Posts from Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition - Tactical Edition.

The price is calculated as follows: Price = BuildingValue - TempoCost + DiscoveryCost, where: BuildingValue = 4 * Income (for the Capitol branch) TempoCost = 1000 (fixed) DiscoveryCost = 500 * (Number of New Buildings Unlocked by the Building - 1) Explanation: TempoCost = we cannot build multiple buildings in one turn, therefore, when building any building, we spend not only resources but also additionally "spend" tempo on it (which is especially noticeable when building cheap buildings). DiscoveryCost: if a building unlocks several new buildings, this increases its value, as it increases the number of building possibilities. If a building unlocks only 1 new building, then DiscoveryCost = 0 (the number of possibilities before and after construction has not changed). If the building is a dead end (unlocks nothing), then DiscoveryCost = -500 (i.e., the building is slightly cheaper if it is a dead end). Town Hall = Additional income +500, hence BuildingValue = 2000. Price = 2000 - 1000 = 1000 Magistrate = Additional income +1000, hence BuildingValue = 4000. Price = 4000 - 1000 = 3000. Capitol = Additional income +2000, hence BuildingValue = 8000. Price = 8000 - 1000 - 500 (dead end) - 500 (prevents building Capitols in other cities) = 6000. From the point of view of payback, if income-generating buildings are placed on days 1, 3, and 5, then: Town Hall = costs 1000, payback is 2 days, by the time day 3 arrives (construction of the Magistrate), it breaks even. Magistrate = costs 3000, together with the Town Hall, the total payback is 2 days, by the time day 5 arrives (construction of the Capitol), the Town Hall + Magistrate combination breaks even.

I see that you have put a lot of thought and planning into this. All that's left is to bring all your ideas to life. If you have any questions, feel free to ask, and I'll be happy to share my opinion.

The math behind the building's value is appealing – the question is how this will translate to the other branches (guild, fortification, and dual-skill branches).

Similarly. The only difference is in how to calculate the actual value (not the price). For example, for a dwelling, the value = 100% x Value of Income + 50% x Value of Growth (since the income is here and now, and the growth is only next week). But here, you also need to cleverly take into account the potential boost from fortifications. The Value of Income or Growth is calculated as Price of Creature x Quantity x 150%. That is, for example, the value of 4 Knights for hiring with a price of 1000 will be 1500 x 4 = 6000 (and the value of already hired Knights will be 100% more, i.e., 10 thousand).

question regarding the balance between cities - there are various buildings that can only be constructed in a specific city - will they be removed or left and balanced through their cost? (we are not talking about buildings that support racial skills, such as the altar of elements or the school of runes, but about buildings such as the artifact shop, library, chaos gate, etc.)
In general, how do you think they can be evaluated in terms of effectiveness relative to each other (in my opinion, the artifact shop is the most valuable)?

In the new schemes, there is no need to discard buildings, as there is no shortage of space. Regarding fortifications, I have come to the conclusion that they should not accelerate upgrades, as they already work very well (by increasing the growth rate). Upgrades will provide a fixed, one-time bonus equal to twice the base growth rate, except for tier 7 (where it will be a single bonus). There is the possibility of returning buildings like farms with a similar bonus to upgrading (+200%), but not as a one-time bonus, but weekly (to the growth rate). For example, militia farms +16 militia per week. They can be placed as an additional improvement, after the upgrade (in the same slot).

Sorry, but what does "upgrading grades" mean?

This means increasing the bonus provided by an upgraded building. For example, upgrading militia provides a one-time bonus of +8 (increase), while the bonus under a castle (fort-citadel-castle) will already be +32. Currently, if you cancel the upgrade, the bonus for the upgrade will be fixed (+16).

In the new layouts, there is no need to discard buildings, as there is no shortage of space.

In your 5x5 layout, there are 3 free cells, compared to the 5x6 layout with 6 free cells in the standard version. If all buildings are returned as separate structures, only 1 free cell will remain, which will make balancing and player perception of the building layout more difficult. (I didn't quite like the 5x4 layout with 1 free cell.)

It is possible to return building types like farms with a similar bonus as when upgrading (+200%), but not as a one-time bonus, but weekly (to the increase). For example, militia farms +16 militia per week. Place them as an additional upgrade after the grade (in the same cell).

I don't see a significant loss from buildings with increases, unlike the other "racial" buildings, but if it's done as an additional upgrade, it's worth considering. But then it turns out: base income 100% + increase 100% - upgrade income +200% - upgrade increase - 200%. That is, for militia, the base is 10 - fort 10 - stronghold 10 - castle 10 + 20 upgrade increase (instead of 40 max increase 60). This will not fit into your concept of a 10-40 increase, as you wanted. I don't see the point in reducing the base to 7, since the one-time income of militia will be: 7 base + 7 upgrade = 14, which is significantly less than 10+10=20 (in my opinion, a base of 10 is better). I think buildings with increases are not worth it and only interfere with balancing!

Currently, the militia increase is 8-32, not 10-40. With farms, it will be +16, i.e., up to 48.

Currently, the militia growth is 8-32, not 10-40. With farms, it will be +16, i.e., up to 48.

Okay, you know better about the balance. I'm curious, how should we handle the growth of, for example, a level 6 Ent? Base 1 - castle - 1, Ent Saplings - 2, together 4, or how? Is +200% growth for 3 upgrade levels too much?

P.S. Can you write your own growth scheme using Tier 6 as an example (standard units with 2-3 growth), specifically for Hydras and Ents?

It's simple: Tier 6 units can only be recruited from a Castle, meaning if the base recruitment rate is 1, the maximum is 2 (1-2). Regarding farms, yes, a +200% bonus might not be suitable in all cases. Either we make it +100% for some (which wouldn't match the tier and building level), or we don't return all farms, but only the low-level ones.

It's simple: Tier 6 units are only upgraded by castles, meaning if the base increase is 1, the maximum is 2 (1-2).

Regarding farms – yes, a +200% increase might not be suitable in all cases. Either we make it +100% for some (which doesn't match the tier and building level), or we don't return all farms, but only the low-level ones.

So, will all units have the same increase of 1-2, both for Hydras and Ents? In the standard version, Ents were weaker than other Tier 6 units, but they had a higher growth rate. So, the question is: how to make it, and is a higher or lower increase needed for Tier 6? Farms: As I wrote above, 200% is probably too much, especially for higher tiers. Options for farms: 1. 200% for Tiers 1-2, 150% for Tiers 3-4, 100% for Tiers 5-6. 2. 200% for Tiers 1-2, 100% for Tiers 3-4, none for Tiers 5-6. 3. 100% for Tiers 1-6.

Not for everyone, but specifically for Hydras, Ents, and Tan. As the strongest creatures of tier 6. A larger increase for tier 6, for example, for Griffins (the weakest): 3-6.

Not for everyone, but specifically for Hydras, Ents, and Trolls. As the strongest creatures of tier 6. A larger bonus for tier 6, for example, for Griffins (the weakest): 3-6.

Will all other tier 6 creatures have a 2-4 bonus?