Posts from How can the game be made more realistic?

While browsing the spells in Heroes 3, I noticed that many of them are never used. After some thought, I realized that the original concept of combat was quite different. Most spells are designed for individual use, but it’s clear that using them is pointless when a head-on clash occurs (7 vs. 7). So, here’s my question: is it possible to somehow reduce the number of creature slots in a hero’s army, as well as reduce the weekly creature growth rate? For example, if the number of slots is reduced from 7 to 3, this will automatically redistribute the entire existing “value system” towards spells. This will immediately make spells like “Destructive Ray,” “Clone,” and “Executioner” meaningful. In turn, reducing the weekly growth rate will force players to be more careful about losses, and battles with neutral monsters will become more dangerous, etc. Therefore, the question is: are there any mods for Heroes 3 that would allow you to do what is described above?

There is something similar.

While browsing the spells in Heroes 3, I noticed that many of them are never used. ... Suddenly, spells like "Destructive Ray," "Clone," and "Executioner" would make sense.

Firstly, the value system depends on the situation, and if there are no more valuable spells available, then a destructive ray can be successfully used. Secondly, sometimes only these rarely used spells allow you to win a battle. And thirdly, if there were no bad spells, there would be no good ones either, because everything is known by comparison. And, of course, if all the spells are available, you will always choose the best one (in your opinion), and you will never even try the worst one.
p.s. I recently played a map, and in every battle, I had to use the Executioner spell. And although there were many other spells, it was either impossible to use them (on a dragon) or they were not very useful.

By the way, regarding the damaging beam? Did you know that this spell cannot be removed at all until the end of the battle? And if you blind the units and keep casting the damaging beam, you can completely nullify the unit's defense. As a result, it becomes much easier to kill them. Well, this is, of course, assuming you have enough mana. Because you need a lot of mana. Especially if there is a large enemy army. So it's not useless, it's just specific and you need to know how to use it.

The thing is, the game's mechanics change significantly as the number of troops increases. Essentially, it all boils down to using two spells: "Bless" or "Slow" to finish off the enemy army, and "Resurrection" (if you still take a hit). At least 95% of battles follow this pattern. Just in case, I'll clarify: I always play on a relatively easy difficulty level and only against the AI. Perhaps playing against real people will offer more variety in terms of spells used, but from my point of view, there are so many downsides to playing against humans that I prefer to play solo.

However, I understand you, comrades. Another question then: can we bring back the original animation speed? I remember that in Heroes of Might and Magic III, either the medium or slow animation speed was the closest to reality: people walked like people (and not ran like crazy rabbits), but in Heroes of Might and Magic IV, everything changed. As a result, everything is either very slow and jerky, or, conversely, everything is too fast and doesn't look very realistic.

If you play without animation speed-up, in SoD 3, the battle speeds are quite slow, and it's unlikely that an arrow flying at the speed of a walking person looks realistic. And in a real battle, you would run towards enemy positions like a mad rabbit, not walk like in a parade while the enemy shoots you like in a shooting range.
And using only 3 spells out of almost 70...:confused: And if those spells don't appear, do you have to start the game over?

dnaop-wr
I meant the realism of the animation when units move. I know that in a real battle, everyone runs instead of walking calmly. But Heroes 3 appeals to me precisely because of its calm and unhurried gameplay. Hence, the desire to observe smooth movement animation.

As for the spells, they all belong to the fourth level. Which is quite suitable for the human faction with their Castles. And if the right spells don't drop, that's not a big deal: Archangels provide the ability to resurrect once, which allows you to eliminate the most significant losses. Considering that the AI opponent always focuses on ranged units, it is not very difficult to choose a moment shortly before the end of the battle and resurrect all the fallen. And in this way, survive until capturing the cities where the guild of mages contains the necessary spells.

This is why people want to see smooth movement animations.

You'll spend your whole life just watching. I just find the way the demons move amusing, but it's better to actually play the game than to wait for the animation.

Just to be clear: I always play on a relatively easy difficulty level and only against the AI. Perhaps, when playing against real people, there will be more variety in terms of the spells used, but from my point of view, there are so many disadvantages when playing against people that I prefer to play alone.

How many? Name them all.

Lider1
Perhaps I'll name the most important one: I can't save at any moment and do something else. And why would I even need to explain that? I assume you know the differences between single-player and multiplayer better than I do. You can even tell more drawbacks than I can. But, of course, I ask you to consider everything from the perspective of a single-player's comfort. In other words, if something that exists in the single-player game is missing in the multiplayer game, that's a drawback.

P.S. Please correct the signature. It should be written as "StarCraft II".

I can't just save at any moment and do something else.

That's a valid argument. No irony intended. I understand.

And why should I even explain this?

Probably because I asked about it.

P.S. Please correct the signature. It should be written as "StarCraft II".

And this will do :D

Lider1
Well, since you're so interested... here you go. Playing against the AI involves using well-honed combinations and skills. This minimizes unpleasant experiences such as losing troops, Castles, etc. Consequently, there are more positive emotions from the gameplay. What will I do when playing against a human? It's obvious that my favorite tricks and tactics will either not work at all or will work poorly. Will this make me happy? Of course not. In fact, I get an infinite number of possible combinations that I need to find in order to win. Is this interesting? For some, yes, it is. For me, it's not. There will be many defeats and disappointments with this approach, especially at first. I have very specific emotions and feelings associated with this game. Why would I want to spoil them? Games should bring positive emotions, not negative ones. If playing against the AI brings these emotions, then it is fulfilling its purpose.

