HoMM3 HD is a mod (add-on) for the game Heroes of Might and Magic 3. — HD mod and expansions.

Dirty_Player

8/29/2012 1:47 PM UTC

Auto-translated

2marmot, please don’t interfere in matters you don’t understand. 2baratorch, please don’t take criticism personally. We greatly appreciate your work, but this discussion is precisely aimed at gathering opinions about the changes and helping to make the HD mod as comfortable as possible for everyone. So, please continue to post updates in this thread. :)

baratorch

8/29/2012 1:59 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Oelm

Could you please rephrase this in a more natural way?

in Russian:
If online in version 3.0, certain features that modify the standard SoD rules are enabled (e.g., bug fixes or starting the timer after a turn is taken), then they are enabled for all players, and they compete on equal terms.
However, if an offline tournament is held, and one player plays with a pure SoD version, while another plays with version 3.0 with modified rules, their results cannot be compared within the same tournament. However, their save files are identical, and as a result, it is unclear according to which rules the game was played. This is incorrect.

In RC5, a replayable quick start without magic was added unilaterally (i.e., it was possible to play with this feature against a version without this feature online), while in the original SoD, 1. it is impossible to conduct a quick start without magic under any circumstances. 2. online, it is impossible to replay a quick start.
This is unfair, so in RC6, the replayable quick start without magic was linked to the ImprovedGameplay option (what this means, see the description of 3.0).
Furthermore, this decision will be changed to benefit everyone and ensure fairness

HoMM 3 HD:

последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)

последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8

полное подробное описание

In reply to Dirty_Player

Medium_HP

8/29/2012 2:00 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

2baratorch, please don't take the criticism personally. We really appreciate your work, but this discussion is precisely aimed at gathering opinions about the changes and helping to make the HD mod as comfortable as possible for everyone. So, please continue to post updates in this thread. :)

I agree.

Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс

baratorch

8/29/2012 3:05 PM UTC

Auto-translated

and there was something else I wanted to say: in HD, I won't be creating a new version for every minor change or option, as some would like. Firstly, it's technically more complex, more time-consuming, and requires more effort. Secondly, I don't see the point in having a choice: playing Shades of Darkness with X or Y percent of fixes. If it's going to be bug-free, then it should be completely bug-free; otherwise, it should be played with the original bugs. And I don't understand the complaints about having to coordinate with opponents to play with certain features. No one is surprised that to play with Conflux, collections, and other additions and fixes, you need to convince your opponent to play SoD instead of RoE. Or, if you want to play with features from Warlords, you need to convince them to play Warlords instead of SoD. However, SoD cannot play with RoE using RoE's rules, and Warlords cannot play with SoD using SoD's rules. But HD+ can play with SoD using SoD's rules – and that, in my opinion, is a significant convenience.

HoMM 3 HD:

последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)

последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8

полное подробное описание

In reply to baratorch

rebellious

8/29/2012 3:18 PM UTC

Auto-translated

baratorch

...
Yes, 2.98 allows you to see MP when playing against SoD, where these very MP cannot be seen. This is unfair (much more unfair than having quick standard actions). But if everyone agrees with this unfairness, please, bring back the display of movement points with any opponent).

The genie is simply out of the bottle. After all, there are no concepts of fair and more fair. There is no need to quarrel with oneself. ;) The advantages are not even combat-related. And, in general, if a SoD player plays with a mod user (and knows/doesn't know about the existence and advantages of the mod), then he is not going to compete with the latter due to his unfamiliarity with this very competitive environment.

baratorch

...this is a complete disaster... IT'S ALREADY DONE IN 3.0! (I want to swear)
HAVING A GAME BETWEEN ANY VERSIONS AND SETTINGS UNDER ONE SET OF RULES IS THE MAIN CONCEPT OF 3.0 FROM THE VERY BEGINNING!!!!!!!!!...

