Плагин Fresh Mod для SOD — HD mod and expansions.

Dirty_Player

3/23/2020 9:48 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Kventin

I disagree about another game.
Almost all AI Improvements (AIIP) that were planned have been made.
What was the purpose of all this?

Well, it's obvious that the people who are still in SOD (Strategic Online Duel) are doing it for a reason. They're doing it because they don't want to change anything; they're conservatives, and they're happy with the way things are. It's clear that these people won't accept AIIP in any form. So, it's not clear who will play this SOD with the new first aid and cheap Inferno portal.
Personally, if I ever feel like playing Heroes and SOD, I definitely won't play with AIIP. As will many others here.
A huge thank you for fixing the generator bugs! In my opinion, this is the only thing that can somehow save SOD.

Sadness

to Kventin, before the "Gameplay Changes" checkbox appeared, there were no alternatives at all; I managed to play a couple of dozen games with modified creatures and Hives.
I don't consider myself one of the players who are looking for something new. That would be strange, considering that we're playing Heroes 3. FM (Fan Made) without expansions is very good because it fixes the game's inherent unfairness, unlike AIIP, which already changes the gameplay. I'm not refusing to play with AIIP out of spite, but because I'm not looking for something new.

Confirmation of my words, written above.

Sadness

And besides, who is against it (besides Davos)?

It's time to get used to the fact that only Sir Davos knows what is in the spirit of Heroes and what is not. He knows what heroic gameplay is and what is a "cheap imitation"! He is a kind of guardian of the heroic spirit! :smile16:

In reply to Dirty_Player

sir Davos Seaworth

3/23/2020 10:41 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

It's high time to get used to the fact that only Sir Davos knows what is in the spirit of the heroes and what is not. He knows what heroic gameplay is and what is a "cheap imitation"!

This is not only known by Sir Davos, but many simply won't argue about it; they immediately refuse Fresh Mode. If Fresh Mode maintains its organized appearance as it is now, there is a chance to start promoting it in Tournaments, to convince people that the basic FM gameplay does not spoil it, but only improves the interface and fixes the generator's bugs (
but at the same time, it leaves the possibility, by mutual agreement, to play with AI). And I am even ready to participate in promoting such an FM. And quarantine contributes to this (yesterday, the online lobby exceeded 360 people). But if
wishes prevail over common sense (and AI should be in AI, where it belongs), then FM will have to be abandoned, and it will remain
a pastime for 10-15 people (plus the occasional "Oh, how cool it is, I played a couple of games - it's great. I'll go back to playing HotA")

"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479

Xocenk

3/23/2020 10:54 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Sir Davos Seaworth, how many times have you played with the Fresh Mod, and on which versions?

ICQ - 703804372
Discord - Xocenk#2473

In reply to Xocenk

sir Davos Seaworth

3/23/2020 11:02 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Xocenk

sir Davos Seaworth, how many times have you played with the Fresh mod, and on which versions?

I understand the provocative nature of the question, but I will answer it for the first time.
Not much, on different versions, starting with the very first one; I won't say exactly how many times. I haven't played with AI Improvement Pack, and I don't plan to. It was enough to watch streams of people playing with it. And you don't need to tell me "just try it." Some things don't need to be tasted to be absolutely certain that they are not suitable.

"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479

Grando

3/23/2020 11:11 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Overall, it seems that the sets of checkboxes should be divided not into 2, but into 3 parts. Between the two existing ones, insert a third one – something like "Lesser changes." Currently, rebuilding a guild from any level will immediately fall into this category. And then, many other things might appear, for example: - Removing a skill in the Witch Hut. - Seeing a bonus type for the schoolboy. - Removing control scrolls from the map. That is, these are gameplay changes that, for those playing HotA, already seem natural and don't even change the gameplay, but rather remove utter nonsense. However, for fans of SoD, this isn't utter nonsense, but rather native features. And the third group – such mega-improvements as replacing the reward for clearing Conflux with native ones – this is even for HotA players a change in gameplay. This is roughly the gradation that emerges.

In reply to sir Davos Seaworth

Dirty_Player

3/23/2020 11:43 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Grando

Right now, any level guild reconstruction will immediately be implemented here.
And then, perhaps, many other things will appear, for example:
- the ability to refuse a skill in the Witch Hut
- the ability to see the type of bonus for a student unit
- the removal of control scrolls from the map.
That is, these are gameplay changes that, for those playing Heroes of Might and Magic, already seem natural and even not changing the gameplay, but rather removing utter nonsense, but for fans of Might and Magic, this is not utter nonsense, but rather familiar features.

This is also an unrealistic idea because some player will appear who needs some of the changes, but not others. And the discussion will start all over again.

sir Davos Seaworth

But if
wishes prevail over common sense (and IAPs should be in IAPs, where they belong), then FM will have to be abandoned, and it will remain
a pastime for 10-15 people (plus the occasional "Oh, how cool it is, I played a couple of games - amazing. I'm going to go back to playing Heroes of Might and Magic").

