PDA

View Full Version : Anybody Else Miss HoMM III's Fortress?



SwampLord450
11-21-2010, 10:36 AM
Hey all,
Those of you who played HoMM III will remember the Fortress town; it was a swamp town with lots of lizard-like creatures and an emphasis on defense. For me, this was my favorite town of the entire HoMM series; I loved its creatures and the swamp feel.

It is also the ONLY town from the previous Heroes games not represented in the new Heroes series in some way. Even Conflux got the four Elemental types, phoenixes, and Sprites in; the only creature that remains from the HIII Fortress is the Hydra. This is extremely disappointing; I really want to be able to play my favorite town in upcoming games, but I fear that it will never return at this point.

This thread is meant to be a place where fans of the Fortress from HoMM III can discuss ways that a swamp-themed town, or Fortress's creatures, might be implemented into the new Heroes series storyline and world, and to express support for including the town in the game.

mcgslo
11-22-2010, 02:00 AM
We already discussed about water faction. I dont think they will put H3 Fortress in the beginning but maybe in 1st or more likely 2nd add-on.
In the end i want lots of Factions to be included H6 game... more the better.

dchalfont
11-22-2010, 02:18 AM
I'll miss them less than I will the other 2 factions that are facting the choping block for MMH6...

Academy and Sylvan have been there from the start. I am insulted that that are not sure bets for MMH6.

We better see all 'core' factions in the expansions.

I'm talking whichever 2 out of Dungeon, Academy and Sylvan that aren't in the vanilla game both be in the first expansion. Then you can have your fortress and stronghold factions back http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DaveJame
11-22-2010, 04:48 AM
Actualy

The Warlocs (Dungeon/Darkelf), Sorcerers (Rampert/Sylvan) And Barbarians (Stronghold/Orcs) are the three missing factions that have been in the game since its beginning. The Necropolis and Wizzards have been added in Heroes 2 (Inferno in Heroes 3)

So, if the 4th faction isn't one of these three and the remaining two wont be in the expansions It will by for the first time that on of the original 4 will by missing

wdcryer
11-22-2010, 08:42 AM
I am not so upset about the idea of not having some core towns in Heroes 6. I figure the less towns there are the more they can focus on making the towns unique and interesting. There are a lot of units in Heroes games that I just don't buy unless I have a lot of extra gold. Many units aren't compelling or very valuable strategically. The decision about which units to buy should be hard. That would mean a lot of thought went into the value of each creature on the battlefield. The less towns they have to develop the more they can work on things like creature balance.

Back on topic, I also miss the fortress town. I didn't play it very often because it felt kind of weak, but I really liked the concept. That said, I seriously doubt it will be included in Heroes 6.

SwampLord450
11-22-2010, 08:35 PM
The thing with people wanting Sylvan and Stronghold, etc, in is that they have been in every game, and they are guaranteed to be in future games at some point. I'm worried that Fortress, which hasn't been represented since H3, may have been lost entirely. We can't have the same towns in every game every time; there was always at least one new town from H1-H3. I'd personally like to see a new water/swamp/jungle based town, or some other new town, before we get the sure additions of Sylvan and Academy again. Fans of those towns have actually had the luxury of being able to play them since H3; fans of Fortress have to go back to H3 to play a town that represents it. It's hardly fair for them to be in every game while past towns such as Fortress and Conflux that were just as unique and interesting get passed over.

I think there may be a jungle-based town this time around, given that an interview mentioned the existence of a jungle tileset, and an Aztec-themed town like Fortress would fit the bill perfectly.

mcgslo
11-23-2010, 01:47 AM
There is Jungle tileset but Fortress is more like swamp water tileset? Jungle fit more to Sylvan or new Jungle based faction...

I dont agree with you wdcryer. You cant perfect balance heroes games. Even if you somewhat balance creatures there will always be diference in attack, defence, level of hero, diferent skill sets, magic, resistance, and some other random effects. So what good will only 3 factions for sake of balance do? You (I) will get bored very soon.

So again more Faction the better i want at least 9+ faction with addons...

dchalfont
11-23-2010, 07:20 AM
Originally posted by wdcryer:
I am not so upset about the idea of not having some core towns in Heroes 6. I figure the less towns there are the more they can focus on making the towns unique and interesting. There are a lot of units in Heroes games that I just don't buy unless I have a lot of extra gold. Many units aren't compelling or very valuable strategically. The decision about which units to buy should be hard. That would mean a lot of thought went into the value of each creature on the battlefield. The less towns they have to develop the more they can work on things like creature balance.



I agree on all points, in every other heroers the lower tier units not only got so exponentially weak towards the end that they weren'ty worth having, but they also looked like crap compared to higher tier units. In MMH6 the units look awesome right from the core to the elite units.

The fact that there are only 3 tiers not means that units of each tier balance out better and won't be as weak compared to the next tier as say tier 1 was to tier 5 or 6 in the old games.

Originality is key for a great game.

mcgslo
11-23-2010, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by dchalfont:
I agree on all points, in every other heroers the lower tier units not only got so exponentially weak towards the end that they weren'ty worth having, but they also looked like crap compared to higher tier units. In MMH6 the units look awesome right from the core to the elite units.


I dont know how many games of let say H3 or H5 have you played, but a lot of fights in the one big end fight have won tier 1,2,3 creatures... in H3 1000+ skeleton could beat any massed high level creatures, or 500 archer units, or 500 guardians... if armies were evenly matched than lower level creatures did make "end game like" difference

dchalfont
11-23-2010, 08:29 AM
Originally posted by mcgslo:

I dont know how many games of let say H3 or H5 have you played, but a lot of fights in the one big end fight have won tier 1,2,3 creatures... in H3 1000+ skeleton could beat any massed high level creatures, or 500 archer units, or 500 guardians... if armies were evenly matched than lower level creatures did make "end game like" difference

That was like...12 years ago...in heroes 5 specifically, lower tier units didn't count for much at all at when the game is well under way.

In H2 etc even small units had high initiative ( speed at the time ) and could actually get a turn, in H5, many lower tier units were so slow they were just extremely expendable sponges for ranged fire and costly at that due to low defense.

SwampLord450
11-24-2010, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by mcgslo:
There is Jungle tileset but Fortress is more like swamp water tileset? Jungle fit more to Sylvan or new Jungle based faction...

I dont agree with you wdcryer. You cant perfect balance heroes games. Even if you somewhat balance creatures there will always be diference in attack, defence, level of hero, diferent skill sets, magic, resistance, and some other random effects. So what good will only 3 factions for sake of balance do? You (I) will get bored very soon.

So again more Faction the better i want at least 9+ faction with addons...

If you look at H3 Fortress, it would actually fit perfectly into a jungle tileset; the vaguely Aztec theme of a lot of H3's Fortress works really well with a jungled environment, imo. If it's Sylvan I will be very disappointed; they don't make much sense for a jungle, as they always live in traditional woodlands, and I don't find them very interesting as a town in general. Especially since they got elfed up in H5. :P

zenithale
11-25-2010, 02:19 PM
Fortress is my favorite town from all Heroes games, with dragonflies, hydras and heroes with huge Defense. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

Destruction3402
11-27-2010, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by zenithale:
Fortress is my favorite town from all Heroes games, with dragonflies, hydras and heroes with huge Defense. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif
...And the mighty gorgon!
I love Fortress in H3! Mindblowing townscreen, music, monsters, heroes, everything!

wdcryer
11-29-2010, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by mcgslo:
I dont agree with you wdcryer. You cant perfect balance heroes games. Even if you somewhat balance creatures there will always be diference in attack, defence, level of hero, diferent skill sets, magic, resistance, and some other random effects. So what good will only 3 factions for sake of balance do? You (I) will get bored very soon.

So again more Faction the better i want at least 9+ faction with addons...

I'm not saying it will make it possible to make the factions perfectly balanced, but it will make it a lot easier to make them comparable, and in a game like this that's very important. The less variables you have to balance the better. With 9+ factions it would be incredibly difficult to make it so some factions didn't suck compared to others. I'd rather they spend their time developing 5 interesting, fleshed out factions than making 9+ with the same amount of development time. I'm sure they'll add more in expansions, anyway.

I think a some sort of fortress/naga town would fit perfectly in this game. A lot of the screenshots have shown a lush jungle tileset that would be perfect for that kind of faction.

C_h_u_c_k_l_e_s
11-29-2010, 04:08 PM
Well, I for one don't miss Heroes 3 Fortress town. Simply because I still play Heroes 3. :O)

Now would I like to see a town heavily populated by beasts/creatures instead of humanoids? Sure. But in H6...nope, I ain't sayin' NOTHING. You've just gotta wait and see. But until then, fire up H3!

SandroTheMaster
11-29-2010, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by C_h_u_c_k_l_e_s:
Well, I for one don't miss Heroes 3 Fortress town. Simply because I still play Heroes 3. :O)

Now would I like to see a town heavily populated by beasts/creatures instead of humanoids? Sure. But in H6...nope, I ain't sayin' NOTHING. You've just gotta wait and see. But until then, fire up H3!

Is that an admission of a back-to-its-roots new Dungeon with a heavy emphasis on classic monsters?

I sure hope so! Minotaurs, medusas, harpies, hydras, dragons, troglodytes, beholders, manticores... bring them all (or rather, fit in everything that you can fit)

Jester64
11-29-2010, 06:46 PM
Fortress is my personal favourite from Heroes III.

Factions I want in Heroes 6:

Haven
Inferno
Necropolis
Sylvan
Stronghold (Orcs)
Academy

Factions in the expansion packs.

Fortress (Swamp)
Dungeon (The one from Heroes III)


The recent additions like Dwarves and Inferno seem a little too in-versatile. They all just seem to be variations of the same thing.

I love the atmosphere of Fortress, and the music. Paul Romero must come back.

Ygds11
11-29-2010, 07:53 PM
Chuckles...that's just naughty. How could you bait us like that? Just kidding. But I have to say that variation has always been an attractant for me in this frachise. The Fortress' uniqueness was what made it stand out. I pleased with H5's inclusion of the wyvern in Stronghold, and their cultural adaptation of it.

However I would love see both factions have a slight redo. The Stronghold should not be populated only by orcs. As I recall ogres and trolls are also supposed to be their. Now perhaps they were there in "spirit" in H5 but their is something about seeing these units in their classical incarnation that is more gratifying.

As for the fortress, it continues to be my favorite, all of it's characteristics are just incredible. The town music, the special abilities of the units, the heroes (gnolls and lizard people) and the emphasis on defense and tanking units. Gnolls were awesome, yes they are a D&D rip-off but they just felt right, and they played great, I never have to worry about my 500 gnolls during a siege.

The serpent flies were truly original (as far as I know) and though a hashed together chimera of sorts, were by far one of the most useful units in the game. not so high in level that they were expensive and able to grow in numbers at a rate that always ensured a sufficient supply.

The gorgon was my favorite, destroying level seven creatures was a blast. Never needed more than 40 of them.
However the hydra needs to stay where it is. It is part of the Dungeon Faction, and should stay there. Personally I would not mind the basilisk taking that position. However a better one might be this australian mythological beast from aborigine folk lore I read about in a book many years ago. It's like the basilisk, but is far larger. A giant six legged frog lizard of some kind. Definitely fits. I'll see If I can find out what it is.

Anyway. I still play Homm 3 just for this faction. A good tune up is all it needs. Many people would play Tower or Dungeon merely because their top tier units are so powerful, and really overpowered in the older Homm (my opinion, see when 4 Black dragons take out 7 chaos hydras with a defense boost of 24 with bless and stone skin, I begin to wonder what's going on).
As long as the faction is not underpowered or overpowered. Fortress was way underpowered in Homm 3 this time around make fortress competitive. that's all I have to say. looking forward to the big reveal in the next few weeks.

Ygds11
11-29-2010, 08:03 PM
I nobody really cares, but the creature I was thinking of is called a Whowie. A google search won't give you much. But I have always thought it would make a great addition, even if the name sounds a little unimpressive in the indo-european language family.

Jester64
11-29-2010, 08:19 PM
I simply adore the atmosphere of Fortress. It was so different from ones like Inferno and Necroplis that were just devils and skeletons. Fortesses units were just so unique and varied.

The architecture almost seems rather Aztec like and it was awesome. They were very underpowered but still useful in particular situations.

What I think the tier should be

1. Dragon Flies
2. Gnolls
3. Lizardmen
4. Carniverous plant
5. Witch Doctor
6. Gorgon
7. Basilisk

SandroTheMaster
11-29-2010, 09:29 PM
Personally, seeing as how the Fortress draws from meso-american culture a bit, they could have Coatls as the top tier units.

Also, Hydras lost to Black Dragons because they're meant to attack several creatures at the same time. If you attack 2-3 creatures with the hydras their damage far surpasses the dragon (even though it was possible for the dragon to attack 2 at once it needed trickier positioning). Not to mention it didn't need to fear retaliation.

Even so, comparing Hydras with Black Dragons is nothing, try comparing with Ghost Dragons... even aged Black Dragons easily win this dispute. Ghost Dragons had to be used with care against units that couldn't retaliate to try and weaken them.

But hey, it's not like Heroes 3 was all that balanced anyway.

Ygds11
11-29-2010, 10:20 PM
Sandro you are quite correct. Positioning was a very important part of that. And bone dragons were very tricky to use, their aging effect was only truly devastating if you could hammer out the damage later.

