Imperium Jaskini Behemota

Ururam Tururam

SUMMARY
of a poll and a discussion
that took place in the Behemoth's Lair community
(http://heroes.net.pl)
on the topic
"what is the optimal system of creature choices
and upgrades in Heroes V castles".

Prepared by
Ururam Tururam (ut@heroes.net.pl)

The community of the Behemoth's lair organized a poll and a discussion on
the question "what is the optimal system of creature choices
and upgrades in Heroes V castles". Only the members of the Community
were allowed to vote in the poll. Both members and guests were allowed
to express their opinions in the discussion. The results follow.

There was 43 votes in the poll.
2 (5%) votes for no upgrades and no choices;
13 (31%) votes for allowing upgrades only to the units that are logically
upgradable;
16 (37%) votes for upgrading all the creatures;
1 (2%) vote for no upgrades but choices (Heroes IV - like);
11 (25%) votes for bot choices and upgrades.

There was 49 posts in the discussion.
Here are the main arguments for various options:

* No upgrades, no choices:

- "I don't want any of them. I want just more independent units. Why not to
introduce archers and crossbowmen or red and black dragons as totally different
units?"

- "Let's not demand too much not to make Heroes V another RTS. One creature for
each level is enough."

* Only logical upgrades:

- "Repainting red dragons to black ones is totally illogical. But I want
upgrades."

- "I'd like to see three levels of creatures in each castle. On the first
two kinds without upgrades, on the second a few ones with upgrades (even
multilevel ones) and on the third one only one unit without any upgrades."

- "An illogical game is not good. The upgrades should be available only if
they are consistant. But the creators can make the upgrades for all the
units logical if they try hard enough."

- "I want upgrades but I don't want to see nonsense units. A kind of metamorphosis,
growing up or growing more mature could be OK."

- "Wild creatures - no upgrades. Wild but intelligent ones and domestic ones -
with one upgrade. Humanoids - multiple upgrades. Upgrading have to take time and
resources. Introducing experience levels and maitenance costs may be valuable."

- "Choices are too hard to balance and upgrading all the units even against the
reason is silly."

- "I want upgrades for all but the strongest units in each castle. It is not fun
to allow creating too strong army."

- "My idea: 6-8 creatures in castles and only some of them upgradable. I see no reason
for upgrading unicorns, hydras, mummies etc."

- "Upgrades in some castles no upgrades in others. Hard to balance, but exciting!"

* Upgrades for all creatures:

- "I want to see upgrades, even multi-level ones of all the creatures.
I don't care about any logic in the game. More upgrades means longer
development of the castles and more possible strategies."

- "I want upgrades not to have all the castles fully built after a short time.
But no multilevel not to lenghten the castle development process too much."

- "Upgrades for all. But different paths of upgrades (e.g. a choice if
the upgraded creature could shoot or strike twice)."

- "Upgrades for all! And make all of them logical. It should not be too hard.
A dragon need not to be repainted it can have a rider, or perhaps augmented
claws."

- "Upgrades - yes. More creatures: more fun. Choices - no, they are to hard to
balance. An I suggest gaining experience by creatures. Not too much experience
levels for therm hovever, perhaps 10."

- "The Heroes III system was the best. It may be improved by introducing different
upgrades."

- "Upgrades of creatures should be just buying them some armament."

- "I like upgrades but they must be much different fron those of H3, where the
upgraded unit was only barely more expensive but much better the same time.
So the basic units should be much weaker an dmuch cheaper than the upgraded ones.
Multiple paths of upgrades are good. But they must be balanced."

- "Upgrading is fine, but experience for creatures is much to complicated both for
creators and for players."

- "Logical upgrades for all the units - that's it. The game should not be too
sophisticated. It should be intuitive."

* Only choices, no upgrades:

- none

* Upgrades and Choices:

- "I want both, but the choices must be well balanced. As in Heroes IV
in the cases of Nightmare/Efreet or Medusa/Minotaur. Not like Ogre/Cyclops,
where the choice is obvious. And in the case of upgrades there must be
a substantial difference between normal and upgraded units."

- "I'd like too see choices and upgrades for low level units, choices or
upgrades for medium level ones and neither choices nor upgrades for the top
creature in each castle."

- "Two types of units to choose from and two levels for each of them - this
seems OK."

- "I suggest choices between different upgrades".

- "I want both. And the system I see is as follows: I build a human/elf/orc/
whatever dwelling. Then I can (upgrade!) give a bow, a sword or a book of
spells to that creature, having upgrades as a kind of studies. There should
be much more kinds of units in a castle than slots in an army."

- "The more possibilities the more interesting the game."

- "I want as many units as possible. 200 is not too much."