It's time for some critics.

[Smash]

Originally Posted by sector24

Hmm, I'm not sure I can adequately explain this. I've been playing TBS games for almost 25 years now, and you get a "gut feeling" of whether a game is well designed or not but you can't always say why.

One thing I really like is the way they implemented the "wait" command. Sounds silly I know, but in most games, if you wait and then your opponent waits, you still have to go first. In KB, the advantage goes towards the unit with higher initiative, so that if you wait your slower opponents can wait but they'll still have to move before you. It's a small thing, but it adds a lot of strategy.

It is same like in homm3, Archangels are the fastest unit for example if you press wait they will act last no matter if your opponent use wait too.No new things here.

Also, I really like the randomly generated battlefields with obstacles, and sometimes with goodies like treasure chests. My favorite are the coffins with skeletons inside, but the whole thing is just a good concept taken one step farther than the games that came before it.

Battlefields are nearly same, in homm3 obstacles are randomize too. There is no goodies on battlefield but treasures make no sense why you cannot pick them after fight? Logic fail. I would really prefer destructible obstacles, few levels not one level battlefield (it is 3d FFS) and maybe during fight random third party encounter to spice battle.

Another thing I like about the combat is that luck exists, but plays such a small role that strategy is still the defining factor in who wins. This is not a direct comparison to any of the HoMM games, just a general observation. Sometimes random damage ranges and critical chance make a game too unpredictable, but KB not only gives you those values up front, but when you mouse over your opponent you can see the damage range and how many opponents you will kill. A very nice little feature.

Well it is same like in homm3 apart that you need count yourself how much you kill (in homm5 this you have already implemented). Luck factor is in both games homm and kb, you just need to take it in calculation.

I think the power levels and leadership costs of the units are well balanced. What unbalances the game are a select few items and a select few spells. For instance, Magic Spring is a game destabilizing spell. I relied on it heavily to bend the AI to my will. Without it the game would be much harder. Sacrifice and Resurrection are similar but I actually like those spells. Possibly the game would be more challenging not if they were removed, but just toned down so that intelligence didn't add as much to the spell's power.

Well homm3 is far from balance too. KB:L would be much harder if ai wasn't so dump.

The items that unbalance the game are Anga's Ruby, Isshara's Whip, etc. They're definitely fun, but they massively increase the damage potential of female and low leadership units. Of course, lake fairies, sprites and dryads are low leadership female units, so you see why they're so powerful. Even the dragonslayer sword to a degree unbalances what should be seriously difficult fights.

There should be powerful items but not guarantee one. This is problem.

You didn't really answer my question sadly, for someone who played a lot homm3 this game do not offer anything new or interesting and because of small content it is get boring very fast.

[Amamake]

Originally Posted by Smash

You didn't really answer my question sadly, for someone who played a lot homm3 this game do not offer anything new or interesting and because of small content it is get boring very fast.

Eh, no, he did provide an excellent answer to your question. You are just being a douchebag.

[monkeydog]

This game is an excellent game. As about all of us would agree or we wouldn't be posting all of these great comments and as the reviews have shown as well. The original HOMM was very good too. I played 2 through 5 and 3 was the best and had the best AI. I hate to admit it, but I played HOMM3 for about a year solid. Anyway, just for the record, I wanted to add that I think this game wasn't rushed in the slightest. It has a lot of depth and lots of details. I actually think a lot of time went into looking at the HOMM series finding, what worked and didn't and incorporated that into the design of this game. There are many new things too that are wonderful and make the game a joy to play. I guess I can't see why someone who loved the original HOMM series (specifically 3), wouldn't love this game. Clearly the developers did as can be seen by playing this game. The only things I can see that HOMM3 had that was nice and this game doesn't would be multiplayer, better AI, 7 troop stacks with larger battleground (although I prefer the new battlegrounds of this game - this would just add to it), enemy artifacts when defeating them, and multiple maps/worlds for more replayability. The only glaring thing that stands out to me are the spell exploits with the rez/sac. I mean if someone can win on impossible with no losses, then obviously this aspect needs to be re-worked. The game is very well balanced overall. Kudos guys on a job very well done overall!

[sector24]

Originally Posted by Amamake

Eh, no, he did provide an excellent answer to your question. You are just being a douchebag.

I have to admit I laughed when I read this, but then I felt a little bad for laughing. A little.

