Ametuct
Auto-translated
I completely agree with the author regarding realism with small armies: personally, I've always been bothered by the hero mechanics where I can take 200 griffons, but if I take 199 griffons and one knight, there isn't enough provisions =) it's understandable that it's game mechanics, but still)
Regarding the independence of the number of units in a stack from the ability, it's generally not an issue if they are roughly between 1 and 16. And as I understand it, these are exactly the army ranges that will be in battles. It's just that I've only played duels with pre-set armies, and it's not yet entirely clear to me what the limits will be in finals on regular maps (Well, if there aren't 80 or more vampires on each side, then my grievance on this point is dropped).
Regarding the lich and the fact that his mana should be a multiple of five, I didn't know; if it's more convenient that way, let's just discard this point.
And separately, let's talk about hero attacks:
The last table seems attractive to me ( where - for tier 7: from 2% down to 1% per hero level (10% of creature in duels = 7-25 damage))
Regarding perks like oversight, it was pointed out absolutely correctly. You could give a reduction in the ATB scale hit or double-triple damage from oversight as a package. This needs testing. If the game were on a map with bots, I would have mapped everything out long ago =) But otherwise, I can't figure out in my head how strong or weak this is)
Personally, I think of it like this: an attack should be equal in effectiveness to free spells in this mod (like weaken or earth spikes), and at the base level of progression! (without basics of darkness or chaos magic respectively). That is, the fact that I invested one of my perks into chaos or summoning magic should give me an advantage even without mana (on the hero's turn I get a magic arrow or wasp swarm (at expert), which are free and deal more damage or provide more utility than an attack). If this condition isn't met, then the advantage of expert magic is questionable. (What if mana runs out and my two berserkers take something down? Why have darkness magic then? I'd rather take a combat hero and pump their expert defense and leadership, oh and mass haste from offense). This was a problem with the original for me =) It will be hard to judge here, as I haven't played a regular map. I just ask you to keep this point in mind.
In general, the trouble with the original Heroes of Might and Magic V for me is the lack of a general standard for starting conditions: some play 1*1 online, others like me more often play FFA on 8 with computers. Accordingly, different conditions and different priorities for perks. Chaos and machines in FFA go straight into the trash: defense and darkness are everything. Consequently, I felt very comfortable playing humans and I simply didn't understand what to do with dark elves in the late game. And I really, really didn't like that. The strength of Castle armies is more or less equal by week, but the strength of heroes varies greatly depending on how many months the game has lasted.
My opinion on this: all races should have equal chances at all stages of the game. In this mod, all races already have separate caster-heroes, half-caster-half-warriors, and warrior-heroes, which helps, but I also personally want to see equally strong mages and fighters in the late game. For example, add some +% damage bonus for a chaos hero.
Roughly like this: the damage of, say, earth shock 120(I made up the number!) + 4*(skill expert)*K (hero spellcasting)*X where X is a percentage of the total HP of the unit stack. Balancing such a thing will be difficult, but chaos will always be relevant with such a formula, not just in the early-mid game.
Make the ballista weaker, but invulnerable. What's with the nonsense in the original where a demon with 12 perks (attack and machines) invests in the ballista, but the enemy centaurs move before it and destroy it on the first turn =))))
I repeat, everything said above and below is purely my opinion; you can ignore it. I'm just reading the author of the article's opinion on balance and, inspired, decided to share mine here!!!
own thoughts. So: combat hero is a guy ready to fight with his army against another such guy. He has little magic and it's very weak. He himself can help very little, but he buffs the army with his attack and defense stats, as well as combat perks like leadership. He rushes mages if he sees them.
Hero who took light magic: buffs their own army with casts so that they are roughly equal in stats to a warrior-hero. The Holy Word spell and especially Divine Vengeance seem completely out of place in this school (my opinion!). Instead, mass variations of buffs. In short, I see buffs, healing, resurrections, and more buffs here. In fact, you get the same power-hitter with their own pluses and minuses.
Hero who took darkness magic: this one is the opposite - makes the combat hero's army as weak as their own))) And specifically that tactic, not: cast mass slow then mass stone skin, since you have it (defense is a must-have), and throw berserkers at them while keeping the army on defense. That is, you actually debuff the enemy army with this school so that they are equal to you in strength and it's profitable to fight them! As for Berserking, as you probably guessed, I just hate this spell =) What kind of nonsense is "hit the nearest", regardless of whether there are 200 people in a stack or 10 hydras =) And if they are standing mixed together, why didn't they all attack at once? =) But Forgetfulness (where Part of your own pack was under the effect of the spell) was perfect, but beyond that it's too much in my opinion. I would change this spell entirely: instead of it, have: 1. transferring defense to attack with an increase in initiative for an allied target, 2. the squad deals slightly reduced damage to itself (most logical), or summoning death knights (like summoning elementals) - most spectacular =).
