Nargott
Auto-translated
I don't think a 10-20-30% bonus to Initiative is that strong, given that units often can't reach their destination in a single turn. It's more of a nice combat bonus that complements logistics. In the arena, you'll probably have to pay extra gold to make sure this skill is chosen for the final battle.
The Undead faction has Dragons of Terror, with an ability that gives them, among other things, a +50% Initiative bonus at the start of the turn. However, I wouldn't say that this shift feels particularly strong for a melee unit; it's more of a small tactical advantage, allowing them to quickly occupy a good position. Perhaps, for a melee unit, +15% to survivability or Initiative is stronger than +30% to Initiative (but for a ranged unit and especially a caster, this bonus is as strong as it was in the original, because the first turn is decisive).
How can you evaluate a 30% bonus to starting Initiative? Roughly speaking, it's just +50% to Initiative, but only during the first turn. Is it overpowered? Without a starting movement bonus, it's useless.
Regarding ranged attacks – 4 mana and 1 mana (and with any discount – 0 mana) – there's a difference. Besides, in the original game, ranged attacks are only needed in the early stages; later on, they're not very useful with a good Spell Power (the cost is almost the same as Lightning, but the damage is much lower).
Added 2 hours 1 minute ago
Regarding logistics – I like the approach implemented in Disciples 2. There, the logistics skill gave as much as +20% to the unit's movement range, but each battle consumed exactly half of the turn, so no matter how good your logistics skill is, your army can't complete more than 2 battles a day.
In WGE, I've done the same (and these are already working scripts), meaning that logistics on the map gives a speed advantage, but not in Initiative, and doesn't directly increase the number of attacks or experience gained. However, like speed in battle, it allows you to choose more appealing targets for attack.
That's why I think it's right to add a decent combat bonus to the skill itself. It's been a long time coming – why should heroes with logistics have fewer combat skills than others?
At the same time, it's possible that some skills in logistics will increase the hero's "Initiative," allowing them to complete more battles a day, but that's not the skill itself; the skill only affects the unit's mobility on the map (not counting the combat bonus).
Added 8 minutes ago
I believe there shouldn't be this nonsense with endless PvE, where you complete a ton of battles a day with the same army (but it's annoying when the hero can't reach a really important object because their speed is low). If you only have one army, all your PvE is limited. If you want to complete many battles, create many battle-ready armies, and that's exactly the motivation to have several combat heroes with their own armies; it's economically more efficient than putting everything into "one stack" (and the hero on the map is strategically just 1 stack). And this is another way to combat the accumulation of a huge number of creatures in one army, even in long games on a large map. Because, in essence, it shouldn't be necessary for clearing the map, but only for the final battle, but try to catch an opponent with a super-hero who has several armies, each capturing their own objects, mines, and cities in different places on the map.
An effective army for clearing the map is one that's sufficient to clear most neutral creatures because it won't hinder economic development, like an excessively large army (instead of which you can assemble 2 effective armies).
And this, by the way, is another reason why I think the idea of restoring 50% of losses after each battle is a good one. It further enhances auto-battles. Most PvE battles should be conducted in automatic mode, and only the most interesting ones (1-2 per day) should be in manual mode. This is the optimal game dynamic, in my opinion. Probably, each manual battle should not only reduce the hero's turn by 50% (like an auto-battle) but take all 100%, so that all of their movement ends on this important battle, but we'll still be testing all these ideas in the future. This is regarding my vision of the game on the map; duels (currently) are not affected by this in any way.
The Undead faction has Dragons of Terror, with an ability that gives them, among other things, a +50% Initiative bonus at the start of the turn. However, I wouldn't say that this shift feels particularly strong for a melee unit; it's more of a small tactical advantage, allowing them to quickly occupy a good position. Perhaps, for a melee unit, +15% to survivability or Initiative is stronger than +30% to Initiative (but for a ranged unit and especially a caster, this bonus is as strong as it was in the original, because the first turn is decisive).
How can you evaluate a 30% bonus to starting Initiative? Roughly speaking, it's just +50% to Initiative, but only during the first turn. Is it overpowered? Without a starting movement bonus, it's useless.
Regarding ranged attacks – 4 mana and 1 mana (and with any discount – 0 mana) – there's a difference. Besides, in the original game, ranged attacks are only needed in the early stages; later on, they're not very useful with a good Spell Power (the cost is almost the same as Lightning, but the damage is much lower).
Added 2 hours 1 minute ago
Regarding logistics – I like the approach implemented in Disciples 2. There, the logistics skill gave as much as +20% to the unit's movement range, but each battle consumed exactly half of the turn, so no matter how good your logistics skill is, your army can't complete more than 2 battles a day.
In WGE, I've done the same (and these are already working scripts), meaning that logistics on the map gives a speed advantage, but not in Initiative, and doesn't directly increase the number of attacks or experience gained. However, like speed in battle, it allows you to choose more appealing targets for attack.
That's why I think it's right to add a decent combat bonus to the skill itself. It's been a long time coming – why should heroes with logistics have fewer combat skills than others?
At the same time, it's possible that some skills in logistics will increase the hero's "Initiative," allowing them to complete more battles a day, but that's not the skill itself; the skill only affects the unit's mobility on the map (not counting the combat bonus).
Added 8 minutes ago
I believe there shouldn't be this nonsense with endless PvE, where you complete a ton of battles a day with the same army (but it's annoying when the hero can't reach a really important object because their speed is low). If you only have one army, all your PvE is limited. If you want to complete many battles, create many battle-ready armies, and that's exactly the motivation to have several combat heroes with their own armies; it's economically more efficient than putting everything into "one stack" (and the hero on the map is strategically just 1 stack). And this is another way to combat the accumulation of a huge number of creatures in one army, even in long games on a large map. Because, in essence, it shouldn't be necessary for clearing the map, but only for the final battle, but try to catch an opponent with a super-hero who has several armies, each capturing their own objects, mines, and cities in different places on the map.
An effective army for clearing the map is one that's sufficient to clear most neutral creatures because it won't hinder economic development, like an excessively large army (instead of which you can assemble 2 effective armies).
And this, by the way, is another reason why I think the idea of restoring 50% of losses after each battle is a good one. It further enhances auto-battles. Most PvE battles should be conducted in automatic mode, and only the most interesting ones (1-2 per day) should be in manual mode. This is the optimal game dynamic, in my opinion. Probably, each manual battle should not only reduce the hero's turn by 50% (like an auto-battle) but take all 100%, so that all of their movement ends on this important battle, but we'll still be testing all these ideas in the future. This is regarding my vision of the game on the map; duels (currently) are not affected by this in any way.