Skills and Abilities rant!

[Bandobras Took]

If your idea of challenging is enforced limits with no real meaning, then I truly do pity you. That's right up there with thinking that "frustrating" and "repetative" means fun. If heroes can gain all the abilities for their skills that they meet the requirements for - then this would apply to all heroes, not just yours. You'd face other human players who may have opted to specialise in a single skill, or might have spread their talents a little more into two or three skills. This isn't unbalancing, it is just different...

Unbalancing is when you try to pit a Necromancer hero with Leadership, Recruitment, Estates, and Diplomacy, with one that has Leadership, Diplomacy, Recruitment, and Herald of Death. Or pitting a caster with Light Magic, Master of Blessings, Master of Abjurations, and Guardian Angel with Light Magic, Master of Blessings, Master of Abjurations, and Master of Wrath. Unbalancing is pitting an hero with the Ultimate ability with one who is prevented from getting one because they too a wrong skill somewhere.

Your complaint is still about documentation. Your argument is that the player has an unfair advantage who knows what he's doing when he's levelling up.

And, incidentally, I'd rather have Master of Wrath than Master of Abjurations if I've gone with Guardian Angel.

[ThunderTitan]

@BT:

Some heroes can't gt the Ultimate at all because of their starting Abilities. I'm sorry, but that doesn't seem right to me.

[Da' vane]

My compliant is NOT about documentation. There is an issue with documentation, but this will NOT solve all the problems.

My issue IS about the limit of three abilities per skill, since not all abilities are created equally. 2nd tier abilities are generally meant to be more powerful than perks, and 3rd tier abilities are gnerally meant to be more powerful than either perks or 2nd tier abilities.

However, the 3 ability limit treats all abilities the same. This means that a perk and a 3rd tier ability are treated the same. This is because if you take a 2nd perk, you are prevented from taking a 3rd tier ability. If you take a third perk, you are prevent from 2nd tier abilities as well.

What is even worse, is that if you take a 2nd perk in a certain skill, you are often prevented from getting the ultimate. This means a perk and the ultimate are treated the same. However, since ultimate comes under racial, rather than under ubilities for any one skill, a hero who gets the correct combination of abilities will be able to take an extra ability when maxed out over ones who do not.

A limit of 3 abilities for "selectiveness" is simply just annoying, and often unbalancing. If they want a hero to only have three abilities for a skill, then all abilties should be created equal, and you should be able to get any of the abilities for a skill directly after gaining that skill. There shouldn't be any cross skill or cross ability requirements.

Otherwise, they should remove the limit completely. This way, a hero can take as many abilities as they want from their skills, as long as they meet the requirements. This means that if they lack the cross skill for a 3rd tier ability, they can pick it up should they gain the skill later on, even if they have already taken other abilities from that skill.

From the looks of it, the only reason for the 3 abilities limit is NOT "selectiveness", but because that is what fits into the interface. You know, the hero screen which is half taken up by a useless 3d model of your hero. If they ditched that, they'd have plenty of space to more abilities for each skill, possibly even being able to remove the limit completely, because all the abilities for a skill can fit on the screen.

[Gaidal Cain]

However, the 3 ability limit treats all abilities the same. This means that a perk and a 3rd tier ability are treated the same. This is because if you take a 2nd perk, you are prevented from taking a 3rd tier ability. If you take a third perk, you are prevent from 2nd tier abilities as well.

Not doing this would also create problems. Some of the perks are clearly better than others, at least in some circumstances. If I' a warlock and have picked up enlightenment, Intelligence is clearly the best perk in terms of it's direct effect. If I'm heading for the ultimate, doing so would be suicide however. A system where you just can pick and choose whatever you want would IMO just lead to heroes end up being copies of eachother with all the best skills and abilities.

[DaemianLucifer]

@Da' vane

But that again is not a problem of having just 3 abilities for each skill but the problem of balancing the abilities.If all second abilities were stronger then the first ones,there would be no problem,since because its stronger its just natural it should have a limitation.

[Da' vane]

The ability balancing isn't a problem, as such.

Getting abilities is like a flow chart - you take one, which opens the next one, which opens the next. If you need another requirement, such as an ability from another skill, getting that opens more options the in flow chart.