Coatls do sound like they could be top tier, hypothetically speaking. Of course we know nothing. But I am almost certain that one of the factions in the release will have this beast heavy focus. So I have my fingers crossed.

As far as the Aztec theme goes. The architecture seemed to be meso-american, but the creatures were all either made up (well perhaps one could say that lizardmen are meso-american, but that is from extrapolation), or from European mythology or medievil nature guides (i.e. the Gorgon/catoblepas). however that said, the style of Black-hole seems to be a little more coherent than that, so it seems much more likely that if we do see a meso-american themed army, that it will likely draw on the meso-american stereotyped creatures. Games Workshop has already cornered lizardmen into a meso-american cultural theme. So could be that Black-hole has done the same, and the Jungle tileset will be assigned to the new lizardmen faction. Who knows. Again my fingers are constantly and tightly crossed.

C_h_u_c_k_l_e_s
11-30-2010, 06:48 AM
Originally posted by SandroTheMaster:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by C_h_u_c_k_l_e_s:
Well, I for one don't miss Heroes 3 Fortress town. Simply because I still play Heroes 3. :O)

Now would I like to see a town heavily populated by beasts/creatures instead of humanoids? Sure. But in H6...nope, I ain't sayin' NOTHING. You've just gotta wait and see. But until then, fire up H3!

Is that an admission of a back-to-its-roots new Dungeon with a heavy emphasis on classic monsters?

I sure hope so! Minotaurs, medusas, harpies, hydras, dragons, troglodytes, beholders, manticores... bring them all (or rather, fit in everything that you can fit) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope. That's a tease is what that is. :O)

Smash-PL
11-30-2010, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by Jester64:
Fortress is my personal favourite from Heroes III.

Factions I want in Heroes 6:

Haven
Inferno
Necropolis
Sylvan
Stronghold (Orcs)
Academy

Factions in the expansion packs.

Fortress (Swamp)
Dungeon (The one from Heroes III)

Why Sylvan not Rampart? You really like town full of elves variations? And why Academy not Tower? I do not really like this heavy arabic themes in Academy.


The recent additions like Dwarves and Inferno seem a little too in-versatile. They all just seem to be variations of the same thing.

I love the atmosphere of Fortress, and the music. Paul Romero must come back.
You mean Barbarians other way you sentence do not make sense.

SandroTheMaster
12-01-2010, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by Smash-PL:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The recent additions like Dwarves and Inferno seem a little too in-versatile. They all just seem to be variations of the same thing.

I love the atmosphere of Fortress, and the music. Paul Romero must come back.
You mean Barbarians other way you sentence do not make sense. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heroes III Fortress its what he's talking about.

SwampLord450
12-02-2010, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by C_h_u_c_k_l_e_s:
Well, I for one don't miss Heroes 3 Fortress town. Simply because I still play Heroes 3. :O)

Now would I like to see a town heavily populated by beasts/creatures instead of humanoids? Sure. But in H6...nope, I ain't sayin' NOTHING. You've just gotta wait and see. But until then, fire up H3!

Already on it! I found my game disc again and have been playing up a storm; there go my final grades. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

There's a jungle tileset, so there must be a jungle town,right? And what would be better suited to the jungle than the Aztec and tribal architecture of HIII Fortress!

Also, I agree that the Coatl or Quetzalcoatl would be a really cool T7 for an Aztec-themed jungle faction.

Destruction3402
12-02-2010, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by SwampLord450:

Already on it! I found my game disc again and have been playing up a storm; there go my final grades. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

There's a jungle tileset, so there must be a jungle town,right? And what would be better suited to the jungle than the Aztec and tribal architecture of HIII Fortress!

Also, I agree that the Coatl or Quetzalcoatl would be a really cool T7 for an Aztec-themed jungle faction.

Coatl or Quetzalcoatl would fit perfectly! It could beneficially act as a tougher version of the Dragon fly in Heroes 3 in my opinion.

Ygds11
12-03-2010, 12:15 AM
A bigger badder serpent-fly sounds great, if indeed the coatl will fit the bill. Of all the factions ever developed this one needs a return. It was an instant classic, and a true joy to play as. Sure some fan made faqs and player guides made the statement that it was the weakest faction, but that was because they lacked insight into the factions finer details. everything was above average at low levels and below average at higher levels. The faction was designed to take a beating, and wear their opponent down. high defense combined with a large number of walkers and abilities like turning your opponents to stone, poisoning and weakness and death stare, it was merely an example of careful management. Though I still felt a little chinced on stats, My previous example of Hydras versus Black Dragons. Though it was because it offered this challenge that I loved it so. It matched my battle style perfectly, take a beating and keep on coming, meanwhile the Wizard runs out of shots and has to engage in close combat, he no longer has a chance.

Jester64
12-03-2010, 07:16 AM
I think we're on to something here. The creators and designers had better be reading all of this.

I do hope that they bring out 2 expansion packs, as is tradition. If the last 2 factions in the 5 are dungeon and academy...which they probably are, I want 1 of the expansions to have the Heroes III Fortress update. It needs it.

I miss my Dragon Flies.

SwampLord450
12-03-2010, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by Jester64:
I think we're on to something here. The creators and designers had better be reading all of this.

I do hope that they bring out 2 expansion packs, as is tradition. If the last 2 factions in the 5 are dungeon and academy...which they probably are, I want 1 of the expansions to have the Heroes III Fortress update. It needs it.

I miss my Dragon Flies.

Actually, based on the tilesets, it's likely that we won't get Dungeon or Academy in H5 base; there's confirmed to be at least one new town, and there's also a jungle tileset confirmed, so things are looking up a bit.

We know that the game has the following tilesets:
Plains (Autumn)
Plains (Summer)
Wasteland (Necropolis)
Lava (Inferno)
Jungle
Underground

Plains is likely to be Haven/Sylvan.
While it's quite possible for there to be an Underground town, no desert means no Academy, and HIII Fortress with its Aztec-themed architecture is perfectly suited for a jungle town. And I'm sure they are reading the forums; we know there is a VIP forum for certain members of the community to communicate fan input, so I'd be very surprised if Black Hole wasn't aware of what transpired on these boards.

I also agree that HIII Fortress always got a bad rap; Tazar was AMAZING, one of the best heroes in the game hands down, and most of the creatures were damn solid. Hydras could have done with some more stats and a higher base damage IMO, and Wyverns shouldn't have been as crap as they are (although you can powerstack them from hives, I suppose) but it was a great town. Dragon flies made for amazing scouts, Day 2 Wyverns were awesome, being able to upgrade powerstacked hive Wyverns to Monarchs is a big edge, Gorgons were awesome, Lizardman Warriors were solid, Basilisks were solid, and Dragon Flies were awesome with their debuff. The town's also dirt cheap, making it very easy to build on poor maps.

Fortress seemed weak at first glance, but once you went a bit deeper some very powerful strengths become apparent.

kodial79
12-03-2010, 11:56 AM
If there are jungle tiles then there's a very high possibility that Fortress will make it back. That or the new faction they're talking about, is the Naga faction. Nagas are aquatic creatures but not of the deep seas, right? I'd preffer the Lizardfolk out of the two, as long as the Dragonflies don't make it back.

SwampLord450
12-03-2010, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by kodial79:
If there are jungle tiles then there's a very high possibility that Fortress will make it back. That or the new faction they're talking about, is the Naga faction. Nagas are aquatic creatures but not of the deep seas, right? I'd preffer the Lizardfolk out of the two, as long as the Dragonflies don't make it back.

Nagas are aquatic, yeah, I believe. It's quite possible that we'd see them as a jungle faction. I'd rather not, as Nagas as a race don't hold much appeal for me, but the possibility is there nonetheless.

Jester64
12-03-2010, 10:15 PM
I don't think we should assume what factions are left by the terrain. It's a little too risky and kinda vague. Just because there's no desert (as far as we know) doesn't mean that there won't be an academy. Maybe they'll bring back Tower from Heroes III.

I think I would prefer Fortress coming back in an expansion pack. It seems like it would suit that better. It's never really been a part of the big 5; haven, inferno, necropolis, tower and dungeon.

Still there is a huge oppurtunity here that I hope they won't disregard.

SwampLord450
12-04-2010, 02:00 AM
Originally posted by Jester64:
I don't think we should assume what factions are left by the terrain. It's a little too risky and kinda vague. Just because there's no desert (as far as we know) doesn't mean that there won't be an academy. Maybe they'll bring back Tower from Heroes III.

I think I would prefer Fortress coming back in an expansion pack. It seems like it would suit that better. It's never really been a part of the big 5; haven, inferno, necropolis, tower and dungeon.

Still there is a huge oppurtunity here that I hope they won't disregard.

Actually, the "Big 5" are Castle/Haven, Sylvan/Rampart, Tower/Academy, Necropolis/Necromancer, and Barbarian/Stronghold; they're the ones that have been in the series since I or II. Remember, Inferno was a new town in HIII just like Fortress.

I also agree that the terrain doesn't let us rule out towns for certain, but each town has had a unique and distinctive tileset in every past game, and Academy does not seem like it would be present on a grass tileset in any capacity.

GoranXII
12-04-2010, 02:21 AM
Hey, don't forget Warlock/Dungeon, they've been in since H1 as well remember.

torzsoktamas
12-04-2010, 03:50 AM
Hi.I wasn't really a fan of the HeroesIII Fortress,mainly because i found them weak,...or atleast they didn't suited my style.But artistivaly it was a nice town,and I wouldn't mind if they would return:But in a new expansion.I would like to see the Academy as a 4th faction,and in my opinion that will be the case,as H6 will aslo present the rise of the necromancers,who are the enemies of the silver cities(aka Academy),..so I can't imagine that they will leave the Academy out.And I think we really can't go by the tilesets.The 5th faction will be a new one,and I think that they will really release a new faction,which wasn't used in any other series,so I can't imagine that this 5th faction would be the H3 Fortress or Tower or Stronghold.Even if they will make new creatures,it still will be an old faction.So I think they will really present a new one.
And naga faction would be cool to me.Or the Faceless,which would be even cooler.

SwampLord450
12-04-2010, 08:26 AM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
Hey, don't forget Warlock/Dungeon, they've been in since H1 as well remember.

Yeah, meant to put them in too, sorry; this is what happens when I post at 3 in the morning. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

And again, the tilesets aren't a cut-and-dry guide, but the fact that both tilesets that have been used for a wizard town are not present is pretty damning evidence that Academy won't be in, at least initially. They'd have to restyle the whole town again to fit them onto a grass template.

Jester64
12-04-2010, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by torzsoktamas:
I can't imagine that this 5th faction would be the H3 Fortress or Tower or Stronghold.Even if they will make new creatures,it still will be an old faction.So I think they will really present a new one.
And naga faction would be cool to me.Or the Faceless,which would be even cooler.

What are the "faceless"? I keep hearing about them.

Sarshazar
12-04-2010, 09:35 AM
Faceless are the Dark Elves/Warlocks

Xenofex_086
12-04-2010, 10:11 AM
Faceless are the right opposite of the Angels in Ashan and have nothing to do with elves, light or dark (except that they help the latter at one point). Probably some sort of dark angels.

SwampLord450
12-04-2010, 11:12 AM
I'd imagine that they're probably something like the Faceless from Warcraft, or Mind Flayers from D&D; tentacley-faced people that live underground.

GoranXII
12-04-2010, 12:42 PM
Elememtally they're the opposite, but remember that demons are right outside the spectrum, kind of the opposite of everyone, Perhaps especially Necropolis (who still worship Asha).

Destruction3402
12-04-2010, 08:47 PM
Maybe have one naga creature in the speculated swamp/jungle town?
I think that we can all agree that those "mono-cultural" factions are a bit dull... At least that's my opinion. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

GoranXII
12-04-2010, 09:25 PM
It makes it easier to write the lore though. Also, some of us do like our factions to feel like they'd stay together beyond the next victory, rather than feeling like they'll tear each other to bits over a piece of meat.

SwampLord450
12-05-2010, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
It makes it easier to write the lore though. Also, some of us do like our factions to feel like they'd stay together beyond the next victory, rather than feeling like they'll tear each other to bits over a piece of meat.

I think there's a happy medium to be found in between the two. Some towns in HV, Dungeon and Fortress in particular, were so heavily dominated by creatures of a single race that they began to feel a bit bland. In my opinion, the best way to represent a racial theme within a town is via say 2 racial units and a common racial theme for the heroes. No more should really be necessary.

GoranXII
12-05-2010, 02:02 AM
I'll agree to that only if you can find another 3 fantasy creatures to stick in Haven.

Xenofex_086
12-05-2010, 05:14 AM
Haven is difficult material to work with, their whole concept is too bland to allow much maneuverability. A cosmopolitan line-up for a faction which is composed of obscurantists and zealots by definition is a contradiction. I think they wasted the opportunity for a more diverse composition when they wrote the lore and decided Haven to be your regular medieval Western European closed society. With all the holy stuff and blah-blah.

Ygds11
12-05-2010, 11:39 AM
I think they wasted the opportunity for a more diverse composition when they wrote the lore and decided Haven to be your regular medieval Western European closed society. With all the holy stuff and blah-blah.

quite agreed, quite agreed....

SwampLord450
12-05-2010, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Xenofex_086:
Haven is difficult material to work with, their whole concept is too bland to allow much maneuverability. A cosmopolitan line-up for a faction which is composed of obscurantists and zealots by definition is a contradiction. I think they wasted the opportunity for a more diverse composition when they wrote the lore and decided Haven to be your regular medieval Western European closed society. With all the holy stuff and blah-blah.

