View Full Version : We deserve better heroes specializations

08-17-2015, 06:28 PM
Dear developers,

you have refused one of the most discussed idea, the skillwheel rework. Now we have in my opinion the biggest problem since then. Most of fans are very dissatissfied with the current heroes specializations, similar to H6 ones which were definitely really hated. So I am applying to you, CHANGE the heroes specializations´ system, even if you would have to have a delay because of it.

Why is the current system so bad? Well, it is very simple. It is only "the hero gets +x to something" or "the unit production of some unit is increased by x" or "the hero starts with xxx skill and ability". These ones are static, so they will not influence the game much after the hero gets new levels and skills. This a big mistake. The specializations are designed to make every single hero UNIQUE, to provide different strategical possibilities for players owning different heroes from the same faction. You may argue that H7 has a class system which makes every hero different, but this is actually not true. The class system only disables some skills to affect and restrict the strategy of the hero, but as long as there are no special skills for each class (and as everyone knows, it is impossible to make them with so many classes), we still need the heroes specializations which will make our hero unique during the whole game, not only at the beginning.

The special cathegory of the specializations are the ones increasing the unit growth. They are the biggest nonsense, because if "more heroes you hire" simply means "bigger unit growth", not matter how many cities you have, the game mechanics and principles are totally broken then. Players will hire as many heroes as soon possible, and the map will be full of heroes on the level 1 which are "only" giving units bonuses. And this is exactly, what should NOT be Heroes about.

The only solution of the problem I have explained I see in the specializations increased by hero level. They will be improved as the hero get new levels, so they will be useful every time. And people will have to consider not only the class, but also the specialization during the hero hiring choice. It has worked very well in H5 anyway.

You have been silent about this problem for a very long time, never told us your opinion and possiblities. We would really like to hear your solution of this problem, which could (hopefully) be the specializations increased by hero level whole community is applying for.

I hope you consider this idea and let me (as well as the other fans) know!

08-18-2015, 10:20 AM
Well they have said that the skillwheel won't change, so i doubt they will do the same with the specializations. And i noticed that Ubi now ignores all negativity. Must be a new tactic and in my eyes is the worst way to treat your fanbase. We have been asking for a good communication between Ubi/Limbic and the fans, and it looks like they just don't care. I really think this hurt thier reputation even more. And it already was bad.

08-19-2015, 03:29 PM
Increasing specializations "per level" would be too much in my view. However, something like every 5 levels makes sense.

Example: Darkstorme. +1 minotaurs per week. Fine. Later levels should give perks to the minotaurs in his army such as better retaliation, attack, defense, etc.

A hero that has a particular magic specialty - perhaps ultimately, they can GM in that type even if it ends up a "4th" GM'd skill. Other perks could be improved uses of different spells and so on.

I'm just spit-balling here. There is no chance any changes would occur prior to release, but perhaps for expansions....

Issues like specializations, skill wheels, and so on likely aren't "problems" in the minds of developers. Time and repeated play of the game will reveal the merits and flaws of most of these "problems". At present, I think of them and refer to them as "concerns". The difference is that I'm allowing for the possibility (however remote) that I'm wrong about said concerns. I'll end up playing, giving it all the benefit of the doubt which I think will allow me to present an argument later (assuming I still believe it necessary) that acknowledges and respects what was intended when recommending changes and improvements. This thinking will be lost on many who participate here, alas.