HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

Posts from Heroes VII

General
No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
In reply to FireCool
User Avatar
Offline Андрей
Registered:
Posts: 1,321
#1052
Auto-translated
FireCool
Source: https://vk.com/pubhomm?w=wall-53800143_32055
He's disappointed. But they themselves – the employees of "Limbic" – are to blame! A year has passed, and they still couldn't create a playable version of the game! It's full of bugs and synchronization issues! There's no need to blame everything on "Ubisoft"! Probably, "Ubisoft" realized that these developers wouldn't be able to fix what they themselves had created, and it's easier to just shut down the game, hire another studio, and start working on "Heroes 8".
ДУРАКОВ ОЧЕНЬ МАЛО, НО ОНИ РАССТАВЛЕНЫ ТАК ГРАМОТНО, ЧТО ВСТРЕЧАЮТСЯ НА КАЖДОМ ШАГУ.
Прошу прощения у Arandor-а. Я слишком резко отреагировал. Просто очень люблю спорт. Извини...[/SIZE]
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Nargott
Registered:
Posts: 1,592
#1053
Auto-translated
It is precisely Ubisoft that should be blamed. Whoever pays, orders, and is responsible for the result. Ubisoft chose the developers and dictated its terms as a client, and they have already failed twice with the developers – the first time with BlackHole. Some believe it was a third time, but Nival, at least at that time, had a successful experience with Demigods, and in general, the fifth installment had significantly more content than the subsequent ones.

The guys from Limbic simply don't know how to make games of this caliber and in this genre; their fault here is perhaps that they agreed to undertake such a project for Ubisoft and on Ubisoft's terms (with a low budget). However, if they had refused, Ubisoft would have hired even lower-budget developers (and, moreover, without experience working on the 6th installment), and the situation would have been even more dire.

Bugs and synchronization issues are only a superficial reason for the failure. Saving on the technical part of the game could not but affect the saving on gameplay and game balance. And if some players are weeded out due to bugs, others are due to the gameplay. For example, I didn't see any interesting battles or interesting units in the game. This does not mean that they are not there; it's just that, from my point of view, the combat and units are not well-developed enough. And looking at the city structures, carefully preserved from the 5th installment, it became clear that the game is not very focused on Multiplayer (too slow development). And there were also statements that esports is not a priority (what is esports? It's high requirements for balance, multiplayer, and dynamics).
Разработчик Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition.
Сайт проекта - пока неактивен
Автор Асимметричных шахмат
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Nargott
User Avatar
Offline KillAndAction
Registered:
Posts: 2,464
#1054
Auto-translated
Nargott
it became clear that the game isn't very focused on multiplayer (development takes too long).
I disagree. In my opinion, development is 1.5-2 times faster than in Heroes of Might and Magic V: on the first day, you buy 1 hero + dwellings, and the units can be of a high level (e.g., a Knight), and quite strong elementals help a lot, and so on. The economy is easier to manage than in Heroes of Might and Magic V: resources are everywhere. Sometimes there are bottlenecks with rare resources, but the guarding is normal. Although, if you're lucky, you can start taking them at the end of the first week...
Будьте осторожны со своими желаниями. Иногда они исполняются.
Сервер в Discord
Стрим на twitch.tv
Стрим на GG
ЛИДЕР Клана"ХРАНИТЕЛИ НЕБЕСНЫХ ВРАТ" Рейтинг: Латник
Вступление в клан "Хранители небесных врат"
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Nargott
Offline Pridu
Registered:
Posts: 567
#1055
Auto-translated
Nargott
multiplayer (too slow development).
Well, for this, there's the Governor with economy skills. If you spend some experience points on him, developing him first to Architect, you save money on constructions, and then further to Town Planner. And it also depends on the map; one thing is a random map, another is these "balanced" fixes with obelisks costing 50k experience. On some fixes, you can have elite creatures and two Governors on building (economy) and recruitment/growth (diplomacy) by your second week. On random maps, it's a bit more complicated, but even there, you can sometimes really shine right from the start.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#1056
Auto-translated
For example, I didn't find the battles or units in the game to be very interesting.
Well, let's put it this way. From a tactical point of view, they implemented many things that you yourself considered important (relatively low movement speeds, for example). Other things (like the ability for some ranged units to move before/after shooting, flanking/rear attacks, obstacles that hinder shooting) can't even be implemented in the fifth installment, but they are quite interesting.
Another question is that many abilities have been introduced into the game somewhat randomly, and in fact, due to their poor implementation, they don't add much variety to the tactics. Weak synergies, and so on...
the game isn't very well suited for Multiplayer (too slow development)
Actually, I saw a review somewhere that explained clearly that you simply don't need to develop extensively. The main thing is to build a base and upgrade a basic unit (an enhanced basic unit, which is usually not too far down the development tree), maybe add a few elite units, and you can already finish the game if you maintain the appropriate pace. Although, with this approach, some of the content is lost, of course.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Nargott
Registered:
Posts: 1,592
#1057
Auto-translated
"KillAndAction"
I disagree. In my opinion, development is 1.5-2 times faster than in the 5th installment: on the first day, you buy 1 hero + dwelling(s), and the units can be of a high level (e.g., a knight), and quite strong elementals provide significant help, and so on. The economy is easier to manage than in the 5th installment: resources are everywhere. Sometimes, there can be a bottleneck with rare resources, but the guarding is decent. Although, if you're lucky, you can start taking them towards the end of the first week...
I don't think the 5th installment is geared towards Multiplayer either; it's also too slow due to similar problems with unit stats. There are no such problems in the 3rd installment.
"Ment"
Actually, I saw a review somewhere that explained in detail that you simply don't need to develop extensively. The main thing is to build a base+ (an enhanced basic unit, which is always not too far down the development tree), maybe a few elite units, and you can already finish the game if you maintain the appropriate pace. Although, with this approach, you lose some of the content, of course.
Exactly, development should be fast and without sacrificing content. When you have to wait 2 weeks for a top-tier unit, that's not ideal. I'm judging the overall development speed based on this factor.
From a tactical point of view, they implemented many things that you yourself considered important (relatively low speeds, for example). Other things (like the ability for some ranged units to move before/after shooting, attacks from the flanks/rear, obstacles hindering shooting) cannot even be implemented in the 5th installment, and they are quite interesting.
Where are the low speeds? I haven't seen a single unit with low speed in the 3rd installment. And simply the absence of 7-8 speed units reduces the variety of speeds, which is a negative for the game. Especially considering that the turn frequency of units is not different.
And by the way, I'm not against 7-8 speed units - these speeds really add variety if they are not too common.

