic non-armor for some of the female units. One unit even has a book on its chest :smallsigh:. I have to admit the Archangels look kinda awesome, though.

[Spiryt]

Heroes II had some sweet graphic, but so had III. I don't know why people don't like "washed out look" so much. It had plenty details, interesting designs...

Of course, few things I don't like but one can't please everyone.

Personally, I liked quite a lot graphic elements from IV part too, particularly adventure map vegetation and similar details, Dragons, nomads, orcs...

Generally, "look" of Heroes IV was alright, animation was tragic part IMO.

All could look even nice, until it started moving.

Fifth part is discussed to death, probably - some great graphics, offset by mentioned weird stuff appeal of which I will never understand. Particularly some epileptic, horrendous pink/colorful flashes or whatever, when peasant, wolf or anyone else bites or stabs someone... :smallconfused:

Archangel indeed looks nice, if only he didn't fight with some shiny anchor. :smalltongue:

[TheSummoner]

Considering that Markal's motivations can be summed up as revenge, I don't see why its a problem that he'd be willing for others to suffer... Thats kind of the entire point.

The biggest problem with Isabel is that shes too dumb to live. I'm willing to forgive her being manipulated during the Haven campaign since she really had no way of knowing what was going on, but around the time Markal showed up, her stupidity really shined through. Trusting a necromancer at all is sketchy at best... Trusting one whose completly honest about his intentions to raise your dead lover as an unholy abomination and HELPING him do so is worthy of a Darwin Award (or would be if she had died from it anyways). Blame the grief for impairing her judgement if you like, but anyone with a functioning brain should know that much. That said, the protagonists of Shadow of Death weren't much better off. Sandro wasn't as open about his intentions, but the lot of them were still pretty damn gullible and didn't need much persuasion.

[Caustic Soda]

Heroes II had some sweet graphic, but so had III. I don't know why people don't like "washed out look" so much. It had plenty details, interesting designs...



I cant quite put a finger on it, but I think my problem with H3 is that it seems muted somehow, like a faded mural.

That said, one thing where H3 compares positively to the newer ones is that the design of the creatures seemed more believable. it is definitely less over the top than H5. You can't really call it realistic, but the H3 Minotaur King in its musle cuirass (or whatever it is) seems somehow more 'there' than the bondage-gear minotaurs of H5.

Although, now that I look, H3 actually had the eyesore that is the chainmail bikini :smallsigh:.


Considering that Markal's motivations can be summed up as revenge, I don't see why its a problem that he'd be willing for others to suffer... Thats kind of the entire point.

The biggest problem with Isabel is that shes too dumb to live.

-snip-
That said, the protagonists of Shadow of Death weren't much better off. Sandro wasn't as open about his intentions, but the lot of them were still pretty damn gullible and didn't need much persuasion.

I don't think I've explained myself very well. I think Markal is a pretty well-written character. certainly better than the others in the campaigns, with the possible exception of Godric. People like Markal or Biara are unambiguously 'Black', morality-wise. The others can't really be said to beidealistic or unselfish, IMO, so that makes them 'Grey' by default. My point being that it wouldn't really be a change for Heroes 6 to be 'Black and Grey'. It will be a change to have convincing dialogue, though.

Regarding the SoD campaigns, yes Gem and Crag Hack were fantastically gullible, but I didn't mean to imply that the (non H4) campaigns of other Heroes games were paragons of talented writing. But the original H5 had pretty unconvincing storyline and generally annoying protagonists, if not to the level of The Eye of Argon, or the Baldur's Gate novels *barf*.

[TheSummoner]

Ok, that I can agree with. A case could be made for Godric, Findan and/or Zehir being "whites" instead of "grays" but its not a point I care enough about to argue. I don't think anyone plays these games for the writing... though it would be nice to have a well-written game script for once... For the most part, I don't have any complaints about the plots themselves (5 was one of the weaker ones but it wasnt terrible), but the dialogue is at times, painful.

