Quote:
Originally Posted by it-ogo
First some very general statements. Usually we don't really know why do we like a game. I can say (suppose) why HOMM V is bad: small number of castles killed the strategy and new battle mechanics killed tactics. But I can not say why HOMM IV is bad. It has many improvements which are very nice by itself. A fraction system, magic system, hero promotion system, battle system in particular were very nice with few minor faults. But overall gameplay was much worse then in HOMM III. I don't really know why.
Second, my position towards Disciples 2: I strongly appreciate its style-atmosphere-art and storyline, but the gameplay for me was slightly too boring. I did not finish expansion campaigns.
Then about KB:L. It has lesser potential and replayability then HOMM III mainly because of absense of random generated games and limited modding possibilities. It's too early to compare campaigns as KB:L expansions are to be made. But the battle system is better then in HOMM III. How do I mark it: a hardcore player have longer way to perfection. Many may have a pleasure of playing but few can make something like "no losses on impossible". So you are always have a way to become better tactician and strategist. It was not so realy in HOMM III IMHO - the cap of perfection was much lower.
And I really like the the concept of rune-sphere system of hero promotions (as well as its concrete implementation). I think it is the first system of that kind in gaming but I know analogies in the area of sensorics. That is what really can provide flexibility and specificity in the same time - that means great variaty of viable pathways and good adaptation mechanism.
It is hard to compare tactics in KB-HOMM with XCOM-Jagged Alliance. The latter have much bigger and diverse arenas while the former have developed magic system and those make different kinds of tactical systems. Now I don't see the way to combine it successfully. Maybe AD&D gives something intermediate.
|
I would argue otherwise based off playing heroes 3 and 5 extensively online.
When you play against the computer you play at a level to achieve what your goal is, whether it's to beat the game on impossible or shortest amount of days.
In HOMM 3 & 5 online you have to play against people with hundreds of games under their belt, with large variation in strategies due to difference races, artifacts and tactical approaches.
HOMM has both tactical and strategic considerations, where as KB is more about exploiting very effective strategies, units and artifacts once you discover them.
I like both games for different things, KB is fun single player, HOMM is great in multiplayer if you have an experienced opponent.
I'm still playing through my first game of KB, and (probably due to my HOMM experience) am not having much difficulty on impossible with a paladin.
Anyway both are great games!