Yeah, I do think casting aside the old M&M universe was the biggest mistake made when rebooting the series. It's great that they saved the series, but creating an all-new universe and completely disregarding the old and loved one was not the way to go about making a new game.

Regarding Haven/Castle/Knight, it has always been about depicting an army of medieval humans. Medieval humans, unlike elves and dwarves, do not have deep-seated associations with fantasy and myth. As such, I am fine with Haven having 4-5 human units; I don't think of fantasy and magic when I think of a medieval army. However, when I think of dwarves and elves, that calls up all kinds of mythological beasts and fantastical creatures. As such, I at least see a difference between a human town focused exclusively around one race and towns whose racial focus is a mythological creature.

Xenofex_086
12-05-2010, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by SwampLord450:
Regarding Haven/Castle/Knight, it has always been about depicting an army of medieval humans. Yes, but they tend to stick to the model of the Western European feudal society and armies when there is much, and I mean much more they can work with. Take the human cavalry in the HoMM (and not only) games. It is always some heavily armored Gendarme-like lancer. There are also horse archers, mounted skirmishers, various types of light and medium spear/sword/mace-armed cavalry, mixed archer/lancer cavalry, even the quite famous Cataphracts could be used for heavy cavalry if it so important to have a high tier mounted units and so on. And all these are easily found in Europe, so they don't have to ransack the medieval military history of the whole world for inspiration.
The organization of the society is also pretty heavily influenced by the late Western feudal model. But the feudalism is not something homogeneous too and is definitely not the only form of social organization during the Middle Ages, although it is the dominant one. There is quite a difference between the Frankish and Eastern Roman (Byzantine) feudalism. There are free cities, trade alliances (the Hanseatic League), even republics. There are so many forms that if they make a detailed search and implement some real-world models, they can create a human faction which differs quite a lot from the previous Knight/Castle/Haven stereotypes. For example, if they use the multi-culture, tolerant model of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, they can easily mix humans and non-humans and have no problems with the lore at all.

SwampLord450
12-05-2010, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by Xenofex_086:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SwampLord450:
Regarding Haven/Castle/Knight, it has always been about depicting an army of medieval humans. Yes, but they tend to stick to the model of the Western European feudal society and armies when there is much, and I mean much more they can work with. Take the human cavalry in the HoMM (and not only) games. It is always some heavily armored Gendarme-like lancer. There are also horse archers, mounted skirmishers, various types of light and medium spear/sword/mace-armed cavalry, mixed archer/lancer cavalry, even the quite famous Cataphracts could be used for heavy cavalry if it so important to have a high tier mounted units and so on. And all these are easily found in Europe, so they don't have to ransack the medieval military history of the whole world for inspiration.
The organization of the society is also pretty heavily influenced by the late Western feudal model. But the feudalism is not something homogeneous too and is definitely not the only form of social organization during the Middle Ages, although it is the dominant one. There is quite a difference between the Frankish and Eastern Roman (Byzantine) feudalism. There are free cities, trade alliances (the Hanseatic League), even republics. There are so many forms that if they make a detailed search and implement some real-world models, they can create a human faction which differs quite a lot from the previous Knight/Castle/Haven stereotypes. For example, if they use the multi-culture, tolerant model of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, they can easily mix humans and non-humans and have no problems with the lore at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree that they do have a ton of other source material to pull from, but I believe the design aesthetic of Knight/Castle/Haven has always been that of a distinctly Western medieval viewpoint. As such, while certainly interesting, I'm not sure how well stuff like horse archers and Byzantine-style knights would fit into what has always been the theme of the human town in Heroes.

Conversely, if they were to seek to change the theme, it'd definitely be a great way to take the town; I'm just not sure how I'd feel about them changing yet another town theme. At least in my opinion Dungeon is far less interesting at the moment than the Warlock or HIII Dungeon towns were; the old themes were classics for a reason.

SandroTheMaster
12-05-2010, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by Xenofex_086:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SwampLord450:
Regarding Haven/Castle/Knight, it has always been about depicting an army of medieval humans. Yes, but they tend to stick to the model of the Western European feudal society and armies when there is much, and I mean much more they can work with. Take the human cavalry in the HoMM (and not only) games. It is always some heavily armored Gendarme-like lancer. There are also horse archers, mounted skirmishers, various types of light and medium spear/sword/mace-armed cavalry, mixed archer/lancer cavalry, even the quite famous Cataphracts could be used for heavy cavalry if it so important to have a high tier mounted units and so on. And all these are easily found in Europe, so they don't have to ransack the medieval military history of the whole world for inspiration.
The organization of the society is also pretty heavily influenced by the late Western feudal model. But the feudalism is not something homogeneous too and is definitely not the only form of social organization during the Middle Ages, although it is the dominant one. There is quite a difference between the Frankish and Eastern Roman (Byzantine) feudalism. There are free cities, trade alliances (the Hanseatic League), even republics. There are so many forms that if they make a detailed search and implement some real-world models, they can create a human faction which differs quite a lot from the previous Knight/Castle/Haven stereotypes. For example, if they use the multi-culture, tolerant model of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, they can easily mix humans and non-humans and have no problems with the lore at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I see where you're going... this is Heroes of Might and Magic, not Total War or Civilization. The factions only have to be concise within the inside workings of the setting, not to mention there's a limited creature slot format to fill. The Lancer-like cavaliers may be somewhat limited in scope and use, but they are the most commonly associated figure for a "medieval knight". Even the relatively famous cataphracts don't evoke much imagery from most.

Sure, if they made stacks show more than one unit you could show a diverse "knight" or "Haven" castle show a more varied selection of cavaliers or archers, but they must still keep some sort of thematic.

Xenofex_086
12-06-2010, 01:23 AM
Well, this was valid for Heroes I-IV because they were placed in the same universe and the heroes were explicitly named Knights. When they made the transition to Heroes V however, they had an excellent opportunity to shape the factions without taking into account the previous games. Heck, even in Heroes VI they were able to do so, with all these Slavic (Eastern European) characters, respectively different types of feudal system (even the time allows this change, it is 400 years before Heroes V after all). They decided to stick to the stereotypes though. While I appreciate that the western knights and their society are much more famous (although not in details, just the very basics) than, say, the medieval Eastern European, Arabic, Turkic, Persian, Far Eastern societies, the Haven faction does not become more interesting with the repetition of one and the same pattern. And really, this commonly presented western image (usually even quite distorted) has such fame mostly because of the pop-culture movies, not because it is more interesting or whatever.

SwampLord450
12-06-2010, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by Xenofex_086:
Well, this was valid for Heroes I-IV because they were placed in the same universe and the heroes were explicitly named Knights. When they made the transition to Heroes V however, they had an excellent opportunity to shape the factions without taking into account the previous games. Heck, even in Heroes VI they were able to do so, with all these Slavic (Eastern European) characters, respectively different types of feudal system (even the time allows this change, it is 400 years before Heroes V after all). They decided to stick to the stereotypes though. While I appreciate that the western knights and their society are much more famous (although not in details, just the very basics) than, say, the medieval Eastern European, Arabic, Turkic, Persian, Far Eastern societies, the Haven faction does not become more interesting with the repetition of one and the same pattern. And really, this commonly presented western image (usually even quite distorted) has such fame mostly because of the pop-culture movies, not because it is more interesting or whatever.

Eh, personally I do prefer the Western Europe medieval look to the Eastern Europe one and would rather see that continue to represent the human faction.

Xenofex_086
12-07-2010, 01:07 AM
I believe a lot of people will agree with you and this is one of the reasons Haven to stay a "knight faction". My point was that it is stagnating this way, but the popular demand is more important here. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

GoranXII
12-07-2010, 01:35 AM
It's not just Haven that's stagnating, Academy and Sylvan aren't exactly hotspots of innovation either. In fact the whole game is stagnating really, mostly due to the fact that Ubisoft isn't prepared to do much innovation in regards to factions, thus, for all the game-mechanic that are changing, we're still playing with the same faction as we always have, which was great in the old world where less than 50 years passed between H1 and H3, but now we're talking about 400 years, it seems somewhat less plausible that so little could have changed (in the real world we're talking about the time between William the Conqueror's invasion of England and the English Civil War).

SwampLord450
12-07-2010, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
It's not just Haven that's stagnating, Academy and Sylvan aren't exactly hotspots of innovation either. In fact the whole game is stagnating really, mostly due to the fact that Ubisoft isn't prepared to do much innovation in regards to factions, thus, for all the game-mechanic that are changing, we're still playing with the same faction as we always have, which was great in the old world where less than 50 years passed between H1 and H3, but now we're talking about 400 years, it seems somewhat less plausible that so little could have changed (in the real world we're talking about the time between William the Conqueror's invasion of England and the English Civil War).

Huh? Academy changed DRAMATICALLY in appearance from HIII to HV. Maybe the lineup itself didn't change that much, but the appearance is completely different.

Anyways, Elvin on HC has confirmed that returning factions are quite different for HVI, so they may have addressed your concerns. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Smash-PL
12-07-2010, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by SandroTheMaster:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Smash-PL:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The recent additions like Dwarves and Inferno seem a little too in-versatile. They all just seem to be variations of the same thing.

I love the atmosphere of Fortress, and the music. Paul Romero must come back.
You mean Barbarians other way you sentence do not make sense. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heroes III Fortress its what he's talking about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Please reread his first sentence i quoted. Inferno is old faction, added was dwarves and barbarians.

SwampLord450
12-07-2010, 10:07 AM
Barbarians aren't really even a new addition, while they've gotten a makeover the Barbarian town hails all the way back to H1.

SandroTheMaster
12-07-2010, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
It's not just Haven that's stagnating, Academy and Sylvan aren't exactly hotspots of innovation either. In fact the whole game is stagnating really, mostly due to the fact that Ubisoft isn't prepared to do much innovation in regards to factions, thus, for all the game-mechanic that are changing, we're still playing with the same faction as we always have, which was great in the old world where less than 50 years passed between H1 and H3, but now we're talking about 400 years, it seems somewhat less plausible that so little could have changed (in the real world we're talking about the time between William the Conqueror's invasion of England and the English Civil War).

Hoplites stayed in vogue for more time than that. The entirety of the medieval times saw very little progress be it cultural or technological. Only in the last 200 years or so we saw such disparity over a relatively small time frame. If you compare 2010 to 1610 you'll see a huge difference but if you go for 810 to 1210 it is very much less so.

Not to mention that stagnant medieval fantasy settings are a very hard trope to break.

GoranXII
12-07-2010, 05:05 PM
Well Alexander The Great managed to trounce Hoplites not much more than 400 years after the Archaic Period began, and as for the difference between 810 and 1210, I'd point out that in places like Britain and the Byzantine Empire the changes were colossal. Really, the medieval stasis is the sign of someone not really trying to come up with anything better.

SwampLord450
12-07-2010, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
Well Alexander The Great managed to trounce Hoplites not much more than 400 years after the Archaic Period began, and as for the difference between 810 and 1210, I'd point out that in places like Britain and the Byzantine Empire the changes were colossal. Really, the medieval stasis is the sign of someone not really trying to come up with anything better.

"Better" is inherently subjective, though. I find medieval history and medieval culture fascinating, so I really like the traditional medieval Knight/Castle/Haven. Others who don't enjoy that culture and time period as much may not enjoy those towns, but it's inherently a subjective thing when you get right down to it.

GoranXII
12-07-2010, 08:00 PM
Except that both H5 Haven and H6 Haven are basically set in the last 2 centuries of a period that lasted almost a millenium. I'm sorry, but I just find it illogical that so little could have changed in such a long time.

SwampLord450
12-07-2010, 10:42 PM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
Except that both H5 Haven and H6 Haven are basically set in the last 2 centuries of a period that lasted almost a millenium. I'm sorry, but I just find it illogical that so little could have changed in such a long time.

As has been pointed out, some cultures actually have stagnated to that degree in history. Not all, but some do, and that's enough to support Haven doing so.

Furthermore,
you'll note that the architecture of H5 Haven is quite different from that of HVI. It looks far more advanced; the H5 citadels practically defy gravity.

GoranXII
12-08-2010, 12:33 AM
Those cultures that have stagnated have tended to be small (Haven certainly isn't) and in such a hard way that pretty much their whole time is taken up with just surviving.

Also, the architecture changing is a bit of an issue, since that sort of thing generally happens 'slower' than cultural changes, as a result of buildings taking ages to build (more than 100 years in the case of some of the cathedrals).

Xenofex_086
12-08-2010, 01:57 AM
Actually the level of technological advancement and military organization suggests that the Havens in both Heroes V and Heroes VI are late medieval western-type factions and even that Haven in Heroes VI is slightly more advanced than Haven in Heroes V. The full plate armor forging techniques and proliferation were developed in the late Middle Ages and somewhat coincided with the introduction of the gunpowder on the European battlefields. The "knights in shining armours" - which are present in both Heroes V and Heroes VI, not to mention other slodiers with similar gear - were nowhere to be found during the first 6-7 centuries of the European medieval period (and the knights on shining horses appeared in the late 2010, mind you). Their armour, although clearly superior to the common soldier's, wasn't that "awesome" and usually included some type of chain mail, some protective gear for the legs and the hands of similar design and a helmet.
Furthermore, the Heroes VI Haven army is more professional than the Heroes V one, where conscription seems to be heavily employed, which is another sign that Heroes VI Haven is more advanced (but still it is the same cliche faction). So these guys seem to be moving backwards. I am almost certain that none of the designers tought about it so much though. The "it's a fantasy world, we can do whatever we want" rule applies.

kodial79
12-08-2010, 04:40 AM
I think you're looking too much into it. Hmm, the best way to say this, is by giving another example. The Succubus design from Heroes 5 is nothing like the one in Heroes 6. This doesn't mean that Succubi changed their appearance over the ages, it's just the need for a design to be more refreshing, creative and detailful than the previous one. I think that's just all there's to it. The artists and devs did not mean to show us any signs of technological advance from 6 to 5 with their designs of Haven town and its units. They just wanted to out-do their previous design and present us with something even better. So the change in the appearance of some units has nothing to do with the game's lore.

