Posts from Are there any maps similar to the original ones?

Hello, all Heroes fans! I hope I created this topic in the correct forum section... So, are there any maps that were intentionally designed in the same style as the original Heroes III maps? It's easy to see that the vast majority of fan-made maps are either crammed with resources, artifacts, and monsters, mixing elements from various landscapes (screenshot example), or, conversely, are poorly designed (screenshot example). I understand that after so much time since the game's release, the standard maps are of little interest to most players, and most players create maps with a focus on hero development and battles, or even create maps with RPG elements to bring something new to the beloved game, but personally, I strongly dislike this and prefer to play "ordinary" maps. Here is a screenshot example of one of the original maps, where beauty and the natural arrangement of elements on the map are organically combined, as well as an engaging gameplay experience. I downloaded an archive with maps from the "Best Map for Might and Magic III" contest for 2009 from the forum, but I only found one map that more or less matches the atmosphere of the original maps. In the "Maps" topic, I also found a couple of good maps, but I would still like to get specific advice and recommendations (plus links) from the forum veterans on the topic that interests me. A couple of technical points. I play "The Shadow of Death" from Bukka. I don't like WoG and other modifications at all. So, please recommend only maps that are compatible with it. Just in case, here are my contact details: - E-Mail: Avatar-Lion@Russia.ru - Skype: Avatar-Lion - ICQ: 238-579-908

The example of a 'poorly designed' map is simply astonishing. Does anyone actually play something like that?:) In principle, you've expressed my credo; although I sometimes fall into the trap of being too busy, I always try to maintain a consistent style. Soon, I might upload another batch of new maps here, following the same stylistic principles. But by the way, original maps are not always simple, and they are not always designed to be completed in a single way. Take, for example, 'Battle Gauntlet'; it's very interesting, organic, but also not standard.

This "poorly designed" map is called 04_Shaktod_map_1. It was taken from the archive of those very "Best Maps for Heroes of Might and Magic 3" from 2009. I was also surprised to see it there. But I'm just showing it as an example so that later people don't ask what "poorly designed" means. I don't know what kind of "Combat Gauntlet" it is; at least, I can't remember any maps with that name right now. In fact, I don't like all the original maps either; there are also some absurd maps or restrictions that I don't like (for example, I can't stand time limits or when they don't let you choose a starting hero). But about 1/3 of all their maps are still very decent. Of course, the replayability of Heroes III tends to infinity, but I wanted some variety. Although the main question still hasn't been answered: what maps can you recommend?

Avatar-Lion, try downloading a dozen or so maps from http://heroesportal.net/maps.php - one of the largest collections of maps (over 3000!). You'll find maps of all the types you mentioned (and some you didn't). You're sure to find something to your liking. Regarding the landscape design, I can say that tastes differ; for some, the intensity or engaging nature of the action is more important than the scenery. I believe it's best to aim for a "golden mean": let the landscape look natural and not dull! Compared to custom maps created over the past 10+ years, the landscapes on the standard maps are, frankly, rather simplistic.

Yes, I've already been there. After that, I realized that if I manually download and browse 200-300 maps, I'll quickly go crazy. That's why I asked the forum veterans to help me choose; they've been here for a long time and should be able to suggest at least two or three maps (I don't need more than that for now). Regarding the standard maps and their "poverty" – I haven't played all the standard maps, but it depends on what you consider "poverty." If you consider maps in terms of "every square should contain something," then yes, they are "poor." But the world of Heroes III was created to create the right atmosphere and provide engaging gameplay. Maps cluttered with all sorts of nonsense ultimately boil down to mindlessly clicking on monsters/artifacts/resources (choose as needed), of which there are tons. Again, maps in the style of "kill them all" should also contain an economic component so that the entire gameplay doesn't boil down to simply accumulating an army. What's the point of resources if you can find enough resources in the first week to build 100% of your home castle? Exactly, none... Remember the first part of Heroes. There, rare resources (crystals, mercury...) were truly rare, and you really had to search for them. The third part of the game is easier in this regard, but the original maps are good because they don't allow you to build an Angel Portal in your castle in the first week, while many fan-made maps resemble a treasure chest...

Avatar-Lion, then try playing one of samatrona's maps posted here (you can also read their discussion and share your opinion): "Butterfly Effect," "Search for the Lost City," "Island of Little Skull," "Beastly Grin"… They are definitely not easy, and you won’t be able to complete them quickly.

