Posts from HotA - General Questions and Discussions Auto-translated

Lizard doesn't need to be turned into an overpowered unit; it already makes life difficult for mages, just as effectively as the Knight.

There are plenty of overpowered things in the game, that's just how it is. But I think that even the most overpowered thing should follow a clear logic, and not be some random, ill-conceived idea.

Oh my god! They're complaining again. Resistance is already buffed compared to the original mechanics. Are you suggesting giving them 100% immunity to enemy magic? Let me remind you that mages have nothing to counter melee units with besides magic.

But I believe that any, even the most overpowered ability, should follow a clear logic, and not be an ill-conceived, random thing.

It seems to me that it's difficult to accuse the current effect of lacking clear logic. Its description sounds like this: "Reduces the power of the enemy hero's magic by x% during battle." And the ability actually does exactly that, no more and no less. The effect is also displayed accurately in the battle interface (the reduced magic power of the enemy in parentheses). The weakening of your own Armageddon has nothing to do with the effect of the ability or its display in the battle interface, so it seems more like something done "randomly."

The description has been changed, yes. But we shouldn't forget that the skill is called "Magic resistance" (and not, for example, "enemy hero sp reduction"). The spirit and style of the ideas should be consistent. It was interesting: when attacking mythical dragons with resistance, does their SP decrease? Or do mythical dragons not have spell power?

Just rename it, and everyone will be happy :) In reality, it's no longer resistance, but suppression of the opponent's magical powers (because I don't know how resistance can weaken a blessing, for example). It's clear that they wanted to make a percentage reduction in magic damage instead of complete reflection, and they took the easier path (reducing spell power is easier than reducing physical damage, which would require deeper changes). And everything makes sense for Lizard, if units resist magic (and resistance gives the hero's army the ability to suffer less from magic, not debuffing the opponent's hero), then it doesn't matter what the source is, the damage should be reduced, period. Please be so kind as to state "we removed resistance because it was overpowered and replaced it with another skill," instead of adding an inconsistent description.

It's clear that they wanted to implement a percentage-based reduction in magic damage instead of complete reflection, and they took the easier route (reducing Special Power is simpler than reducing combat damage, which would require more in-depth changes).

What makes this clear? Without Spell Power, besides combat magic, summons and resurrection are quite overpowered (although there's a ring against resurrection in HotA). A mage with 1000 mana and a huge Special Power could easily overwhelm a simple warrior with summons. Now, there's some weakening of this tactic.

Resistance is not only the ability to resist something, but also a physical quantity that weakens the current passing through a section. If we apply this analogy to magic, then reducing the power of magic seems quite reasonable (we can imagine that each hero has his own magical channel through which he affects magic on those around him, and the opponent may be able to worsen it, increase resistance there). I note that artifacts for resistance in the English original also have "almost physical" names — Garnitude of Interference, Surcoat of Counterpoise, Boots of Polarity, and the new property suits them even more.

Nevertheless, changing the name and icon of the skill in some form is quite likely, since the correspondence to it in the new version is still weaker than in the old one, and this bothers many. And it goes without saying that the new version is connected to the old only by the fact that they both counteract magic, so there is no need to apply the logic of the old version to the new one.

It was interesting: when attacking fairy tale dragons with resistance, does their SP decrease? Or do fairy tale dragons not have spell power?

It clearly follows from the description that it does not decrease. But I can "reassure" you — the original resistance does not work on them either.

It is clear that they wanted to make a percentage reduction in damage from magic instead of complete reflection, they took the path of least resistance (it is easier to reduce SP than to reduce damage from combat, for this you have to dig deeper).

Nonsense. Perhaps such an approach was practiced for WT — I don't know, but this is not typical for HotA. In this case, exactly what they wanted was implemented. In particular, they wanted to weaken resurrection and summons. But Armageddon on its own — there is no need for that. In addition, it is easier to implement golem resistance than to reduce spell power.

And everything is logical with the Lizard, if the units resist magic (and resistance endows the hero's army with the ability to suffer less from magic, and not debuffs the opponent's hero), then it doesn't matter what its source is, the damage should be reduced, period.

The old resistance endows its own units, the new one debuffs the hero. Each of them has its own logic. If it was decided to completely change the property of the skill, then there is no particular reason to tie to this detail — except for the correspondence to the name and icon of the skill, as I wrote above — their change is quite likely.
Well, the option "Reduces SP + reduces Armageddon on its own" still does not fit into any logic.

I have always fully agreed with Sava's arguments and even admired his logic at times, but here, I'm sorry, it's just NONSENSE. Either he completely misunderstands what I wrote, or he deliberately interprets it "in his own way," just to somehow justify his decisions. A hero with resistance, using combat magic, and at the same time dealing more damage to his own units than to the enemy units – that's absurd. Period. There's nothing to discuss.

A hero with resistance who uses combat magic and deals more damage to his own units than to the enemy's units – that's absurd. Period. There's nothing to discuss.

In general, yes, if his own units received more damage, it would be somewhat absurd. But with the new resistance, that's not the case. The damage dealt is the same to both his own and enemy units.
The new resistance only affects the enemy hero, not the creatures on the battlefield. It also doesn't affect his own units (they are affected by the enemy's resistance, which reduces damage regardless of who the target of the spell is, his own or the enemy's – it simply reduces the spell points throughout the battle, and that's it). Mechanically/in terms of the interface, its property is simple and clear (if you don't try to connect it to the old resistance property). In terms of atmosphere, I wrote some justifications above and acknowledged that, nevertheless, it still makes sense to work on the name and icon.

The damage dealt is the same to both allies and enemies.

Let me explain in more detail, in simple terms, although I've already written about it:

You have Torgrim at level 20, and your opponent simply has a hero with resistance, let's say, Bronze. Torgrim uses Armageddon, and he hits himself harder than he hits Bronze. That's all I'm saying.

You have Torgrim, level 20, and your opponent just has a hero with resistance, let's say, Bron. Torgrim uses Armageddon, and it hits himself harder than it hits Bron. That's all I'm saying.

I understood that, but it's not quite right. Let's say Torgrim has 20 Spell Power and no Fire resistance. If he fights against a hero without resistance, his Spell Power is 20, and Armageddon deals 830 damage to both his own and the enemy's creatures.
However, if he fights against Bron with Expert resistance, Torgrim's Spell Power becomes 14. This means the damage of Armageddon is 590. This is the damage that will be dealt to both Torgrim's creatures and Bron's creatures.
Bron's own resistance only affects Torgrim's spells, and it doesn't play a role in the calculations above.

Resistance simply reduces the power of the enemy hero's magic. It's as if he forgot to wear an artifact before the battle. The reduced power is displayed in parentheses in the hero's window, and only this reduced value is relevant during the battle.
The new resistance doesn't have any tricky hidden properties that depend on who the target of the spell is. It's much simpler than the Sphere of Vulnerability.

You have Torgrim at level 20, and your opponent just has a hero with resistance, let's say, Bronze. Torgrim uses Armageddon, and hits himself harder than Bronze. That's all I'm saying.

If resistance reduces spell power, then the damage will be less. How can the damage be different then? :confused:

Well, that's a twist. :eek:

By the way, if this was a real-life case with different damage from Armageddon's Blade, it could be a bug. However, I think it's more likely that the golems/firebirds took less damage, or a fire resistance spell was cast.