However, with the 3 ability limit, you are forced to either stick to one level of the flow chart, or you can't get to the higher reaches of that flow chart. The limit closes off options.

What's wrong with allowing the Warlock with Enlightenement the ability to take Intelligence, and to go for the Ultimate? After all, in taking Intelligence, the hero would have delayed his reaching of the Ultimate by 1 level, which in H5 is quite significant. This is restriction enough for the 2nd and 3rd tier abilities - feel.

In fact, the 3rd tier requiring cross-skill abilities is quite a good idea. But if I don't have that cross skill, and never get it, I can't ever get the 3rd tier ability. But under the current system, there is an even worse penalty - if I save the ability slot for it, and never get the skill, I've left an ability slot unused that could have been filled with some other ability. The reverse of this is true, if I later get the required skill, but I've already filled my ability slots, I can't get the 3rd tier ability anyway.

It would be much better to remove the limit for abilities, so that you can gain all the abilities under that skill if you have the requirements, including third tier abilities should you later pick up the skills for them. After all, if your spend six levels getting abilities under light magic, that's six levels you are not spending on another skill or ability.

There's a limit of five skills out of twelve, so there is a good selection of skill combinations, and thus different ability combinations. If you have the option to take all the abilities under these skills when you meet the requirements, rather than just three, then some heroes will focus only on one or two skills, getting most of the abilities in them, while others may focus on more than two skills, getting some of the abilities from each of them.

If heroes got an infinite number of levels, then yes, quite a few of the heroes would end up similar, with all the abilities of their five skills. Even so, beause the five skills would be different (mostly because the starting skills would be different), you'd still see different combinations of abilities. The only way Heroes would be the same if they have infinite levels would be if a hero could take all 12 skills - even then, they'd be different because of their unique racial skills.

There are five abilities for each skill, that 5 levels to take all the abilities in a single skill. That's 25 levels to get all 5 abilities in all 5 skills. Add another 15 to get all three levels of skill. 3 more for your racial. 4 for racial abilities and ultimate. That's 47 levels there alone to "max" your hero with the five skills you can choose. Currently we're lucky if we get beyond level 30 - even in the campaigns.

But, there's also a added advantage to removin the limit, which will be possible with a patch or a sequel - more abilities. More abilities to choose from, more ways to customise your heroes, more decisions to have to make, and more ultimates. You'll still only get so many levels on the map, so you'll only ever get the option to take so many skills and abilities - but if you want to put all of those skills and abilities into Light Magic, you should be able to. Right now, limiting of 3 out of 4 or 5 isn't so bad, but what about when it's a case of limiting to 3 out of 10 or 3 out of 20?

If Nival doesn't include any additional abilities in the inevitable expansion, then we will see just how lazy and uninspired they really are. After all, they evoved the system from H3 and H4 - they could at least support it instead of the usual industry "fire and forget" approach...

[DaemianLucifer]

What's wrong with allowing the Warlock with Enlightenement the ability to take Intelligence, and to go for the Ultimate? After all, in taking Intelligence, the hero would have delayed his reaching of the Ultimate by 1 level, which in H5 is quite significant. This is restriction enough for the 2nd and 3rd tier abilities - feel.

You forget about which huts.This would allow you to get the ultimate as well as your opponent,but youll have one extra ability.

[Jolly Joker]

Actually, intially when the closed beta test began the system was as follows: 25 ability slots (6x4 + 1 for the ultimate). Furthermore there was no limit in any way in terms of the umber of abilities you could pick in comparison to the number of skill levels you'd chosen.
That led to heroes basically having all skills (with few exceptions) on basic level and around double as much ability levels than skill levels.
An overwhelming majority of the testers (I think there wasn't even ONE against it) complained about that and wanted to make things more difficult and logical by introducing more prerequisites for gaining abilities.
That led to the system as it is now: each skill level allows ONE ability. So if you pick basic Offense, you may be offered any of the basic Offense related abilities, but when you have picked one, say, Archery, you MUST pick advcanced Offense first bevor another offense related ability is offered, no matter what tier the ability may be.
The system is sensible, fun and interesting. You know exactly what is possible and you have to make decisions based on probabilities - which is true to the nature of this game because HoMM is and always has been a game of chances and probabilities.