[J.Gellert]

I think the main reason why I can't get over the art from Heroes III is simple... It was the first ever fantasy game that I played, at least that I remember. Before that, I hadn't even watched fantasy movies in that style.

So to me, beholders will always have tentacles, basilisks are lizards (not snakes), and troglodytes are these strange hunched humanoids that I haven't seen in any other game since.

:smallsmile:

It wasn't until a while later that I figured Heroes III has actually picked most of these ideas from elsewhere, but it's alright. It's still how I imagine all these things.

[TheSummoner]

While not my first fantasy game, III was my first Heroes game. In high school I had a computer class. It was a fairly easy class and incredibly fun. The teacher was awesome. One time a friend of mine brought in Heroes 3 (my friends were either done with whatever project we were working on at the time or it was a blow-off day... Like I said, the teacher was awesome). A bunch of the guys in the class played it and I got hooked.

[Caustic Soda]

I, too, started on the series with Heroes 3. Alongside the fifth, it is the only game of the series that I play semi-regularly, although I have played through the campaigns of 2 and 4. Archibald Ironfist is just so endearingly smug, especially in the final cutscene of his campaign :smallbiggrin:.

I have to admit, even though I rag on the graphics of heroes 3, I still like them a lot. Nostalgia, probably :smallsmile:.

[Rion]

I think the main reason why I can't get over the art from Heroes III is simple... It was the first ever fantasy game that I played, at least that I remember. Before that, I hadn't even watched fantasy movies in that style.

So to me, beholders will always have tentacles, basilisks are lizards (not snakes), and troglodytes are these strange hunched humanoids that I haven't seen in any other game since.

:smallsmile:

It wasn't until a while later that I figured Heroes III has actually picked most of these ideas from elsewhere, but it's alright. It's still how I imagine all these things.
I know how you feel. I also played Heroes III before I found out where it had taken the ideas from. I always have and always will imagine black dragons as stronger than any other dragons.

[TheSummoner]

So I googled and looked through the artwork... As a courtesy, I'm putting the pictures in spoiler tags as to not stretch the screen.

Seems that Crystal, Sulfer, and Mercury have indeed been ditched. A shame really =/.
http://blogfile.paran.com/BLOG_205498/201008/1281977767_mmh6_01.jpg

Looks like its retaining the square-grid from Heroes 5. The Haven/Human units are pretty easy to identify... but the undead ones are fairly different... From top to bottom, I would guess... Vampire, Ghoul/Zombie, Skeleton Javelin Thrower, Lich, Ghost... I read somewhere that like half of the units would be new additions to the series so I could very easily be wrong.
http://blogfile.paran.com/BLOG_205498/201008/1281977767_mmh6_03.jpg

Also from a few things I've read...

Seems that towns will be a bit more customizable.

Hero abilities will now give the player full control instead of giving a random choice of skills you can take.

Battles will be given more variety. The size and shape of the battlefield can vary from fight to fight. Conditions in battle can change during combat (one example I read was a fight on a beach having the the tide slowly flooding the area). Different battles may have different objectives.

Heroes 3 style turns. Bye bye init system. It will still have the "turn bar" at the bottom though.

Three tiers instead of seven with more than one unit type per tier. No more alternate promotions. Units of the same tier will be of similar strength but have different abilities.

Units can attack walls, but are less effective at doing so than the catapult.

There will be (atleast) 5 factions.

You can put ranged units in the main tower during a siege.

Town conversion will be expensive and take more than one turn to finish. If it is attacked, the conversion is interrupted (so much for my theory about doing it to screw over a stronger enemy). During a conversion, common buildings (tavern, marketplace, blacksmith, etc.) will remain intact.

[Caustic Soda]

Well at least maps can be a little less cluttered now that the standard layout isn't 'town + 6 resource mines'. we'll see how it works out.

Is it just me or do the undead seem a bit off? I I'm not certain, but they seem a bit blurry and undetailed compared to their surroundings. I suppose it may not be the final version(s).