Hero who took summoning magic: Summoner. Not all spells in this school summon, but it won't be hard to imagine what the spells will do to fit the style. That is, the enemy approaches you, and you already have elementals, a phoenix, hives, walls blocking passages, and mines placed somewhere. It should be very interesting in theory to play like that. Stats are weaker than a warrior's, of course, but free meat tanks; we take them by number in the literal sense. Whoa, I'm on a roll now, and there's no stopping me)))))
Hero who took chaos magic: deals good direct damage. This little guy will be the hardest to balance - because he doesn't depend on his own army: take seven ones and go into battle. Cast what you can and retreat. Hire more and repeat. Perhaps it's worth tying damage somehow to the number of your own troops. Yes, that's difficult, but very interesting to figure out =)
Hero who took sorcery: This deserves a separate discussion:
Look, why do I need two schools of magic? Almost always in the original, I'd rather take darkness, for example, and help it with sorcery and scholarship. On top of that, I'll add defense, class skill, and whatever is left (maybe a second school, maybe logistics, maybe luck). The point is that there is only one hero, and increasing the arsenal of spells doesn't increase the speed of their use. I'll pump darkness and summoning. I'll start casting mass darkness, then I look and think: why do I need these fire warriors, better to cast blindness again or something else.
In general, my opinion here is this: with every new development of a skill (not a perk) of any school, the hero's turn should increase by roughly 0.04 percent on the ATB scale (conditionally). That is, we embed sorcery into all schools at once. And then there's a point in taking two if it gives a larger bonus.
But what will sorcery itself give? I don't know =) but you surely have plenty of ideas) maybe suggest something to me=) magic interference or perks for second heroes like treasury management. I don't know)
Attack, defense, luck, leadership well, this is all clearer - skills of the warrior and half-warrior-half-mage. same as with chaos - plenty of ideas, not one sensible =) Although if armies in the mod are small, it should be easier to balance. As an option, merge shooting and ballistics into one. Like, they broke it, so at least shooters still deal more damage. In short, you need to put some brainpower here and test a lot; what I've written is exclusively my hobby and thoughts aloud.
Anyway, thanks if you read this, "respecting the old man" so to speak. Maybe some ideas will seem sensible even to someone, or same as with chaos - plenty of ideas, not one sensible =) Although if armies in the mod are small, it should be easier to balance. As an option, merge shooting and ballistics into one. Like, they broke it, so at least shooters still deal more damage. In short, you need to put some brainpower here and test a lot; what I've written is exclusively my hobby and thoughts aloud.
Anyway, thanks if you read this, "respecting the old man" so to speak. Maybe some ideas will seem sensible even to someone, or Nargott will take something note for the future. All the best!
Regarding the independence of the number of units in a stack from the ability, it's generally not an issue if they are roughly between 1 and 16. And as I understand it, these are exactly the army ranges that will be in battles. It's just that I've only played duels with pre-set armies, and it's not yet entirely clear to me what the limits will be in finals on regular maps (Well, if there aren't 80 or more vampires on each side, then my grievance on this point is dropped).
Regarding the lich and the fact that his mana should be a multiple of five, I didn't know; if it's more convenient that way, let's just discard this point.
And separately, let's talk about hero attacks:
The last table seems attractive to me ( where - for tier 7: from 2% down to 1% per hero level (10% of creature in duels = 7-25 damage))
Regarding perks like oversight, it was pointed out absolutely correctly. You could give a reduction in the ATB scale hit or double-triple damage from oversight as a package. This needs testing. If the game were on a map with bots, I would have mapped everything out long ago =) But otherwise, I can't figure out in my head how strong or weak this is)
Personally, I think of it like this: an attack should be equal in effectiveness to free spells in this mod (like weaken or earth spikes), and at the base level of progression! (without basics of darkness or chaos magic respectively). That is, the fact that I invested one of my perks into chaos or summoning magic should give me an advantage even without mana (on the hero's turn I get a magic arrow or wasp swarm (at expert), which are free and deal more damage or provide more utility than an attack). If this condition isn't met, then the advantage of expert magic is questionable. (What if mana runs out and my two berserkers take something down? Why have darkness magic then? I'd rather take a combat hero and pump their expert defense and leadership, oh and mass haste from offense). This was a problem with the original for me =) It will be hard to judge here, as I haven't played a regular map. I just ask you to keep this point in mind.
In general, the trouble with the original Heroes of Might and Magic V for me is the lack of a general standard for starting conditions: some play 1*1 online, others like me more often play FFA on 8 with computers. Accordingly, different conditions and different priorities for perks. Chaos and machines in FFA go straight into the trash: defense and darkness are everything. Consequently, I felt very comfortable playing humans and I simply didn't understand what to do with dark elves in the late game. And I really, really didn't like that. The strength of Castle armies is more or less equal by week, but the strength of heroes varies greatly depending on how many months the game has lasted.