[Da' vane]

Witch Huts don't automatically allow you to get the ultimate - they give you a random skill, which may or may not be one needed for the ultimate. However, these are risky when going for the ultimate, because you need four particular skills for the ultimate, and if your starting skill is not one of those skills, the Witch Hut giving you the wrong skill can shatter your ambitions right there. If your starting skill IS one of the four needed for the ultimate, you can suck up the skill at the Witch Hut either way...

I'm sorry, but that solution seems to be be just laziness. If Nival already put ability prerequisites for 2nd and third tier abilities, they can just as easily put skill level requirements in as well - after all, such a concept of needing a specific level of skill was in H4...

Only 2nd and 3rd tier abilties have real justification for being limited in such a way - so you need Advanced wahtever before you can take a 2nd tier ability, and Expert whatever for a 3rd tier ability.

Of course, that brings us to the rather arbitary decisions of what is a skill and what is an ability. A number of abilities jould just as easily have been skills rather than abilities, which would have changed the balance of skills vs. abilities. The fact is, people prefer abilities over skills, because that's where all the cool stuff is - enforcing this absurd limit to force us to take weak skills is, quite simply, stupid.

They could always have gone the other way, and made the skills abilities instead. You know... Offence (+20% to the damage for Melee troops) and similar.

Frankly, I have nothing but distain for Nival and H5. I was part of the beta text, and I disliked it then, and eventually stopped testing. I only have it now because I got HoMM Complete from Amazon.co.uk - which I only picked up to finally get my hands on Winds of War for H4.

But I will say this - Nival needs to learn about gameplay. I know the HoMM series isn't a roleplaying game, but Heroes development is ultimately taken from RPGs. They should do some research - I'd recommend they look towards sources like D20, where they can see abilities done properly (in D20, these are simply feats). Heck, they can even take existing CRPGs an inspiration - both Diablo 2 and Fallout have good character development systems (The skill trees in Diablo 2, just assume you can have only a single point in each; Perks in Fallout, which is pretty much the predecessor for D20 today).

[Jolly Joker]

The strange thing is that nearly everyone else seem to think that the skill/ability system is the best the heroes series has seen so far.

[DaemianLucifer]

The strange thing is that nearly everyone else seem to think that the skill/ability system is the best the heroes series has seen so far.

Even some of us that the dislike the whole game in general

But hey,every system has their good and bad sides.

[Da' vane]

Well, it is H5. A lot of people think a new Heroes game is the best thing ever, regardless of what it is actually like.

The skill system is improved over H3 - heroes actually do lot more. It's not like H4, where heroes were actually on the battlefield, which is a shame, but not everybody liked. Depending on your opinion of H4, H5 is an improvement, or a step back.

It's just that games have moved on, and there's much more inspiration out there, that the system we see in H5 is not the best way it could be done. But that's Nival all over it seems, as they appear to have been extremely lazy in the development of H5. They could have looked towards other systems and ideas and seen better ways of doing things - but instead, they forced 3d on us, even when it wasn't neccessary, and basically made an unfinished product. It's not unplayable, but it could be a lot, lot better...

I don't want to have to wait for the H5 equivalent of Wake of the Gods or Equilibris to mod H5 to actually make it what it could have been. I mean, the title of the game should have given Nival some clue where the focus should be - HEROES of Might and Magic. They took a step in the right direction... but really, they should have been down the other end of the road at their destination by now, not waiting for patches and expansion packs...

[Gaidal Cain]

What's wrong with allowing the Warlock with Enlightenement the ability to take Intelligence, and to go for the Ultimate? .

Lessening the tradeoff you do to get to ultimate considerably.

It would be much better to remove the limit for abilities, so that you can gain all the abilities under that skill if you have the requirements, including third tier abilities should you later pick up the skills for them. After all, if your spend six levels getting abilities under light magic, that's six levels you are not spending on another skill or ability.

Apart from promoting heroes that pick whatever is the mmost powerful at every turn and making it impossible to reach the ultimate becuase they're swamped with ability choices that doesn't lead to it? Not much...

Well, it is H5. A lot of people think a new Heroes game is the best thing ever, regardless of what it is actually like

Except that even people who don't think that H5 is the best heroes game ever tend to think that the skill system is good.

