Only 4 resources. Good or bad?

The new Heroes games produced by Ubisoft. Please specify which game you are referring to in your post.
User avatar
Linky
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 132
Joined: 10 Jan 2006

Unread postby Linky » 06 Sep 2010, 23:41

You can discuss the topic without having to make a big effort to shoot down everything I write point by point. As I'm sure you realize, me remembering Necromancer town resource requirements correctly is hardly relevant. It's not too enjoyable discussing when the tone is that aggressive.

Anyway, the issue is much more complex than simple better / worse. I know many are fond of the old resource system, but try to look at things a bit more open minded. Sure, there's always the change that new system turns out to be rubbish, but for some reason I am not too worried about the cons.

Dragon Angel, I get the point about map variety but I kind of think that it'd be nicer if the map variety wasn't provided by mines but rather by other special buildings. Also I'd kind of wish that there could be different level mines available, some that provide more resources, maybe even multiple different kinds. But yeah, the resource adjustment affects maps a lot. It'll be enjoyable as a map creator not to have to juggle around with all the different resource types that much though, and focus on the more interesting parts. :)

Anyways, as it's pretty clear, I'm actually quite optimistic about this change. If nothing else, at least it spices things up a little bit. We've had the same resource system in the HoMM games for quite a long time already. Don't you guys want a little bit of a change too? Otherwise we could just keep playing HoMM3 or whichever your current favourite is. :)

MattII
Demon
Demon
Posts: 309
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: New Zealand

Unread postby MattII » 07 Sep 2010, 05:23

Actually I am fairly open minded about most changes, I just happen to feel that resources are among the few mechanics that really need to stay the same, along with methods of unit production, and building construction. Change any one of these, and IMO the game doesn't even belong in the continuity.

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23271
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Unread postby ThunderTitan » 07 Sep 2010, 07:31

Linky wrote: - If you have only a few resources that are tiered by rarity / purpose instead of by faction usage, it gives you more strategic options

I want to elaborate the last point with an example:
In HoMM3, Stronghold used crystals, Necromancers used mercury etc. Eveyrone used wood and ore and gold. There were really only three tiers of resources: Gold, General and Special. Mercury and Crystal mines were essentially of the same value. Depending on which castles you owned, you only had use for some of them though. This isn't really bring that much strategy into the game, it's more about chance and when you have a few different castles it doesn't really matter which special resources you have, since you most often are dependent on gold to produce the level 7 units.
Obvious solution: make all towns use all resources more.

And anyway, you still benefited from having more mines because you could trade the extra resources for gold, and you could deny the resources to your opponent even if you didn't really need them yourself etc.
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
Kristo
Round Table Knight
Round Table Knight
Posts: 1548
Joined: 23 Nov 2005
Location: Chicago, IL

Unread postby Kristo » 07 Sep 2010, 22:27

Linky, I mostly agree with what you're saying. I think for us to get some real strategic depth out of the resource system, there has to be an effective long-term strategy beyond racing to acquire piles of level 7 creatures. Right now, it sounds like Crystal will be the linchpin resource for unlocking the best troops. To have real strategic depth, a player needs to be able counter being cut off from Crystal. He should be able to do something else with his other resources and still field effective armies.

There's another resource we haven't been considering: time. Early game vs. late game and game duration are important factors to consider when balancing the resource system. All strategies do not have to be viable on all time scales. That implies that in my above example, your killer level 7 creature should require a significant time investment. If you cut off someone from Crystal, then they should have the ability to strike you while you're saving up to buy something big. If the enemy doesn't act before the time window closes, then he deserves to lose. But he at least should have the opportunity.
Peace. Love. Penguin.

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23271
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Unread postby ThunderTitan » 08 Sep 2010, 06:59

I love you guys... because we all know fighting over 1 resource is so much more complex then fighting over more.
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
Linky
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 132
Joined: 10 Jan 2006

Unread postby Linky » 08 Sep 2010, 11:30

When will you learn not to mix complexity with strategic depth? B-)

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23271
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Unread postby ThunderTitan » 08 Sep 2010, 12:07

As soon as you stop confusing balance with strategic depth.