My opinion on this: all races should have equal chances at all stages of the game. In this mod, all races already have separate caster-heroes, half-caster-half-warriors, and warrior-heroes, which helps, but I also personally want to see equally strong mages and fighters in the late game. For example, add some +% damage bonus for a chaos hero.
Roughly like this: the damage of, say, earth shock 120(I made up the number!) + 4*(skill expert)*K (hero spellcasting)*X where X is a percentage of the total HP of the unit stack. Balancing such a thing will be difficult, but chaos will always be relevant with such a formula, not just in the early-mid game.
Make the ballista weaker, but invulnerable. What's with the nonsense in the original where a demon with 12 perks (attack and machines) invests in the ballista, but the enemy centaurs move before it and destroy it on the first turn =))))
I repeat, everything said above and below is purely my opinion; you can ignore it. I'm just reading the author of the article's opinion on balance and, inspired, decided to share mine here!!!
own thoughts. So: combat hero is a guy ready to fight with his army against another such guy. He has little magic and it's very weak. He himself can help very little, but he buffs the army with his attack and defense stats, as well as combat perks like leadership. He rushes mages if he sees them.
Hero who took light magic: buffs their own army with casts so that they are roughly equal in stats to a warrior-hero. The Holy Word spell and especially Divine Vengeance seem completely out of place in this school (my opinion!). Instead, mass variations of buffs. In short, I see buffs, healing, resurrections, and more buffs here. In fact, you get the same power-hitter with their own pluses and minuses.
Hero who took darkness magic: this one is the opposite - makes the combat hero's army as weak as their own))) And specifically that tactic, not: cast mass slow then mass stone skin, since you have it (defense is a must-have), and throw berserkers at them while keeping the army on defense. That is, you actually debuff the enemy army with this school so that they are equal to you in strength and it's profitable to fight them! As for Berserking, as you probably guessed, I just hate this spell =) What kind of nonsense is "hit the nearest", regardless of whether there are 200 people in a stack or 10 hydras =) And if they are standing mixed together, why didn't they all attack at once? =) But Forgetfulness (where Part of your own pack was under the effect of the spell) was perfect, but beyond that it's too much in my opinion. I would change this spell entirely: instead of it, have: 1. transferring defense to attack with an increase in initiative for an allied target, 2. the squad deals slightly reduced damage to itself (most logical), or summoning death knights (like summoning elementals) - most spectacular =).
Hero who took summoning magic: Summoner. Not all spells in this school summon, but it won't be hard to imagine what the spells will do to fit the style. That is, the enemy approaches you, and you already have elementals, a phoenix, hives, walls blocking passages, and mines placed somewhere. It should be very interesting in theory to play like that. Stats are weaker than a warrior's, of course, but free meat tanks; we take them by number in the literal sense. Whoa, I'm on a roll now, and there's no stopping me)))))
Hero who took chaos magic: deals good direct damage. This little guy will be the hardest to balance - because he doesn't depend on his own army: take seven ones and go into battle. Cast what you can and retreat. Hire more and repeat. Perhaps it's worth tying damage somehow to the number of your own troops. Yes, that's difficult, but very interesting to figure out =)
Hero who took sorcery: This deserves a separate discussion:
Look, why do I need two schools of magic? Almost always in the original, I'd rather take darkness, for example, and help it with sorcery and scholarship. On top of that, I'll add defense, class skill, and whatever is left (maybe a second school, maybe logistics, maybe luck). The point is that there is only one hero, and increasing the arsenal of spells doesn't increase the speed of their use. I'll pump darkness and summoning. I'll start casting mass darkness, then I look and think: why do I need these fire warriors, better to cast blindness again or something else.
In general, my opinion here is this: with every new development of a skill (not a perk) of any school, the hero's turn should increase by roughly 0.04 percent on the ATB scale (conditionally). That is, we embed sorcery into all schools at once. And then there's a point in taking two if it gives a larger bonus.
But what will sorcery itself give? I don't know =) but you surely have plenty of ideas) maybe suggest something to me=) magic interference or perks for second heroes like treasury management. I don't know)
Attack, defense, luck, leadership well, this is all clearer - skills of the warrior and half-warrior-half-mage. same as with chaos - plenty of ideas, not one sensible =) Although if armies in the mod are small, it should be easier to balance. As an option, merge shooting and ballistics into one. Like, they broke it, so at least shooters still deal more damage. In short, you need to put some brainpower here and test a lot; what I've written is exclusively my hobby and thoughts aloud.
Anyway, thanks if you read this, "respecting the old man" so to speak. Maybe some ideas will seem sensible even to someone, or same as with chaos - plenty of ideas, not one sensible =) Although if armies in the mod are small, it should be easier to balance. As an option, merge shooting and ballistics into one. Like, they broke it, so at least shooters still deal more damage. In short, you need to put some brainpower here and test a lot; what I've written is exclusively my hobby and thoughts aloud.
Anyway, thanks if you read this, "respecting the old man" so to speak. Maybe some ideas will seem sensible even to someone, or Nargott will take something note for the future. All the best!