Posts from [ANNOUNCEMENT] Heroes 3: World Tournament - an add-on for tournament games.

1) Remove 25%.
2) Move classes to skills.
3) Additional functionality for skills.
4) Specialists in Logistics and Armorer.
5) Inferno patch.
6) Tavern.
7) Ufretin&Co.
8) Remove scrolls at the zaobjts.txt level, meaning simply so they don't generate on the map. The checkbox to replace them accordingly as well.
9) Adjust the Miner's starting Troglodyte count to 20-25 (currently 15-25).
10) Make Dimension Door a dual-school magic - Water and Air.
11) Replace Scholar at Expert with any basic skill of the player's choice. Another point for buffing Tavern.

1) Yes.
2) Acceptable.
3) The change to Diplomacy and Ballistics is liked, Learning - no.
4) Do not touch Armorer specialists under any circumstances, Logistics specialists - yes.
5) No.
6) Building Giants and Naga on week 1 is liked, reducing Titan cost - no.
7) No.
8) Yes.
9) Yes.
By the way, regarding the mandatory Griffin Conservatory as a one-unit under the Castle. Can such a script be made? :)
10) Put Dimension Door, Fly, Town Portal, and Mass [Slow] in all schools, so there are no problems at all. Seriously, just return Dimension Door to Air.
11) No.

And finally, the most important thing last - bring back replays.

I have some questions: what about simultaneous turns and anti-cheat? Will they be finalized?

Simultaneous turns are a key feature of WT that influenced my switch from SoD to WT. Some bugs need to be fixed, such as buying identical heroes, incorrect calculation of bonuses from specialists, changing the appearance of native castles, and the bank. Also, if the simultaneous turn function worked flawlessly, it would be possible to play, for example, 2 vs. 2 with normal limits.
The number of games in club tournaments could increase significantly by adding objectivity to the results, because in the tournament, only 27 games were played. In general, determining the winner based on that is simply ridiculous.

I am confident that if simultaneous turns work perfectly, many will be grateful for it.

1. I think yes, because there are no HP bonuses in the Sod, and people play with them normally.
2. The classes are kind of... unclear!
3. It would be cool to have ballistics, because it's useless in the Sod. Although sometimes when it's included, and the Fortress ends up in the castle, and you break down the gates in the first round, it's enjoyable. ))
4. Nah, it's not necessary. It's fine as it is.
5. Some kind of Inferno patch... I wish I knew what's in it.
6. Okay, I'm tired... Don't take any of my answers seriously. I haven't played in a long time =D
7. - yes
8. - doesn't matter
9. - yes
10. - yes
11. - yes

Message from Wicc

So, the proposed changes:

1) Remove the 25% hit bonus for monster specialists.

Against

2) Remove classes as a concept, and transfer their functionality to individual skills.
Against

3) Additional skill functionality
Against

4) Give armor and logistics specialists a 2.5% bonus per level. We won't touch offensive specialists for now; they don't seem to be overpowered.
Against

5) Add Yavor's scripts for the Inferno patch, new constructions, and the symmetrizer to the standard package. Enable the Inferno patch by default (remove the checkbox), and make the rest optional (with a checkbox).
Against

6) We need to somehow improve the Tavern; it's a very weak Castle. We don't want to change the heroes from the Tavern yet, as the skill balance is still unclear, and heroes alone won't help much, so we need to change the building tree and prices.
Why not change the heroes? We changed them for Inferno, and it worked.

7) Forget about complexes regarding the starting army and give Ufretin, Stricker, Edrick, and Korbak an army like the regular heroes of their respective Castles.
Against

8) Remove scrolls from the zaobjts.txt file, i.e., simply prevent them from generating on the map. Also, remove the checkbox for replacing them.
Against

9) Adjust the number of starting troglodytes for the Miner to 20-25 (currently 15-25).
For

10) Make the Dungeon Dweller use two schools of magic: Water and Air.
Against

11) Replace the Scholar with any basic skill of the player's choice on the expert difficulty. Another point to strengthen the Tavern. Also, add it to the "new skills" checkbox.

For.

Something like Conflux suffers heavily from p.1. Maybe Lacus as a specialist in flyers as compensation?

Lore could have Armor? She already has high chances for Tactics and Offense.

The rest doesn't matter, as long as the manual is detailed.