Rock, Paper, Scissors has perfect balance, but i'd hardly say it has more strategic depth then a game with 300 choices, even if that game has only 2 OP strategies that will defeat anything else (thus less optimal choices then the 3 RPS has).
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
TheRider
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 37
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby TheRider » 08 Sep 2010, 12:19

It all depends on the cost of the buildings, not on the resources itself. I have made a mod for myself for HMM4 changing all building costs (making them real high), so you need more time until last tier units. It was quite an effort balancing all towns but at the end the game was more enjoyable. I dont see the point to have tier 7/champions on week 3 or 4, because after that everyone is focusing on last tiers units and the low tiers become worthless.

What they have to think better is the name of the crystal resource, something like DRAGONSHARD not crystalized dragon blood as in the moment.

Personally I think that a system with 3 common resources (metal, stone and wood) plus 2 rare resources (dark/light factions or might/magic buildings - like sun gems/azurithes and mithril/dragon stone) plus gold is the ultimate resource system.

User avatar
Linky
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 132
Joined: 10 Jan 2006

Unread postby Linky » 08 Sep 2010, 13:40

ThunderTitan wrote:Rock, Paper, Scissors has perfect balance, but i'd hardly say it has more strategic depth then a game with 300 choices, even if that game has only 2 OP strategies that will defeat anything else (thus less optimal choices then the 3 RPS has).
But what's the point of having meaningless choices? It's all just fluff and an illusion of depth if there are only a few real strategies. That's kind of what I'm against. If the extra resources don't really serve a different purpose each, then it's hardly necessary to have them at all.

In the end, I would be fine with the 7 resource system myself, but I just don't see why it's such a dealbreaker not to have them.

MattII
Demon
Demon
Posts: 309
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: New Zealand

Unread postby MattII » 08 Sep 2010, 16:13

TheRider wrote:I dont see the point to have tier 7/champions on week 3 or 4, because after that everyone is focusing on last tiers units and the low tiers become worthless.
True, so you'd have to graduate the cost of the dwellings, maybe leave tier 1 where it is, and after that increase the costs by 10-15% per tier, so at tier 7 the cost has increased by 50-100%. Mind you, with the 3-tier system we're using not this might not be such an option.
What they have to think better is the name of the crystal resource, something like DRAGONSHARD not crystalized dragon blood as in the moment.
What's wrong with just calling it crystal?
Personally I think that a system with 3 common resources (metal, stone and wood) plus 2 rare resources (dark/light factions or might/magic buildings - like sun gems/azurithes and mithril/dragon stone) plus gold is the ultimate resource system.
Fair enough, but what would you use the wood and stone for after all the buildings were built?
Linky wrote:In the end, I would be fine with the 7 resource system myself, but I just don't see why it's such a dealbreaker not to have them.
Because 7 resources are a part of the continuity, or were. I mean, sure, if they were making a RTS of it I might say yes, but I don't hold with making such game-affecting changes in a sequel.

User avatar
TheRider
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 37
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby TheRider » 08 Sep 2010, 16:59

MattII wrote:
Personally I think that a system with 3 common resources (metal, stone and wood) plus 2 rare resources (dark/light factions or might/magic buildings - like sun gems/azurithes and mithril/dragon stone) plus gold is the ultimate resource system.
Fair enough, but what would you use the wood and stone for after all the buildings were built?
Core units could cost gold + ore/wood/metal (archers will cost wood, pikemen - metal, demons - ore -- just an example)

Elite units could cost gold + more ore/wood/metal

Champion units could cost gold + crystal

MattII
Demon
Demon
Posts: 309
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: New Zealand

Unread postby MattII » 08 Sep 2010, 17:27

TheRider wrote:Core units could cost gold + ore/wood/metal (archers will cost wood, pikemen - metal, demons - ore -- just an example)

Elite units could cost gold + more ore/wood/metal

Champion units could cost gold + crystal
Fair enough, although it would mean boosting the production of all none gold resources by something like 10 times.

