Suggestion: Allow heroes to join units/Participate from the sidelines

This is probably a very difficult proposition, but a few things lead me to suggest this.

  • Heroes, as single model units, have sub-par HP and damage output compared to multi-model units.
  • Heroes leading units would open up a lot of interesting mechanics through their variety of added skills and would enhance combat in many different ways.
  • It would increase the feeling of growing in power and numbers without having to boost the heroes to the previous levels where they were too strong compared to the regular units.

I realize that it would require a lot of rewriting of how things work, but the current system means that with enough resources your basic units are almost as strong as the heroes individually, and they come in greater numbers. I don't see how this can add up without creating an awful lot of special rules/circumstances for the heroes.


Commanders

This brings me to the second suggestion.

Perhaps keeping heroes out of battle should be an option. If they are kept on the sidelines they could add strategic abilities and magical aid during the combat. This would help heroes with low hp and damage to have a use in combat and gain some much needed xp.

22,408 views 16 replies
Reply #1 Top


That was the single feature I hated most about HoMM, and I am really happy that Fallen Enchantress is not at all like that.

On the other hand, it sounds very Legendary to step aside while your tropos fight and die X|

Reply #2 Top

I would like to have that option for a Sovereign to join a unit thus giving some bonus to attack perhaps or spell resistance based on his class. Seems more "realistic" that way.

Reply #3 Top

So kind of like some tabletop miniatures wargames (Warhammer Fantasy Battle comes to mind)? Let champions become the leader of a squad/unit, adding various bonuses to them as a result? That would be pretty cool actually. Imagine a mage unit all chating in unison with the lead mage champion for powered up spells, or a high initiative melee unit with an assassin sneaking around to the backline and shanking all the archers. Could be cool, would be hard to make/balance though.

Reply #4 Top

That would be a dramatic change to the game.  Many things would have to be changed, not just from a coding perspective.  It really just won't work.  Besides that, I like having my champions on the battlefield.  It adds a lot to the game, IMO.

Reply #5 Top

Quoting Darxim, reply 4

That would be a dramatic change to the game.  Many things would have to be changed, not just from a coding perspective.  It really just won't work.  Besides that, I like having my champions on the battlefield.  It adds a lot to the game, IMO.
End of Darxim's quote

I think the OP is just trying to brainstorm a way to make heroes useful again.

Personally, I don't think the OP's suggestion fits this game.  I would rather see heroes be able to earn more experience so they have a hope of getting some depth in the skill tree.

 

Reply #6 Top

I don't find heroes un-useful... The game abstracts the units... its not 3 units on the battlefield its more like 30 units. The hero is 1 unit. Thus, in a fight 1 vs. 30 who wins... The hero kills 30 troops in this abstraction and I call that legendary. But start stacking the odds against him... 40 vs 1, 50 vs 1 70 vs 1... this become rather difficult to fight against by yourself. A hero on the field shouldn't be able to decimate a small village of trained soldiers by themselves, and if so, it should be done with some difficulty.

Hero units are quite useful. The only concern I have is that there is just not enough XP on the map without farming it and that deals with some micromanagement.

I don't mind if we introduce the Total war mechanic (general surrounded by troops), but that will require stardock to do some changes with the grouping dynamic.

Reply #7 Top

While it's true that in real life one champion could not take out probably more than 10 unless it's Hollywood and the enemies come one at a time. But this is fantasy and the heroes should at least be on par with a single stack of "current" trained troops.

Yes, the mechanism is there in place for making heroes on-par with troops, but as you said, there is not enough XP.  I'm sorry, but I want ALL my hereos to be op-par, not just one or two.

Lack of XP is the issue.  Plain and simple.  There are numerous posts across many threads stating so.

The devs need to change the XP split to start after 2 heroes and also change the XP nerf to be not quite as nerfed.

 

Reply #8 Top

Something I have been pondering for the XP problem is adding a simple base exp modifier to each monster.  Such that they get the base bonus and then added to that would be the additional bonus xp that you get for the current system of attack modifiers.  So no matter what you get a set amount of xp before the split.  So those 5 groups of mites would be worth 1 xp per mite (before the systemic value is added) for a total of 25 xp. Then add in total attack value from the systemic value then it will be divided.  This will bring the base xp up as long as you scale the base value depending on the base monster/unit.  A mite would be worth 1 per unit whereas a ogre might be worth 10 and a troll might be worth 20 and a dragon might be worth 200.  Just a thought.

Reply #9 Top

Ick. :typo:

Reply #10 Top

Quoting ampoliros5, reply 7
The devs need to change the XP split to start after 2 heroes and also change the XP nerf to be not quite as nerfed.
End of ampoliros5's quote

No they don't.  Based on what?

IMO hero level-up traits need to be buffed.  Each trait should be far superior than the current meager traits we get (even the new Warrior traits are still blah.)

The XP split among heroes in the same group is just fine.  I'm not againt traits (creation and/or level-up) altering the split certain heroes get; the mechanic works as intended.  Altering this should not be taken so lightly.

Reply #11 Top

Quoting mqpiffle, reply 10

Quoting ampoliros5, reply 7The devs need to change the XP split to start after 2 heroes and also change the XP nerf to be not quite as nerfed.

No they don't.  Based on what?

IMO hero level-up traits need to be buffed.  Each trait should be far superior than the current meager traits we get (even the new Warrior traits are still blah.)

The XP split among heroes in the same group is just fine.  I'm not againt traits (creation and/or level-up) altering the split certain heroes get; the mechanic works as intended.  Altering this should not be taken so lightly.
End of mqpiffle's quote

I think there are two possible solutions. One is to enable heroes to level up more often so they can have more quantity of "small" traits. The other is having "bigger" traits so each level up counts.

