Posts from Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition - Tactical Edition. Auto-translated

Well, making mods is fun, at least for me.

Welcome to the Boring Club, the first rule of the Boring Club is not to talk about the Boring Club…

Да, о Lord Of Z......i Club!

Engineering: The hero's war machines gain +5/10/15 to defense and attack, and +100/200/300% to hit points. The healing effect of the tent is increased from 10 to 20/50/100. The wagon increases the attack of ranged units in the hero's army by 1/2/3. The catapult hits the designated target with a 30/40/40% chance.
Ballistics: The allied ballista (if present) fires 2 times per turn, is controlled by the player, and recovers after battle.
Rate of Fire: The allied ballista (if present) fires 3 times per turn.
Military Medicine: The allied tent (if present) gains the ability to resurrect creatures, is controlled by the player, and recovers after battle.
Plague Tent: The allied tent (if present) gains the ability to fire at living creatures.
Military Craft: The hero's war machines gain +3 to initiative.
Artillery: Before each battle, 10% of enemy troops die (rounded down). During a siege, the allied catapult fires 2 times per turn and is controlled by the player. The wagon recovers after battle.
Sulfur Rain: Before each battle, a total of 20% of enemy troops die (rounded down). During a siege, the allied catapult fires 3 times per turn.
Fire Arrows: The allied ballista (if present) ignores 50% of the target's defense when firing, deals an additional +50 fire damage, and recovers after battle.

Ballistics – Rate of Fire
Military Medicine – Plague Tent
Military Medicine – Military Craft
Artillery – Sulfur Rain – Fire Arrows

Nargott, in your project, aren't the role and abilities of war machines significantly enhanced?

The catapult is excessive...

The catapult is too powerful...

Considering the game length for which Nargott is making this mod, it's not that excessive, but yes – I would slightly reduce the percentage.
Assuming that rounding is done downwards, Tier 7 will lose one unit only if there are 5 or more units, and WGE is designed for a game length of approximately one month, so it is most likely that Tier 7 will not be affected or will be affected by only 1 unit, and these perks will have the strongest effect on Tiers 1-3.

Yeah, and an army of 30 elite units? That's a common occurrence in my games.

Currently, artillery/sulfur rain differ slightly, but their combined effect is the same:

Artillery: Before each battle, up to 20% of large enemy units are killed (rounded down).
Sulfur Rain: Before each battle, up to 20% of small enemy creatures are killed (rounded down).

As rightly noted, 20% is a lot, but the rounding is done downwards, which means that tier 6 units will often either not be killed at all (except for neutrals) or will be killed in a noticeably smaller number due to rounding (e.g., out of 9, only 1).
In addition, the details are not described, but it is implied that it is possible to counter artillery perks by splitting up troops. That is, the 20% effect will be applied to each stack; for example, 2 stacks of 4+4 wyverns will not be affected at all.
On average, it is assumed that the actual losses will be around 15% (due to rounding). And that's not that much; the same skilled defense + evasion (4 perks) gives a -30% reduction in physical damage from enemy creatures. Here, advanced engineering + artillery and sulfur rain (4 perks) will give a -15% reduction in enemy creatures.

Overall, engineering should work better than in the original. Since firearms are not necessarily required, and a three-shot ballista without firearms (which cannot be taken at the same time) will work approximately the same as a three-shot ballista with firearms in the original, i.e., the same effect for a significantly smaller number of perks. The tent will also work much more effectively (25/50/75/100). And the artillery branch should not lag behind either the ballista or the tent.

The number of "30 elite units" by the time of the endgame will rather refer to tier 3 than to tier 6, unless the game is specifically prolonged. :)
The concept implies a game in the spirit of Starcraft, with early interaction between players and early encounters, rather than preliminary isolation for a month or two while waiting for a giant army to be assembled.

and WGE is designed for a game duration of approximately one month.