Anyway, it's been quite awhile since I played HoMM 3 and obviously my memory is a little hazy. I honestly don't remember them implementing recursive waiting but it could very well be true. So I'm just going to have to go back to my "gut feeling". I remember HoMM 3 battles being largely about attrition and not very much about strategy. Basically every time you were in a battle with a non-trivial opponent, you were going to lose some of your army no matter how good you were at the game. You might lose a little more or a little less, but you were always going to lose some units just because your opponent had an army of a certain size.

This makes sense in the scope of HoMM because you can buy new units every week and the game is primarily about resource management, not tactical combat. But that's not the focus of KB at all. I like that if you really take the time to think things out, you can pull an Alexander the Great or Sun Tzu type of overwhelming victory. It's the same concept that makes the Total War games great. You don't get that in HoMM at all.

The other thing that bothered me in HoMM (and this has no comparison to KB) is that the enemy heroes could just run around willy nilly and sometimes you couldn't catch them. I remember being in a protracted battle with an AI the same size as me across a huge wide open continent. His heroes were just a tiny bit faster than mine, so I could never catch them. He'd always just run around stealing my weekly resources, or putting himself in a position where he could attack 1 of 2 castles, and I had to choose which one to defend. Then he'd always take the other one, and I'd take it back and crush him, but lose about a week's worth of units doing it. He'd buy his hero back from the inn and we'd do it again.

The whole thing was frustrating and pointless and due to the fact that no matter how skilled I was, I was going to lose half my army taking back my castle, I could never get out of that stupid cycle. I eventually just quit. That is the sour taste that sticks with me from HoMM and why I stopped playing. It's not a game about strategic combat like KB is.

[Zhuangzi]

To echo some of what sector said, I had a think about it and there are a couple of key reasons why I think this is about the best TBS in only 15 years of strategy gaming:

The leadership system. This is genius. Instead of there being weak and strong units like in most games, the leadership systems means that pretty much any unit is viable throughout the game. Wonderful. Black Dragons are probably the 'best' unit overall but are you going to use them with their 2500 leadership? Or do you want to go for Lake Fairies? Or Evil Beholders?

Level design (at the strategic, not battle level) This is especially true in Darion, which is just put together in such a way as to draw you into the game. While this game doesn't have an interesting story, it does lure you with the quest design. I also love the way that enemies move on the strategic view, unlike in Disciples II.

Thirdly, the battle system. I'm with sector on this. I can't remember a more enjoyable and rewarding battle system in a game. The grid is very small (usually) but this makes it like chess. This is a real STRATEGY game.

Oh, and why does everything have to be compared to HOMM 3 anyway? If I loved that game, and then someone made a successful homage to it many years later, I would be ecstatic. I'm still waiting for a real spiritual successor to XCOM, and Master of Orion 2 (i.e. not MOO3, or Galciv 1/2), and Jagged Alliance 2.

[wolfing]

Originally Posted by Amamake

HOMM V is good and expansions improved it a lot. You will probably find this game not as addictive and somewhat lacking in clarity compared to KB:TL, but still it's very intelligent and interesting game. Same applies to HOMM 3.

I agree. HOMM V is really good. As good as KB in many aspects, yet different so I do recommend both games entirely (HOMM V I believe is more difficult than KB and much more replayable)

[Metathron]

Originally Posted by Zhuangzi

I'm still waiting for a real spiritual successor to XCOM, and Master of Orion 2 (i.e. not MOO3, or Galciv 1/2), and Jagged Alliance 2.

You mean Jagged Alliance 3, right? And I'm sure you know it should be released any day now, right? So no need to wax nostalgic about that!

Oh yeah, if you're thinking of getting HoMM V, take my advice and just skip the vanilla game and the first addon The Farmers of Hate, err The Hammers of Fate, and just go straight through to the standalone expansion Tribes of the East, which has all the other two have and lots more. The only thing not featured in TotE are the campaigns from the first two, but there is a (legal) mod that lets you play the original and first addon campaigns under TotE, complete with all the cutscenes and what have you, so there's really no reason to get the first two.

My favourite games of all time are HoMM II and IV. I only moderately liked V, but with TotE I grew to love it as much as the other two.

Anyhoo, IMHO its gameplay is superior to HoMM III. Long story short, I think you'd really like this game.

[Zhuangzi]

Originally Posted by Metathron

You mean Jagged Alliance 3, right? And I'm sure you know it should be released any day now, right? So no need to wax nostalgic about that!

Oh yeah, if you're thinking of getting HoMM V, take my advice and just skip the vanilla game and the first addon The Farmers of Hate, err The Hammers of Fate, and just go straight through to the standalone expansion Tribes of the East, which has all the other two have and lots more. The only thing not featured in TotE are the campaigns from the first two, but there is a (legal) mod that lets you play the original and first addon campaigns under TotE, complete with all the cutscenes and what have you, so there's really no reason to get the first two.