Anyway, as we all know, there isn't a lot of technological advancement to any High Fantasy themed games. The main human empire seems to always be in the same as Haven/Castle has always been. This is a classic standard to almost every such world created out there. Sure, there are lesser human kingdoms or tribes all around that represent other cultures of the real world; and maybe, far to the East, a huge Oriental one. But there always have to be a human kingdom in that fashion, the Medieval Ages of Western Europe. High Fantasy worlds are timeless concerning technological advancement. There's no realistic explanation about that, even though could blame it on the existence of magic. You know, since there's magic providing with an easy way to achieve their goals, they don't need to work their brains for it. But I think that's false, it's just probably that High Fantasy games are conservative in nature or they would be High Fantasy no longer.


If you would introduce technological advancement to a High Fantasy setting, and try to be as realistic as possible about it; in time it would turn to a Steampunk themed setting, you can be sure about that. Then you would have to include firearms, electricity, etc. and well, we don't want that happening, do we? So you have two options: You either keep it in a minimum timeframe so you would not have include any technological advancement or you exclude technological advancement from your world right out. But ofcourse High Fantasy settings can't do without their "100 years before/after..." stories and so, it's just more prefferable to choose the latter option.

Jester64
12-08-2010, 05:51 AM
Gremlins with their gunpowdered canon things is the most "technologically advanced" it should get. If this is set a couple hundred years before 5 then nothing like that should exist. It's all bows, arrows and magic. Not primitive guns.

I've been playing a lot of Heroes III recently. Is anyone else disappointed by Lizardmen, the ONLY ranged attackers of Fortress? Not by the fact they were weak but that they didn't have some kind of awesome ability. They're freakin lizards, why not something like "cold blood" or "heat vision" or "loose tail" or something like that. They just seem kinda boring.

I honestly would want Fortress to come back over Naga, but so much stuff is pointing to a Naga race. If it's not that then a lot of people are going to get suprised. Although I'm still hoping for a Kraken boss fight.

GoranXII
12-08-2010, 11:31 AM
@kodial, this is set ~400 years before H5, I don't expect the technology to be better, I expect it to be worse, ie, like what was around in the 11th century, rather than a seemingly carbon-copy of H5 Haven.

SwampLord450
12-08-2010, 12:14 PM
Not necessarily true; one might recall that in Lord of the Rings the technological level of the main human faction, Gondor, actually decreases with time.
Obviously this isn't true for the whole world, but Gondor itself regresses technologically. Same thing could have happened to Haven.

@Jester-I actually really like Lizard Warriors. They don't have anything flashy like Double Shot, but they are INCREDIBLY tough; with Tazar they are like brick walls.

torzsoktamas
12-08-2010, 12:30 PM
This technological regression is applyable for the roman empire too.The legions of the principate were way better soldiers than the ones at the fall of roman empire.They had better equipment too.

kodial79
12-08-2010, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
@kodial, this is set ~400 years before H5, I don't expect the technology to be better, I expect it to be worse, ie, like what was around in the 11th century, rather than a seemingly carbon-copy of H5 Haven.

Doesn't matter which came first, I was trying to make a point on why there should not be any technological advancement in the series.

IMHO, design-wise only, this is the best Knight faction to ever grace the HOMM series. This is how it always should have been.

SandroTheMaster
12-08-2010, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by Jester64:
Gremlins with their gunpowdered canon things is the most "technologically advanced" it should get. If this is set a couple hundred years before 5 then nothing like that should exist. It's all bows, arrows and magic. Not primitive guns.


*cough, cough*Laserweapons*cough, cough*

One thing that some die-hard Heroes fans like to forget (and really annoyed me throughout the development of Heroes V and cries of despair over the possibility of the Assassin having a submachine gun) is that the Might & Magic series (like other classic PC RPGs) was always a mixture of High Fantasy and Sci-fi. Sure, technology was scarce and only great planetary heroes got to get blasters and laser rifles, but some technological anachronism shouldn't raise eyebrows. Or at least shouldn't raise eyebrows from true Might and Magic fans http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

All in good humor though. Albeit I do miss the non-conventional fantasy brand from those times.

SwampLord450
12-08-2010, 09:44 PM
@Sandro- I miss that stuff! The old M&M world was so unique... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

kodial79
12-09-2010, 12:33 AM
Assassins with submachine guns? Heh... I don't even wanna know!

But to be honest, I'm glad that sci-fi/fantasy mix of the old world now belongs to the past. To me, it was a bad idea to begin with and I believe that's why it never showed up again in the HOMM series and the later M&M installments.

Think about it, how ridiculous would any HOMM game be, if somehow any of these sci-fi elements found their way to the game...

And it's not as unique as the lot of you think...

Xenofex_086
12-09-2010, 05:33 AM
It's not like they didn't try. (http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/heroes3ab/forgetown.shtml) For some reason though, too many people find the idea of fantasy world violated by a sci-fi elements unpleasant. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Like the standard, repeated 1434574567 times Tolkien-like fantasy world isn't colossally humdrum already, after being copied in 9 out of 10 games placed in a fantasy realm. But I guess it's a matter of taste (I can only comfort myself that my taste is better the these people's http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif).
In any case, the "it was a mistake" part was the fundamental driving force behind 9 RPG games and and 4 TBS games situated in one and the same universe. You can ignore it, but you can not deny it. Devils fly on space ships and goblins use blasters. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Anyway, as we all know, there isn't a lot of technological advancement to any High Fantasy themed games. The main human empire seems to always be in the same as Haven/Castle has always been. This is a classic standard to almost every such world created out there. As I said, the pop-culture is to blame for this. Some people probably even think that the Middle Ages were all about kings, knights, crusades and that sort of stuff and will not acknowledge that Western Europe was among the most backward civilized placed in the medieval world until the Renaissance - culturally, scientifically and technologically surpassed by other peoples which are generally frowned upon after the beginning of the Modern Age.

SwampLord450
12-09-2010, 11:21 AM
While it definitely can be a little jarring, I liked the way it came through in the HoMM games; it was always in the background as a suggestion, but wasn't as blatant as people running around with laser guns.

And regardless of how unique it is compared to some settings, it's certainly more unique than your average "high fantasy" world setting.

Ygds11
12-09-2010, 02:09 PM
The mythos framework of the Old was not as original as one might think, but it was original enough to set it apart. To give an example, what do you see when you look up fantasy video games? You see the same mythos rehashed with different names. Now as for storyline, well good luck making something original there. The trick is always to embed the unexpected within the stereotyped layout, that is what can make a high fantasy game brilliant as opposed to mediocre.

the other, more terrible and dangerous way, is to invent a mythos. Breaking stereotypes, dissolving old concepts, like human power lust, Elven wisdom and orcish barbarism. Personally I would love to see a game where the orcs are the civilized cultured people and the elves are tribal brutish creatures, it would just make my day. Also to see one that breaks down the classical designs of yesteryear, and reconstructs them. As relevant and amazing as the work of Tolkien is, it certainly should not form the basis for all other high fantasy archetypes, which it has persisted in doing for...longer than Gandalf's beard by now.

Some have broken this, but are often referred to as Low Fantasy. Such as the Diablo or Fable mythos(es). Personally I believe Diablo made the transition to high fantasy as soon as grand warfare was introduced. Homm6 though, seems to be shaping up nicely, even though we know so little about it. I will be happy as long as the jungle theme doesn't have giant frogs in it, unless they include the WHowie,that would be freakin awesome.

GoranXII
12-09-2010, 10:37 PM
Personally I would love to see a game where the orcs are the civilized cultured people and the elves are tribal brutish creatures, it would just make my day.
What about this then, humans are feudal, ruled over by despotic kings, with the church made up of semi-psychotic monks with magical powers (working magic ruins the mind). One said monk, less psychotic than the rest eventually rebels and runs away to raise an army and overthrow all this and put some decent people in power. Of course the first likely creatures he comes across are orcs, quiet tribal creatures that just want to be left alone. Of course, while the lone wizard is less psychotic than his companions, he's hardly the most stable mind himself, and so his attempts to raise an army are not well liked by the orcs, but unfortunately they can't really rebel against his magic, and so are forced to become his unwilling slaves.

There, you go, evil humans (or at least evil leaders), psychotic wizards and sympathetic orcs. You could include xenophobic elves getting disturbed both by humans felling the forests, and by the orc army. If you want to go whole-hog, include some gold-obsessed capitalist dwarves who won't stop digging, and eventually disturb an ancient horror who just wanted to be left alone, which starts tearing the dwarves to pieces, but some humans/elves eventually end up being killed as well (collateral damage is a bugger).

MilliyBaes
12-11-2010, 10:17 PM
Goran, that scenario you came up with definitely sounds like it would be an interesting setting for a medieval fantasy game, especially for a PnP game like D&D

As for the main topic of this thread, I can't say that I really miss HoMM III's Fortress faction. Don't get me wrong, they were pretty neat, and worked well in the setting of the original HoMM, but I don't see them working so well in the world of Ashan.

SwampLord450
12-11-2010, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by MilliyBaes:
Goran, that scenario you came up with definitely sounds like it would be an interesting setting for a medieval fantasy game, especially for a PnP game like D&D

As for the main topic of this thread, I can't say that I really miss HoMM III's Fortress faction. Don't get me wrong, they were pretty neat, and worked well in the setting of the original HoMM, but I don't see them working so well in the world of Ashan.

Another reason why I miss the old M&M universe. :P

Heroes VI does seem to be returning to the "realistic fantasy" atmosphere of the previous games, however.

SandroTheMaster
12-12-2010, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by SwampLord450:
Heroes VI does seem to be returning to the "realistic fantasy" atmosphere of the previous games, however.

I'm scared to ask, but what the hell is "realistic fantasy"?

SwampLord450
12-21-2010, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by SandroTheMaster:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SwampLord450:
Heroes VI does seem to be returning to the "realistic fantasy" atmosphere of the previous games, however.

I'm scared to ask, but what the hell is "realistic fantasy"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Realistic fantasy is this:
http://www.the-genies-lamp.com/images/H3_artwork/archangel.jpg

As the name implies, while it's fantasy, proportions are more or less realistic, weapons are realistic, armor looks realistic. This is the design philosophy that Heroes has always followed; even HII, while very cartoony, had very "realistic" designs.

Heroes V had very strong Warcraft/Final Fantasy influences on a lot of its units, which I disliked. Take the angel for example: very non-realistic. http://www.mightandmagic.com/HeroesV/de/artworks/hd/HOMM5_Haven_Creature_Archangel.jpg

Heroes VI seems to be shifting back to the traditional Heroes design philosophy for the most part, which I am very happy with. Heroes V units looked fine, but I just wasn't a huge fan of the whole Warcraft-inspired direction they took the art in.

I would also like to call attention to the fact that Heroes III Fortress just won a voting competition on Heroes Community to determine users' favorite town from the entire series. Obviously not a huge thing, but I just wanted to post this here in the hopes that Black Hole reads this forum to make them aware that Heroes III Fortress still has a pretty strong fan following.

Bring it back! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

kodial79
12-21-2010, 11:10 AM
I never liked the H3's Angel design. Something about having a beard didn't sit well with me and my notion of angelic genders (they're supposed to have none). I never liked the design of its wings either, too unimpressive. Not to mention that it was one of the most boring designs in the entire game. I mean there was nothing divine about him, he was just a tall human with fake wings. His design had almost no details and especially the non upgraded angel who just looked like a deathly pale, diseased ridden human. Long story short, Angels of H3 didn't strike me as celestial and divine beings, just monstrous humanoids.

I definitely like H5's Archangel better than any other Angel design so far, including H6's Seraph and Celestial. Although Archangel Michael is the best yet, but since we're talking about units here, I'm not taking him into account.

I get the FF vibe in that H5's Angel has a big sword, but I don't see any Warcraft similarities. I don't care if that makes them unproportional since they look a lot better. And who says that divine beings have to look realistic? They have to look impressive, detailful, and well, divine... If anything, keeping things simple makes fantasy boring. I really don't think that's what H6 is doing. Their Angels at least look very similar to those of H5.

