Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from [ANNOUNCEMENT] Heroes 3: World Tournament - an add-on for tournament games.
Added after 11 minutes [/U]And finally: such a tent would simply lead to taking maxed-out cons with just one angel on the first, for example. And then Verdish would instantly become cooler than Bronkh.
:confused: Did you ask Vigo in Michurinsk for a smoke? I can't find any other explanation for how you saw a tent when taking a con.
P.S. Almost forgot: add a script so that 2 identical relics don't drop from one Dragon Utopia.
Oh, you're right. This suggestion overlapped with an older one, where it was proposed to extend the effect of the tent to include potions. Next time, I'll be more careful!
Oh, that's right. This suggestion overlapped with an older one, where it was proposed to extend the duration of the tent buff to potions. I'll do better next time!
It wasn't just a suggestion – there's even a working script with a tent buff applied to potions. But you probably didn't get to see it in action.
Here's a suggestion: if a hero has the "Eagle Eye" skill, they could learn enemy spells directly on the battlefield (in percentage proportions, of course). Is this even possible? If the skill allows learning at the end of the battle, could it also allow learning during the battle and using the learned spells? At least, this would be the only useful application of the "Eagle Eye" skill... P.S. The tent should only function in dungeons if the hero possesses this skill...
I have a suggestion: with the "Eagle Eye" skill, allow the hero to learn enemy spells (in percentage proportions, of course) directly on the battlefield. Is this even possible? If learning happens at the end of the battle, could it also be learned during the battle and used immediately? At least, this would be the only useful application of the Eagle Eye skill... P.S. The tent should only work in dungeons if the hero has this skill...
Eagle Eye is already very useful for beginners after level 7, at least on Hard and Impossible difficulty. I remember using it extensively on symmetrical maps as well.
P.S. Indra's argument in support of Taras's overpoweredness:
Forrest is great. But I would like to see a more detailed argument for each point.
Classes and experience bonuses for monster specialists were a feature of TE, conceived by Horn. I am strongly against removing this. And in general, any radical changes (and this is precisely a radical change) are increasingly altering the gameplay. And then more and more people will prefer to play SoD after a break rather than the repeatedly changed WoG (For example, Stinger always does this).
РП (Реальное папство!) *Автосейвы не беру и не даю.
Against. Classes are a feature of heroes; it's better to balance them instead!
3) Additional functionality for skills.
Lore increases experience gain by 10/20/30%; on Expert difficulty, it is replaced with any basic skill of the player's choice. Okay. Ballistics: Okay. Diplomacy: Doesn't matter.
4) Specialists in logistics and armor.
Logistics: For. Armor: Don't touch it!!!! Or touch it together with the offensive specialists, since they currently have parity.
5) Inferno patch.
It should have been included in the base game from the start, and the issue should have been closed.
6) Tavern.
For.
7) Ufretin & Co.
For.
Lore increases experience gain by 10/20/30%; on Expert difficulty, it is replaced with any basic skill of the player's choice. It doesn't seem overpowered and is useful.
8) Remove scrolls from the zaobjts.txt file, i.e., simply prevent them from generating on the map. The checkbox for replacing them should also be removed.
For.
9) Adjust the number of starting troglodytes for the Shaman to 20-25 (currently 15-25). Increase the number of harpies for the others to 6-8 (currently 4-6), and give the Lore hero Scouting and Tactics from the start. For
10) Make the Sorcerer use two schools of magic: Water and Air. Against, Air already has Fly. Suggestion: Make the functionality of wings the same as the Fly spell; otherwise, early wings seem overpowered.
11) On Expert difficulty, replace the Scholar with any basic skill of the player's choice. Another point to strengthen the Tavern. For
1) Remove the 25% hit bonus for monster specialists.
This 25% only hinders Broghur; I wouldn't touch the others, including Tyraxor.
2) Remove classes as a concept and transfer their functionality to individual skills. Warrior, Sage, Explorer, and Governor, Speedy.
Don't touch.
Terraformer -> Pathfinding (prices are negotiable, need to increase) Healer -> First Aid (plus casts spells based on skill level) Leprechaun -> Luck Marauder -> Leadership (numbers need to be reduced) Merchant -> Estates (numbers are negotiable) Artificer -> Eagle Eye (conditions are negotiable)
I agree.
3) Additional skill functionality Diplomacy - reduces the cost of monetary transactions with the Merchant and Terraformer, increases the maximum purchase volume with the Merchant. Numbers are negotiable. Also, on the advanced difficulty level, it allows you to bribe neutrals, and on the expert level, to bribe them "from the map," like breaking a scout.
We can try.
Learning - reduce the experience bonus (numbers are negotiable), but on the expert level, don't forget the skill, but change it to any basic skill of the player's choice.
Don't touch.
Ballistics - increases the range of direct fire by 2/4/unlimited (currently 1/2/4), and on the expert level, ignores walls (similar to Guardian Angel).
I agree.
4) Give specialists in armor and logistics a 2.5% bonus per level. For now, we won't touch offensive specialists; they don't seem to be overpowered.