And don't forget to remove already known bugs - negative experience and neutral creature growth when retreating.

Forrest is great. But I would like to see a more detailed justification for each point, especially since most people seem to be positive about these changes. For example, regarding this: why not give Strider a decent army? After all, I was the one who made fun of having 10 gnolls in his starting army. Although there is a chance that the opponent won't have a great start. But in Warlord Tactics, it's either restart or lose, even if he reaches level 121. Added 1 hour 10 minutes ago

I suggest an experimental option: you say how to nerf Tyrus, then we play for money up to 3 wins - you play as Tyrus, I play as Inferno (Fiona with the patch) or Flax (at my discretion). Templates - all XL+U in turn. Full Warlord Tactics, we change the color each restart, standard rules. In principle, I am ready to play against an un-nerfed Tyrus as well, but since you consider him overpowered...

Are you not quite yourself when you write? First, I am against the Inferno patch in its current form, because there is no need to strengthen a good castle even further. Second, will we play like this? Let's say I lose - what will that prove? Maybe I had a bad starting layout, or maybe I just didn't play well, what will that have to do with the overpoweredness of the Wolf Riders. If you had suggested playing for money against the current Tyrus, that would be proof of your position. And, of course, I would like to play with the new changes, such as removing health from specialists and armored units. Without the Inferno patch. I'm open to it if the time and conditions match.

I am against the Inferno patch in its current form because there is no need to strengthen a good castle even further.

Such opinions are often voiced, so I will reiterate my position on this issue in detail.

So, what is the main problem with Inferno? Why are its game statistics normal, but it is almost always excluded? At the CIS Championship, they only allowed them to play in one match. Even the overpowered Swamp faction was given 3 matches, but Inferno got none. Only the Tower has fewer, but thankfully, everyone understands that something needs to be changed there. But the public's blindness regarding Inferno genuinely surprises me.

The whole problem is that Inferno is the most variable castle. If we translate this into terms of unit damage, then most castles have damage in the range of 3-6, while Inferno has 1-8. That's why people don't choose it for themselves so that they don't get a 1, and they don't let their opponent choose it so that they don't get an 8.

This problem needs to be solved from both sides – by increasing the minimum damage and decreasing the maximum damage.

The Inferno patch solves the problem of increasing the minimum damage. It reduces the risk of getting a bad roll and allows you to play with less variable starting heroes than Marik.

The task of reducing the maximum damage is solved by removing the 25% bonus for specialists; now, Marik's goats will not be such an overpowered unit.

That is, these things need to be implemented simultaneously, not separately. If you reduce the bonus and don't implement the patch, who will want to play with such a weak castle?

Therefore, I say that the Inferno patch is non-negotiable; it is needed, and that's it. Just believe me that it will be better for Heroes. All sorts of learning curves, armor, and other things do not have such a strong influence on the balance of castles; you can experiment with them.

This dragging out of the Inferno patch has been going on for 2 years, and for some reason, people don't understand the obvious pattern – when there is no patch, Inferno is almost never used (neither chosen nor banned), but when there is a patch, it is played often and willingly. It is even a mystery to me why they don't see this. Perhaps there is something psychological about it, a legacy from SoD, where Inferno does not exist, so who cares.

Инферно :smile41: :smile41: :smile41:

Vik, create a random template already (you know what I mean) – that will be a breakthrough.

The Inferno patch and Tower patch are definitely needed, as without them, these castles are the worst. This is based on practical experience, which, as is well known, is the highest criterion of truth.

I'll risk making an obvious suggestion: Inferno without the patch is not viable because the obvious strength of the Castle in the late game (when there are a couple of rings or, even better, an elixir allowing one to stamp out a demon from 2 gnolls) is not why they aren't picked; rather, it's because the Castle is objectively difficult to play. It has a heavy start requiring precise calculation of moves in the first week, high-quality battle management, and a significant time investment—essentially giving the opponent a time advantage (by the way, considering the upcoming time control at the championship — 4000+400, isn't that the reason). Even FireToSky sometimes asked for a limit of 5000+600, despite being an order of magnitude stronger than me in fast-clicking, for example. With the Inferno patch, Inferno gets a comfortable start as well as the strongest bonuses in the late game; demons with HP artifacts will be impressive not only for Marusya.

