Ruin Searching Level Restrictions

[kerog]

I find some maps with few or no level 1 ruins to be extremely frustrating. In order to get to level two you have to make your way to the front to fight some enemies. But then you've bypassed all those juicy ruins, and to get to them after you've finally leveled up, you have to backtrack a long way. Waterworld was particularly annoying this way. When new heroes pop behind the lines, they too have to ignore the ruins. Seems like there should be some way around this. Possible that instead of allies you could have heroes show up already at level 2 for a higher cost? A way to teleport your hero from one castle to another like a vector?

[KGB]

Possible that instead of allies you could have heroes show up already at level 2 for a higher cost?

This was asked for already. It's going to be in the next version.

KGB

[Solo]

Possible that instead of allies you could have heroes show up already at level 2 for a higher cost?

I think it is a bad idea.
This game have a feature - hero learning, development during the game process. If we let to buy high level heroes for gold it will make the game worse. We could also add shops on the map where heroes could buy any items for gold. ;D

The game have not to be a one direction wide road. We get a hero, then we go to the nearest level 1 ruin, then attack a weak castle, then getting level 2 go to level 2 ruin and attack a town with more strong defenders. It is easy but maybe not very interesting.

A way to teleport your hero from one castle to another like a vector?

I think this is needed feature as it was made in DLR.

[piranha]

You will be able to get heroes at higher level than 1 but its quite restrictive so you will always be better of keeping your heroes alive.

No way to teleport your hero to a specific city. We had that in our beta 4 version. You could build a tavern in your city and that would allow new heroes to start from that city instead. But we removed all new build features before launching beta 4.

[Experix]

I don't like the idea of buying better heroes as well. I would be quite curious how that would be implemented. And I can't also see any good enough reason for it...

From my, still not very large experience, the hero offers have certainly the largest impact on the game among the things the player can hardly influence. In some games, I got many very cheap hero offers while in others I could hardly got any, and if I got some, it was very expensive and on the most inconvinience place.
Since I find heroes extremely important, I would like this impact to be reduced, but possibility of buying better heroes would make the situation even worse, in my opinion.

I finally forced myself to study the code for hero offers in wiki. I think there are two mistakes there. At least, it does make sense to me only if the following numbers are changed:
- if((currentgold > 400) && (newherochance < 500)) {newherochance = 500;} // Always a 10% chance - assuming enough gold
- if(rand(400,1400) < newherochance)
{
hero = rand(400, currentgold);

If I got it right, it makes, for example, 0.3 probality, if you have one hero and 800 gold. Especially getting the second hero I find quite important since it has usually big impact on the speed of expansion. That makes 0.3 probability you get your second hero in next turn, but also nearly 0.12 probability you don't get him for 6 next turns, assuming you are holding approximately the same gold. (Just a model situation why I think even a small portion of luck makes quite a big difference.) Of course, if you have a very small number of heroes, you can increase your chance by not buying any new production. However, if you find only some weak production in cities you conquer, I am not sure it is the right path. And, you have certainly no influence in which city you get the offer (remembering one game on Battlefield where I got hero offers in capital again and again - that meant the hero had to move for 10 turns before he could be used in some action

I also don't like the idea that you have carefully prepared attack on some important city, and your opponent suddenly buys some strong hero there which completely changes the situation.

Overall, I think developing of heroes is a key strategy element and a long-term in-game goal; and if you have some possibility to skip this part of the process (which possibility moreover depends on the luck, doesn't it?), I am afraid it would not be good for the game.

[KGB]

Experix,

if(rand(400,1000) < newherochance)

This is correct. In Javascript the 2nd number is not the max (as in 400-to-1000) but the range to add to the initial number. So the 1000 means add 1000 to 400 to get a range of 400-to-1400. Coming from the C/C++/C# world it was something I had to get used to as well.

However the other bug you pointed out is right. If the chance is between 400 and 500 is would end up lower than the base 10%. So it should be 500 as you suggest.

As for buying better heroes, the game definitely need this feature for the following reasons.

1) As you have noted, many times your hero comes in poor locations where there is nothing for him to do. So by the time he gets to the front lines he is a useless L1 hero.
2) As Kerog noted this will help with ruin searching since if you lose your heroes that can search L2 or higher and your opponent doesn't you are out of luck if there is no way to level your hero due to being far from battle / no neutrals to conquer etc.
3) There isn't enough ways to level up heroes in the game. The game desperately needs a quest system or another way to level up new heroes in the mid/late game. Very often I end up buying heroes only for their allies and then disband them so that I can get more offers of allies. Buying leveled heroes will help with this.

I suggested the following:

Turn 1-5: L1 hero only
Turn 6-10: L1 or L2 hero.
Turn 10+ L1, L2 or L3 hero.

On the hero selection menu the player chooses the level of the hero they want. L1 heroes cost as they do now. Having the hero come at L2 or L3 increases the cost by 400 gold per level so that a L1 hero that cost 1200 would cost 1600 if you wanted him at L2 and 2000 if you wanted him at L3.

The hero always comes out at L1. If you bought a L2 or L3 hero then on the next turn that hero gets +1000 XP (taking him to L2) and the turn after another +1000 XP taking him to L3. This prevents the problem of someone immediately getting a L3 hero right on the front lines and using him. They will have to wait 2 turns until that hero reaches his level. In the mean time you can acquire XP and potentially level up normally as all that will happen is getting the +1000 XP at the the start of your next turn.