My favourite games of all time are HoMM II and IV. I only moderately liked V, but with TotE I grew to love it as much as the other two.

Anyhoo, IMHO its gameplay is superior to HoMM III. Long story short, I think you'd really like this game.

Any day now? I thought it had been pushed back to 2009 and maybe never? I have watched the gameplay video from last year, and there's been nothing new since then.

[Smash]

Originally Posted by sector24

I have to admit I laughed when I read this, but then I felt a little bad for laughing. A little.

Anyway, it's been quite awhile since I played HoMM 3 and obviously my memory is a little hazy. I honestly don't remember them implementing recursive waiting but it could very well be true. So I'm just going to have to go back to my "gut feeling". I remember HoMM 3 battles being largely about attrition and not very much about strategy. Basically every time you were in a battle with a non-trivial opponent, you were going to lose some of your army no matter how good you were at the game. You might lose a little more or a little less, but you were always going to lose some units just because your opponent had an army of a certain size.

It is same like in KB:L try to beat this game with no losses without resurrection. Both game has same amount of strategy on the battlefield. Good Luck. Btw you really need to refresh your memory .

This makes sense in the scope of HoMM because you can buy new units every week and the game is primarily about resource management, not tactical combat. But that's not the focus of KB at all. I like that if you really take the time to think things out, you can pull an Alexander the Great or Sun Tzu type of overwhelming victory. It's the same concept that makes the Total War games great. You don't get that in HoMM at all.

This is very untrue. You can buy new troops every weak but so can your opponent if you take during encounters bigger losses than opponent you are putting him in advantage. In KB:L you can always rebuy your army to full leadership potential after lost with easy as long you have money, in homm even if you have money you cannot buy more than you get per weak this force player to play very carefully as every soldier is crucial.

Btw. I played shogun and medieval and this game are not as great, truly there tactical and strategy potential is a joke, my friend show me once how easy beat opponent, just make army full of your best melee warriors put them in falanga (make one long line) and just move them to the other end of map when they engage with enemy you can just close left and right flank. Medieval i finished using just vikings, sometimes winnings fights with 1:10 army size proportions. I can post screens if needed . I lost my interest with this series as i found no strategy on battlefield in this games so i don't know if medieval 2 is somehow better.

The other thing that bothered me in HoMM (and this has no comparison to KB) is that the enemy heroes could just run around willy nilly and sometimes you couldn't catch them. I remember being in a protracted battle with an AI the same size as me across a huge wide open continent. His heroes were just a tiny bit faster than mine, so I could never catch them. He'd always just run around stealing my weekly resources, or putting himself in a position where he could attack 1 of 2 castles, and I had to choose which one to defend. Then he'd always take the other one, and I'd take it back and crush him, but lose about a week's worth of units doing it. He'd buy his hero back from the inn and we'd do it again.

This is irritating but well this is part of game , to catch up enemy you need
some of this things: logistic, pathfinder, spells: dimension doors, town portal, artifacts increasing movements etc.

The whole thing was frustrating and pointless and due to the fact that no matter how skilled I was, I was going to lose half my army taking back my castle, I could never get out of that stupid cycle. I eventually just quit. That is the sour taste that sticks with me from HoMM and why I stopped playing. It's not a game about strategic combat like KB is.

You mean this game is not as easy as KB:L is because ai is not that dump? I agree.
Talking that homm3 do not involve strategy combat is... lol?
No offense but i beat both homm 3 and disciples 2 on highest possible difficult mode so well i know what i am talking about .

Originally Posted by Zhuangzi

Thirdly, the battle system. I'm with sector on this. I can't remember a more enjoyable and rewarding battle system in a game. The grid is very small (usually) but this makes it like chess. This is a real STRATEGY game.

This screens are for you .

[jokebook]

Originally Posted by Amamake

Eh, no, he did provide an excellent answer to your question. You are just being a douchebag.

winner

And if you love HOMM3 so much, just play it...we get how YOUR best game ever is better than King's Bounty, we simply don't agree, me included. You kind of remind me of....well me after I had been playing Starcraft Brood War for....O..... eternity. Nothing would EVER live up to it. I finally allowed myself to like another RTS and found now that I absolutely love it (Company of Heroes). Try to enjoy the game for what it is, and not compare it to your beloved HOMM3 and you may actually find some things you like more and enjoy the game you already bought. If not, well, go play your game we'll play ours and you can keep the TT over on the HOMM forums.