Other than that, the graphics look gorgeous, much better than I had hoped. The world map looks kinda inspired by Age of Wonders 2, in a good way. It's probably too early to make conclusions about unit style, though.

I hope that the new skill system will have somewhat more balanced abilities. Stuff like Eagle Eye will be even more redundant otherwise. OTOH, never having to risk picking up trashy skills will probably make for less frustrating gameplay. I wonder if they've coupled the hero customization with Heroes 4-style generic heroes (i.e. same start skills, no specialization)?

The new system with varying battlefields sounds interesting. Varying the layout has been there since at least Heroes 2 IIRC, but varying size and objectives? that's the kind of thing that tends to be either a noticeable improvement or incredibly annoying. hopefully it'll be the former :smallsmile:.

It's probably for the better that they got rid of the init system. Much as I liked it, it made low-init troops very vulnerable, which wasn't all that balanced.

It sounds like they've combed through the ideas of Heroes 4 more thoroughly this time. Units in the towers, unit attacking the wall (gate), fewer tiers with more units. I hope it works out, although I didn't like the H4 implementation.

The town conversion system sounds kinda like that of Wake of Gods (a fan-made 'Heroes 3.5' mod). I hope it is less clunky than on WoG, but that shouldn't be too hard since the programmers can hardcode it, unlike the WoG modders.

[Morty]

I wouldn't put too much trust in the screenshots. According to an article I found via the site linked on the first page, they're from an early alpha. It's still possible things will be changed. However, it does look there will be only one "special" resource, which sucks.
Fewer tiers with more units per tier is an interesting idea. It's one of the things I really liked about Heroes IV. Let's just hope the implementation is better.
Also, I'm curious about the other two factions. The one that'll be revealed in November and is supposed to be known from previous games is most likely Academy, but I wonder what the 5th brand new faction will be.

[Terraoblivion]

It sounds promising and interesting at least. Especially the lower amount of tiers should be good. I can see that promoting more strategy than before, at least.

[Rion]

Hero abilities will now give the player full control instead of giving a random choice of skills you can take.
Definitely an improvement. I've always hated when I only got lousy skills at level up.


Battles will be given more variety. The size and shape of the battlefield can vary from fight to fight. Conditions in battle can change during combat (one example I read was a fight on a beach having the the tide slowly flooding the area). Different battles may have different objectives.

Three tiers instead of seven with more than one unit type per tier. No more alternate promotions. Units of the same tier will be of similar strength but have different abilities.

Units can attack walls, but are less effective at doing so than the catapult.

You can put ranged units in the main tower during a siege.

Town conversion will be expensive and take more than one turn to finish. If it is attacked, the conversion is interrupted (so much for my theory about doing it to screw over a stronger enemy). During a conversion, common buildings (tavern, marketplace, blacksmith, etc.) will remain intact.
This makes me more hopeful. It shows that they are willing add something new, rather than make Heroes III with updated graphics.

[Gamerlord]

This makes me more hopeful. It shows that they are willing add something new, rather than make Heroes III with updated graphics.

That would be bad thing? :smallconfused: :smalltongue:

[TheSummoner]

It wouldn't be a bad thing, but it wouldn't have any potential to improve either.

Heroes 3 was a great game, but it wasn't perfect. Ignoring 4 since it was so different, 5 improved over 3 in several ways (the skill system is one thats pretty hard to debate). If 6 just does the same thing as three, then it essentially is the same thing. Chances are 6 won't be perfect. They'll likely make as many bad changes as good, but unless some experimentation and tweaking is done, theres no way to improve the series.

The thing that intrigues me the most is having fewer tiers with more unit choices per tier... If pulled off well (units of the same tier generally being about the same power and plenty to choose from), it could add a whole new level of depth and strategy to the game.

[Winthur]

It wouldn't be a bad thing, but it wouldn't have any potential to improve either.

Heroes 3 was a great game, but it wasn't perfect.

Well, you know, there was Wake of Gods.