All of H6 designs look good so far. Save for the Breeder. The Breeder looks good but I am not so sure if that little thing above its head, is the Imp. I don't like my Imps being flying octopusses! I just don't like some of the names, (Fury and Lamassu) and other than that they're perfect. Detailful, lively and colorful, impressive and highly unproportional with those huge spikes growing here and there! XD

-----

Oh, the Fortress again... Well, if it's going to return, I would have rather it be called Pyramid (as in Mesoamerican Pyramid), being a Lizardfolk race based faction (3 at least out of 7 creatures), and none of this Gorgons, Gnolls, Basilisk and other D&D mumbo jumbo. OK, Basilisk can be in, as long as their design isn't a complete rip-off of D&D's Basilisk again. Oh, and absolutely no serpent flies! For me, they were the worst design in every Heroes game so far. Come up with better names for their heroes classes too, as Witch implies females only and there are going to be both males and females in every class of every faction, as we know. Give some cultural flavor to the lizardmen because frankly, in H3 they looked quite boring and blue scales did not fit them either. Get rid of the Beastmasters and introduce another class that's more fitting this time (If you ask me, Beastmaster was chosen because they didn't know what else to do. Beastmaster could as well be in the Dungeon or Stronghold. Looks like they were just running out of ideas.), I want classes that make sense in being in a swamp based or lizardfolk faction.

Hmm...
CORE UNITS
1. Lizardman who blows venomus darts.
2. Lizardman melee defensive unit, with a spear and huge turtle shell as a shield
3. Lizardmen riding velociraptors, fast strikers

ELITE UNITS
1. Gorgon Dark Magic Caster and ranged attacker (Gorgon as Medusa is a Gorgon)
2. Basilisk, completely re-worked and re-imagined.
3. Wyvern

CHAMPION: Hydra

That's a nice Pyramid! (Fortress)

Now, let me raise my huge turtle-shell shield to prepare for SwampLord450's bashing!! XD

Pitsu
12-21-2010, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by kodial79:
Long story short, Angels of H3 didn't strike me as celestial and divine beings, just monstrous humanoids.


And considering the MM backstory they ARE "monstrous humanoids" not celestial or divine beings...

kodial79
12-21-2010, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by Pitsu:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kodial79:
Long story short, Angels of H3 didn't strike me as celestial and divine beings, just monstrous humanoids.


And considering the MM backstory they ARE "monstrous humanoids" not celestial or divine beings... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, I got that piece of information from somewhere too. And I've been trying to ignore it ever since.

Xenofex_086
12-21-2010, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by kodial79:
I never liked the H3's Angel design. Something about having a beard didn't sit well with me and my notion of angelic genders (they're supposed to have none). Why are they supposed to have none? There is some Angel-drawing manual published by the god of some of the religions that have angels? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
The HoMM III Archangel deliberately looks like a Greek warrior (and the HoMM 3 Arch Devil deliberately looks like his "dark side") and his whole presence, movement and attack screamed "respect" without being overdone. The HoMM V Angel and Archangel screamed "give me bloody normal sword, wings and remove the damn hood (Archangel) - how am I supposed to fight with this trash?!" It's a taste thing mostly. Some people like it realistic and rational, other - shiny and awesome.

GoranXII
12-21-2010, 12:18 PM
My choice for a Fortress faction would have been:
Core
Lizardman Hunter
Monitor Lizard
Snapping Turtle

Elite
Lizardman Warrior
Lizardman Shaman
Wyvern

Champion
Giant Crocodile

kodial79
12-21-2010, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Xenofex_086:
Why are they supposed to have none? There is some Angel-drawing manual published by the god of some of the religions that have angels? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
The HoMM III Archangel deliberately looks like a Greek warrior (and the HoMM 3 Arch Devil deliberately looks like his "dark side") and his whole presence, movement and attack screamed "respect" without being overdone. The HoMM V Angel and Archangel screamed "give me bloody normal sword, wings and remove the damn hood (Archangel) - how am I supposed to fight with this trash?!" It's a taste thing mostly. Some people like it realistic and rational, other - shiny and awesome.

There's a reason that bearded angels are such a rarity in whatever movie, game, book, comic, painting etc... It's just not becoming on them!

If you ask me, the Archangel of H3 screamed "I need to shave!" while the H3 Angel screamed "I need a doctor!".

But yeah, I agree, it's a taste thing.

Ygds11
12-21-2010, 01:44 PM
Oh where to begin with the Angel issue!

First, I am going to suppose everyone knows the archaic meaning of the Hebrew word for Angel, right? It meant messenger, that's it (if you want more details it had the four character root of maim, lahmed, aleph and quoff, and was Mahl'ah'kah). The term became related to "winged" messengers from heaven in Ezekiel I believe and Isaiah. Before then, they were just messengers and many "angels" may have actually been humans, but this is conversation for another type of forum.

Art and religion has made the Angel a representation of Deity interaction with mankind, and so H5 did well with having them be the racial representatives of the Dragon of Light. All good, actually quite clever. My dispute continues to be that they are feminized and really don't look threatening.

When I think of a heavenly messenger, something capable of holding back mortal armies single handedly, I think of something much more impressive. This does not mean I favor H3 any more, cause while good for it's time, I don't think it would translate well in 3D.

The H5 angel had pinkish wings!! I'm OK with bright colors, what I don't like is beardless battle gown wearing pussies. What their wearing is a skirt, not a stylized robe, it's a bloody skirt!! I won't push for realism, but I will push for impressive.

It looks more like some super weird anime cartoon about Red riding hood turning into a super hero. I hate the look. If the hood is that big don't show any face, make the sex ambiguous. (by the way gender neutrality of angels has it's origin in philosophical resolutions concerning their identity carried out by Catholic philosophers and some gnostic traditions, and their male identity is preserved in hebrew scripture, though I need to look at my greek again for New Testament stuff).

The angel is too new age. I would love to see one that has more of a babylonian mixed with roman look, like they come from a culture that was more advanced than but pre-dating the medievil themed Haven. Give them spears and round shields, even battle masks would be great.


Now to start on something else, the D&D mumbo jumbo mentioned by Kodial79. Kodial79, I am really sorry I disagree with you so much, but again I have to make a point. I will agree that the beholder and gnoll are blatant rip-offs of D&D. Serpent-flie concept is more about taste, do you like it or not? It's subjective.

However I am sick and tired of the Gorgon and basilisk being totted as D&D rip-offs. I will admit a similarity in the art, to a degree, but the figures were both easily derived from classical descriptions.

First off, already wrote a post in another thread, the gorgon is not a gorgon in the greek sense but it is one in another sense. The creature is really the scaled bovid with poisonous breath and a deathly stare first described by Pliny the Elder called a Catoblepas. Called a gorgon in some encyclopeadias because of it's singular ugliness.

In some myth encyclopedias the cockatrice/basilisk is described in some as serpentine, but in others as a six-legged lizard like entity, though I think the head was supposed to be that of a *****. A chickens head however doesn't look very intimidating, so a more stylized lizards head was used in fantasy worlds. Sorry but the references for this are at my local library, and I have found the internet not very well stocked when it comes to this kind of information.

Were the character sprites influenced by popular culture, you bet, was it a rip-off, not really.


you ask me, Beastmaster was chosen because they didn't know what else to do. Beastmaster could as well be in the Dungeon or Stronghold. Looks like they were just running out of ideas.

I can't really speak authoritatively about what the devs were thinking, but beastmaster is exactly what I would choose as a might class for this faction. Since most of it's units were non-sentient creatures, the heroes should be people who are experts in coordinating and training the beasties for war. A fascinating way of fighting in my opinion. Any person who can accurately command thousands of creatures in large scale battle deserves the moniker beastmaster.

Your idea for the line up of a lizardman faction on the other hand sounds great. I don't think we'll find hydras anywhere else but dungeon though (sad I know). I personally would not include three lizardmen units, but placing them as core I think is a very good idea, they should form the bulk of their units.

But as I said before, since the gorgon of H3 was actually a Catoblepas, I would love to see it's return instead of the Greek Gorgon (medusa archetype). Just my opinion, really your line-up works for me.

The only problem is the fortress is not the fortress we remember, unless it includes this atypical saturation with non-sentient and non-anthropomorphic units.

My optimum fortress would be an army which is the product of a physically strong people with a slow generation time, and consequently small numbers. They compensate for their low numbers by being able to domesticate and train creatures that are so dangerous that other nations would be hard pressed to even survive the attempt.

I do think a reptilian species is good for this, since the reptilian theme was part of the original fortress. But anything swampy would work. Also an emphasis on slow moving tanking melee units, only one or two flyers and maybe a ranged unit. Maybe based off of the Ylane of West of Eden.

My line-up would be:

Core:
Ahuizotl: small skirmishers, able to attack in front and behind. Trained to wield a dagger in it's tail hand

Lizardman degenerate: Malformed or misbegotten ones, sent in because the majority of broods produce these, mute stupid and expendable. Eaten by the other creatures to refill health and gain bonuses.

Basilisk: Smaller than H3 and more patronage paid to it's chicken headed like inspiration. (this got edited for some reason when I typed the proper term for male chicken, that's funny)

Elite:
Lizardman overseer: A lizardman, that uses an atlatl instead of a bow, and has the ability to increase the defense and attack power of other units around it.

Gorgon/Catoblepas: yes I know kill me

Wyvern: always thought it should be here.

Champion: Whowie. Only because the Hydra will likely not be here (well the Ahuizotl is just as unlikely as is this list!). look into it, it's a great creature, like a huge gluttonous frog. I could see this thing swallowing up whole armies of lesser creature.

Will this happen, don't think so. But other creatures that might fit are grindylow, kelpy, dobhar-chu, bunyip (not the pop-culture one, the scary creature of Aborigine myth), minhocao or Uncegila.

The real theme of fortress was it's domination by non-sentient creatures. An illogical set-up for military conquest, but one that is very disparate from classical ideas of warfare, getting other species to do it for them. The old Dungeon came close, but it's feel was different.

Anyway, my 2 cents.

kodial79
12-21-2010, 03:13 PM
@Ygds11

I think you misunderstand the meaning of being 'non-sentient'. The entire line-up of Fortress was sentient, non-sentient are the Golems and mindless Undead such as zombies and skeletons (even though in Heroes 3, skeletons were kind of sentient as they made a habit of gossiping about Sandro's flirting with a young necromancer girl.... And then people are telling me they like this better than Heroes V? Aaah!).

Anyway, I know what you mean. But still the Beastmaster could be applied to Dungeon and Stronghold and with a little imagination to other factions as well. He's nothing particular to the Fortress only. I wanna see a class the makes sense as a jungle or swamp dweller or something for the culture that has been chosen for the race that dominates that faction, that will help the faction flesh out some identity for itself.

I know that stuff about the Angels being Messengers, ofcourse. Besides Angel in Greek means just that: Messenger. Now I watch a lot of Anime but I still don't get any anime vibes from watching the Angels or any other Heroes V unit. To be honest, they're not the way I would like them to be either, but what I'm saying is that for me, they're the best design of Angels that appeared in the Heroes series. With H3 design being boring, H4 ridiculous, H6 is good I guess but I can't get over the dual sword wielding thingie.

The way I personally imagine the Angels, is the ultimate villains (I believe though that H6 might wanna pull something like that off with Archangel Michael cause I read somewhere that he's a major antagonist of the game), watching them must make you feel they're masking cruelty and what passes for pity is actually hate for what they consider to be impure. That's just my views though. Heroes' Angels aren't far from this, they just don't look the part so much.

As for their appearance, I like it if it's obvious that they're asexual, emotionless and calm, mysterious all the same. Again I think Heroes V came pretty close on that. I don't care about the outfit as long as it's impressive and the wings ought to be big enough to inspire awe. I would rather them hold a flaming sword but that's alright too.


Now, no matter how much you're trying to excuse 3DO's ripping off D&D, there's no point. To put it simply, if these monsters weren't in D&D, they would not have appeared as units in H3, and that's a fact! Do you doubt that the Gorgon, the Basilisk, and many other units would not be in the game if it weren't for D&D? Especially for some of them, it just looks like they opened a Monstrous Manual and just copied what they saw there. Well, not for the Beholder apparently. They based that monster on the freaking Flying Spaggheti Monster!

It's not just similarity in art. They're completely the same. D&D got it wrong with the Gorgon, and Heroes 3 just copied that mistake and not just appearance but the abilities too. That only proves it. They took it from D&D, and they didn't even care to find out anything else about the creature they put in their game.

The Catoblepas is a good choice for a swamp champion, but I think the Hydra is better. Creatures have been changing factions in every game of the series, so why not again? Kelpie could serve as a mount to the Hero of the faction, that'd be nice... But oh well, they already created the new faction so giving pointers now is useless.

Xenofex_086
12-21-2010, 04:05 PM
People, this kind of discussion is not for this forum. The angel concept is older than the Christianity and Judaism, there is no universal angel model (some descriptions of these beings can make their mainstream lovers shoot themselves) and their appearance varies per religion and per region. One can write a few volumes only about the origin of the idea and its later development. But that's not the point. This is about whether you like realistic drawing, with less "awesome" and more common sense, or you like non-realistic models, which make no sense at all, but look cool (or stupid, depending on the point of view).

SwampLord450
12-21-2010, 04:20 PM
At least in my eyes, the Heroes III Angel looked like a real battle-ready warrior, while the HV Angel looks like an androgynous fop that just flew out of Final Fantasy with the silly hood and the keyblade. :P
I recognize this is inherently subjective, but that's my view on the issue.

In any case, I was mainly posting to call attention to the fact that Fortress won the competition at HC. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

And people, HoMM has always been about taking creatures from mythology and D&D, changing the design and such and putting them together into factions; that's the charm of the series. The creatures aren't original, but they never have been, and I like it better that way. What other game lets me fight armies of Medusas and Nagas with Hydras and Wyverns?

Destruction3402
12-21-2010, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by kodial79:

There's a reason that bearded angels are such a rarity in whatever movie, game, book, comic, painting etc... It's just not becoming on them!