Okay, then why not abandon the reconstruction altogether? Isn't that a pure IAP? But why is one reconstruction option acceptable, while another is not? This seems like double standards.

In reply to Dirty_Player

Grando

3/23/2020 11:52 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

This is also an unrealistic idea because there will be some player who needs part of the changes, but not the other part. And the discussion will start all over again.

It won't start because of just one player.
I summarized the groups of players that currently exist.

In reply to Grando

Dirty_Player

3/23/2020 12:05 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Grando

It won't start because of one player.
I summarized the groups of players that currently exist.

I wrote it hypothetically. In any case, people will divide into categories of "this is needed" or "this is not needed."

Grando

3/23/2020 12:08 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Of course. The goal is to simplify the division.
To do this, the checkboxes should be grouped in a way that reflects how people are grouped in real life.

In reply to Dirty_Player

Kventin

3/23/2020 12:09 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

Therefore, it is not clear at all who would actually play such a SoD?There are many different people with different tastes and preferences.
And one should not think that "if I don't like this, then no one will."
There will be those who try the game both with and without the checkbox, compare their experiences, and choose the option that provides more dynamic and diverse gameplay.
I am for open and honest competition; that is exactly why the IIP flag was added, and all bug fixes, generator fixes, and interface improvements are not included in it.

Dirty_Player

with new first aid and a cheap Inferno portal?
I understand that prejudice cannot be broken by logic. But I will write it anyway.

The change to first aid helps achieve this goal:
«2. Move away from the unconditional domination of Necromancy on XL+U templates. But not through its castration, but by adding competitive alternatives in the form of diplomacy and demonology.»

The change to the Inferno portal achieves this one:
«4. Increase the variety of tactics and strategies by returning original objects to the game that were either not used at all or were banned due to their imbalance.»

The position of rejecting these changes probably sounds like this:
"Ha-ha, so now you don't have to play Necromancer in every single game, but can often use demons and diplomacy, and sometimes even combine them! What madness!"
"And there is also a 'cheapened' Inferno portal! This means that sometimes Inferno towns/villages can be used strategically. What nonsense! Who would play something like that!".

Dirty_Player

Huge thanks for the generator bug fixes!This will be the main direction of FM's further development.

In reply to Dirty_Player

sir Davos Seaworth

3/23/2020 2:02 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

Okay, then why not just abandon the restructuring altogether? Isn't that just an AI improvement in its purest form? But why is one restructuring option acceptable, while another isn't?

I've answered similar questions several times before, and I'm tired of repeating myself.

And yes, I forgot to add that the only AI improvement that is actually interesting, despite its radical nature, is native troops in structures. I might even participate in a tournament where it's used (but only separately from the other AI improvements).

"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479

Sadness

3/23/2020 4:59 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Quentin,

the viability of changes is best tested in practice.

From what I can tell, most games are played without Gameplay Changes, but this is mainly among hardcore online players.

RoseCavalier listed all the changes in his SOD_SP as checkboxes.
Yes, it looks like WoG, but at the same time, it's an option: you can bother with checkboxes, or you can choose not to, because there are some default values.

I suggest a real solution: also list all the changes as checkboxes, but at the same time, create sets of checkboxes in accordance with your vision of what should be in the ITP (Initial Tournament Pack) and what should be in the default set. For example, let the "minor changes" button only mark bug fixes for RMG, etc., and let the "gameplay changes" button mark all the remaining checkboxes.

In the end, you can collect statistics on which checkboxes people use (for this, you need to include the appropriate module in the plugin, or somehow agree with Baratorch to collect statistics).

In this case, you won't even need surveys; you'll see everything yourself, and at the same time, you'll understand what is in demand in your product and what is not. You can collect statistics from a hundred games in a couple of weeks, no more.

A certain user experience will be developed. Over time, sets of checkboxes for tournaments will appear, tested and recognized by the player community.

Right now, you can take complete control and decide for yourself what should be where, or you can entrust everything to the community – but then be prepared for unexpected results. It is quite possible that, apart from bug fixes, no other change will turn out to be necessary. The third option, which you have chosen – to listen only to part of the community – is the path that will take you furthest from your goals.

Grizvald

3/26/2020 7:45 AM UTC

Auto-translated

These dungeons on the Community Map are certainly pleasing to the eye, and the games look much better than the L+U on the HL-U after this.

Мой стрим-канал: http://heroes3.tv/Grizvald.

Восстановил старый номер аси, теперь тут: 625045517

"Это нам идеально подходит" (с)

"Лабета - папашка на первую неделю" (с)

In reply to Grizvald

Sadness

3/26/2020 9:35 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Grizvald

Of course, such underground areas on a small map are pleasing, and after this, games don't look so bad when played on high settings instead of low ones.

This has nothing to do with the functionality of Fresh Mod. The sizes of zones are determined by the template, in the "base size" column in rmg.txt.

Here is this link where you can download a program for editing templates and experiment with it; perhaps you will gain some insights. P.S. The standard Windows archiver cannot open it; I was only able to use 7zip