Marmot, you know, I appreciate detail and thoroughness in maps, as well as naturalness and realism. And when I see something like this, something like this, or something like this, my desire to play suddenly disappears. It's clear that they're not focusing on quality, but on quantity. Again, what does it mean that "they can't be called easy, and they can't be completed quickly"? If what was meant was what I showed in the last screenshot, then it doesn't excite me either. If the value of a map is measured by the number of zeros after the number of monsters, then this is not a virtue at all, but a creative impotence. Yes, of course, maps of this size and complexity cannot be completed quickly; that's a fact. But playing something like this isn't very interesting. From my own experience, I can say that a map that takes more than 3-4 days to complete starts to become tiring, even if it's a good map that was originally in the game. I'm not familiar with samatron, so I may not know the true motives behind him creating all sorts of strange things like this, this, or at least this. Maybe he wanted to show endless forests and fields. Or countless hordes of monsters. But, honestly, I'm too lazy to come up with legends that would explain such absurdities. Most likely, the simplest and most banal reason lies at the heart of all this: he aimed for something great, but halfway through, he realized that he only had enough strength for something small...

I agree with Avatar-Lion's last comment.
I personally really like the Dwarfen Tunnels map from Armageddon's Blade.
It's a shame that it's just a small map.
I remember a great game where the AI took over my castles, and I wandered around with a single main hero and a powerful army...

Marmot, You know, I appreciate detail and thoroughness in maps, as well as naturalness and realism. And when I see this, this, or this, my desire to play suddenly disappears.

Lider1
Started at 18:16. Finished at 18:37. Plus, a couple of clients distracted me (I'm at work right now). So, on average, it takes 15-20 minutes per screen like this. A standard M-sized map consists of 9 such screens. 9 x 20 = 180 minutes = 3 hours. In my opinion, spending 3 hours creating a map of this kind is much better than creating something vague, examples of which I posted above.

I'm writing this not to boast about my map-making skills (I don't have the most outstanding abilities in this regard, and I am well aware of this, so I'm not in a hurry to flood the Heroes world with my creations), but simply to justify my claims regarding the maps mentioned above.

Avatar-Lion, I understand: you appreciate detailed artwork, and aesthetics are more important to you than playability. In that case, I'll gladly provide screenshots of a map whose design is among the best I've seen: Vengeance is mine (which is also considered one of the most difficult; I haven't completed it yet, but I have it in my collection). You just want to exclaim: "Wait, is this a map or a painting by Shishkin?!" Yes, it's a map, and I would love to live in such a landscape (even if you could hang it on the wall as wallpaper!):)
But the downside of such beauty is that sometimes, very beautiful maps can be uninteresting to play (this one definitely isn't, but it can happen with others).:(

But why is 'aesthetics more important than playability'? People are looking for harmony, the kind that existed in the original game. I understand that very well, although when I was on a similar quest, I eventually got tired of searching and started practicing the principle of 'do it yourself'. It just took more than 15 minutes to get it right on the screen, and I also wanted it to be different from a random generator.

Yes, it's beautiful, but it's a bit much. In general, when I look at fan-made maps, I often get the impression that people don't quite understand the purpose of design elements and landscapes in Heroes III. How did the developers see it? Their perspective was, in a way, similar to that of a child playing. How does a child see the world during a game? A sandcastle is a castle, a puddle of water is a lake, a twig is a tree, and so on. And they are not at all bothered that in their game, a soldier is bigger than a tank. The same is true in Heroes III. The game world is largely conventional, but it is deliberately designed this way so that the player can imagine the rest, i.e., everything is exaggerated. The fifth installment of Heroes, by the way, deviated quite a bit from this approach in favor of realism and three-dimensionality, which, in a certain sense, greatly reduced the game's charm.

And when people create maps, they always go to extremes – either they fill everything with duplicates (mountains, forests, rivers), or they create something like what you showed me above. It's beautiful, I don't argue, but essentially, the player will only visit such places a couple of times at most. So, what's the point of creating all this beauty if no one will really look at it? Mr. Kird understands me well, by the way. He is right that I am looking for harmony – a harmony of beauty, convenience, playability, and engaging gameplay.

Well, if you don't spend much time drawing the map, then make a few masterpiece maps as you envision them. Everyone has different tastes. Show how it's done :D And the users will appreciate it.

Heh... I'm not chasing the fame of a great mapmaker. And playing my own maps is the same as solving my own crossword puzzle. That's why I'm here.