I'd be happy with Heroes 3 with better graphics, tweaks to Eagle Eye and Mysticism, giving magic heroes a bit more power (so that they don't have to rely on Armageddon/Berserk to defeat might heroes), and nerfing Conflux and Necropolis. :smalltongue:

[Caustic Soda]

Well, you know, there was Wake of Gods.

I'd be happy with Heroes 3 with better graphics, tweaks to Eagle Eye and Mysticism, giving magic heroes a bit more power (so that they don't have to rely on Armageddon/Berserk to defeat might heroes), and nerfing Conflux and Necropolis. :smalltongue:

But Heroes 5 without expansions essentially was H3 with more detailed graphics :smallconfused:. They changed the skill system, and went back to the 'one hero type per town' principle of H1&2. Heck they didn't even have caravans until the expansions, even though that was perhaps the one feature of H4 that was universally (or nearly so) approved of.

It still had towns where you needed 1-2 special resources and could ignore the rest. Damage spells vere still linear. Buffs and debuffs still ruled all. Intelligence still made knowledge above 10 irrelevant. Logistic was still The One True Skill (tm).

Even the town dynamics are similar. Castle was still among the most powerful towns, and Academy and Dungeon the most expensive. Inferno is still one of the weakest towns.

The units of Castle, Necropolis, Academy and Sylvan were almost lifted directly from heroes 3.

The map editor is supposedly much more clunky. I don't make maps myself, but there are noticeably fewer than there were for Heroes 3 in the same time period.

edit:


BTW, my post was more tongue-in-cheek than anything. :smallwink:

Oh. Well, comprehension fail on my part :smallredface:.

[Winthur]

Intelligence still made knowledge above 10 irrelevant.

While knowledge above 10 made Intelligence pointless. :smallwink:


Even the town dynamics are similar. Castle was still among the most powerful towns, and Academy and Dungeon the most expensive. Inferno is still one of the weakest towns.

Inferno rocks if you know how to demon farm. :smallwink:

BTW, my post was more tongue-in-cheek than anything. :smallwink:

[Spiryt]

Just a matter of opinion, I guess...


Battles will be given more variety. The size and shape of the battlefield can vary from fight to fight. Conditions in battle can change during combat (one example I read was a fight on a beach having the the tide slowly flooding the area). Different battles may have different objectives.

Kinda tricky.... If they do it right, it will probably be great though.


Three tiers instead of seven with more than one unit type per tier. No more alternate promotions. Units of the same tier will be of similar strength but have different abilities.

Not sure about that one....
I think that reworked H5 system would be ideal - 7 tiers, but not necessarily "in order" - 4th tier guy can be just different than 3rd one, not strictly "better"

Units can attack walls, but are less effective at doing so than the catapult.

No....... Damn, Catapult was classic element, making sieges challenging and fun.... And one of the reasons why clunky sieges in H4 were total chaotic fail.

Last thing I want to see is Hydra biting trough the wall, or whatever. :smallyuk:

You can put ranged units in the main tower during a siege.

Nice, I guess

Town conversion will be expensive and take more than one turn to finish. If it is attacked, the conversion is interrupted (so much for my theory about doing it to screw over a stronger enemy). During a conversion, common buildings (tavern, marketplace, blacksmith, etc.) will remain intact.
Hmmmm. We shall see, but smells like not very good idea to me

[Istari]

Hmmmm...

not really sure about these changes, the graphics look nice, but going down to one special resource bothers me, they didn't have to keep all of them, but keeping 2 special resources I think might have been better.
The unit tiers is really suspicious to me. I don't mind adding army variety and such, but only three tiers? Seems too few to me.

[Spiryt]

I kinda hope they'll change their mind 47 times before serious version is finished, and come up with decent ideas.

I don't like those few supposed ones too much.