P.S. I refreshed my memory, looked at the unit tables. Okay, in principle, there are 7-8 speed units, but the vast majority of units have 5-6 speed, there are a few with 3-4, but almost all of them are ranged units (it's difficult to judge, since ranged attack is not indicated in the abilities). I was only looking at the speed stat. Of course, low speed for ranged units is not an indicator, since these units don't move much anyway.
Разработчик Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition.
Сайт проекта - пока неактивен
Автор Асимметричных шахмат
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#1058
Auto-translated
I haven't seen a single unit with speed 3.
Arbalesters seem to have 3.
Especially considering that the turn frequency of units doesn't differ much either.
Yes, that's a drawback.
And by the way, I'm not against 7-8 speed – these speeds really add variety if they occur relatively rarely.
And they do occur. Air elementals, for example, seem to have a speed of 7 – they reach the enemy ranks.
Well, in general, you're probably right about the speeds, Nargoth. It's just... They seem to have taken the right approach again (limiting unit speeds), but the implementation once again turned out to be not very good (all speeds are too similar, which hurts variety). It's the same with everything.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Nargott
Registered:
Posts: 1,592
#1059
Auto-translated
Have you seen how movement speed is implemented in Heroes 1-4? There's a great variety, and yet infantry doesn't cover the map in a single turn. They didn't even need to invent anything new.
Разработчик Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition.
Сайт проекта - пока неактивен
Автор Асимметричных шахмат
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Nargott
User Avatar
Offline Андрей
Registered:
Posts: 1,321
#1061
Auto-translated
Nargott
They should have looked at how movement speeds are implemented in Heroes 1-4; there's a great variety, and infantry doesn't cover the entire map in a single turn. They didn't even need to invent anything new.
But where can you move across the entire map in a single turn, considering that the battlefields vary in size? Sometimes, there are as many as 20 cells between the starting positions of the opponents.
ДУРАКОВ ОЧЕНЬ МАЛО, НО ОНИ РАССТАВЛЕНЫ ТАК ГРАМОТНО, ЧТО ВСТРЕЧАЮТСЯ НА КАЖДОМ ШАГУ.
Прошу прощения у Arandor-а. Я слишком резко отреагировал. Просто очень люблю спорт. Извини...[/SIZE]
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Nargott
Registered:
Posts: 1,592
#1063
Auto-translated
Where can you move across the battlefield in a single turn if the battlefields are of different sizes? Sometimes, there are as many as 20 cells between the starting positions of the opponents.
We're talking about comparing it to the fifth game, where there were many creatures with speeds of 7-8, capable of moving across the battlefield in a single turn. To fix this, subsequent installments significantly reduced the number of such units, but they didn't add more low-speed units; moreover, even units with a speed of 4 became rare. As a result, we got a uniformity of speeds of 5-6.

And regarding battlefields of different sizes – is this just a quirk, or does it not happen in multiplayer?
Разработчик Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition.
Сайт проекта - пока неактивен
Автор Асимметричных шахмат
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#1064
Auto-translated
As for different map sizes, isn't that just a gimmick? It doesn't exist in multiplayer, right?
I think it's only during sieges.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Nargott
Offline Pridu
Registered:
Posts: 567
#1065
Auto-translated
Nargott
but they didn't add low-speed units
Why would low-speed units be needed? So that you could run away from them using archers without magic? Welcome to Heroes of Might and Magic III, but with an infinite supply of arrows for the archer.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#1066
Auto-translated
Without magic, could you use ranged attacks to run away from them?
Even now, Centaur Marauders can endlessly chase down many units, right?
The problem of "too easy" neutral units to defeat is easily solved by introducing a large number of mixed units. And the few light neutral units that remain will be in the minority and will not have a significant impact on the gameplay.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0