At the moment, it seems like there's not much reason to have normal units as opposed to heroes, in your main army.- Heroes level up better, gaining stats as they go along.- Heroes can re-equip later on, when you discover appropriate technologies for better weapons and armor- Heroes can buy weapons from the shop at short notice, and can also, e.g. buy horses even when normal units can't, as you have no source of HorsesSo, essentially, my mid-game, once the gildars come in fast enough, is to travel the world, buying up any named character wandering around.Really, there should be more of a rock-paper-scissors relationship for better strategy, and that would be the monster-hero-soldier approach.So, how can this work?Monsters beat armiesMost monsters need to have special abilities that are very effective against large numbers of low-level units:- Magical fear that causes soldiers but not high level heroes, to lose actions and not to be able to counter-attack- High Dodge values, requiring a better attack rating to hit them- Area attacks (dragon's fiery breath, or spiders' webs being extended to cover multiple squares)- Single-use whole battlefield damage dealt- Monsters have large amounts of counter-attacks; some of these strike all enemies around themHeroes beat monstersHeroes are there to fight monsters.- Heroes can find\buy and equip magical weapons that lower monsters' damage resistance- Heroes have a higher base hit chance- Heroes' level protects them from monsters' special abilities- Heroes can use healing items mid-battleArmies beat heroesArmies beat heroes because of sheer weight of numbers.- Heroes run out of counter-attacks when surrounded by many enemies (need to reduce Dodge for surrounding enemies?)- Heroes do not have ungodly amount of hitpoints even at high levels (HP based on CON + 2-3 per level?)- Archers can shoot down a lone enemy hero (consider a cover mechanic - they should be unable to shoot the hero if the hero has normal units in front)
I think the main problem with this is I don't WANT my champion to be weak against armies.
Point taken. The champion is still stronger than an individual soldier, and an experienced one can probably take two or three soldiers down, more if the enemy is under-equipped (a champion knight in heavy armor can mow down enemy peasants with ease). And in battles the champion can act as force multiplier, taking out the enemy damage dealers, but being flanked by soldiers so that he can't be counter-attacked by too many enemies. But if the champion alone is always the answer, then the set of useful strategies is very limited.
With this approach, we can have:
1) A civilization that prioritized Warfare, and is fielding a large standing army of recruits. It's looking to bash some heads, but has trouble handling some of the bigger monsters wandering the wilderness.
2) A civilization that went Diplomacy and started taming monsters to defend against the first civilization's armies.
3) A civilization that prioritized Adventure, and has several high-level heroes with magical equipment, who explore lairs and advance it that way. The heroes have a chance of beating the standing army of first civilization, or they really help on defense (an archer hero behind walls can take out enemies with ease, whilst a general provides bonuses to soldiers). But they will find it difficult to take the fight on offense.
I like this idea as a general rule. That said, it's hard to balance this way.
Heroes will also need to be magic resistant, or armies will need to be vulnerable to magic (fireball spells do triple damage to groups of 3 perhaps, and so on?)
Thanks - as to the balance issue, of course it's going to be hard to balance, but it is an attempt at balance between monsters\heroes\armies. At the moment, I don't see any balance at all.
Well, the monsters' spells should probably have less of an effect on higher-level units (which I'd argue that heroes are far more likely to be). In addition, heroes may also have a high INT\CON\CHA (whichever stat ends up contributing to magic defense), which should also help us with magic resistance.
I like the game the way it is in this respect.
I quite like this idea. If implemented well this could give each type a clear purpose, but still allow for some differentiation.
Make heroes quite a bit tougher than ordinary troops, and give them bonuses when fighting monsters (who are a lot tougher). Take for instance a basic spider monster; it could take 3 peasants to defeat it and two of them probably wouldn't survive. A basic hero with some okay equipment could beat two peasants, but 3 would be difficult. However the hero has bonuses fighting monsters, and kills the spider without much trouble.
If special abilities are ever put in the game this could give you a lot of options to make heroes more interesting; you could make a hero that is good at fighting monsters, one that is good at leading troops, one that is good at killing troops, one that is good at fighting other heroes (assassin type), one that is good at offensive magic, etc...
I'm not very mod savvy, but I was looking through the xml files. I noticed that only spider monsters have a <class>Spider tag, and heroes have a <class> that states whether the hero is an adventurer, merchant, etc.. Could it be possible to give heroes an ability that gives it a +50%damage when fighting units of a certain <class>? This would require other monsters to be given a class as well...
I think heroes should act like the king in a chess game. He provides bonus to the group, but must be protected at all cost. I see that it is ridiculous to see a single unit destroy groups of soldiers singlehandedly. What is he / she? Rambo? a god? But it is only apply to late game, when the group of army is too big for a single unit to handle.
If I wanted to play Paper Rock Scissors, I wouldn't need a PC for that.
In greek mythology (and pretty much any hero-worship mythology), a hero was worth hundreds of men.
But, if you want to act realistically, just imagine that each hero actually supplies his own troops much like the old game Destiny of an Empire, where the heroes HP was actually units of men on the battlefield.
In the games I played, I notice I tend to buy up every hero I can and I keep 4 or 5 into the Stack of Doom.
For one thing, if I don't buy them up someone else will.
I build units for garrison and some scouting.
The two big downsides to built units are
1) They are too slow and I'm better off with just heroes
2) They can't be upgraded
The last game towards the end, I played I finally built some mounted cavalry with all the speed items equipped, and they were still slowing me down.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
