Posts from HoMM3 HD is a mod (add-on) for the game Heroes of Might and Magic 3.
Could you please rephrase this in a more natural way?
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
последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)
последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8
полное подробное описание
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. :)
последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)
последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8
полное подробное описание
...
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).
...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!!!!!!!!!...
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?
...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...
...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)...
... And according to this concept, RC5 with a one-sided, replayable quick battle without magic was a mistake, which was urgently fixed in RC6....
...
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.
In HD, I won't be making changes for every little thing, for every minor adjustment to an option, as some would like.
First, it's technically more complex, more labor-intensive, and time-consuming.
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.
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.
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.
Все в ней нулево и кукольно.
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 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. 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.
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.
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!
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.
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?!
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.
Or another solution - add a 'Learn' button under each skill.
последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)
последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8
полное подробное описание
actually, it's getting harder to promote it here, but I'm curious why, and I don't understand why.
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.
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
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.
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
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."!
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.
