Posts from Heroes of Might and Magic V [Game Discussion]

2 Katrine
Thank you for the thoughtful response. Your position is clear to me, but I still maintain my stance – I'm all for upgrades! "YES!!"
Regarding the graphics in Neverwinter Nights, as a seasoned D&D player, I can say that in Baldur's Gate (the best RPG in the history of gaming, IMHO), the sprite models looked better and more lively, or something like that... and the overall design and depth of the game are, unfortunately, unattainable for the flat and mainstream Neverwinter Nights.

Only 4 companies knew how to make strategy games: SSI, NWC, Blizzard, and Activision. Their games were hits. Nivala isn't on that list. IMHO

Nivala isn't on that list, at least because it's not a well-known brand. But Demiourgos is very good in terms of the depth of the gameplay, with the limitless ability to create your own unique deck (a term from MtG). Personally, I've always liked that kind of depth.

Thank you for the worthy response.

:d Thank you.
Regarding everything else, I don't see the point in arguing. ;)
It's unlikely that any of us will change our opinion.

Did we really need this variation? We ourselves were the ones shouting about how harmful it is! Although, on the other hand, with a reasonable approach, it could have been useful. Apparently, the problem lies in the "reasonable approach" :)

It's awful – there hasn't been such a small map in any game of the series (maybe only in the first part) – it's practically a complete disadvantage for ranged units + the absence of any tactics – just a simple brawl in the Russian style – "wall against wall":mad:

The single-player mode is terribly cut down:mad: – only five maps for each faction – it's pathetic:eek: :confused:

Regarding the size of the map: In chess, the board is 8x8, and there are fewer "monsters," and the rules haven't changed for decades. And yet, the game has been successful for centuries. Maybe this will also benefit the Heroes...

2 NecroFill
Yes, the map does seem a bit small. But if we assume that the fastest angels will move 6 squares, then 10 squares will be enough. Here's an example: chess has a small board, and the key is the mutual positioning of the pieces. I already expressed the idea on AG.RU that either the game will be incredibly tactical, where you need to consider a lot of nuances, or it will be total carnage. Time will tell!

And you're wrong about the single-player mode. In Heroes of Might and Magic III, there were actually 7 (or 8?) campaigns, not 6, but there were only 5 maps. So the single-player mode is standard.

Although, on the other hand, with a reasonable approach, it would be useful. Apparently, the problem lies with the "reasonable approach."

It seems that the problem really is with the "reasonable approach." Personally, I would be happy to see the new feature in action.
Otherwise, they announce something, and before the release, all the features are removed. Even the unit placement before the battle turned out to be a tactical skill. And it was presented as a novelty. :(

Damn, this is terrible - there hasn't been such a small field in any game in the series (well, maybe only in the first part) - this is essentially a complete disadvantage for ranged units + the absence of any tactics - just a simple brawl in the Russian style - "wall against wall."

I'll have to learn about Russian mythology. About Alyosha Popovich and Dobrynya Nikitich.
The field is small. But this should have been expected - reducing the game to a brawl solves the problem of the lack of balance. In a brawl, you don't care if you have a wrench and the opponent doesn't. Balance isn't needed here.
But what bothers me the most is the square grid. The only argument in its favor, according to Nival, is the ability to attack from 8 directions. But what's the point if there are only 5 units in each stack? And why are there 7 levels then? :mad: Tactics are useless anyway:mad:

In chess, the field is 8x8,
and there are fewer "monsters," and the rules don't change for decades.
And yet, the game has been successful for centuries.

In chess, unlike this masterpiece, you have to think. And in Heroes, you had to think before too. But now they've reduced it to a brawl and are happy about it.

On AG.RU, I already expressed the idea that either the game will be incredibly tactical, where you have to consider a lot of nuances.

Be optimistic:D What tactics are we talking about here? Spells aren't even needed. The game ends in two or three turns. It's difficult to win in chess in three moves:)
At least four. And there's nothing to say about the imbalance in chess.
White's move - victory, black's move - draw. But it is in this imbalance that lies the main component of their success. No one would call chess a mindless brawl.

Such a small field means death for many tactics that I loved in Heroes... positioning against shooters (those who hit across several cells), using archers to wear down slow units (simply by running away from them), surrounding and pinning own units against obstacles, and many others... On such a field, it will be simply impossible to maneuver—it will just be dull and uninteresting shoving, and as Catherine correctly noted once again, it will be completely impossible to surround a unit or utilize this "vaunted" quad grid... Essentially, what is this? A mockery of the fans?