Within 1 month, but not a whole month. The ideal average time for "final" encounters is 2-3 weeks. In chess terms, week 1 is the opening, week 2 is the middlegame, and week 3 is the endgame.

Boring. I prefer games that last 2-3 in-game years. On a large map with plenty of opportunities for tactics.

The Castle is fully built within a month (slightly faster in WGE, slightly longer in the original game). What should you do on the map for the rest of the time? Play an RPG? Build secondary Castles? They should already be capturable in 1-2 weeks and built with a slight delay. If it's impossible to capture secondary Castles in the first week, it means that the first week is strategically incomplete because the expansion phase is simply cut out. If it's impossible to reach the opponent with a "roach" (a fast unit) in the first week, it means that the next strategic element, scouting, is missing. And harassment (taking over mines, resources, and the opponent's "roaches"). And rushing (killing the opponent in the first week). Based on this, I strive to make as many strategic options available early on, so as not to play an incomplete strategy in the first weeks, but this also means early interaction with the opponent, and therefore the chances of losing early on, as well as in all subsequent stages, are high. That is, theoretically, you can play for a year, but the chance that someone won't lose earlier, having a high chance of losing every week, is very small. In essence, I strive to provide the widest possible range of strategic actions that are available and relevant from the very first days of the game. To ensure diversity from the beginning of development, and not after it ends. High dynamics and short game times are a side effect, but the primary goal is strategic depth. This, by the way, does not mean a small map size. Logistics in the mod are also accelerated. Within 1 month, you can fully explore a map of any legal size. The hero's movement is almost equal to the length of the zone (a typical zone is an area comparable to the screen). A week = 7 turns = +7 new zones. And this is just for 1 "roach" scout.

Boring. I prefer games that last 2-3 in-game years. On a large map with lots of opportunities for tactics.

What tactics can last 2-3 years??? Spending more than 3 months on a map only leads to pointless suffering and savoring something unclear, unless it's a scenario. The balance shouldn't be designed for such games at all.

It’s immediately clear who only cares about winning. Playing, enjoying the progression, and exploring are not for you.

Added 2 minutes later
Kill the enemy before they have a chance to develop. I prefer to fight a strong opponent, not a weak one who hasn't had time to do anything before their castle was taken.

Added 5 minutes later
I exaggerated with the 3 years; it hasn't been longer than 9 months.

I would rephrase it differently – it immediately becomes clear who plays a strategy game and who plays an exploratory adventure game. The goal of a strategy game is to defeat the player by outplaying them (and the interest lies in countering the opponent). The goal of an exploratory game is to perform the maximum amount of effective actions, regardless of the time spent, in other words, to clear the entire map. Therefore, the concept of "development" also differs. For a strategist, development means reaching the planned composition of troops or technologies. In the 2nd week, it is possible to reach any final technology, from tier 7 units to level 5 mage guild units. It is possible to seize half the map, even up to 10 secondary cities, with a massive expansion. Is this not enough for the concept of "development"? Is it also necessary to have dragons in every captured city? Well, all of this is technically possible already in the 1st month of the game. "Not having time to do anything" also differs significantly. Not having time to clear the map? Yes. But having time to reach level 15-20 in the 3rd week, reaching the final upgrade, conducting 10-20 battles, including for major bonuses like the Dragon Utopia, would be strange to call "doing nothing." The maps that Dyrman writes about, which take 3 months to play, are, of course, of a more closed type and for the dynamics of the original game, but the difference with WGE is only 2, and for particularly single-player games, 3 times. In reality, nothing prevents you from agreeing with your opponent or the AI not to touch them and playing for a whole year. But I don't think that 20% artillery will suddenly become a real imbalance in this case. A little stronger than usual perks – yes. But given that ballista and tents are multiplied by 0 at such a late stage, and engineering will most likely have to be upgraded to the maximum, resulting in 6 perks spent, and besides the 20% troop kill, nothing useful remains by the time of the endgame. Why I don't play exploratory games, the answer is B – balance. In an exploratory game, it would be necessary to forget about strategic balance. For example, tier 7. One player has 2-3 dragons at the endgame because he wanted to come early. In another game, another player has 20-30 dragons at the endgame because he played to clear the map. And how do you balance this at the same time? The "Deadly Cold" perk is on the verge of being imbalanced in the first case, and useless in the second, only killing summoned phoenixes, which are killed in one hit by troops at such a late stage anyway. And there are many such examples. For a strategy game, it is generally characteristic that different things play differently at different stages. A rough balance can be built, for example, like this: the perk is designed for the 3rd week, came earlier – well done, the perk played a little stronger, came later – missed it, the perk played a little weaker. But it played! And did not become completely useless, as when the game is dragged out to 1 year. From a strategic point of view, a player who sits on the map for a whole year is a whim. In tactics, the analogy is – an elven archer suddenly starts fighting in melee – also a whim. Because there are ways to use archers much more effectively. Even if the player wants to run around and explore the battlefield. It's strange to complain that elven archers are such useless and weak creatures, when their swordsmen kill them so easily. Although, honestly, it would be fair to make them fight equally in melee, specifically for such a play style. This is not to say that exploring the map is bad. It's good to play in any style, but balance cannot take into account all whims. In a strategy game, the one who effectively uses their opportunities wins, but not all opportunities are effective, precisely from a strategic point of view. The exploratory motive is a very cool element, but you can completely devour the entire tree with all its insides, or you can examine the entire tree and selectively eat the most delicious fruits, each time different ones. And I believe that the second aspect, with strategy, can coexist. Specifically, on the maps in WGE, this will be expressed by maximum freedom of exploration, as I already wrote, opening the entire map takes only a few weeks.

