Posts from "HW rulez" mod (add-on) for HoMM3. Auto-translated

Well then, I'll make some wishes:

1. Removal of one-way paths.
2. Mirror template.
3. Mage Guild rebuild?

Of course, these should be optional checkboxes, so no one worries—nobody wants true SoD )

Regarding the Mage Guild rebuild—in my opinion, it's not a completely obvious plus: i.e., there won't be a situation of control vs meat. This means that whoever is unlucky with their meat will more likely lose. Although perhaps I'm missing something. In any case, it should be included since so many renowned players are for it.

*Went to practice occultism*

Aiwe, it seems that simply adjusting the settings won't solve the problem – new types of portals are needed, or the number of connections needs to be reduced. Restructuring... and if one player has control but lacks resources, they also need something for balance; otherwise, it's unfair. I don't really see much point in randomly (P=0.1...0.15) spending a slot and resources on something that is consistently available in the Books.

I decided to share my IMHO: Why do we love Heroes 3? Besides everything else, I dare suggest it is precisely because of the gameplay and its variability. Therefore, while Wicc may be right that VT complicates the game against a human and makes it easier against the generator—which allows the game to become more e-sports like—it is exactly these simplifications that reduce variability. After all, besides everything else that makes Heroes good, let's take CS for example. I know—well, not just know, I'm sure—that one cannot "grind" their "finger" muscle and the lost nerve in the brain responsible for such "grinding" enough to become a Master of Sport in CS. However, in Heroes 3, I can always count on luck, which can come from anywhere: the generator; an opponent who is collapsing; a battle where the terrain helped me; or 100 golems who gave away a relic for free (since it's easier to take it from them than a pacifier from a baby); the 1st Dragon Utopia and immediately getting control, while the opponent can't find anything more valuable than a captain's hat even after the 6th. (And only the "daddies" know how to neutralize all this and turn it to their maximum advantage). And although experience tells me that same often happens in reverse, which is why I always have someone to blame for my failure. (evil-generator)

Therefore, let's not introduce unnecessary linearity into the game if we don't want it to end up like VT.

As for what could be changed: Instead of rebuilding the Mage Guild (it's easier to implement changes from HotA regarding scrolls and shrines—limits on identical spells, water spells, etc.). Increase the value of 4-5 lvl scrolls. From personal experience, I can say that in 60-70% of generations where there was no control in the Dragon Utopia or Mage Guild, I found it in scrolls. Many simply don't fight for them (and thus play more linearly) and then complain that they were unlucky. Thus, I failed to get control at the necessary moment in only 10-15% of total generations. Therefore, it is too early to introduce rebuilding.

Regarding the buffing of certain secondary skills: Of course, there are skills that need to be raised, but this must be done very carefully. For example, Literacy is not the best skill. BUT, precisely because of the impossibility of rebuilding the Mage Guild, I snag a scholar in the first week so that if Slow is missing from the Mage Guild, the assistant can bring it from anywhere and give it to whoever needs it. Do you feel the interconnection of things? And what a joy when my foresight rewards me—that is linearity and the happiness from how you solved the problem, especially when a scholar bought on 111 retrains "daddy" in all spells from other hired heroes and even a Mage Guild isn't needed.
Therefore, everything must be changed very carefully. There are definitely skills that "daddies" will never need but are very necessary for "noobs," which increases variability. So if we are talking about improving these skills, let's instead think about how they can be used alternatively on noobs. This will further enrich the choice and the game itself. When we measure everything by why this is needed and how it will look on the main hero—let's just play Heroes 4 then. There, "daddy" settles everything even without troops.

And one more thing regarding 2lvl. I think the variability of its build-up should be left for Castle and Conflux; otherwise, these strong castles will become even stronger. Make it mandatory only for Tower and Inferno.
Thx for your attention.

This is a good patch as long as it implements only restrictions for non-infringement of rules.Good patch for beginners who do not know the rules completely.

how many times do I have to EXPLAIN it to you?

In VT there are about 30 options for settings (the same will be in the "HW rulez" patch over time).
You can ENABLE an option, or you can NOT enable it.

If desired, you can configure almost a chaste SoD there.
And at the same time, you can create such variability that you couldn't even dream of.

The whole irony lies precisely in the fact that the variability created by checkboxes requires prior coordination and explanation, and many do not want to delve into them. In the end, in any case, everything comes down to a set of certain fixes which, on one hand, limit the desire of some new members to join, and on the other — in the event of an unsuccessful implementation — lead to the exodus of established members, which in the circumstances of a small community leads to stagnation and subsequent regression of the project. A prime example is VT.