Here's another thought, why not make mana itself a resource? it could be used in the creation of summoned creatures like Djinn or Elementals and of constructed creatures, like Golems.

Another method of limiting high tier creatures might be to introduce an upkeep cost, say 1 crystal per week, or 20 gold per day.

User avatar
TheRider
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 37
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby TheRider » 08 Sep 2010, 19:55

Of course they can increase the daily income OR make something different. From the pool of core units, every 10 can cost gold + 2 ore. In this way it will be wiser not to bye 8 creatures, since the ore cost will be the same.

User avatar
Linky
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 132
Joined: 10 Jan 2006

Unread postby Linky » 08 Sep 2010, 20:58

I was thinking about how the seven resource system would be best implemented, and I'm thinking that I would like the most if every faction had options to use any resource. Each dwelling tier would have multiple dwelling choices. You can pick only a select amount of dwellings from each tier. Since there would be more choices per tier, we could reduce the tier quantities. Here's a rough example of what Haven/Castle could look like:

Tier 1, two buildings per town:
Peasant Hut (Just Gold),
Archery (Wood),
Pikemen Barracks (Stone)
Circus (Acrobat unit) (Wood + Mercury)

Tier 2, two buildings per town:
Monastery (Stone + Gems),
Church (priestess unit) (Wood + Crystal),
Royal Kennel (Warhound unit) (Wood + Stone),
Peaceful Cemetery (Graveyard Warden unit) (Stone + Mercury)

Tier 3: two buildings per town:
Knight's Hall (Stone + Gems + Mercury)
Cannoneer's Academy (cannoneer unit) (Stone + Sulfur + Mercury)
Royal Library (Librarian (spellcasting) unit) (Wood + Sulfur + Crystal)
Hunter's Lodge (Veteran Hunter unit) (Wood + Stone)

Tier 4 one building per town:
Jousting Arena (Wood + Stone + Crystal + Mercury)
Crusader's Castle (Stone + Crystal + Gems + Mercury)
Griffin Nest (Wood + Mercury + Sulfur)

Tier 5 one building per town:
Heavenly Gate (Angels) (Stone + Crystal + Gems)
The Round Table (Knights of the Round) (Stone + Wood + Mercury + Sulfur)


This way, you would have choices you have to make both by which resources you can gather and what kind of units you want. I would also prefer if more units would cost resources to create as well, not just building the dwelling.

But this is just wishful thinking. Will never happen. B-)

MattII
Demon
Demon
Posts: 309
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: New Zealand

Unread postby MattII » 08 Sep 2010, 23:05

TheRider wrote:Of course they can increase the daily income OR make something different. From the pool of core units, every 10 can cost gold + 2 ore. In this way it will be wiser not to bye 8 creatures, since the ore cost will be the same.
Or they can buy two creatures at a time, which ought to incur a 0 ore cost since those two creatures together will require less than half-a-unit of ore.
Linky wrote:I was thinking about how the seven resource system would be best implemented, and I'm thinking that I would like the most if every faction had options to use any resource. Each dwelling tier would have multiple dwelling choices. You can pick only a select amount of dwellings from each tier. Since there would be more choices per tier, we could reduce the tier quantities. Here's a rough example of what Haven/Castle could look like:

Tier 1, two buildings per town:
Peasant Hut (Just Gold),
Archery (Wood),
Pikemen Barracks (Stone)
Circus (Acrobat unit) (Wood + Mercury)

Tier 2, two buildings per town:
Monastery (Stone + Gems),
Church (priestess unit) (Wood + Crystal),
Royal Kennel (Warhound unit) (Wood + Stone),
Peaceful Cemetery (Graveyard Warden unit) (Stone + Mercury)

Tier 3: two buildings per town:
Knight's Hall (Stone + Gems + Mercury)
Cannoneer's Academy (cannoneer unit) (Stone + Sulfur + Mercury)
Royal Library (Librarian (spellcasting) unit) (Wood + Sulfur + Crystal)
Hunter's Lodge (Veteran Hunter unit) (Wood + Stone)