It just so happens that few people know about this, except for the mod author:smile01: And this concept needs to be organized and formalized somehow - in the interface, for example.
And this is objectively true.
Even many strong players do not understand the settings of 2.98, because they don't like/don't want/can't delve into these settings. Almost everyone needs to be "shown the way" and told what and how. They need it to be "plug and play." There is no need to scold the user-player, but not the advanced user. And they don't even know what's happening in 3.0. And this is only about the main settings.
And here the author is bursting with enthusiasm and releases versions almost every day. No one has time to digest/analyze the information. And, in addition, it needs further adaptation. So, a quick fix was made... well, and who even remembers about the concept?

baratorch

...The stupid check in 2.98 using [F2] to detect enabled bugs was made only because it was impossible at that time to implement automatic settings synchronization, which is now available in 3.0...

It was a very clever detector. It reacted to about ten players detected.

baratorch

...WHY THE HELL am I even posting a description of 3.0 and changes relative to 2.98 here if no one reads it???????????????????? (I won't do this anymore)...

This is a very predictable behavior of users. Here, people play, not analyze the basics of programming (as on developer forums). They delve into the theory as they go. But it is very easy to argue and get offended. Only, who will this benefit? After all, the version is still not stable, i.e., it has not yet been possible to play even one game to the end without problems. Perhaps a description in the first post would help, but for now, we are still testing - not playing.

baratorch

... And according to this concept, RC5 with a one-sided, replayable quick battle without magic was a mistake, which was urgently fixed in RC6....

Now, let's hope that RC5 was downloaded by few people (although the genie is out of the bottle again, and this is useless) and that it will be unstable and unplayable. And it is also necessary to make sure that subsequent versions are incompatible with it.

baratorch

...
I wanted to write about the changes...
P.S. the description of the mod has been updated and is available on the website, relevant to the latest RC6, in case someone still wants to read it.

Those who are interested will find it on your website. Here, only the key points... Well, if there is still enough gunpowder :smile01:

In reply to baratorch

Medium_HP

8/29/2012 6:30 PM UTC

Auto-translated

baratorch

In HD, I won't be making changes for every little thing, for every minor adjustment to an option, as some would like.

Changing the quick battle mechanic after introducing the ability to replay it is no longer a minor thing.

First, it's technically more complex, more labor-intensive, and time-consuming.

This is an argument. There are 3 options here:
1. Don't introduce the most controversial fixes.
2. Spend time and introduce them as optional.
3. Introduce them rigidly and hope that the gaming community will come to its senses and start playing with them. At the same time, it is obvious that the hope is all the less, the more controversial the changes are.

Secondly, I don't understand the point of choosing: play SoD with X or Y percent of fixes. If it's going to be bug-free, then it should be bug-free; otherwise - with the original bugs.

At the very least, there is a problem with a comprehensive and universally accepted list of bugs that need to be fixed. For some, the sulfur in the nagabank is a bug, and for others, the damage from towers.
In my opinion, it's not worth lumping everything together; there are features, bugs, BUGS, BUGS, etc.

And I don't understand the indignation about the fact that in order to play with some features with an opponent, you need to negotiate.

The indignation (an unfortunate word, rather, disappointment) is caused not by the fact that it is necessary to negotiate, there is nothing to be done about it, but by the introduction of changes that make a positive outcome of the negotiations extremely unlikely.

No one is surprised that in order to play with Conflict, collections, and other additions and fixes, you need to persuade your opponent to play SoD, and not RoE, or if you want to play with the features of WoG, you need to persuade them to play WoG, and not SoD.

It's a bit of an exaggeration; no one plays RoE online. With WoG, yes, there is a problem.

However, SoD cannot play with RoE according to the rules of RoE, and WoG cannot play with SoD according to the rules of SoD. But HD+ can play with SoD according to the rules of SoD - and this is a big, in my opinion, convenience.

There is no arguing with that. It seems that this is what it is leading to: you will have to use only this convenience of the mod.

Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс

In reply to Medium_HP

Oelm

8/29/2012 8:02 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Baratorch, it seems to me that for the HD-MOD to look like a relatively complete project, it needs: the ability to play with a chess timer; the ability to quick combat without mana, with the option to interrupt; and the ability to calculate MP. I don't know how difficult it would be to make a "smart quick combat" option, but the benefit is minimal, while the inconvenience is significant. In general, the game's mechanics should be treated with care. If we don't find common ground here, it will be very difficult to promote the third version. For now, the changes have a mixed effect on me.

Земля нуля.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.

Sevensan

8/29/2012 9:32 PM UTC

Auto-translated

well, if a lot of people downloaded version 5, then the developer has effectively made changes that give an advantage to those who use it. Essentially, if they want, the mod could simply become a cheat. I hope this doesn't happen, and the changes will be consistent.

ICQ 335-665-133
Discord Sevensan#3379

In reply to Sevensan

Medium_HP

8/29/2012 10:02 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Sevensan

Well, if a lot of people downloaded R5, then the developer has effectively made changes that give an advantage to those who use it. Essentially, if they wanted to, the mod could simply become a cheat. I hope this doesn't happen, and the changes will be consistent.

Do you regret not downloading it in time? The fact that move showcases in 2.98 don't bother you for some reason, even though that is actually an advantage, unlike quickcast.

Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс

In reply to Medium_HP

Sevensan

8/29/2012 10:08 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Medium_HP

Do you regret not downloading it in time? The fact that the replays are at 2.98 somehow doesn't bother you, even though it's actually an advantage, unlike quick replays.

I never regret anything. The question here is about coordinated changes, not about the old approach of "I wanted to, and it seemed better to me, so I implemented it." This is a somewhat dead-end path, leading to my post above.

ICQ 335-665-133
Discord Sevensan#3379

In reply to Sevensan

Medium_HP

8/29/2012 10:13 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Sevensan

I never regret anything. This is about coordinated changes, not about the old approach of "I wanted something and it seemed better to me, so I implemented it." This is a bit of a dead-end path, leading to my post above.

Coordinated with whom? It's impossible to coordinate with everyone. Realistically, you can only hope for coordination with common sense.

Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс

baratorch

8/30/2012 2:55 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Oelm

Baratorch, it seems perfectly obvious to me that for HD-MOD to look like a relatively complete project, it needs: the ability to play with a chess timer; the ability to quick combat without mana, with the possibility of a rematch; the ability to calculate MP. I don't know how difficult it was to make a "smart quick combat," but the benefit is minimal, while the inconvenience is significant, and in general, the game's mechanics need to be treated with care. If we don't find common ground here, it will be very difficult to promote version 3. For now, the changes seem ambiguous to me.

And what are the inconveniences of the corrected quick combat?
If you don't like the bug fixes, just turn off the option, and there will be no fixes, and no one will force you to turn the option on.
And why will it be difficult to promote version 3? (actually, it's already difficult to promote it here, but I'm interested in why and I don't understand why) if it offers more features, expansions, fixes, and conveniences compared to 2.98 AND without changing the gameplay???
What logic led to these conclusions?
I'm not at all against adding a chess timer and displaying MP to the target; I'll definitely do it when I have time (MP is easier and a higher priority). (Now R55Max will start some incomprehensible rant for me, because all this will be optional, separate from the true SoD mode, and available only by mutual agreement.)

Medium_HP, regarding the option for every little thing, I meant that changes will be grouped under an existing option. That is, in the end, they will still be optional. However, something like "I want to play without art bugs, clones, AI freezes, but with peeking and a buggy quick combat" will not happen!

Sevensan

The question here is about coordinated changes, not like before, "I wanted something and it seemed to me that it would be better, so I implemented it." This is a somewhat dead-end path, leading to my post above.

