Auto-translated
In other words, this is Might & Magic: Heroes VIII. The gameplay is canonical. However, the city screens remain in 2.5D, just like in Heroes VII. A tight budget, wouldn't you say?
Posts from Heroes of Might & Magic: Olden Era - Обсуждение
AstralLein
Auto-translated
It certainly does. For the simple reason that it is a reaction to a message left in the "Heroes of Might and Magic" thread.
Auto-translated
I watched a few videos about this game on YouTube. In my opinion, Ubisoft is trying to do a cosmetic overhaul of the third game and sell it again. If this project were for mobile devices, I could understand, but is this really necessary for PC?
AstralLein
Auto-translated
Ubisoft is only involved in the project through rights and distribution. It has little influence on the game itself.
Mооnst@r
Auto-translated
Looking at the battlefield from the olden era, I feel deeply disappointed. They say, "We took all the best from the previous Heroes games." They took the hex grid, where units move vertically like drunks, swaying from side to side, reduced the battlefield size (compared to the fifth game) by 25%, and made all creatures occupy a single hex, thereby ruining the tactical element: you can no longer use small creatures to block the path to archers and so on. A large creature occupying four hexes (in a cross shape) will take up three lines, which means the battlefield will have to be even larger than in the fifth game, but then all of this won't fit on a mobile screen. Indeed, they took all the best and threw it away, and what they left, they butchered beyond recognition.
I would complain, but I accepted the visual style and interface designed for octopuses, but the caveman-like combat system is a definite no. It's a monstrous simplification. There's no hope left for a great combat gameplay.
I would complain, but I accepted the visual style and interface designed for octopuses, but the caveman-like combat system is a definite no. It's a monstrous simplification. There's no hope left for a great combat gameplay.
Ment
Auto-translated
A large creature occupying four hexes (in a cross shape) will take up three lines, which means the battlefield will have to be even larger, but then all of this won't fit on a mobile screen.
Drunken movement vertically, yes, but many people like hexes because movement in all six directions is symmetrical, whereas in the case of squares, the diagonals turn out to be longer.
Personally, I think this isn't particularly important, but the size of the battlefield is a rather significant drawback.
Mооnst@r
Auto-translated
Large creatures can simply be three-hex wide, which is easier. Or even two-hex wide, like in Heroes of Might and Magic III, but that also looks strange when the creature isn't large in itself, but simply elongated.
A three-hex horizontal width creates dissonance, and two is pointless. A two-hex (elongated) creature can slip between two small, one-hex creatures.
Auto-translated
A three-hex width creates dissonance, while two is meaningless. A creature with a two-hex width (elongated) can slip between two small creatures in a single hex.
Ment
Auto-translated
A 3-hex horizontal arrangement feels dissonant.
......
..0..
.00.
......
Or like this:
......
.00.
..0..
......
Or with the possibility of standing and facing either way, although that might be a bit mind-bending (but tactically it could be interesting for forming dense formations).
Mооnst@r
Auto-translated
No, of course not. A triangle.
......
..0..
.00.
......
Or like this:
......
.00.
..0..
......
Or with the possibility to stand and face either way, although that's a bit mind-bending (but tactically it could be cool for forming dense ranks).
Ment
Auto-translated
If the arrows are in the corner, it will work (with the correct angle geometry, because there are two options). Also, as in the case of square tiles, a large square tile generally cannot be used to block arrows from large creatures on the edge of the map, but it can be used in the corner. Alternatively, the number of creatures needed to block is reduced (1 large + 1 small vs. 3 small).
Overall, of course, I agree that squares look more natural based on most criteria.
Overall, of course, I agree that squares look more natural based on most criteria.
Mооnst@r
Auto-translated
If the arrows are in the corner, it will work (with the correct corner geometry, because there are two options).
Драккошка
Auto-translated
In the third installment, units didn't rotate diagonally, and two-hex units were always on the same plane. In a 3D plane, I assume it will be more complex to program two-hex units, taking into account their angles and everything. Triangles will also have some issues with rotations. The ideal would be seven hexes in a circle. But then, large units would be really BIG. So, either the battlefield needs to be enlarged, or everyone needs to be crammed into one hex.
Although, maybe I'm exaggerating the complexity of the programming. In King's Bounty, all units are single-hex, but some spells were used on areas of different configurations, like those walls, and it all worked perfectly fine. I don't know. In the godforsaken third Disciples, they also introduced large units, and where is that, forgive me, game now...? (yes, this is far from the main problem of the third Disciples, but just for laughs).
А, вот почему.
??+⛓️♿=?
??+⛓️♿=?
Mооnst@r
Auto-translated
I don't think they'll change the size of creatures on the hexes. It would create targeting issues, making it difficult to select a creature and attack. Besides, there's hardly any room for them to move around.
Auto-translated
I was reading comments on YouTube, and many people are comparing this game to modern mobile games. If Heroes of Might and Magic: Olden Era were released on consoles, it would only be suitable as a physical copy for the Nintendo Switch or the upcoming console from the company that created Mario, The Legend of Zelda, and Metroid.
Statistics
Welcome our newest member:
Emil