8x10

[Merciless.Magal]

and also no possiblities for heroes specialist in tactics i guess... lol... imagine a heroe with tactics expertise being able to place the units 3 more rows ahead... lol... what is left ?

this is so tiny and absurd that im almost sure it will be bigger in final game.

[wimfrits]

IRT TT :
Hmmmm, now I'm confused.

Your last post on the page before suggested you actually knew what you were talking about....

[ThunderTitan]

and also no possiblities for heroes specialist in tactics i guess... lol... imagine a heroe with tactics expertise being able to place the units 3 more rows ahead... lol... what is left ?

this is so tiny and absurd that im almost sure it will be bigger in final game.

Well apparently 12x14 was too big for them:

There have been major changes to the battle system, too - arenas are no longer laid out in perfect squares as before, but are made up of an 8 by 10 grid.

That wasn't always the plan though, according to Decroix. Initially, they wanted to go for two layout options - a 7 by 7 square, and a larger 12 by 14 arena. But after mucking about with this concept for no less than 18 months, they had to concede that there were too many problems (the smaller arenas were just too small, and the larger ones were so big you spent half the battle just moving towards your opponents so you could attack). So they went back to the drawing board and settled on the 8 by 10 option, which Decroix says makes battles "much faster and more intense."

Your last post on the page before suggested you actually knew what you were talking about....

Well things change in time. I do know I don't like small BF's. Let's just leave it at that.

[Gaidal Cain]

And can anyone tell me who can they think that this is enough room?

Plenty of space there. In fact, just enough for some Angels, priests and swordsmen (if militia are merged)

Seriously- for that size of an army, the battlefield plays very well. Add in a big stack more and it isn't quite as good.

[DaemianLucifer]

Seriously- for that size of an army, the battlefield plays very well. Add in a big stack more and it isn't quite as good.

So now you agree with me?I was saying that same thing over and over again for days!

Well,at least I got my post number high...

[ThunderTitan]

If th BF was still scaleable maybe. I still see it as too small but i'm a bit claustrophbic and i don't really like how the squares look.
But come on, HoMM isn't chess. Not having room on the sides is just...

[Gaidal Cain]

So now you agree with me?I was saying that same thing over and over again for days!

Pardon, but I didn't notice anyone saying anything but "it's too small! Make it larger than h3's or I shall be very mad!"

[Francesco]

I'm with you guys, I think that 8x10 is too small.

I don't like fast and furious battles, this is not Need for Speed it's HoMM!
In heroes3&4 battles strategies and tactics were important and using a good tactic could meant win even against a larger and stronger army.
More squares means more strategies and tactics!
Heroes5 battlefield, apart from looking claustrophobic, will leave lesser space for strategy, and please do not compare this with chess... chess is chess... HoMM is HoMM.. in chess you do not have spells, ranged and flying units, retaliation, units stats and mostly in chess you move only 1 unit per turn, try moving every unit every turn as in HoMM and you will experience a nice deathmatch massacre ending in 5 or 6 turns.
I hope they will change it before the game goes gold.. 10x14 or 12x14, while being not so big to break the game, would be better IMO.

[FatalTheRabbit]

OMFG just looking at that thing... That's it. There's no way I'm paying for this. No way in hell. Just take battle mode out of the game as it has no strategic value whatsoever, and let the computer automatically decide it. That will save time right nival? It's just eye candy for the brainless monkey's they're looking to attract. Absolutely NOTHING can occur on a battlefield like that besides a tactless slugfest. Why even bother to allow the units to move? You might as well just allow the player to choose what he wants to attack each turn and do away with the battlefield entirely, because that's essentially what is going to happen after the first turn.

Out of 10 HMMV = HMMIV-10.

I'll bet if you removed the nice graphics nobody would be approving of what is going on here. NOBODY.

[DaemianLucifer]

So now you agree with me?I was saying that same thing over and over again for days!

Pardon, but I didn't notice anyone saying anything but "it's too small! Make it larger than h3's or I shall be very mad!"

Thats right,you didnt notice anyone saying that.I just said that 8*10 is to small for a heroes game,and used 2 full armies of large creatures as an example of its smallnes.

[Corribus]

Out of 10 HMMV = HMMIV-10.

Yeah, because H4 was such a great game. How can you rate a game before you've played or even seen the final version?