Don't touch armor specialists; give the bonus to logistics specialists.
5) Add Yavor's scripts for the Inferno patch, new constructions, and the symmetrizer to the standard package. Include the Inferno patch by default (remove the checkbox), and make the rest optional (with a checkbox).
- Inferno patch. Leave +1 speed on native land by default, and make the rest optional. - New constructions, hives. Optional. Include the mirror image spell in the list of templates.
6) We need to somehow improve the Tavern faction; it's a very weak castle. For now, I don't want to touch the heroes from the Tavern; it's still unclear what balance of skills will be established, and even with heroes alone, it won't help much, so we need to change the building tree and prices.
Don't touch the building tree; return the golem lair.
7) Forget about complexes regarding the starting army and give Ufretin, Straker, Edric, and Korbak an army like ordinary heroes of the corresponding castles.
Pyredrake, Ufretin, Edric, and Korbak are playable as is; perhaps give Straker a stack of skeletons.
8) Remove scrolls at the zaobjts.txt level, 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 Dwarven faction to 20-25 (currently 15-25).
We've been playing like this for a long time.
10) Make the Dungeon faction use dual magic - Water and Air.
Against.
11) On the expert level, replace the Scholar skill with any basic skill of the player's choice. Another point of strengthening the Tavern. Also, put it in a checkbox "new skills."
Classes are definitely a highlight of Warlords, but they have a major problem – they aren't used. More precisely, only two are used – Speedy and Explorer. The rest appear in roughly 1 out of 50-100 games. That is, a lot of rather interesting functionality is essentially excluded from the game.
The problem here is that classes are very unpredictable in terms of build. Modern Heroes is a very dynamic game; starting from the middle of the second week, the game can end at any moment. Therefore, taking a random skill in the hope of getting a second one later is, in most cases, a negative move. A skill should start to be useful immediately after it's taken.
As a result, leveling up when playing with classes and when playing without classes differs only in that, with classes, you take navigation towards the Scout, and sometimes Passfight. Otherwise, the leveling strategy is identical. Classes are either collected randomly or by noobs.
I have intentionally built the Warrior class maybe 5 times in several hundred games. Terraformer – 2 times. I haven't intentionally built any other class.
That's why I came up with the idea of transferring the functionality of classes to skills. I want to bring it back into the game, diversify the gameplay, and boost the skills that are currently not used.
If we go down the path of strengthening the classes themselves, this will only increase the variance without fundamentally changing the situation. And it will add a lot of cases like "I took a skill, but didn't get the Scout." All this doesn't quite correspond to the concept of a competitive game.
Regarding the 25% bonus – this feature was originally designed for fixes where mages were overwhelmingly dominant, and it was necessary to somehow strengthen the warriors. In a random game, however, warriors don't need to be strengthened; they may even need to be weakened. This bonus has led to the fact that 95% of games start with monster specialists, and they continue to play with them until the end.
Even in SoD, there are more cases of switching to a different hero than in Warlords. I want to see something similar in Warlords – so that monster specialists are taken as starting heroes because of their army, and then, depending on what skills they get, players can choose different builds. Overly powerful abilities here only reduce the diversity of gameplay.
The same, by the way, applies to armorers – they have overpowered abilities that are not so noticeable because they start as monster specialists. After removing the 25% bonus, armorers will get a second wind. And they are not in parity with offensive heroes at all. If I see that my opponent has dug up Tazar, I'm sad. If I see that they have dug up Kreg, I don't care.
Forgot to add something myself :)
Swap the Scout unit for Brok with the Resistant unit for Bron.
Build a Library for Tower from the start.
And if you're editing hero skills (Inferno patch) - take from some, give to others. Strengthen heroes not by adding armor or tactics "out of nowhere," but by enhancing the skills they already have.
I'm talking about maintaining a balance of skills among the heroes.
Currently:
Marius – Armor Armor
Fiona – Scout Scout
Ignat – Tactics Resist
To do:
Marius – Armor Scout
Fiona – Scout Tactics
Ignat – Armor Resist
We take the armor from Marius and give it to Ignat. Ignat gives tactics to Fiona, and Fiona gives Scout to Marius.
Marius is often given useless items, but this way, he gets Brokh :) well, of course, if you reduce the special ability by 25%.
Maybe I'm not paying close enough attention, but it seems to me that no one starts with Ignat or Fiona, only after the patch appeared. Now they help Castle or Tower more, like a supportive father.
Or:
Marius – Resist Scout
Fiona – Scout Tactics
Ignat – Armor Armor
Marius will get his armor later; the probability is good.
Classes are definitely a highlight of the game, but they have a major problem – they aren't used. More precisely, only 2 are used – Speedy and Explorer. The rest appear in approximately 1 out of 50-100 games. That is, a lot of quite interesting functionality is essentially excluded from the game.