[Bandobras Took]

Well, it is H5. A lot of people think a new Heroes game is the best thing ever, regardless of what it is actually like.

And a lot of people are going to complain about a new game no matter what. DL takes every chance he can to complain about H5 -- repeatedly -- and even after having been shown to be wrong. It's his favorite way of passing the time.

And even he's not complaining about the skill system, as he said.

The skill system is improved over H3 - heroes actually do lot more. It's not like H4, where heroes were actually on the battlefield, which is a shame, but not everybody liked. Depending on your opinion of H4, H5 is an improvement, or a step back.

I liked H4. I feel H5 is an improvement. Does this mean that those who didn't like H4 feel that H5 is a step back?

It's just that games have moved on, and there's much more inspiration out there, that the system we see in H5 is not the best way it could be done. But that's Nival all over it seems, as they appear to have been extremely lazy in the development of H5. They could have looked towards other systems and ideas and seen better ways of doing things - but instead, they forced 3d on us, even when it wasn't neccessary, and basically made an unfinished product. It's not unplayable, but it could be a lot, lot better...

Yes, it could have been better. The point of contention is whether allowing people to get every single subability of a skill is a way to make the game better. As it stands now, I look at a skill chart, decide which three subabilities I want, and get them. I have yet to fail in getting the subabilities for which I was aiming. This complaint seems akin to those on the Ubi forums who feel that the Necropolis is weak because they rely a great deal on Skeleton Archers and Summoning Magic.

I don't want to have to wait for the H5 equivalent of Wake of the Gods or Equilibris to mod H5 to actually make it what it could have been.

Fortunately, most of the game files are .xml and easily unlocked with a trial version of WinRAR, so you won't really have to. You said that Nival was lazy and didn't look towards other systems and ideas, but that level of freedom is far beyond anything previous Heroes titles offered, and is much the same as Civ IV's.

I mean, the title of the game should have given Nival some clue where the focus should be - HEROES of Might and Magic.

No, the gameplay should have given Nival some clue where the focus should be. Since Heroes I, it's been about Heroes and Armies. If you want games that focus solely on Hero-building, may I recommend the Might and Magic games?

They took a step in the right direction... but really, they should have been down the other end of the road at their destination by now, not waiting for patches and expansion packs...

But they're not going to get there by listening to minority complaints. Once we cut through everything, your complaint is that you can't get all the subabilities for a skill. Approximately one other person has agreed with that, as far as I can tell. The rest of us seem to be just fine choosing the subabilities we want and going for them.

[DaemianLucifer]

And a lot of people are going to complain about a new game no matter what. DL takes every chance he can to complain about H5 -- repeatedly -- and even after having been shown to be wrong. It's his favorite way of passing the time.

Really?Ive been proven wrong about so little things about HV and those I dont mention anymore.

I liked H4. I feel H5 is an improvement. Does this mean that those who didn't like H4 feel that H5 is a step back?

Some do actually.The ones that miss kingdom overview,post game statistics,dialoge text(especially after getting an artifact),stronghold,fortress,etc.

Fortunately, most of the game files are .xml and easily unlocked with a trial version of WinRAR, so you won't really have to. You said that Nival was lazy and didn't look towards other systems and ideas, but that level of freedom is far beyond anything previous Heroes titles offered, and is much the same as Civ IV's.

This one I aplaud nival for.The best improvement they couldve made

No, the gameplay should have given Nival some clue where the focus should be. Since Heroes I, it's been about Heroes and Armies. If you want games that focus solely on Hero-building, may I recommend the Might and Magic games?

Or the HIV,since its all about heroes there too

[OliverFA]

The strange thing is that nearly everyone else seem to think that the skill/ability system is the best the heroes series has seen so far.

And I agree. There is absolutely no doubt about it. Skills system is the best part of Heroes 5. But it would be even better if heroes didn't have a limtied number of skills.

If a hero wants to end with "basic everything" and "expert nothing" let him be a jack of all trades. In fact that's an strategical choice. Isn't it?

[Da' vane]

BT, which part of my post lead you to believe that I want to focus ONLY on Hero development? Did I even say anything along the lines of get rid of armies and just have heroes? Heroe development should be a significant part, and it it can be made to improve that, it develops the game AS A WHOLE.

