More heroes that have ally bonus or impact on the enemy?

[Emacz]

If I'm correct, only one hero has it's bonuses applied to allies as well.  Actaully 2, one of the Han heroes as well as Hannibal? What about a hero that "starves" enemies, like the opposite of ptlomies -1 one food per second or 2?  Again might be fun/good idea to make some of the weaker civs have OP heroes for TGs

[real_tabasco_sauce]

imo the roman heroes are very bland. Somewhere there is a version of a roman hero (DE maybe?) that slows enemy units among a couple of other things, and I think that one sounds super fun (not for the enemy ofc).

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

6 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

imo the roman heroes are very bland. Somewhere there is a version of a roman hero (DE maybe?) that slows enemy units among a couple of other things, and I think that one sounds super fun (not for the enemy ofc).

[chrstgtr]

8 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

imo the roman heroes are very bland. Somewhere there is a version of a roman hero (DE maybe?) that slows enemy units among a couple of other things, and I think that one sounds super fun (not for the enemy ofc).

In general, I think we should explore features that impact enemy units. I think only one exists--the Roman cav hero that impacts enemy inf. It's one of my favorite auras. 

It's fun because it gives a huge advantage. But it isn't OP because the enemy can mitigate its effect (i.e., make cav instead of inf).  

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

53 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

In general, I think we should explore features that impact enemy units. I think only one exists--the Roman cav hero that impacts enemy inf. It's one of my favorite auras. 

It's fun because it gives a huge advantage. But it isn't OP because the enemy can mitigate its effect (i.e., make cav instead of inf).  

What do you think about putting Heroes in @Village or Town phase? A little more integral to the course of the game. Or maybe 1 hero in Village, 1 hero in Town, 1 hero in City.

[chrstgtr]

24 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

What do you think about putting Heroes in @Village or Town phase? A little more integral to the course of the game.

I would be open to it. Don’t love or hate it. Could be hard to balance. 

We’re not the first ones to note that the game cadence leaves something to be desired. P2 fights are rarely worth it. Having a hero would help. 

34 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Or maybe 1 hero in Village, 1 hero in Town, 1 hero in City.

Don’t know what you mean.

1. Do you mean keep each civ’s current three heroes become available at different phases? That would lead to huge balance issues because some civs have multiple good heroes while others have only one or less (I think this is a problem in and of itself—I think each hero should be more or less as good as any other hero). The idea itself is fine, though. 

2. Do you mean we create a bunch of new heroes to be available in p1 and p2? That sounds hard to implement. We already struggle to find 3 good heroes for every civ. The idea itself is fine, though.

3. Would this mean that you can get multiple heroes at once? I love that idea. Might be a good cov bonus too  

4. Something else?

[Emacz]

9 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

imo the roman heroes are very bland. Somewhere there is a version of a roman hero (DE maybe?) that slows enemy units among a couple of other things, and I think that one sounds super fun (not for the enemy ofc).

I always thought Rome had 3 decent heroes

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

looks cool!

 

1 hour ago, chrstgtr said:

In general, I think we should explore features that impact enemy units. I think only one exists--the Roman cav hero that impacts enemy inf. It's one of my favorite auras. 

It's fun because it gives a huge advantage. But it isn't OP because the enemy can mitigate its effect (i.e., make cav instead of inf).  

agreed!

39 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

What do you think about putting Heroes in @Village or Town phase? A little more integral to the course of the game. Or maybe 1 hero in Village, 1 hero in Town, 1 hero in City.

Id be all for that!

[real_tabasco_sauce]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

What do you think about putting Heroes in @Village or Town phase? A little more integral to the course of the game. Or maybe 1 hero in Village, 1 hero in Town, 1 hero in City.

I don't know about that. For one, heroes have super strong stats and could be used for very cheesy stuff early on. I suppose we are introducing a p2 hero (kind of a B tier hero) in a27 for Athenians, so we will see how strong that is.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone what about this: instead of selecting a hero, you select a ruler. This would be a purely infantry unit without much fighting stats, but some bonus or aura, potentially you could use existing civ bonuses for this too. I don't really like doing it at the start of the game, because it becomes a 1 click strategy: your choice would determine your follow up moves. It could be interesting to make this available from the cc once you reach p2: Click an icon in the cc called "Take rule" or something, and it pulls up the dialogue to make the selection.

Then these ruler units could be used for regicide.

idk, just a thought.

Edited May 17 by real_tabasco_sauce

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

2 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I don't know about that. For one, heroes have super strong stats and could be used for very cheesy stuff early on. I suppose we are introducing a p2 hero (kind of a B tier hero) in a27 for Athenians, so we will see how strong that is.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone what about this: instead of selecting a hero, you select a ruler. This would be a purely infantry unit without much fighting stats, but some bonus or aura, potentially you could use existing civ bonuses for this too. I don't really like doing it at the start of the game, because it becomes a 1 click strategy: your choice would determine your follow up moves. It could be interesting to make this available from the cc once you reach p2: Click an icon in the cc called "Take rule" or something, and it pulls up the dialogue to make the selection.

Then these ruler units could be used for regicide.

idk, just a thought.

I think what you're basically describing is the Han Minister. 

 

I've put a mild amount of thought into genericizing the Heroes. So, for instance, instead of named heroes, you'd have officer units that do what the heroes do. They'd have double or triple health of a champion and a training limit, but not the massive health of a current hero.

Politician

• Train from Civic Center
• Boosts Gathering and Building

Banner Carrier/Standard Bearer

• Train from Barracks and Stable
• Infantry and Cavalry versions
• Boosts movement and armor

General/Officer

• Train from the Fortress
• Boosts Attack

They'd be themed to their civ of course. The Athenian "General" would be a Strategos. Athenian "Politician" would be an Archon, Satrap for Persians, etc.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

17 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I think what you're basically describing is the Han Minister. 

no i mean more like a civic equivalent of the heroes we have. The ministers are more like an economic version of the trumpeters.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

on "officer" type units, I don't really see the need to simulate these except for civ - specific reasons, like the centurions. Other than for special cases, there is really no point in simulating officers and lower level military leadership. It just seems like a complication that may as well be baked into the soldiers anyway.