:2: Voron: The comparison with chess is completely incorrect. In chess, there are fewer (diverse) pieces and the movement characteristics of these pieces vary greatly—which allowed for the creation of a game unsurpassed in tacticity... But in Heroes? There are more units—and they all move the same way (only with different ranges)—therefore, reducing the field for them is the complete killing of any own tactics...

Chess is just an example, used only to compare the size of the playing field; in chess, 32 squares are occupied at the beginning of the game – half of the cells. The observation about comparing the movement of a unit in Heroes and chess is absolutely correct. And “meat grinding” often happens in chess as well. An imbalance in chess is a minor issue; one weak move can easily outweigh this imbalance... I'm not an optimist. Therefore, I don't expect anything supernatural from Heroes. But if we are to believe the critics, we are in for a complete disappointment... I believe that Heroes will at least be a good, solid game. And I still hope that there will be something to think about.

2 Katrine
I'm not an optimist; I just don't rush things and look at things with an open mind. First of all, I'm not comparing the 5th game to the 3rd.
And please, no more about chess. I have a first-degree ranking in chess, and I actively played it for about 7 years. If you seriously believe that "White's move is a win, black's move is a draw," then it means you have a very vague idea about chess.
About the 3 moves. Firstly, there is a checkmate in two moves in chess. Secondly, if in the 5th game the units' movement range is reduced to the optimum (the fastest angels move 6-7 squares), then the battles will be even longer than in the 3rd game. And about tactics... I won't argue about that. I almost certainly know that there are more tactics in the 5th game than in the 3rd and 4th, and possibly in all of them combined, and I'm tired of proving it.

The battlefield is small. But this was to be expected – reducing the game to a meat grinder solves the problem of the lack of balance. In a brawl, you don't care if you have a wrench and the other guy doesn't. Balance isn't needed here.
But what bothers me most is the square grid. The only argument in its favor, according to Nival, is the ability to attack from 8 sides. But what's the point if there are only 5 units from each side? And why have 7 levels then? Tactics are definitely lacking.

I still can't resist. But this is the last time.
There are 7 units on each side. It's just that their total area must be less than 16. Decide for yourself what is better (you don't have to comment on this – I know what you'll say): 7 units that meet the condition, or 4 large units.
I'll leave the question of the "meat grinder" and the lack of balance to your imagination – whatever it suggests, that's what you should think. I'm tired of arguing with assumptions and can't do it anymore.

2 NecroFill
You're right about one thing – many of the tactics from the 3rd game won't work in the 5th. There will be a lot of completely different tactical tricks. You can try to understand and master them, or you can... play the 3rd game. That's also a valid option.
And about surrounding a unit... honestly, it's funny. Even if it weren't possible to surround it, so what? Why surround a unit from all sides? But you can surround it! Why even bother?!
About chess. The 5th game differs from the 3rd in that the units attack differently. Some attack in an area, some in a line, some in a special way (casters, succubus, griffin, fury). The 5th game is interesting precisely because of the differences between the units and their abilities, and therefore their tactical application.

time will tell.

but there's not much optimism :(

Hmm, colleagues...
Let's take a closer look at the battlefield...
In each castle, we have one or two "bulky" units, and all the others are single-cell units :d :d
Therefore, the conclusion is - we take four more, one to act as cannon fodder, just like in the second game. On the one hand, this isn't great - I want to use them all! I'll have to think about who to take into battle. I really hope that Nival will reconsider...
On the other hand, I'll still run around with just dragons so that everything else doesn't slow me down :d

On the other hand, I didn't understand D. Estrin at all – he said that not the entire army could be deployed on the battlefield, but part of it would be kept in reserve? So, what will happen – when the hero dies, the reserve that didn't fit on the battlefield will automatically die too?... On the other hand, if the hero has a limit of 7 stacks + 8x2 cells initially, then what reserve was Estrin talking about?

And the beta has been postponed to an indefinite date... :mad: therefore, things are not as smooth as they want to portray in the press... :eek:

There are indeed some misunderstandings regarding the reserve...
And why is it even needed?:confused: More precisely, why should it be kept somewhere. It can be hidden on the battlefield, and then teleported in :D
The most interesting thing about postponing the beta is that two different Ubisoft websites provided different information. The information provided by Nival was in American English, while the French version provided something else.
I'm not a polyglot, but the information about this was on the Ubisoft forum.

I don't think I'm the first to say this, but I'll repeat it anyway...
Since they made the map 8x10, it must have been a good decision because I don't believe that a beta-testing group wouldn't have pointed out the flaw in such an idea. Everything will be great – I believe in it, and therefore it will be so :) I hated the fourth game from the first screenshot I saw, and as it turned out, my intuition didn't fail me. Nival has the ability to create a world-class hit, and I'm sure they will. In any case, it'