If you ask me, the Archangel of H3 screamed "I need to shave!" while the H3 Angel screamed "I need a doctor!".

But yeah, I agree, it's a taste thing.

Wow, you're the first one I've seen that actually preferred Heroes V art over Heroes III art.
I'd take Heroes III angels/archangels over the angels in Heroes V any day of the week.

Definitely a matter of taste, I think the H5 angels has too much stuff going around, for example the disc going on behind it with the star of david, the red sword and having no legs (?!?)
The archangel's beard I think looks awesome, it adds to the masculinity and gives the impression of high hierarchy, which is what being an archangel is all about.

But I do respect your opinion! :P

Arekkusu1
12-21-2010, 06:55 PM
I agree that Fortress would be nice to see again...

But honestly, it wouldn't be a game breaker if it wasn't included. The creature I like best in Fortress is the Hydra and that is technically a Dungeon creature. (4/5 games in dungeon).

I would much rather see dungeon or sylvan return (not like heroes 5, but more like 3). If these are not in the game, then they should be released in a later expainsion, alongside the fan favorite, Fortress.

kodial79
12-22-2010, 02:24 AM
@SwampLord450

I think H1 and H2 designs have not been based on their D&D counterparts. They were generic designs though. H4 designs could have been taken from D&D but they were so ridiculous and failed that I must have not noticed. I really think it's only H3 that was actually copy pasting the Monstrous Manual's designs for their in game units. You see the DIDN'T change the designs, take second edition's Monster Manual and see for yourself. They're not just identical, they're their twins! Ofcourse I'm not talking about all of the creatures there, but many of them.


@Destruction3402

It's not a matter of which designs are better since it's all about taste. And it's not even like that for me, H5's designs are better than H3. What is this all about, is that H3 fans refuse to see any qualities on H5 and any faults on H3. Unless you call them out on that, like I do now. That's what I don't like, they're not being fair to H5, for nostalgia's sake. Nostalgia's sweet but let go already! If you like H3 so much, go back to play it and don't care about what comes next.

Xenofex_086
12-22-2010, 02:47 AM
Originally posted by kodial79:
What is this all about, is that H3 fans refuse to see any qualities on H5 and any faults on H3. Unless you call them out on that, like I do now. That's what I don't like, they're not being fair to H5, for nostalgia's sake. Nostalgia's sweet but let go already! If you like H3 so much, go back to play it and don't care about what comes next. Wow, what do you mean by this? The flaws of Heroes III have nothing to do with the art style. I will dislike the Angel from Heroes V and all similar pompous, ridiculously looking drawings no matter whether they are made for Heroes or for random other project. I guess you will hate bearded Angels everywhere too. That's it.

Ygds11
12-22-2010, 03:16 AM
A few things Kodial79, I wrote my post merely to illustrate another mechanistic pathway for the art designs of the Basilisk and Gorgon, not excuse the extensive use of contemporary media.

Also I did not incorrectly use sentience for the context I was talking about. If this were philosophy you bet I would use sapience as the correct technical term. In the creative writing realm sentience is sufficient to illustrate non-human level intelligence.

Now there is a problem here. I cannot say that the H3 angel design as it was would translate nicely into H5 but for it's context with comparison to it's contemporaries it looked just fine. The H5 Angel on the other hand seems to be a by-product of too many late nights with final fantasy.

heroes has changed from installment to installment. From movie vampires in H2 (bluh!) to gothic sword wielding children of death(which IMO was a great move) in H6, things must change, but they ought to change for the better.

The Angel does not fit it's context, to see one that would have,see the awesome plate armored Angel from the H5 teaser trailer. That's what should have been. Same goes for the Devil design in that cinematic teaser.

they were both utterly unbelievable, were new in style and honored and improved previous installments. In the same vein, what do people think of a comparison between the H4 Devil and The H5 devil? In this case I side more with H5's pitbull demon than the fork handed red skull from H4. So really, H5 did not do too bad artistically, it at least did not recreate that mess.

But again all art is subjective. I personally believe in majority rulings on such issues. In this case, the forum seems mostly on the position that favors the H3 angel over the H5 angel. I only argue that perhaps the H5 Angel is the result of an overlooked teaser trailer. I think they need to bring that look to the game, if they are ever looking for an alternative.

Oh, also, I did not place the Catoblepas as a champion, I reserved that for the Whowie (see last post).

kodial79
12-22-2010, 08:30 AM
@Xenofex_086

Actually I find the major flaws of Heroes III lied in the art of it. The way I see it, little to no effort was put into creating all of those units. Half of them were oversimplistic designs and the other half were copied and pasted from D&D. Most of the non generic, original efforts were way too silly too, as if the designers seriously lacked in creativity. There's only a couple designs that I have to admit they're any good (e.g. the Troglodyte). Heroes V definitely had better designs, they were more colorful, more lively and detailful. An effort was made too, to make every design special instead of just having generic units in the game. They gave them identity, background stories, cultural flavors, etc.

Only H3 fans like bearded Angels. :P
And let me tell you this for a fact! If it were the other way around, if H5 was a bearded Angel and H3 the androgynous one, you'd still be moaning about not liking H5's angels. One of the reasons would be that they have a beard and look too masculine. Admit that I'm right!!! :P


@Ygds_11

See, that's exactly what I'm talking about. It's not ok to use FF's art as inspiration but it's ok to actually copy D&D's designs. That's the untold reasoning of a H3 fan. I don't know, I haven't played FF ever. So I don't know how similar looking are the Angels there with those of H5. But I bet they're not similar at all, if there even are any angels there. There's just a vague feeling about H5's Angels that reminds you of FF. That's just unfair, faulting H5 over that, and preffering H3's Daedalus, errm... Angel. Cause, yeah, I just thought about that: H3's Angels would make much more sense if they were Icarus and Daedalus. lol

Yeah, I know you didn't suggest Catoblepas as the champion. I just considered it to be a possible champion, since it was a very powerful beast.

Xenofex_086
12-22-2010, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by kodial79:
@Xenofex_086

Actually I find the major flaws of Heroes III lied in the art of it. The way I see it, little to no effort was put into creating all of those units. Half of them were oversimplistic designs and the other half were copied and pasted from D&D. Most of the non generic, original efforts were way too silly too, as if the designers seriously lacked in creativity. There's only a couple designs that I have to admit they're any good (e.g. the Troglodyte). Heroes V definitely had better designs, they were more colorful, more lively and detailful. An effort was made too, to make every design special instead of just having generic units in the game. They gave them identity, background stories, cultural flavors, etc.

Only H3 fans like bearded Angels. :P
And let me tell you this for a fact! If it were the other way around, if H5 was a bearded Angel and H3 the androgynous one, you'd still be moaning about not liking H5's angels. One of the reasons would be that they have a beard and look too masculine. Admit that I'm right!!! :P
Sorry, I didn't know that I'm speaking with omniscient entity. I perceived your position as mostly biased, yet open to discussion, but I guess I'm wrong. You know it all, therefor I must retire from this dispute. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

GoranXII
12-22-2010, 11:59 AM
What I always hated most about H3 was the graphics, or at least the combat graphics, those always looked terrible IMO with the way they only had one walk animation rather than 3 (I'd have included walk-'up' and walk-'down').

Ygds11
12-22-2010, 12:09 PM
What I always hated most about H3 was the graphics, or at least the combat graphics, those always looked terrible IMO with the way they only had one walk animation rather than 3 (I'd have included walk-'up' and walk-'down').

You know, playing the game again, your completely right. The walking animation sucks. But as for the graphics, I don't think they could do much better at the time.

SwampLord450
12-22-2010, 01:07 PM
Originally posted by kodial79:
@Xenofex_086

Actually I find the major flaws of Heroes III lied in the art of it. The way I see it, little to no effort was put into creating all of those units. Half of them were oversimplistic designs and the other half were copied and pasted from D&D. Most of the non generic, original efforts were way too silly too, as if the designers seriously lacked in creativity. There's only a couple designs that I have to admit they're any good (e.g. the Troglodyte). Heroes V definitely had better designs, they were more colorful, more lively and detailful. An effort was made too, to make every design special instead of just having generic units in the game. They gave them identity, background stories, cultural flavors, etc.

Only H3 fans like bearded Angels. :P
And let me tell you this for a fact! If it were the other way around, if H5 was a bearded Angel and H3 the androgynous one, you'd still be moaning about not liking H5's angels. One of the reasons would be that they have a beard and look too masculine. Admit that I'm right!!! :P


@Ygds_11

See, that's exactly what I'm talking about. It's not ok to use FF's art as inspiration but it's ok to actually copy D&D's designs. That's the untold reasoning of a H3 fan. I don't know, I haven't played FF ever. So I don't know how similar looking are the Angels there with those of H5. But I bet they're not similar at all, if there even are any angels there. There's just a vague feeling about H5's Angels that reminds you of FF. That's just unfair, faulting H5 over that, and preffering H3's Daedalus, errm... Angel. Cause, yeah, I just thought about that: H3's Angels would make much more sense if they were Icarus and Daedalus. lol

Yeah, I know you didn't suggest Catoblepas as the champion. I just considered it to be a possible champion, since it was a very powerful beast.

First, no, if the Heroes V Angel looked like the Heroes III Angel I would have loved it; Heroes VI isn't Heroes III either and I love the look of most of the Haven units so far. You're acting like I hate HV; I don't. It was a great game, and artistically some of the towns looked fine (Stronghold especially comes to mind). Some of the towns didn't, however, and insinuating that I only dislike those towns because HIII is my favorite game in the series is downright asinine.

Second, the reason I don't like them drawing on Warcraft and Final Fantasy is that Heroes has always been a realistic fantasy series, from HI to HIV-that's why I disliked the art style in HV, because they went away from what Heroes has always been and made it somewhat cartoony in comparison. It's not unfair to dislike a unit because it evokes an art style someone personally is not fond of, and there's no denying the Heroes V angel pretty strongly evokes Final Fantasy with its design.

It's also kind of ridiculous to compare a 12 year old game to a 4 year old one in terms of graphical quality... :\

Also, take another look at H2, most creatures in there can be found in D&D in some capacity.

GoranXII
12-22-2010, 03:59 PM
True, but they were also older than D&D, the same can't be said of the Beholder, the Gorgon (in its H3 style), the Basilisk (in its H3 style) and a few others I can't be bothered to check up on right now.

SwampLord450
12-22-2010, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
True, but they were also older than D&D, the same can't be said of the Beholder, the Gorgon (in its H3 style), the Basilisk (in its H3 style) and a few others I can't be bothered to check up on right now.

What was older than D&D now?

Also, how long has the D&D Basilisk looked like it does in 3.5?

GoranXII
12-22-2010, 05:20 PM
What was older than D&D now? Just about everything, I can't think of a single creature in H2 that dates back less than 60 years, and most of the creatures are much older than that.

Also, how long has the D&D Basilisk looked like it does in 3.5? Well since I don't play D&D I couldn't tell you.

SwampLord450
12-22-2010, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">What was older than D&D now? Just about everything, I can't think of a single creature in H2 that dates back less than 60 years, and most of the creatures are much older than that.

Also, how long has the D&D Basilisk looked like it does in 3.5? Well since I don't play D&D I couldn't tell you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm just wondering how long the Basilisk and D&D Gorgon have looked like they do in 3.5 because 3ed and 3.5ed actually came out after HIII. :P

Most HII creatures are in D&D in some capacity, even if they don't look like their D&D counterparts. Likewise, stuff like the Beholder and Medusa from HIII are in D&D but don't resemble their counterparts that closely.

GoranXII
12-22-2010, 10:47 PM
Well the Gorgon's been a bull since the first release, Basilisk I don't know about, but I'd say probably the same, after all, it's not like they can't just invent a new creature if they want one.

As for whether some creatures were in D&D, it doesn't matter if they were, it was who came up with them first, and the bull-Gorgon and Beholder definitely weren't around before D&D, whereas the Medusa was.

Ygds11
12-22-2010, 11:50 PM
I had a look at the D&D 3.5 monster manual, and the basilisk is very different, eight legs ( not six),chubby face, spines along it's back and more chunky overall. Again easily derived from root material. The gorgon was another creature easily derived from source material, as the D&D artwork is also disimilar in style, the scales are a different kind and the attitude of the animal is much more sinister. It also possesses a distinctive ridge on it's back and obscured eyes and a different style of horns. Again both forms easily derived from source descriptions of the Catoblepas. To be honest I am curious just how creative a person has to be to represent an original enough design for a scaley cow? Would post the art work but I believe it's copyrighted.

The essence of the arguments presented thus far seem to show more about our personal preferences than anything else. I get the sense that those who are old adherents to the franchise have greater preference for the first 3 games and newer ones for H5. This is just a show of how us old schoolers are very nostalgic, we had a steady progression of design from H1-H3, a problem with H4, then a large change in H5. H6 is starting to get back to roots artistically, which is good...for us old timers.

With a change of developers, mythos and marketing came a game which was appealing to people new to the franchise, but was only somewhat significant to older players. But I must be fair, I have not been able to run H5 on any of my computers despite the fact mine is only a year old, it lacks the ability to process it effectively without overheating for about 30seconds before it begins to stall (all effects dialed all the way down), so I have never been able to actually play the game for more than 2 hrs, during which time I got through 2 turns.

So what are we really arguing over? Is the new game turning into something we would want to play, maybe, maybe not. The artwork thus far is very good in my opinion. will the swamp town be brought back in the classical persona shown in H3, don't know.