Tier 4 one building per town:
Jousting Arena (Wood + Stone + Crystal + Mercury)
Crusader's Castle (Stone + Crystal + Gems + Mercury)
Griffin Nest (Wood + Mercury + Sulfur)

Tier 5 one building per town:
Heavenly Gate (Angels) (Stone + Crystal + Gems)
The Round Table (Knights of the Round) (Stone + Wood + Mercury + Sulfur)


This way, you would have choices you have to make both by which resources you can gather and what kind of units you want. I would also prefer if more units would cost resources to create as well, not just building the dwelling.

But this is just wishful thinking. Will never happen. B-)
Well that's one way of doing it, another might be to boost the rare-resource cost of the Mage Guild (Those things used to cost a friggin' fortune in rare resources), but make it a pool-cost, so MG level 2 requires 8 rare resources, and whichever resources you wish to spend determines which spells you're likely to get, so if you spend no sulphur you're not going to get a Destructive spell, or if you spend 3+ gems you're guaranteed to get a Light spell.

You could also do it by giving each building a Hoard, but only allowing two hoards to be built in any town, and each Hoard would require two different rare resources (excludes tier 7 since any hoard here would effectively be overpowered) in fair quantities.

You could also work with the Marketplace, so say the Resource Silo requires one rare resource, while upgrading the marketplace (taking up the space of the Resource Silo, but gives the exchange-rate benefit of two Marketplaces) requires a different rare resource.

User avatar
Dragon Angel
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 79
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby Dragon Angel » 08 Sep 2010, 23:20

Linky wrote:I was thinking about how the seven resource system would be best implemented, and I'm thinking that I would like the most if every faction had options to use any resource.
Careful Linky, you are breaking all reasons you provide for defending the 4-resource system :rolleyes:

Indeed, even easier than that, we have 2 3-creature tyers... why not make it 4, three selectable with:

Tier 1: Basic
Creature 1 - additional cost of mercury for dwelling
Creature 2 - additional cost of gems for dwelling
Creature 3 - additional cost of sulfur for dwelling
Creature 4 - additional cost of crystal (old) for dwelling
and if you want
Creature 0 (vanilla) - only gold+wood+ore

Tier 2: Elite
Creature 1 - high cost of mercury for dwelling, and unit costs +1m
Creature 2 - high cost of gems for dwelling, and unit costs +1g
Creature 3 - high cost of sulfur for dwelling, and unit costs +1s
Creature 4 - high cost of crystal for dwelling, and unit costs + 1c

Champion: may cost all four resources... B-)

Example as necro:

Tier 1
Vanilla: skeleton regular; Crystal: skeleton archer; Mercury: Zombie; Gems: Ghost; Sulfur: Mummy

Tier 2:
Crystal: Deat Knight; Mercury: Wight; Sulfur: Lich; Gems: Vamipre.

Tier 3: Bone Dragon.

Of course, this requires 9 creatures x town... but balance is kept in the sense resources do not influence your town selection, but your buildup inside a town.
But this is just wishful thinking. Will never happen
Going back to the old discussion, I really hope map variety is provided in some other ways instead of mines, I am still in "wait and see" mood... Yet I have to agree this may have broken a bit the "excited to know more" mood.
Probably the resource reduction is not a dealbreaker, but it indeed generates a "identity crysis" in the game, as the mercury/gems/sulfur/crystal was sort of a trademark (if you saw an screenshot of a fantasy seeting, with these four resources (+wood ore and gold), ¿which game would you think of?).
This is not bad in itself, because things have to evolve... but if felt as a loos, there should be a pro in exchange, and I fail to see which it will be (not saying there is not, just that it has not been shown yet)

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23271
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Unread postby ThunderTitan » 09 Sep 2010, 07:29

Linky wrote:But what's the point of having meaningless choices? It's all just fluff and an illusion of depth if there are only a few real strategies. That's kind of what I'm against. If the extra resources don't really serve a different purpose each, then it's hardly necessary to have them at all.
Because some of us don't play just to win, so being able to do more things is better for us, even if they're not the best choices... plus, OP strategies can be patched out, or modded out by fans even...