Probably it's a question of taste, but I think levelling up is fun, so I vote for more smaller level ups ^_^

Reply #12 Top

That's fine with me if leveling up became less of a chore.

Reply #13 Top

Quoting mqpiffle, reply 12
IMO hero level-up traits need to be buffed.  Each trait should be far superior than the current meager traits we get (even the new Warrior traits are still blah.)
End of mqpiffle's quote

I cannot agree with this more. It irks me so much that I have just fought my way through 10 hordes of rampaging enemies, just to gain a "+1 to attack" trait. It's so... lacklustre. And, as has been repeated on so very many threads, it doesn't feel "legendary" in the slightest. It's not that heroes have trouble keeping pace with normal units (ok, well, they do if you try to level up more than just your sov. Or like, if you choose the commander tree for some reason), but more that they make me want to strangle them because....

Quoting mqpiffle, reply 12

That's fine with me if leveling up became less of a chore.

End of mqpiffle's quote

This! It is such a chore at the moment. You spend your time churning out armies for your sovereign to go expend just so they can gain 10 measly xp, less than 1/3 of what they need for the next level. Frustration!

Reply #14 Top

When WoM came out I had really wanted a system that worked similar to the Warhammer 40k Dawn of War, or King Arthur games. Just like what you are asking for, with the hero attaching to a squad of units and leading them into battle, or having their own custom squad of units. At this point though I think heroes have come far enough where they don't really need that kind of system IMO, they could use a few tweaks sure, but nothing so drastic, at least not for all of them. I think it would be awesome if commanders worked like that though, would take a lot of work to implement but would make the class a lot more special and fun.

Reply #15 Top

I was away for a while so I just wanted to say that I appreciate the feedback

These are just some thoughts about heroes and their place in the game as the scale of armies and difficulty of encounters increase. I do not know how hard it would be to add a unit of troops stats to a commanders stats and calculate combat and status effects, but this is obviously not the only way to do it.
Heroes could add to units simply by being next to them, as they do when they attack, and units could defend the hero if the hero is attacked by swapping places, taking damage etc.

I am pretty sure some version of this could work. This system could also be applied to city governors to give them some interesting options. For example, a governor gets xp based on buildings/units built/time spent in city, with a special skill tree to improve his management skills.

I just feel the need something more.

I can't remember heroes being assigned to troops in HoMM, OliverFA_306, but if you are referring to the participating from the sidelines bit, I feel that it adds a lot to the epic feel (Legendary).

Buffing hero xp gain in some way and increasing the power of the skill trees seem like what many people want, and I agree with this, but I feel that is covered elsewhere. What I really want to see are some hero mechanics, not necessarily complex, which add real depth to the heroes.

animageous said it well: 'It irks me so much that I have just fought my way through 10 hordes of rampaging enemies, just to gain a "+1 to attack" trait. It's so... lacklustre. And, as has been repeated on so very many threads, it doesn't feel "legendary" in the slightest.'

Cavil: "I would like to have that option for a Sovereign to join a unit thus giving some bonus to attack perhaps or spell resistance based on his class. Seems more "realistic" that way."

Definitely. As the scale increases, the individual hero needs to add something to the entire army beyond just a few spell buffs. Particularly if they are not spell casters.

AlienFromBeyond: "So kind of like some tabletop miniatures wargames (Warhammer Fantasy Battle comes to mind)? Let champions become the leader of a squad/unit, adding various bonuses to them as a result? That would be pretty cool actually. Imagine a mage unit all chating in unison with the lead mage champion for powered up spells, or a high initiative melee unit with an assassin sneaking around to the backline and shanking all the archers. Could be cool, would be hard to make/balance though.

Exactly like that. This implementation would add so much to the current model.

@Darxim: My suggestion was really to allow for the two alternatives. I too like heroes participating directly and getting into the fray.
I think that some of the more squishy heroes like mages, as an alternative, could be allowed to stand on the sidelines and participate with spells, rather than be in the middel of the action. Sometimes it is really frustrating to have a ranged character downed on the first round, when all you really want them to do is cast haste a few times. There is an entire level of play which could take place on the strategic level of combat.

@ampoliros5: You are right. I am just brainstorming. The suggestion, in its raw form, might not fit, but having heroes on another level from the rank and file is necessary to create the feeling of Legendary. Heroes, as they stand, are not really filled with OOOMPH!
More experience would of course help make heroes more powerful, and this is the short cut, or perhaps more band-aid, to what I see as in large parts a problem with hero relevance.

@parrotmath: I think that abstracting like that is unneccesary. The hero needs to be useful throughout, and without increasing hp and damageoutput dramatically they have no real use in the late game.
Heroes are obviously useful for buffing and early summoning/city specialisation, but the combat/city governor aspect is just lacking in a major way. The lack of xp is definitely a factor.

Heroes surrounded by troops, or at the back supporting, is exactly the kind of thing I am looking for.

Sanati: "When WoM came out I had really wanted a system that worked similar to the Warhammer 40k Dawn of War, or King Arthur games. Just like what you are asking for, with the hero attaching to a squad of units and leading them into battle, or having their own custom squad of units. At this point though I think heroes have come far enough where they don't really need that kind of system IMO, they could use a few tweaks sure, but nothing so drastic, at least not for all of them. I think it would be awesome if commanders worked like that though, would take a lot of work to implement but would make the class a lot more special and fun."

This is where I am. I agree that this is a major change. Possibly too big, and obviously more complex than just plopping the hero into a troop. I would like to see it for the flavour and the fun.

Reply #16 Top

Dawn of war did this REALLY well. 

I agree that getting the experience points to hero return ratio right is the real problem. This wouldn't be a real fix.

But it is a great reason to go play the original Dawn of War, which was FUCKING AWESOME.