As far as the Angel goes, long explanation short, doesn't fit, plain and simple, the new cherub is the only unit that is violating the artistic direction shown so far, because it resembles the Angel. everything else is coherent. Now I know this could be argued till the cows come home, but really, that thing doesn't scare me. The pit fiend looks scary, the fate weaver looks scary, the cyclops looks scary the cherub...not scary. does it have to be? Well answer that for yourself, scary might not be your cup of tea. Again look at the original teaser here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDcuZ0NAqGU

that's consistent, original and a complete deviation from the H3 angel, And I love it, better than the H3 Angel as far as I'm concerned. The Devil likewise. Sure it got it's butt kicked but it looked amazing. It's face was helmeted and obscured making it's identity ambiguous. This trailer got me so excited 5 years ago. But maybe it's not everyones cup of tea, i get that.

But check your sources before you raise the flags of calling foul on something. D&D rip-offs, gnolls and beholders definitely, they don't show-up in any folklore I am familiar with, and considering I have been studying mythological creatures for over 20 years, these two are totally and utterly taken from D&D.

The Gorgon and basilisk are not sourced in D&D, but both artistic variations are products of the artistic directions of the time. They both look impressive and realistic, that is, they could physically manage living in the real world. I could raise a complaint about the "pegasi" of H3 for being incapable of flight, and being called pegasi (pegasus a proper name), same with "medusas". But if you want the original inspiration for the "medusas" no one need look any further than the original Clash of the Titans. For the vampire, no further than the original hollywood Dracula. The H3 vampire "Nostferatu". The list goes on and on. They have a chance now to make something new, retaining that which was good about the old, but discarding that which was copied. In fact the basilisk and Gorgon were some of the more original designs in the franchise, come to think of it.

Now I make this argument because I saw both of these creatures long before I knew anything about D&D and instantly recognized them as the beings they were, having previously read a lot about them. They were in fact closer to what I imagined them as from the descriptions I had read, rather than the art found in those mythology books. so how did that happen? Maybe because they used source material for them, not D&D. Was D&D used, you bet, look at the gnoll. both the name and the look is D&D. Sure you can say something about were-hyenas, but come on. Same with beholders.

SwampLord450
12-23-2010, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by GoranXII:
Well the Gorgon's been a bull since the first release, Basilisk I don't know about, but I'd say probably the same, after all, it's not like they can't just invent a new creature if they want one.

As for whether some creatures were in D&D, it doesn't matter if they were, it was who came up with them first, and the bull-Gorgon and Beholder definitely weren't around before D&D, whereas the Medusa was.

Personally, I don't really mind whether they draw inspiration from D&D monsters or mythological ones.

To clarify my position on this issue in comparison to my position on Heroes V, my issue with copying in Heroes V is that humanoid factions from other games (Dark Elves in particular) were ripped en masse to form a Heroes faction. I don't have an issue with borrowing creatures from other sources, or even humanoid units, as long as it's not done en masse.

kodial79
12-23-2010, 03:48 AM
@SwampLord450

Well, if you say you would like an H5 Angel being like H3, and dislike an H3 Angel being like H5 then let it be so. I'm not convinced but I can't argue further about it.

I'm not talking about graphical quality and in-game sprites of the units, ofcourse. I'm fully aware of the graphical limitations of the games and I think that for the size of a game such H3, they were quite fine. I'm talking the general concept art of the game. That they chose for their designs to be so simple that they were boring, e.g. the lizardman only had a loincloth and a bow. They were generic at best if not silly. They lacked in impression, creativity and inspiration.

You're wrong though and that goes further to prove my point of H3 fans being absolute and biased. As you can remember, H1 and H2 had cartoonish designs, only H3 and H4 didn't. So if you're ok with the cartoonish designs of 1 and 2, why bashing 5 for that reason?

H2 now did not copy any designs from D&D. That was something that only H3 did. Creatures from H2 have been in D&D, but these weren't original creatures of D&D and their designs weren't taken from those pages.


Now you people are looking at the wrong Monster Manual. :P
I believe that the 3.5 wasn't out just yet. The H3's designs were copied from AD&D's Monster Manual, I think that was the 2nd Edition. The Basilisk is very much similar to the one found in that edition, except for its colors. And even the designs of other more classic creature such as the Centaur was based on that book.

Now the Beholder although it was a creature taken from D&D too, its design was based on the Flying Spaggheti Monster. XD

Once again, out of all the creature the most similar is the gorgon. It's practically the same creature. Let me give you a link:
http://www.dotd.com/mm/MM00145.htm

Also the Basilisk:
http://www.dotd.com/mm/MM00014.htm

As you can see the only difference being the color and the longer neck. Taking into account that they included D&D-only creatures such as the Gnolls and the Beholders, it becomes quite clear that they took the Basilisk (and others) from there too, without even bothering to learn anything more about the creature besides of what D&D had to say about it. That is proved by the Gorgon being a bull and not something like Medusa.

That's what sucks about H3. They didn't include mythological monsters in the game, they included D&D monsters which could or could not have been based on mythological ones.

Sorry people, but for me, if not for the totally misplaced H3 Tower, H3 Fortress would have been the worst faction in the Heroes series.

GoranXII
12-23-2010, 04:09 AM
Again both forms easily derived from source descriptions of the Catoblepas.
Yes, Catoblepas, but they call it a Gorgon, ergo the H3 designers either copied D&D without doing their research, or they couldn't be bothered to come up with a shortened name.


gnolls and beholders definitely, they don't show-up in any folklore I am familiar with, and considering I have been studying mythological creatures for over 20 years, these two are totally and utterly taken from D&D.
Beholders definitely, but gnolls seem to me to be a mix of Were-Hyenas of African and Arabic myth, and Cynocephaly of Greek myth.

Also, in making the Gorgon a bull in H3 they, IMO, missed a beautiful chance of avoiding yet another duldrums upgrade, put the Gorgon in as the base creature in Dungeon tier 4, and have the upgrade be the Medusa. Of course that would have left Fortress tier 5 open but they could have moved the Basilisk up (and given it its traditional death gaze), and slipped a Tarasque (low attack, high defence, decent speed, a good blocker, both of holes in your walls and enemy archers) type unit in at tier 4.

Pitsu
12-23-2010, 05:25 AM
Originally posted by kodial79:
Taking into account that they included D&D-only creatures such as the Gnolls and the Beholders, it becomes quite clear that they took the Basilisk (and others) from there too, without even bothering to learn anything more about the creature besides of what D&D had to say about it. That is proved by the Gorgon being a bull and not something like Medusa.


Of course they knew what a gorgon originally was. Take MM6, the game they published just before HoMM3, for instance (gorgon is what became to medusa empress in MM7). Maybe they did not bother to find the origin of DD gorgon (catoblepas) and therefore switched the name in their later games.

Destruction3402
12-23-2010, 05:50 AM
Originally posted by kodial79:
...text...
...
...

Sorry people, but for me, if not for the totally misplaced H3 Tower, H3 Fortress would have been the worst faction in the Heroes series.

Blasphemy!

kodial79
12-23-2010, 07:23 AM
Do we have any source on D&D basing their Gorgon design on Catoblepas? Because D&D did have a Catoblepas too. Now I can't remember if the Catoblepas was included in the first edition of D&D, though I'm sure that the bovine Gorgon was.

@Pitsu
You mean to say that there was a Medusa in MM6 (which was published before H3), who was turned into a Gorgon (bovine Gorgon?) in MM7 (Which apparently must have been published after H3)?

That sounds like that 3DO found out a bit too late that they made a mistake and tried to patch it up that way. They blundered! lol

@Destruction3402
To me, blasphemy is praising H3 Fortress and its stolen from D&D units, while condemning H5 Dungeon for stealing units from Warhammer. :P

Ygds11
12-23-2010, 08:02 AM
Kodial79, well shoot. This time you win. Those are strikingly similar, and thanks for citing D&D v2, I was wondering about that. I was never into D&D I just had access to their books.

And Just to clarify no one ever argued that these units were not inspired to a degree by DnD, just that as a whole the faction was not ripped from DnD, just 3 units. Two of those three had other possible sources. Also DnD does not place these creatures in an alliance where they commonly appear together in encounters (though I am sure A DM could think of some way to make it happen). The dungeon on the other hand had one to one correlates for ALL it's units with the Warhammer franchise, where the dark elves are presented as a coherent force.

I will agree that the sprites were heavily influenced by DnD. but now you just opened a new can of worms with attacking the H3 tower, probably one of the most revered Factions in the whole series, besides maybe the H2 wizard town. Due to the fact I cannot even begin to rebuttal this (just don't have the energy), I'm just going to let it go. So the Tower isn't your taste, whatever, just cool it on the "the worst faction in the series" absolutist terminology.

On top of that you just cited why you have been attacking the Fortress, you just plain don't like it. That's OK. I really don't care what your preferences are. What I do care about is the fact that you insist that the game must move forward in the same direction of every other fantasy game, with each Faction being a race, and I believe thats the reason you dislike it.

All the factions you have cited as sub-par to you, are ones that possessed this characteristic most strongly, a varied and diverse mythological line-up. I got some questions for you, when did you begin to like this franchise, H1, H2, H3, H4 or H5? How were you even coping with the first 4 installments? Did you even start playing before Heroes 5? So my question is, are you a long time fan? I know you have played the other installments, but I don't know whether they were the first you played. I ask this because your preferences are very typical of the new fans, who attached themselves with H5. I don't mean to stereotype you, just making a guess. Because if that is the case, then I completely understand your position on all issues.

I developed my love for this game when at a young age I played the demo for H2 and had to have it. I was fascinated by it, it was challenging, the whole thing was a creature feature I absolutely loved it.

But guesses aside, There was a tradition set-up in the first 4 installments that was broken in H5 and the Fortress and Dungeon were the epitomies of this tradition. A set of distinct and largely unrelated creatures in alliance with each other for a common ideology, set-up against other ideologies. If you haven't noticed this is starting be reinstated. In fact the Haven is now taking on this character possessing 3 distinct races, humans, angels and glories. Same with stronghold (well since H5 as well, 4 races), goblins, orcs, centaurs and cyclops. The Necromancers have at least distinct units of different orders of undead human and two unique creatures.

Let us not forget that H3 won a game of the year award, I heard of no such award for the generic fantasy game found in H5. If there was I regress. But H3 was a landmark in turn-based strategy, being the refinement of it's predecessors. The life was sapped away in H5, but it seems to be creeping back with H6.

Also I might point out, your opinions seem very much in the minority, and so i understand wishing to push the subject, but the devs are more likely to do what the majority say. As for me I'm done arguing, and admit defeat, those pictures you posted say it all. I will go quietly into the night and I am done arguing.
So consider this my last rebuttal towards you Kodial79.


gnolls seem to me to be a mix of Were-Hyenas of African and Arabic myth, and Cynocephaly of Greek myth.

Went to wikipedia didn't you. they are called gnolls (first seen in D&D), that eliminates the other possibilities.

Pitsu
12-23-2010, 08:19 AM
Originally posted by kodial79:
@Pitsu
You mean to say that there was a Medusa in MM6 (which was published before H3), who was turned into a Gorgon (bovine Gorgon?) in MM7 (Which apparently must have been published after H3)?

That sounds like that 3DO found out a bit too late that they made a mistake and tried to patch it up that way. They blundered! lol


<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">MM6: medusae: medusa, medusa enchantress, gorgon
catoblepi: -
MM7: medusae: medusa, medusa queen, medusa empress
catoblepi: -
MM8: medusae: -
catoblepi: brass gorgon, bronze gorgon, iron gorgon
</pre>

I'd more believe that NWC had it correct, but 3DO, which overtook them, wanted it the other way. But maybe it was all about changes in dev team (JVC not being as active anymore and other people taking over the role).

kodial79
12-23-2010, 09:12 AM
@Ygds11

I should make that clear: I believe the best game of the series is H3. H5 was more to my tastes but it did not have the impact that H3 did, if that makes sense.

I've been playing HoMM since Heroes of Might and Magic III Complete was released. No, actually that was the first copy I owned. I've played Heroes 2 as well, just a little bit at a friend's, but never got too much into the game then. Now, I can tell you this for sure, though I loved H3 and then it was my favorite game, I was already experimenting by making wishlists of race based factions. I was thinking up of race based factions at a time before 5 and even 4 were made. I think it all started with my disappointment with the Orc being just an axe thrower (Orcs have been my favorite fictional faction of strategy games ever since the first Warcraft). When H4 was published, I bought the initial release and I was so disappointed by that game that I never played HoMM again until I found out about H5 much, much later...

It's not that I dislike H3 tower, it's that I feel it was horribly misplaced. Ever since day one, the whole faction looked to me like it was begging to be moved to a desert terrain. Any map I was making in Heroes 3, had the Tower in desert. Well, when I say worst faction, best faction and all that rap, I don't mean to be absolute except for my prefferences.

Ygds11
12-23-2010, 10:02 AM
Well that clears it up a bit, thanks for clarifying Kodial79. And since you point it out, yes the desert was more fitting for the creature selection in Tower, so I agree.

Not to start an argument, but I've been thinking of whether Beastmen (i.e. minotaurs as a base) would have made for a better Dungeon than dark elves. The devs thought of this great mythology including the beastmen as products of the wizards. They could have maintained the long running tradition of Wizards vs Warlocks, that way.

I could see them rebelling similar to the orcs but in contrast to the orcs became a more elaborate society and started an opposing magical tradition under the tutelage of the Faceless. Just thinking.