P.S. on the update: I don't care about the scrolls, I'm for everything else; however, imho, it's worth considering the option of anti-magic in the air and DD in the water—at least it looks interesting

Also, during the discussion, some points that were initially forgotten came up:

8) Remove scrolls at the zaobjts.txt level, meaning they simply shouldn't generate on the map. Accordingly, remove the checkbox for their replacement as well.

2 for

9) Adjust the Miner's starting number of troglodytes to 20-25 (currently 15-25).

Increase the number of harpies for others to 6-8 (currently 4-6), and give Lore scout and tactics from the start.

10) Make Dimension Door dual-school magic - Water and Air.

11) Replace Scholar at expert level with any basic skill chosen by the player. Another point for strengthening Taver.

Feel free to comment on points 8-11 as well.

8) for (never played WT with scrolls)
9) for
10) for
11) for
P.S. Neither in WT, nor in TE-full, nor in TE-lite has anyone ever asked me to uncheck BUILT SECOND LEVEL while playing with me. Therefore, I suggest hardcoding the 2nd level into WT.

1) Remove the 25% hit bonus for monster specialists.

For

When you play with experience, they become too overpowered. :)

2) Remove classes as a concept, and transfer their functionality to individual skills.
I didn't quite understand, but I like the idea of classes and new skill functions.

3) Additional skill functionality.
As is.

4) Give armor and logistics specialists a 2.5% bonus per level. Let's not touch offensive specialists for now; they don't seem to be too overpowered.
Against

I understand the armor and attack part, but logistics already seems messed up in WoG! They seem to only get 5%, not 5% per level like in SoD. :)

But overall, I'm against it; it's been there for a while, and let it stay.

5) Add Yavor's scripts for the Inferno patch, new creatures, and the symmetry tool to the standard package. Enable the Inferno patch by default (remove the checkbox), and make the rest optional (with a checkbox).
Separate the new creatures, add a checkbox for them, and make it work properly.
Inferno should be permanent.

6) We need to somehow improve the Tavern; it's a very weak Castle. I don't want to touch the heroes from the Tavern yet, as the skill balance is still unclear, and even with good heroes, it won't help much, so we need to change the building tree and prices.
It wouldn't hurt to remove literacy from the main playable heroes, or better yet, replace it with logistics. :):):)
And remove golems from the building chain, but then divide the construction costs for giants and titans equally, not by 5; it's too little!

7) Forget about the complexes regarding the starting army and give Ufretin, Strider, Edric, and Corvak an army like the regular heroes of their respective Castles.
For

8) Remove scrolls from the zaobjts.txt file, i.e., simply prevent them from generating on the map. Also, add a checkbox to replace them.
Free gold is very useful; you can remove the checkbox and change it to gold by default. :)

9) Adjust the number of starting troglodytes for the Dwarven Miner to 20-25 (currently 15-25).
For

10) Make the Druid a dual-school mage - Water and Air.
Against

11) Replace the scholar skill with any basic skill of the player's choice on the expert difficulty. Another way to strengthen the Tavern. Also, put it in a checkbox "new skills".
For, but my previous suggestion was also good

I discussed some things with Bayazet in ICQ, he'll explain it better.
I'll just comment on a couple of points: 2.5 is too little for armor specialists, and no need to remind me of the finals in my game with Bayazet — in both fights, Gosha's attack was far behind Taz's defense, and he didn't have Offense.
Without the health bonus, the Dungeon specialists will drop to the level of Tower; in no-experience games it's already useless as is. Do we want to detach it from Shakti: give Lore Tactics instead of Leadership and, as Term suggested, something acceptable for Ajit. The new functionality of Leadership won't help them, because it still won't be a skill for the finals. Who knows, maybe Gunnar will make a comeback, but without adding the Eye — their start will turn into a lottery.

I agree with all the points, except for the starting army for Edrick/Korbak (losing troops in the army is equivalent to one unpleasant unit, and there is less variety) and the armorers – tomorrow I will write a detailed explanation with my friend about why 2.5 is too little.

Added 3 minutes ago
And yes, PREDS and Xzкто are right – the Dungeon faction needs to be buffed a little, but IMO, giving Azimuth offense and leadership would be more interesting – it would be fun to fight with ranged units manually.

Added 11 minutes ago
And finally: such a buff will simply lead to one angel taking all the best items on the first map, for example. And then Verdish will instantly become stronger than Bronha.