Three tiers indeed seem a bit low, and wall biting sucks too. :smallwink:

[TheSummoner]

I'm willing to accept the three tier thing... If I can still field 7+ different kinds of units, I'm fine with having (for example) 2 stacks of a couple of powerful ones, 2 medium stacks of a few average ones, and 3 lower tier stacks in high numbers. It always kinda bothered me that a single tier 7 is generally strong enough to kill 100 tier 1 units.

As for wall attacking, whether this is good or bad (or not even worthy of notice) depends entirely on how much powerful the catapult is than your units when facing a wall. If the wall has rather low defense vs normal units, then it defeats the point of the catapult and is a bad thing. If the wall is too well defended, it defeats the purpose of attacking it in the first place and people will only do it if they don't have the skill to directly control the catapult and have no other way of getting through (fliers, shooters, teleport spell, earthquake spell, lucky shot with AI controlled catapult). I'm waiting to see before I pass judgement on that.

[J.Gellert]

I like the three tiers, different specials approach. Sounds like it may give more choices (and depth) than "7 tiers, 7 slots, I'll just make one of each and not think about it much".

[factotum]

I thought the tier thing was one of the things Heroes 4 got right--four tiers of units; you can build both Tier 1 units in a town, but you have to choose which of the two available to build for each of the higher tiers. Made for some interesting tactical decisions, and made it harder to just build an enormous army of top-tier units because the towns you captured might not be set up to build the same one as you already had!

[Caustic Soda]

I thought the tier thing was one of the things Heroes 4 got right--four tiers of units; you can build both Tier 1 units in a town, but you have to choose which of the two available to build for each of the higher tiers. Made for some interesting tactical decisions, and made it harder to just build an enormous army of top-tier units because the towns you captured might not be set up to build the same one as you already had!

While I agree that the H4 model made for more strategic decisions, I think the game also showcased the pitfalls of such a deign decision. Namely providing alternatives where one of the choices is much better than the other. Some (thankfully less than half) of the cohices were no-brainers.

Choosing between a towns only real shooter (Medusa or Cyclops) and a less-than-outstanding melee unit (Minotaur or Ogre Mage). That's no choice at all.
genies were also so crazy-good that there was no choice there either. If H6 follows this model, I hope that they will be able to avoid such pitfalls.

But I don't think that is the case. One reasons H4 made you choose between units was so there would be of the room for the heroes, since H4 made them take up an army slot. I doubt that h6 will reintroduce heroes as units, since that was the most controversial change H4 made. As I understand the announcement, there would be a few (2-4) same-tier units, all of which could be built in their respective towns.

Of course, as Spiryt said, it's quite possible that they'll change their minds along the way. In that case, I hope they do so early enough to be able to polish and fine-tune whatever new ideas they might come up with.

[Cespenar]

Choosing between a towns only real shooter (Medusa or Cyclops) and a less-than-outstanding melee unit (Minotaur or Ogre Mage). That's no choice at all.

When it's me, I pick Medusa over Minotaur every time, but when I encounter computer-controlled Minotaurs, they tend to cheat and block %90 of all my attacks and mess up my strategy.

Damn you, RNG. :smallannoyed: /tangent /rant

[Spiryt]

Choosing between a towns only real shooter (Medusa or Cyclops) and a less-than-outstanding melee unit (Minotaur or Ogre Mage). That's no choice at all.
genies were also so crazy-good that there was no choice there either. If H6 follows this model, I hope that they will be able to avoid such pitfalls.

But I don't think that is the case. One reasons H4 made you choose between units was so there would be of the room for the heroes, since H4 made them take up an army slot. I doubt that h6 will reintroduce heroes as units, since that was the most controversial change H4 made. As I understand the announcement, there would be a few (2-4) same-tier units, all of which could be built in their respective towns.


Actually, they weren't so no brain, as Ogre Mages, were at least, two times cheaper than Cyclopes, and had bigger population too, IIRC.

Although Cyclops were broken indeed, full mauling.

Anyway, that's the problem with H5 too.

I LOVE the alternative upgrades stuff, provides really many nice things to try, but of course, way too many choices are no brainers indeed.