[FatalTheRabbit]

Are you joking? Are you telling me that all we know about combat means absolutely nothing? Please... Don't kid yourself. Take a look at that screenshot, and tell me how in the most ridiculous of imaginations that it could allow for any tactics.

[Corribus]

I'm telling you that regardless of what a single picture looks like, you have neither (a) seen or (b) played the final version. It is also entirely possible (though I won't assume) that you have neither (a) seen or (b) played the beta version. Ergo you have nothing on which to base a logical opinion except for a screen-shot, ergo you are not in the position to make a comparative analysis of the two games.

[FatalTheRabbit]

Corribus... You are ridiculous. Have you forgotten these six or seven pages of discussion? I've never seen anyone with such selective vision. Thick as brick wall.

[FantoMaxJM]

I hate to add water in the stove (except when I´m in sauna) ,but.. We don´t know yet anything about the movement of the units, or have I missed something relevant? Perhaps only few units go across the battlefield in the first turn (like it was in Heroes III), and for the rest it´ll take normal 2-4 turns..?
This Eurogamer interview (link in the first page) "..But after mucking about with this concept for no less than 18 months.." gave me second thoughts: 18 months of testing the battlefield size!!! *respect* I guess I´ll have to give it a decent try before judging it insufficient.. Anyways, not many hours to get more weight to the opinions for/against the battlefield size.

[DaemianLucifer]

I'm telling you that regardless of what a single picture looks like, you have neither (a) seen or (b) played the final version. It is also entirely possible (though I won't assume) that you have neither (a) seen or (b) played the beta version. Ergo you have nothing on which to base a logical opinion except for a screen-shot, ergo you are not in the position to make a comparative analysis of the two games.

So what?We have enough information from developers,plus some reviews,plus few leaked information to base a general oppinion.It is true that an oppinion based on those thingas can be wrong,and that when the game gets out it will be completely diferent,but from previous expirience that isnt likely to happen.

[Corribus]

Corribus... You are ridiculous. Have you forgotten these six or seven pages of discussion? I've never seen anyone with such selective vision. Thick as brick wall.

Trust me, I've read all your nonsense over the last 6 or 7 pages, and even if you COULD predict how the game is going to play given a "board size" (and you can't - there are too many variables), there's no way to ensure that the board size you saw in that screen shot is going to be the board size in the final game. So it's totally unfair, unreasonable, and, dare I say, stupid to rate a game that is still in development based on some perceived shortcoming extracted from a screenshot.

[Corribus]

...an oppinion based on those thingas can be wrong...

Bingo. So what's the point in trying to rate the game? It's just stupid. That's like me trying to say that SuperBowl 40 is the Greatest Superbowl of All Time, based solely on how the Steelers and Seahawks have been playing the last few weeks. Yeah, maybe it will be great. Then again, maybe it will suck. But you can't rate it until you see it.

[DaemianLucifer]

Corribus... You are ridiculous. Have you forgotten these six or seven pages of discussion? I've never seen anyone with such selective vision. Thick as brick wall.

Trust me, I've read all your nonsense over the last 6 or 7 pages, and even if you COULD predict how the game is going to play given a "board size" (and you can't - there are too many variables), there's no way to ensure that the board size you saw in that screen shot is going to be the board size in the final game. So it's totally unfair, unreasonable, and, dare I say, stupid to rate a game that is still in development based on some perceived shortcoming extracted from a screenshot.

Even if they do increase it to be larger that in HIII,we had such an imense battlefield in HIV,with so much freedom,that any battlefield consisting of large squares,no matter its size,is inferior compared to it.

...an oppinion based on those thingas can be wrong...

Bingo. So what's the point in trying to rate the game? It's just stupid. That's like me trying to say that SuperBowl 40 is the Greatest Superbowl of All Time, based solely on how the Steelers and Seahawks have been playing the last few weeks. Yeah, maybe it will be great. Then again, maybe it will suck. But you can't rate it until you see it.

Quote me to the end next time.How many times before were we faced with games that looked crapy during its development and ended as the best game ever?Its more likely that a game that promises so much in the development stage turns out average or awful than vice-versa.

[Corribus]

Even if they do increase it to be larger that in HIII,we had such an imense battlefield in HIV,with so much freedom,that any battlefield consisting of large squares,no matter its size,is inferior compared to it.

Did we play the same game? The battlefield in H4 was awful! Not only was it impossible to determine line of sight, but the large size of the battlefield made the "blind/slow and run away" and other similar exploits so easy.