What I am saying is that hero development is important to the game, and has been something that has been developing over the entire series, right back from the original HoMM. By contrast, army development has been quite so evident over the series - the last significant army improvement was being able to upgrade your army stacks, and that came with HoMM 2!

I'm sorry, but I don't believe I should wait until H6 or H7, or even H10 to get the kind of development that heroes deserve now, in H5. Yes, H5 is an improvement over previous installments, but that is not an excuse to stop. It's better, but it not the best. There are improvements that can be made - ones that grant more freedom and flexibility to the player. That, to me, just makes the game better. it also means there are more options for the future...

I want to have to print out a skill wheel for every hero and go "I'll have x, y, and z," every time I play, because that DOES create heroes that are identical, because you will always take the three abilities that you think are the most powerful.

Organic development isn't about taking the most powerful option every turn - it's about aking whatever is the coolest one at the time that fits in with the character. A knight like Godric levels up in Light Magic, because he has it, and that's what is supposed to be right for him (he's a paragon night - essentially, a paladin). Compare that to isabell, who levels up in Leadership, because she's the Queen.

Would you like to know the chance of randomly getting the ultimate? Its 1 in 26730. That's 4 in 11 x 3 in 10 x 2 in 9 x 1 in 8 = 24 in 7920, or 1 in 330 just for getting the right skills (assuming your starting skill isn't one of the four required skills). When you factor in randomly choosing the right perk four times (which is 1 in 81), you get a grand total of 1 in 26730. This is the chance of getting everything you need for the ultimate by randomly se;ecting skills and perks (not including the fact you choose from two given options or anything like witch huts, and includes any order you can take the skills and abilities in).

[Jolly Joker]

The strange thing is that nearly everyone else seem to think that the skill/ability system is the best the heroes series has seen so far.

And I agree. There is absolutely no doubt about it. Skills system is the best part of Heroes 5. But it would be even better if heroes didn't have a limtied number of skills.

If a hero wants to end with "basic everything" and "expert nothing" let him be a jack of all trades. In fact that's an strategical choice. Isn't it?

No, I disagree. The main point here has been mentioned by Gaidal Cain: If you are always eligble to get each and every ability related to a skill your hero has the 2 offered abilities would be a very random selection out of a very big bumber of possible abilities each time. The way it is now you have ALOT more control in developing.

[OliverFA]

No, I disagree. The main point here has been mentioned by Gaidal Cain: If you are always eligble to get each and every ability related to a skill your hero has the 2 offered abilities would be a very random selection out of a very big bumber of possible abilities each time. The way it is now you have ALOT more control in developing.

Not if you give always the choice between improving an already existing skill or picking a new one.

[DaemianLucifer]

What I am saying is that hero development is important to the game, and has been something that has been developing over the entire series, right back from the original HoMM. By contrast, army development has been quite so evident over the series - the last significant army improvement was being able to upgrade your army stacks, and that came with HoMM 2!

No,there was the option to select which creature youll buy and that came with HIV.And it is an improvement.And also,there was creature XP that came with WoG(true it is a fan made,but its still heroes).

I'm sorry, but I don't believe I should wait until H6 or H7, or even H10 to get the kind of development that heroes deserve now, in H5. Yes, H5 is an improvement over previous installments, but that is not an excuse to stop. It's better, but it not the best. There are improvements that can be made - ones that grant more freedom and flexibility to the player. That, to me, just makes the game better. it also means there are more options for the future...

Youre right here.They chose to improve nothing so they could reastablish the game.Thats a poor excuse IMO.

I want to have to print out a skill wheel for every hero and go "I'll have x, y, and z," every time I play, because that DOES create heroes that are identical, because you will always take the three abilities that you think are the most powerful.

Organic development isn't about taking the most powerful option every turn - it's about aking whatever is the coolest one at the time that fits in with the character. A knight like Godric levels up in Light Magic, because he has it, and that's what is supposed to be right for him (he's a paragon night - essentially, a paladin). Compare that to isabell, who levels up in Leadership, because she's the Queen.

Um,in each heroes you had a choice of just a few of all the skills,so you couldnt level up the same each time.It adds flavor to the game,and its good.If everyone would level the same heroes would become as bland as many RTS,FPS,RPG titles we have,without any thinking involved.