KGB

[Jeremy]

I don't think we need new abilities -- we need better map design. On normal maps, most ruins should be L1 ruins.

No matter how many new abilities you put in, if a map is poorly designed, it will feel weird or be less fun. You can't code your way out of bad design.

[Negern]

Agree with jeremy. Many maps did fine back when there were no defenders or level restrictions and only gold as possible finds. In Eight kingdoms, for an example, it was just to go into the ruins at turn 1 with no risk at all, getting gold for early powerful productions / hero offers. Now, the ruins seems to get searched only rarely and by certain ruin hunter-heroes, far from the front lines. Clearly, the thought behind the design is another one than how it plays out.
I like the map though, and I like the lvl 2 ruins more than a 1000 g trigger. Only using it as an example of how things have changed and how many older maps haven't kept up with the changes made to ruin searching.

[LPhillips]

As a community, we don't have any reliable way of vetting maps or encouraging changes. We also have a shrinking community at the moment, so the number of maps available remains small. It wouldn't make much sense to restrict the maps further until that is sorted out.

[Experix]

KGB,
thank you very much for careful explanation. But I still don't like this change a lot.

1) As you have noted, many times your hero comes in poor locations where there is nothing for him to do. So by the time he gets to the front lines he is a useless L1 hero.

And wouldn't it be much better if the player could choose the location where he wants to get the hero? For some money as well, maybe?
I mentioned the game on the Battlefield. I got at least 6 hero offers in the capital. At that time, there was nothing to do for the hero in the distance where he could get in less than 10 turns. Whether the hero would upgrade to level 3 was irrelevant, I needed any hero who could search ruins and support my units in the front lines.

2) As Kerog noted this will help with ruin searching since if you lose your heroes that can search L2 or higher and your opponent doesn't you are out of luck if there is no way to level your hero due to being far from battle / no neutrals to conquer etc.

You choose the level of risk with your hero in battles and ruins. And you have some bounds for being absolutely sure your hero doesn't die. But you have very limited powers to influence whether you get the offer and absolutely no influence on where it happens.
When I started to play this game, I understood more gold = better chance for a hero.
Now I see it is totally different.
If I got it right, it should behave actually this way: you have 10% chance for offer, unless your money exceeds certain point, depending on the number of heroes you already have. At that point the probability starts to raise, and if you reach 650 more gold above that point, it is at 75% and you can't increase it more.
On the other hand, more money also means that average price of the offered hero increases as well.

Example:
4 heroes, 2000 gold: chance for hero 10%, average price 1000 gold
4 heroes, 400 gold: chance for hero 10%, price is always 400 gold

In a team game on 8 kingdoms, I found a lot of money in a ruin. I had only one hero and hoped for the other with some ally. I had 2000 gold. I got three hero offers. First one slightly below 1200, the next two for 1200. So I gave up, bought some production and got another offer - for 700. Since the income is cca 100 gold/turn, this is a very big difference. But I lost several turns, both for the second hero and the production. Were these decisions wrong?

3) There isn't enough ways to level up heroes in the game. The game desperately needs a quest system or another way to level up new heroes in the mid/late game. Very often I end up buying heroes only for their allies and then disband them so that I can get more offers of allies. Buying leveled heroes will help with this.

I had never such problem yet. I prefer 1:1 games on larger maps, maybe I would find it different in other games.
I think there's no need for all heroes reaching their maximum at their main skill. I find 4-5 heroes, L7 on average absolutely sufficient.
I see three main reasons why I don't have sometimes as many leveled heroes as I would wish:
- I made some mistake or risked too much when it wasn't important and lost heroes.
- Usual reason: I didn't have offers for so many heroes.
- My opponents forces my heroes to stay on the same place. It's his good job and I don't see it logical if the hero in that position would get two levels in two turns.

In 80 games I played so far, I once got an offer of one red dragon, once of one devil and once of two medusas. Other offers with allies were much weaker, say one ghost/elemental. I have no idea what to do to get some interesting allies. Got the dragon when I had some 1600 gold. I had the same or much greater sum of money in hundreds of other turns. I see it as a pure luck it did happen in that case and in no other...
I can't imagine a situation where one ghost would be better than hero. If I want to attack/defend some place, and I already have dragons, medusas, catapults, unicorns, the only other way to increase power of that stack is adding a hero. Some +4 leadership is no wonder, but still it is a bonus which can't be replaced by anything else. And he can possibly search nearby ruins, if they aren't done yet or are haunted again...

I suggested the following:
Turn 1-5: L1 hero only
Turn 6-10: L1 or L2 hero.
Turn 10+ L1, L2 or L3 hero

So this will be independent on the map? On some maps players don't even meet before turn 10.
I'll try to use and modify your example of using barbarian for expansion. You go forward with your starting barbarian. Then, at certain point, he dies. But not much harm is done, if you are lucky you can buy another barb where the previous one died, wait one turn and continue with his job. I think it should be more important to keep your heroes alive... That means for me, that if you risk your leveled hero and don't succeed, you should have to level your new hero and not just skip one turn.
I would like if the new hero could, for example gain experience more quickly. But not if he gains it by staying on one spot, doing nothing.