This path led to 2.98 and is still leading to a bright future. But how else, if one person is responsible for making all the decisions?
I'm not far from the game itself; it's the best, so I'm making HD specifically for Heroes. I make most things primarily based on my own needs.
If someone suggests adding something, I only do it if I like it, if I agree with the logic and usefulness of the innovation.
For example, I was asked, and offered money, to bring back the double-cast bug into the game (because it's not available in HD for SoD 3.0, because HD is based on 3.2). I didn't do it. In some things (especially in multiplayer), I ask for advice here. But again, if I can implement it, I will only implement something if I am convinced and agree. If everyone tells me that I shouldn't fix the quick combat, I will still add its fix to the existing ones, because why not?!

user RC6

I've accidentally chosen the wrong skill twice now when trying to select it with a double click; maybe I'm just clumsy, but if there are more complaints, I'll support removing the double-click feature to avoid misclicks.

Right now, the double-click here is as heroic as it is in the scenario/save selection window - 400 ms between clicks. We can reduce this interval - it will be more difficult to accidentally double-click.
Or another solution - add a 'Learn' button under each skill.

HoMM 3 HD:

последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)

последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8

полное подробное описание

In reply to baratorch

Marmot

8/30/2012 7:15 AM UTC

Auto-translated

baratorch

actually, it's getting harder to promote it here, but I'm curious why, and I don't understand why.

baratorch, but there's still a thread about the HD mod on 2-3 other sites!;) And by the way, what are other players saying about the new features in version 3?
I believe: "your hard work will not be in vain!":)

For example, I was asked, offering money, to bring back the doublecast bug to the game... I didn't.

Unbelievable facepalm!:smile51: And this... person... plays offline, online, and is considered a strong player?.. Tell him that in that case, he just chose the wrong game: he would be better off with some 3D action game!:D He has no place in "Heroes"!:smile29:

Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)

Marmot

8/30/2012 8:15 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I downloaded the latest 3.0 RC6 and started testing it. I began the "Armageddon's Blade" campaign. Everything was great; I liked the time saved by skipping the message windows when visiting locations, and the maximum number of creatures that could be hired at once... but then I made a mistake and decided to reload. However, since I hadn't saved: it was just a test, and I only had the Autosave file in the Games folder. And when I tried to load it, I got a nasty surprise: see the screenshot.
Now, here's the question: why encrypt offline saves?! Who and why would this be needed?! But even if someone needs it, that's not the point; the point is that it would be better to make this a separate option. What's interesting is that the mod didn't even ask me for a password when saving the game, so where am I supposed to get it now? I don't mind spending time testing this game, but I think it's very illogical.

Update. It turns out to be even more interesting: single-player autosaves (for scenarios) are not password-protected.
There was also one strange case where, when a hero leveled up, the cursor was invisible and only appeared at the edges of the game window.

Attachments 1

1 file attached • Total size: 168.6 KB

Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)

In reply to baratorch

Medium_HP

8/30/2012 8:19 AM UTC

Auto-translated

baratorch

However, there won't be anyone saying, "I want to play without art glitches, cloning bugs, AI freezes, but with peeking and a buggy quick cast."!

Let me try to compare the quick cast bug with other bugs using specific examples.
The quote mentions 5 bugs. Let's assume I'm trying to convince my opponent to use version 3.0 and play with all options enabled. Then:
- I don't need to tell him about the art glitch bug; using it is pure cheating and prohibited by all the rules I know;
- I don't need to tell him about the cloning bug; if it doesn't happen, no one will notice (I barely know what this bug is; cloning is not often used in online games);
- I don't need to warn him about the absence of freezes;
- I don't need to warn him about the absence of peeking; I think it's clear why;
- there's still a whole list of bugs that I don't need to inform my opponent about.
But I definitely need to tell him about the improved quick cast, and not just tell him, but convince him that the old quick cast, which he's used to, is a bug, and the new one is the real deal. If I forget to tell him and he loses in a game, it will be my fault. If I tell him but can't convince him, we'll play without the new quick cast and without some other useful features.
That's what I call a difference.
And what is all this for? For fixing a bug that rarely occurs in a real game, has little impact on the game, and is familiar to everyone, and many don't even consider it a bug.

Награда: Лучшему игроку сезона Осень 2009 за замок Конфлюкс