SwampLord450
12-23-2010, 10:41 AM
@Kodial-While HII's artistic style is cartoony, its designs are quite realistic, which is the point I'm trying to make.

Look at the HII Pikeman compared to the HV Peasant, for example:

http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/heroes2/h2px/pikeman.jpg

http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/heroes5/images/creature-shots/Haven/peasant.jpg


The Peasant looks really cartoony and rather silly with his man-boobs and huge potbelly, while the Pikeman, although drawn in a colorful style, is quite realistically designed.

Beholders also look fairly different from their D&D counterparts, as does the Basilisk. Not a huge difference, but it's not the exact same creature.

Fortress creatures not taken from D&D:
-Lizardman
-Serpent Fly
-Wyvern
-Hydra

I'm not really seeing where your claim of blatant copying is coming from, sure, all towns in HIII have something inspired by D&D maybe, but they all have plenty of mythological creatures as well. Some other ones off the top of my head:
-Phoenix -Cerberus
-Cyclops -Ogre
-Medusa -Minotaur
-Genie -Griffin
-Gargoyle -Vampire
-Efreet -Pegasus

And those are just off the top of my head. HIII's got plenty of mythological stuff. Claims that it's full of D&D monsters to the exclusion of all else simply are not valid.

kodial79
12-23-2010, 12:23 PM
@Ygds11

I think that H5's devs had a purely might oriented image of the Minotaur in mind. This is how I feel too. Minotaur inspires me as a brutal, bloodthirsty warrior who would rush headlong into battle, quite literally too! However, I didn't mind the Minotaur Warlocks of H3, since they had the best portraits of that faction. I'm just glad the spellcasting Minotaurs were just heroes, and the units were pure fighters. I think the Minotaur Warlock was inspired by how the goat, the bull and other such horn bearing creatures are made sometimes into apocryphal occult idols and all that. Although that in itself is great, for me, it gets kinda lukewarm when we're talking about Minotaurs. I'm not absolute though that Minotaurs should not be using magic. If done well, it could be acceptable.

@SwampLord450

I wouldn't say that H2's too designs look more realistic, just less detailful. Though in any case, not bad at all. H5's peasant is not unrealistic at all, he's just fat! I don't know why you're comparing it with the Pikeman though, H2 had its own peasant as well, and my opinion is that it was the best peasant design in the series.

Ok, I know, I've been exaggerating a bit about it all, what I'm trying to say is that many of the units would not have been included or would have been very different if not for D&D. The only blatant and shameless rip-off is actually that of the Gorgon and the Gnolls.

Yeah, I said already the Beholders were based on the Flying Spaggheti Monster! XD

I think the differences of D&D and H3 Basilisks are too minor to be considered. I'm positive that they based their design and the whole reasoning behind the unit on its D&D's counterpart. More than that, I'm sure the Basilisk would not have been in the game if it were not in D&D.

Same thing could be said about the Wyverns, although their design were different. D&D's Wyverns were most oftenly found in jungles than wherever else. At least the 2nd edition ones, that I used to be playing. I'm not sure that Wyverns of other games and media were jungle inhabitants. In real mythology, the legend of the wyvern must have began from UK, and anyway, there was nothing to be hinting it is a jungle dweller. That was all D&D's doing. So the decision of the devs to put the wyvern in a swamp faction, had to do with D&D again. If not for D&D, if the Wyverns would still be included in H3, they would have been totally different creatures! Now don't kill me, I don't say they stole it from them. I'm just saying they were heavily influenced by this, on this one. Pretty much like H5's designs as you say, were influnced by FF. Anyway, it's not like I complain about that too. Years of playing D&D and HoMM makes me feel like Wyverns do belong in jungles for a fact.

The Serpent Fly, yes, is completely original, as far as I know. But like I said before, it's probably the worst design of H3, for me. I'd rather they didn't exist.

The Hydra, I got nothing bad to say about. I was actually displeased that the Hydra returned to the Dungeon for H5. Ever since I saw it on the H3 Fortress, I felt it always belonged there.

The Lizardmen could or could not have been inspired by the Warhammer ones. As I'm very unfamiliar with Warhammer and didn't even know that H5 stole the Dark Raiders at least from there, I can't say for sure. You know, I thought Warhammer was set in the future, somehow. I looked into it when I found out about the Dark Elves and I noticed some similarities between H3's Lizardmen and Warhammer's. I don't even know which came first, I doubt though Warhammer would draw from HoMM. I think the blue lizardmen with the funny fins though are quite similar to those of Warhammer, they just lack a turtle shell.

The rest of the monsters you mentioned are indeed on the clear, and quite commendable are the Efreetis, which I find even better than their D&D counterparts. Also the Vampires for whom a Nosferatu image were used, and that goes more to accordance of my personal tastes for vampires than whatever else. I don't think that one can say that H3's Vampires design is based on Nosferatu, as the Nosferatu itself is more closer to how traditional vampires used to be than anything else. Ever read Bram Stoker's Dracula? Imagine Nosferatu, give him a white beard, mustache and hair and there you have it: Dracula. Dracula in the book, was tall, thin and quite creepy and he was reeking of death, you could not stand close to him without getting nauseated. Quite different than what we saw in all of the other movies. I hate the noble looking, elegant vampires with refined tastes and all that crap. I like them better like Nosferatu. I wanna get the feeling that they're undead, and not some stupid incarnation of Dorian Gray.

There's only one monster in that list that I wanna pay special attention to it. The Medusa may at first seem different than its D&D counterpart. But I've been a long time D&D player and DM, mostly of the 2nd edition, and I know about the Greater Medusa. The Greater Medusa of D&D is H3's Medusa. I never said anything before as artwork of her is quite rare, and I've been thinking that it could just be a coincindence and H3's devs would not be aware of her existence. Anyway, you could argue that she has the lower half of a snake and so what? Many Medusae are depicted like that. Well, the thing is that in AD&D Greater Medusae were always ranged attackers. They would use enchanted longbows and all that because they could not rely on their appearance to get close to unsuspectful victims just like the normal Medusae did. Well, it still could just be a coincidence, since the Greater Medusa wasn't as popular in D&D as the normal one.

GoranXII
12-23-2010, 01:15 PM
Do we have any source on D&D basing their Gorgon design on Catoblepas? Because D&D did have a Catoblepas too. Now I can't remember if the Catoblepas was included in the first edition of D&D, though I'm sure that the bovine Gorgon was.
Claudius Aelianus' description of Catoblepas:
"the creature was a mid-sized herbivore, about the size of a domestic bull, with a heavy mane, narrow, bloodshot eyes, a scaly back and shaggy eyebrows. The head was so heavy that the beast could only look down. In his description, the animal's gaze was not lethal, but its breath was poison, since it ate only poisonous vegetation."

D&D description of Catoblepas:
"A catoblepas has a large, bloated, bison's body with short, stumpy legs like those of a hippopotamus. At the front of its body is a shaggy mane of dark brown hair, from which sprouts a long, snake-like neck. The creature's head like that of a warthog with bloodshot eyes. The beast's coiling tail has a stony mass of stubby spikes at the end. The catoblepas is orange-reddish-brown, and its hide is covered with warts, scabs, and bits of encrusted dung."

Compare that to the D&D Gorgon:
"The gorgon appears in the first edition Monster Manual (1977),[4] where it is described as a bull-like creature covered in thick metal scales, that breathes a cloud of noxious vapors which turn any creature to stone."


Went to wikipedia didn't you. they are called gnolls (first seen in D&D), that eliminates the other possibilities.
Agreed, I was just pointing out that it was based on existing mythical creatures, it was pulled out of a vacuum.


In real mythology, the legend of the wyvern must have began from UK, and anyway, there was nothing to be hinting it is a jungle dweller. That was all D&D's doing. So the decision of the devs to put the wyvern in a swamp faction, had to do with D&D again.
Possibly, but D&D hardly restricted them to jungles:
"Wyverns make their homes in caves in cliffs or mountains overlooking forests, jungles, or even plains or deserts."


The Serpent Fly, yes, is completely original, as far as I know.
The name was original, but we already had the dragon fly, and really, serpent is just a good name for a down-grade.


The Lizardmen could or could not have been inspired by the Warhammer ones.
Or they could have been pulled from the Lizardfolk of D&D, which in any case had Warhammer beat by 9 years ('74 as compared to '83).

Ygds11
12-23-2010, 11:58 PM
Being familiar with the miniature ranges of Warhammer I can reinforce the notion that they are quite different from the H3 lizardmen. Color is no indicator as color is up to the player (a paint job ought to be unique). The rather small scales that gave it a skin appearance as well as being fully erect, coupled with it's dual head fins, makes it quite a different character. Not to mention it's bland clothing in H3. DnD though not sure.

I agree Kodial that minotaurs should be first and foremost melee masters. the idea of an entire civilization of these creatures being warlocks would be impractical and ridiculous. I always however felt like the word warlock (though categorically synonymous with wizard or witch) instilled a more aggressive type of magic, something one could wield more proficiently through an axe or similar weapon than through a staff or wand. In essence a warriors magic. But that's just my thoughts. Everything comes down to presentation. If they ever do an H7 in 2016 or something, I really could see the minotaurs getting sick of being slaves,and realizing that earning their freedom through service is not likely under the Dark elves. At which time the tables turn. Will it happen, no, no, no...I am not so naive.

anyway, whether things return in their past forms is not so crucial as their return in spirit. I am not so concerned with whether the H6 basilisk looks like the H3 basilisk, I am more concerned that there is "a" basilisk. I am more concerned about having a faction that is dominated by the slimy scaly offspring of a putrid swamp under the direction of what look like to casual observers, degenerate swamp dwelling scum. A primitive looking faction that possesses in defense what the orcs have in attack. Possessing in filthiness what the haven has in cleanliness. That's what I need. The essence of the faction as it was in it's first and only incarnation, not an exact copy. I want to see the carnivorous plant again and the various nests, and a look that screams "Biohazard". Please don't hurt me but "Long live the Beastmasters!!!".

However something said by Chuckles makes me think it's a long shot that the base game will include it. He seemed to suggest that the new faction will be just that, new. Not like the "new" dungeon, actually new, as in never seen before, more like the dwarves from H5.

But heres to hoping that it will be there someday.

kodial79
12-24-2010, 01:59 AM
@Ygds11

That'd be nice actually, the way you describe it.

However, new faction or not, it's bound to have creatures that have appeared in previous installments. Basilisk is still likely candidate. Though I don't care so much about that. I still can't get over the thought that the only reason the Nagas are likely to be this new faction is because of the popularity of Warcraft III. That doesn't sit very well with me, though if they're done right and look awesome, I'll have no quarrel with it.

Look at Ashan lore, Nagas are the only other major race that never had their own faction yet. Shalassa and her children have yet to play any pivotal role in the events of Ashan. The more I think about it, plus the jungle and the serpent like statues and all that, the more I think it's gonna be the Nagas. I just hope that when they will be first revealed, they're gonna be so amazing that I'm going to totally and completely forget about Warcraft III's Nagas.

And ofcourse, I don't suppose that the entire line-up will be populated by Nagas. Maybe 3 units should be Nagas. Allied Beasts should still be present and that's where some familiar creatures like Basilisk, may mark their return. And hopefully, a Hydra champion! Let the Dungeon be completely re-worked and re-imagined when it's going to be added in a later expansion. And it be better be added! Together with Sylvan too...



============

Oh by the way, one random thought:

With the line-ups now for H6 as they are, so far Griffin is the only creature to appear in every Heroes' initial release game and be member of a faction. We've got Inferno which debuted in H3. Necropolis debuted in H2. Stronghold was left out of H5's initial release. Haven was in but units were changed drastically in H6. One could argue about the Sentinel and Crossbowman. But I considered the Crossbowman of H6, a totally different unit than the Archer of H1 for example. And the Pikeman was out of the game in H5, replaced by the Peasant. Also the Sun Rider is very much different than the previous Cavaliers. Griffin is the only who remained mostly unaffected, name of basic unit always the same, appearance about the same every time, be a member of a faction in every original release in the game series.
So here's to the Griffin, symbol of Heroes of Might and Magic!

I'm thinking if there is any creatures that could match him, are the Hydras, the Minotaurs and the Unicorns. I don't include Elves because back then was just the Elf and then we had Blade Dancers, Hunters and Druids, they're very different. Same goes for Dragons although we know Dragons are not gonna be in factions this time. Minotaurs and Unicorns are unlikely candidate so it's up to the Hydra to keep company to the Griffin at the Top of Might and Magic! XD

GoranXII
12-24-2010, 02:10 PM
Up until H6 the Minotaur and Unicorn could have outdone the Gryphon, after all they'd never changed sides, which the Gryphon did 3 times.

kodial79
12-25-2010, 12:50 AM
Yes, since probably the Dungeon and Asylum must be the same faction with a different name. It's kinda hopeless for them to make it in the initial release though.

Thunion
01-19-2011, 01:39 PM
...And the mighty gorgon!
Yeah gorgon..i remeber fortress it got 2 tier 6 units>But siriusly fortress was very nice town but the problem now is to fit in the story of 6th heroes.Basicly i would love to get all the factions from heroes 3 with exception of conflux
also+dwarves town becouse i love dwarves so much...

Asterisk
01-24-2011, 12:24 PM
Anyone up for good old Wyrm?
http://images.elfwood.com/art/d/e/dewon/3b.jpg