Next. Various little things. Let's say we start a game, and I don't like the starting artifact. Usually, I click on Restart Scenario in such cases. But in a multiplayer game, I won't be allowed to be so picky, right? However, even all these artifacts fade in comparison to the endless restarts to get the desired hero in the tavern. To clarify: the desired hero is the one that brings +350 gold daily. Because I don't see the point in keeping a hero in the Castle who won't bring any benefit. Instead, I always have one hero traveling and winning, while the other visits external creature dwellings, mills, and other useful places. At the same time, this same hero also generates income. Ideally, it would be good for him to also master the "Estates" skill, so that the income from him is even greater, but that depends on luck.

Next. Time. I think the very idea of sitting and waiting for another person to take their turn is absurd. I am willing to wait N seconds for the AI to take its turn. But a real person will definitely take more time for their actions. What should I do during this time? Stare at the ceiling? Read a book? Watch a movie? That's silly... And if there are not one, but four live opponents? Or even more? I'll hang myself... Unfortunately, I don't have that much free time to allow myself to wait for someone. When I play against the AI, I use the maximum amount of time for pleasant (personally pleasant) activities. Note that, despite all this, I absolutely do not want to limit myself in time. I can spend ten minutes on one game day to calculate who should go where, what artifacts to exchange, etc. Would you agree to such an opponent in a multiplayer game? :)

Next. That very realism. The heroes' movement speed is minimal. The troops' animation speed is average. There is no fast battle. Choosing a random Castle comes down not to choosing a preferred Castle, but to choosing the Castle that best fits the surrounding landscape and nearby objects. Guess which Castle the player who starts on a swamp will have? And I don't care that this Castle might not suit him. I'm used to it, and that's it.

I think I'll end my post here. I could recall all sorts of little things, but why? The main thing is that you have probably already understood my main idea: maximum enjoyment per minute of gameplay. Everything in the game will be subordinate to this rule. My interests are the most important thing to me, which, as I think, automatically makes multiplayer games, even in alliance with people, unacceptable for me. Not to mention fighting against them... And in general, I'm a pacifist. :D

Playing against the AI requires using well-honed combinations and skills.

Let's say we start a game, and I don't like the starting artifact. Usually, I click on "Restart Scenario" in such cases. But in a multiplayer game, they won't let me get away with that, right? However, even all these artifacts fade in comparison to the endless restarts to get the right hero in the tavern. To clarify: "right" means the one that brings +350 gold daily.

Sorry for interrupting, but this moment seemed amusing to me. You say that skills are needed to play against the AI, but then you say that you abuse not only the stupidity of computer opponents but also the element of randomness in the game.

Ple-Sen
I don't know what "abuse" means, but if we're talking about me negating the element of randomness, then yes, that's true. For example, it's quite problematic for knights to acquire the desired magic school compared to mages. And so what? Is that a reason to refuse the most useful (for me, useful) skills? Of course not. I systematically develop the hero until all 8 slots for secondary skills are filled. If, for example, earth magic doesn't drop as the last skill, I simply edit the Save Game using Heroes III SaveEditor. Moreover, I don't even consider this cheating, because from my point of view, it's simply a bug that makes further gameplay with that hero meaningless. Should I start the map over? Of course not. That would be silly, wouldn't you agree? It's easier to manually fix this bug and continue enjoying the game.

In principle, I understand the developers' desire to balance heroes of different classes, but in that case, the balance should be achieved not by forcing the use of various secondary skills, but by more carefully working on other possibilities. In other words, fire magic should be just as valuable an acquisition as earth magic. Does the game have that? No. In the game, half of the secondary skills are not used by anyone. Not to mention that some castles are obviously superior to others in terms of troop strength. These are the balance issues that needed to be addressed. And not by taking earth magic away from knights... Heh...

I don't know what "abuse" means, but if we're talking about me negating the element of randomness, then yes, that's true. For example, it's quite problematic for Knights to acquire the desired magic school compared to Mages. And so what? Is that a reason to refuse the most useful (for me, useful) skills? Of course not. I systematically develop the hero until all 8 slots for secondary skills are filled. If, for example, I don't get Earth Magic as the last skill, I simply edit the Save Game using Heroes III SaveEditor. Moreover, I don't even consider this cheating because, from my point of view, it's simply a bug that makes further gameplay with that hero pointless. Should I start the map over? Of course not. That would be silly, wouldn't you agree? It's easier to manually fix this bug and continue enjoying the game.

Firstly, "abuse" means exploitation. Secondly, yes, your actions are blatant cheating. And my post was about how you want to create the impression that playing against the AI requires "honed skills," while instead of using these very skills, you resort to simple cheating.
Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with wanting to crush an opponent who is unable to adequately oppose you; everyone has their own preferences regarding gameplay. But you're trying to present this as something that requires special skills, when in reality, it doesn't. And I find that extremely amusing.