Posts from Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition - Tactical Edition.

I don't want to have 8 wheels, as they are all standardized. Apparently, the additional wheel needs to somehow depict 8 racial ones + 6 barbarian ones. Perhaps, a mini-wheel for the 6 barbarian ones + 8 "bubbles" for the racial ones.

Thank you! I colored it and added 3D (for comparison, the version without 3D is attached).

I wonder how to beautifully design the racial and barbarian skills.

I meant, next to the main wheel, there should be a smaller wheel with 6 sectors for the Barbarian. Also, 8 separate "bubbles" (spheres?), each with a racial skill. So, in total, a large wheel, a small wheel + 8 spheres.

Perhaps the easiest way would be to simply add two small wheels with 7 sectors each – a Barbarian wheel (6 skills + racial) and a racial wheel (7 racial).

I would still make three wheels:
the first - general skills (12);
the second - general skills, but for Orcs (12);
the third - racial skills (8)

I'd like to share another idea regarding the game's economy.

The goal is to significantly increase the value of resources, besides gold, to the point where 1 gem costs 500 gold (like on the market), and that's its actual value (currently, 1 gem is worth around 200 gold).

Essentially, resources would be presented as the foundation for building cities, while gold would be primarily used for hiring units.

The total cost of building a city in terms of gold should be reduced by 10 times (!), and in terms of resources – by 2.5 times. However, the amount of resources obtained from resource nodes should be reduced by 3 times (e.g., giving exactly 1 gem instead of 2-4), and gold – by 1.5 times (instead of 500-1000, give exactly 500). What would these manipulations achieve? It would significantly increase the strategic role of mines, despite the accelerated game dynamics.

Thus, players would need resources to maximize the development of production capacity (building a base), and gold to hire troops. For example, building a dragon lair could cost 1500-2000 gold (not counting resources), while buying even 1 dragon is more expensive (2500 gold + 1 gem).

It's clear that with this model, troops will be bought daily, rather than simply accumulating, as is the case when building also requires a lot of gold. And this will lead to more active use of troops on the map. In addition, unpurchased reinforcements at the end of the week will be lost, encouraging players to maximize the use of both resources and gold during the week.

unpurchased reinforcements at the end of the week will be lost, encouraging players to maximize the use of both resources and gold during the week.

It could simply limit the housing capacity – storing legions in a building is indeed absurd (it’s simply physically impossible).
For example, the limit could be set to 6 basic increments (i.e., the increment for three weeks with a built fortification).

There might be other figures (depending on the implementation), for example, building costs could be 6 times cheaper in terms of gold and 3 times cheaper in terms of resources (instead of 10 and 2.5).

Regarding the "burnout," the purpose of introducing this mechanic isn't realism, but rather to increase the importance of the economy. The classic gameplay involves spending all resources, including gold, on city development in the first few weeks, with minimal unit recruitment, and only recruiting the entire army closer to the end.

Now, the idea is that if you fall behind in resource acquisition and fail to build the necessary structures within a week, you effectively lose production capacity and part of your army. The same should apply to gold, so that the player is encouraged to spend both resources and gold in a balanced way. A shortage of gold should be as detrimental as a shortage of resources. You can't just say, "I'll build housing for all these dragons in week 5, and they'll have the same growth rate as if they had been there for those 5 lost weeks, because I eventually gathered enough resources for them."

As for the suggestion to limit the maximum basic growth to 6, this will essentially have no impact on the game, as all units can be recruited within 3 weeks, especially since the entire game lasts less than 3 weeks.

Imagine a strategy game like Starcraft, where you build a lot of production buildings, but you don't have enough resources for constant production. And what, will all the units just accumulate on their own, waiting for the appointed hour when you recruit 500+ warriors at once?

The "classic gameplay" of accumulating gold isn't completely cut off; units don't burn out every day, but only once a week. During the week, you can keep troops in reserve, and given the overall length of a game at 2-3 weeks, this is a considerable amount of time.