And there's the fact that taking them out instead of making them work better is something i'm against on a philosophical level in the first place.
In the end, I would be fine with the 7 resource system myself, but I just don't see why it's such a dealbreaker not to have them.
Because the only thing it accomplishes is making the game easier to balance and to play... and frankly i don't think it needs to be... like i said a million times, i know people who couldn't finish highschool that played H3 pretty well... and balance can be worked on with patches and more time... as a consumer i see no reason to give them a free pass on working less on the game when they're not some indie company (i'm looking at you Ubisoft).

Sure, if the game turns out to be good then i'm probably going to buy it when the gold version comes out even with 1 resource, but i'll be damned if i don't do anything i can to make them reconsider such a choice.
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
Linky
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 132
Joined: 10 Jan 2006

Unread postby Linky » 09 Sep 2010, 11:23

ThunderTitan wrote: And there's the fact that taking them out instead of making them work better is something i'm against on a philosophical level in the first place.
I simply don't understand this. Though I work so much with optimization and organisational tasks that having variables that serve no purpose is something I always hate to see.

I am a casual gamer nowdays myself, and I don't play just to win, I play to enjoy. That doesn't meant that having ten buttons that I can press somehow magically equals to a better game than one that has only five buttons.

One additional thing that having fewer resources accomplishes is the developers being able to spend more time on other things than juggling the resource system around. I hope you do realize that there is only a limited amount of resources they can use on this game. That's why the meaningless extra fluff is not something I care to passionately about.

User avatar
Linky
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 132
Joined: 10 Jan 2006

Unread postby Linky » 09 Sep 2010, 11:29

Dragon Angel wrote:
Linky wrote:I was thinking about how the seven resource system would be best implemented, and I'm thinking that I would like the most if every faction had options to use any resource.
Careful Linky, you are breaking all reasons you provide for defending the 4-resource system :rolleyes:
Come on, it's not black and white. Try to get your head around having an actual discussion and not thinking that it's Linky & Kristo vs Matt & Titan & Dragon Angel. This is just a discussion and I write what I think about the resources! There are no absolute truths here. And absolutely nothing I said about how to make the seven resource system work means that the four resource system could be better than the old system we had.

But yeah, what I really want is to have some actual choices to make. In past Heroes games you simply max out your town and whatever resources you can get are sufficient. If you need something more than the other, you just trade them in the marketplace. Essentially in a Heroes game the only real choices you make are done in the adventure map: which battles you fight and where you move your heroes each turn. All other choices are quite straightforward.

I like the idea about choosing which materials to spend when building a Mage Tower, changing the spells you get. Same could be applied to other buildings.

User avatar
Qurqirish Dragon
Genie
Genie
Posts: 1011
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Flying the skies of Ohlam

Unread postby Qurqirish Dragon » 09 Sep 2010, 13:42

TheRider wrote:
MattII wrote:
Personally I think that a system with 3 common resources (metal, stone and wood) plus 2 rare resources (dark/light factions or might/magic buildings - like sun gems/azurithes and mithril/dragon stone) plus gold is the ultimate resource system.
Fair enough, but what would you use the wood and stone for after all the buildings were built?
Core units could cost gold + ore/wood/metal (archers will cost wood, pikemen - metal, demons - ore -- just an example)

Elite units could cost gold + more ore/wood/metal

Champion units could cost gold + crystal
Spellforce has this system- armored units (soldiers, knights, etc.) use ore; hanged troops use either wood or ore based on the projectile type. Magic units use a magic resource (varied by faction). Advanced units used all three types.

Of course, that game is an RPG/RTS hybrid game, so some aspects don't relate here, but I can see some use for the idea.
Matthew Charlap -353 HoMM map reviews and counting...


Return to “Heroes V-VI”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 1 guest