It's immediately clear who only cares about winning. Playing, enjoying the leveling up and exploration – that's not for you.

I really enjoy exploring the world, but not on multiplayer maps. There are excellent scenarios for that.
Multiplayer is all about opposing an opponent. If someone is savoring the game on a multiplayer map, they are clearly doing something very strange. There are different things for different purposes. For example, on the Barbarian Lands, even in the original game, two weeks is enough for a playthrough.
Also, don't confuse exploring a map with savoring it. You can explore a map very quickly. But savoring (repeating monotonous actions, hoping to get or prolong the enjoyment) takes a very long time. It's better to play 2-3 games.

I had a dwarf on a frozen map with 500 lava dragons and similar other units. I'll have to take him down with 20+ bone dragons plus a leveled-up hero. In this single-player game, the catapult will become an indispensable tool.

I'd also like to add that I used to enjoy clearing maps, but eventually, I always suffered from the depressing sight of empty zones. When the enjoyment of the game gradually decreases over time, I believe this is absolutely unacceptable. The most interesting moments are when there are still many uncollected goodies in the zones.

Also, don't confuse exploring the map with savoring it. You can explore a map very quickly. But savoring (repeating monotonous actions in the hope of getting or prolonging the pleasure) takes a very long time. It's better to play 2-3 games.

+1

On a frozen map, I had a dwarf with 500 lava dragons and similar other units. I'll have to take him down with 20+ bone dragons plus leveling up the hero. In this single-player game, the catapult will become an indispensable thing....

500 dragons in one stack is a very specific whim. But at such a scale, darkness will be no less imba than artillery. And killing 500 dragons or 400 doesn't really make a difference. Both stacks will simply crush you in one hit if you miss them.
By the way, in this specific case, skillful defense + evasion for the same 4 perks will give a much greater effect than killing 20% of the creatures. Killing works as a simultaneous reduction of the total damage of the enemy and a reduction of the total survivability. So, the reduction of survivability (total HP) should be ignored, because your own troops or chaos will still be very ineffective in breaking through, and the dwarf will deal most of the damage himself from darkness, on the same scale as without artillery/defense. And in terms of reducing damage, skillful defense works better, because -30% is more than -20%. Out of 500 dragons, 150 are consistently out of the game, imba-defense! :)