I've already played several games with the latest patch. The respawn rate is higher than usual in the Conflux, which positively affects the balance (probably similar to the rates in the Fortress, but there, instead of scrolls, you get gold). However, this is precisely why it's not advisable to play with a fully upgraded 2nd-level structure – a Conflux with a fully upgraded 2nd-level structure and a rich respawn rate has a clear advantage.

Thank you for the feedback and testing. I support the idea about making the game more varied, although, of course, everyone has their own opinion, and it's difficult to please everyone. Some people want to see it more as a competitive discipline, while others enjoy playing with a single stack without a ballista. To each their own. I'm more of a programmer than a player, and I mostly play for fun. For example, personally, I would like to play more against other players than against the map. Regarding balance, I won't express my opinion, as this has been discussed for years. If you want, and if you have ideas on how to make the gameplay more varied, while still keeping the heroes playable and appealing to most players, feel free to share them. Technically, a lot can be implemented. Regarding the infinite number of checkboxes, I agree with Toga, so if we add them in the future, we will try to keep it to a minimum. Of the proposed ideas, I liked the strengthening of secondary skills, changing the percentage on the 2nd level for different castles, and the random distribution of stacks at the start. But, as you understand, this should be a more coordinated action, with more specific details about the changes, so that most people support them, etc. If anyone has the time and desire, open a thread, create polls, discuss ideas, and how to implement them. If they mature enough for further implementation, I can offer free time from my real-life commitments to implement them.

Added 2 minutes ago

Does anyone else have their antivirus software blocking the download, or is it just me?

Yes, unfortunately, there is such a problem with Kaspersky... I wrote to them specifically, but they said that everything is fine on their end, and there are no viruses. For now, I don't know how to bypass this, so the only solution for now is to add an exception for this mod in the antivirus.

Please add a checkbox or a separate module for "Wars of Mages." Functionality: 1) All fighters have a level cap of 5; they cannot level up further. 2) Dungeons will not contain fighters of levels 10-20-30. 3) The player's starting hero can only be a Mage (either a random hero at the start or a chosen starter). 4) Orbs and cloaks are disabled.

regarding the infinite number of checkboxes - I agree with Toga, so if we do add them in the future, we will try to keep it to a minimum

I completely disagree here, the difference is obvious:
the main problem with VT is that it was abandoned, it's buggy, there are practically no streams for it (consequently, new players come to SoD, not VT), there is no clear manual for it; in general, there are many reasons and everyone knows them.

If we add checkboxes for three stacks, morale/non-morale/presence of GS/GM rebuild, bank, I probably forgot something, well you get the idea—it's technically feasible, but the only thing stopping it is the lack of consensus on such actions with the community. In my opinion, that's not an argument; even if a referendum were held, there would still be dissatisfied people and others.

Basically, I'm saying that it would be better to have these checkboxes than not to have them—if you want them, you put them in; if you don't, you don't. The infamous variability only wins from this.

It's a different matter that creating is much more pleasant when you are sure that the public won't shit in your mouth and wipe their ass with your own hair (quote). There's certainly no arguing with that.

Of the proposed ideas, I liked the enhancement of secondary skills, changing the percentage on the 2nd level for different castles, and the random stack drops at the start. But, as you understand, this should be a more coordinated action, with more specifics in the details of the changes, so that the majority supports them, and so on.

If anyone has the time and desire, open a topic, create polls, discuss ideas, and how to implement them. If they mature for further implementation, I can offer free time from my real-life commitments to implement them.

Is it technically possible to replace single-unit stacks? This would be the most painless and most pleasant change for the community.

It would also be good if the opponent could see the settings made by the host. That is, if you banned a certain unit or set the starting level to 2, you shouldn't later pretend that "it just happened that way." These settings should be transparent to both players, and there shouldn't be any deception.

It could be implemented as a two-way confirmation.

It would also be good if the opponent could see the settings made by the host. That is, if you banned a certain creature or set the starting level to 2, you wouldn't later pretend that "it just happened that way." These settings should be transparent to both players, and there shouldn't be any deception.

Yes, that's how it is now: the host sets the settings, then the client sees a window with the selected options and can agree or disagree. If they disagree, the game won't start.

Is it technically possible to replace one-way paths? This would be the most painless and most pleasant change for the community.

Sav knows a lot about map generation; I haven't delved into those details yet. I can suggest replacing one-way paths with 2 inputs, 2 outputs with 4 inputs, 4 outputs, based on the "War of the Ancients" expansion. It's quite simple to implement.

If you dig deeper, in theory, you could replace one-way paths with two-way paths while keeping their graphics, but I feel that it's not that simple, and it's not worth counting on such an option in the near future.

I can suggest replacing the one-way passages with 2 entrances and 2 exits with passages that have 4 entrances and 4 exits, inspired by the Fortress. It's quite simple to implement.

This will be perfect for us!!

Created a poll about single-faction gameplay.