Therefore, it is suggested to simplify the collection or increase the reward for collecting extremely useful classes, such as Governor, Artificer, Warrior, etc. For example, give +10-10 to experts for Warrior, and +50% to growth for Governor, like the Grail. And then, I assure you, everyone in every game will strive to collect them. Right now, many, including me, don't know by heart what skills do. That's how we play. Wicc
The problem here is that classes are very unpredictable in their composition. Modern Heroes is a very dynamic game; starting from the middle of the 2nd week, the game can end at any moment, so taking a random skill in the hope of getting a second one later is, in most cases, a negative move. The skill should start to bring benefits immediately after it is taken.
There isn't much difference in what you take for a secondary hero. But yes, I agree that it would be beneficial, but it's not critical. Wicc
I deliberately collected Warrior, God bless him, about 5 times in several hundred games. Terraformer - 2 times. I haven't deliberately collected anything else.
He only has 8 skills; it's time to introduce 2 more secret ones, and there is an opportunity in WoG. Wicc
That's why I came up with the idea of transferring the functionality of classes to skills; I want to bring it back into the game, diversify the gameplay, and improve the skills that are not used now.
This can be achieved without removing classes altogether. It is enough to simply discuss how to improve them. Wicc
If we go down the path of strengthening the classes themselves, this will only increase the variance without fundamentally changing the situation. And it will add a lot of cases like "I took a skill, but I didn't get a Scout." All this does not quite correspond to the concept of a competitive game.
There is already enough of that. Games are not won without risk. The more we simplify everything, removing morale, adding experience (I would reduce it from 50% to 33%, by the way), the more we risk losing old players and not gaining new ones. All changes should be made for the sake of balance, and not for the sake of the changes themselves. Wicc
Regarding 25% - this feature was originally invented for fixes, where mages overwhelmingly dominate, and it was necessary to somehow strengthen the warriors. In a random game, warriors do not need to be strengthened; rather, they even need to be weakened. This bonus led to the fact that 95% of games start with specialists in monsters, and they continue to play with them until the end. Even in SoD, there are more cases of switching to another hero than in Heroes. Something similar is what I would like to see in Heroes - so that specialists in monsters are taken at the start because of the army, and then whoever gets what skills, excessive powerful abilities only reduce the diversity of the gameplay.
I completely agree with this. Wicc
The same, by the way, applies to armorers - overpowered abilities that are not so noticeable because they start as specialists in monsters. After removing 25%, armorers will get a second wind. And they are not at all on par with offensive heroes. If I see that the opponent has dug up Tazar, I am sad. If I see that he has dug up Craig, I don't care.
Calculate, for example, at level 20, they are actually on par: 100*1.6-30%=112, i.e., Craig is stronger in a direct battle, but in battles with monsters, defense is more noticeable due to fewer losses. And the fact that you don't keep Craig or Gundula as a hero is your problem :)
Added 1 minute ago For starters, although this contradicts my statement about changes... Is it possible to introduce a 10th Castle into the game? The question is more for the developers.
Suggest your version. I've tried many things, but I can't get the Stone Flower to work.
Even the Governor – his maximum value is achieved when recruited on level 1. There's some value if recruited on level 2 (but it's rare). And on level 3, he's practically useless. Buff him, and he'll become a key factor in getting the desired skills. The same applies to other skills. Give the Artificer the ability to convert relics – he'll become a top priority in development. And if someone has to get it...
That's the problem with classes: they are very diverse. While in Heroes of Might and Magic, they try to do the opposite, reducing diversity and adding alternatives. For example, the Logistics skill – it's quite sad to play without it in Heroes of Might and Magic III, but in Heroes of Might and Magic V, there are alternatives like Speed and Explorer. And now, the Merchant will be added.
Therefore, the idea of shifting the functionality of classes to skills, while reducing their effect, aligns with the ideology of Heroes of Might and Magic V – the effect will be smaller, but more predictable.
For example, at level 20, they are practically equal: 100*1.6-30%=112, i.e., Crag is stronger in a direct battle, but in battles with monsters, defense feels more effective due to fewer losses. And the fact that you don't use Crag or Gundula as heroes is your problem.
Armor is a more versatile skill in general, not just against monsters. You can build a battle against Crag in such a way that his special ability doesn't work very well. But you can't avoid Tazar's special ability, except by using magic to counter it.
Also, Tazar has a more varied combat tactic. Crag practically always needs to move forward and attack, using tactics like mass haste/pre-cast spells, while Tazar can be used in a wider range of strategies, including ranged and magical strategies like "stand and shoot with archers/magic".
Also, Berserk – Crag will hurt himself, while Tazar is less affected by it.
And yes, against a map, Tazar's special ability is much more useful. That's why I say that Crag in the enemy's ranks doesn't scare me much. I would personally prefer someone like Moner in the enemy's ranks (say, for Castle), rather than Crag. And I would even consider switching to Tazar, even with such powerful heroes as Shahkti, Gosha, Tiras, Marik, etc.
If we give armorers 2.5 percent, their advantage at level 20 will be - 0.775/0.85 ~0.9, which is equivalent to 4 extra defense, if our defense equals the enemy's attack. If our defense is greater than the enemy's attack (as usually happens), then the armorer's advantage is even smaller in the primary equivalent, since each primary point of defense becomes more and more valuable. Something like that.