There were literally sporadic situations where one elf shooters upgrade could work better than the other one...

[TheSummoner]

Namely when you find the Unicorn Horn Bow and all your ranged units already have No Ranged Penalty.

[Caustic Soda]

When it's me, I pick Medusa over Minotaur every time, but when I encounter computer-controlled Minotaurs, they tend to cheat and block %90 of all my attacks and mess up my strategy.

Damn you, RNG. :smallannoyed: /tangent /rant

This is very true, and the same thing is present in many other games I've played. Oh well, at least the computer can't savescum :smallamused::smalltongue:.

@Spiryt: True, the Ogres and (IIRC) Unicorns provided cheaper, weaker alternatives. But that doesn't increase the choice factor, IMO. It just means that if you need troops now but lack funds, then you buy the cheap buildings, and if you have enough resources, they you buy the others.

I won't claim that H5 avoided the issue of no-brainer upgrades, because it clearly didn't. I do like the ability to switch between upgrades as appropriate,though. It is more fun, and it feels more believable somehow. Even if believable is a largely meaningless term when it comes to fantasy.

[Morty]

It doesn't look like we'll be dealing with alternatives this time, though. At least, that's what I hope for.

[TheSummoner]

Some actual gameplay footage.

Overworld - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PhZh6w9PQo

Note: There will be town screens in the final version. They just aren't featured in this video. Supposibly they'll be in 2D like in Heroes 3 as opposed to the full 3D flythrough featured in Heroes 5. The video shows a Haven being converted to a Necropolis. Also, its fairly safe to assume the end of the video is a lead in cutscene to a boss fight.

Combat - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA7BHO3VUfA

I see Ghosts and Vampires and Liches and Ghouls/Zombies and Marksmen and Griffons.

[Terraoblivion]

Hmmm, not really much to say based on these clips except about the graphics.

However, i must say that those are a lot better than i expected from a game in this series. I mean they don't look like FF XIII or anything similar, but they are by no means ugly either. So as long as they manage to keep the good parts of the series alive, including the caravans, i'd say that the game holds a great deal of promise.

[TheSummoner]

Apparently they're eliminating the need for caravans. Once you capture a creature dwelling, you can directly recruit units from it the moment you capture it, but after that it just increases the number you can recruit from your town. No need for a caravan.

I do not know if this means if I have, for example, two fully upgraded havens, I could recruit twice the number of Angels from one or if I would have to visit both. Thats the only real way I could see this biting us in the ass.

[Morty]

I very much like the change to creature dwellings. Gathering the creatures from the dwellings on the adventure map has always been annoying, especially when you had the upgraded versions of the dwellings in your town. Caravans made it better, but still.

[Ethdred]

While we're on this subject, has anyone tried the MMO - HoMM Kingdons? It's just launched in the UK, but I think has been running in other countries for a while. If you want to check it out, you can follow this link MM:HK (http://mm-hk.com/referral/781b932b23ecf441d7a1d3b935d72d3458329088) (assuming I've done it right, and possibly it will only work if you're in the UK). It gets me some gold, but also gets you more starting gold and resources.

It's quite interesting so far - a fairly standard 'build cities, hurt other cities' game, but with some HoMM twists. I've only just started so don't know how it will develop, but it's got potential, IMHO.

[J.Gellert]

Might and Magic: Heroes Kingdoms™ has not been launched in your country yet!

We chose to open the game to players in each country only when we are sure that the quality has been raised to the top, and when we are ready and confident.

We will contact you when the game is ready to be launched in your country.

Sniff, too bad...

[Ethdred]

Yeah, that's odd. If the game is good enough to launch in the UK, and elsewhere, then I don't know why it wouldn't be good enough to launch in Greece - unless they are still trying to work out the typos in their translation

[J.Gellert]

Maybe it's not about a translation, we're used to English here, especially on games... Could be about servers or something.

Or maybe they are just doing me a favor by not allowing another distraction while I am studying :smalltongue: