Heroes suggestion: reduce the luck element

[sylvanllewelyn]

The problem with combat heroes in general is that they could simply get unlucky during a single fight, and then they are gone forever. Luck has always been an issue in Civ, but with the sheer number of units in a fight, the side with more guys and bigger guys still always wins.

I propose giving them a set number of "hit-points". Everytime you kill them, they lose a "hit-point", which they can only regain slowly if they retreat and stay in place for a set number of turns to lick their wounds. This way, they won't die from a single unlucky defense, as it is a lot harder to lose three 99.95% battles than a single one. However, if the owner of the hero lost their army and their hero is caught alone, they can still be dogpiled and destroyed, especially with a bunch of melee units promoted with drill rather than combat. This, of course, will be balanced by reduced strength.

 

[PanzerWolf]

Then it's better to give them a retreat option like some other units have when their health/ HP si close to zero.

You should never put your hero in the first line anyway unless it's a sure kill. Heroes gome and heroes go

 

[zup]

Heroes rise and fall shortly afterwards. Because if a hero attempts to do whatever is required of the hero, they cannot win. After all, heroes are expected to succeed in the impossible. Obviously that is impossible, so heroes all end up dying.

Unless of course they say 'screw the heroism' and just hang back at say...the safety behind the capital walls?

 

[HadesScorn]

Just like in real life...

On a non sarcastic note, the death of a hero should be expected. You should only use them after a suitable level is reached, and then only with adequate support. Should they pay the ultimate price, well, that's what Archmages with Life 3 are for. Anything that grants heroes *additional* survivability for the Hero will only skew the balance in the other direction [too overpowered]

The real hero is always a hero by mistake; he dreams of being an honest coward like everybody else.

-Umberto Eco

Heroing is one of the shortest-lived professions there is.

-Will Rogers

 

[Ranos]

Heros are fine the way they are. Keep them in a city until they have 100 xp and then only send them out with a stack. Your hero is less likely to be dog piled since it has an army around it and if it just barely wins a victory and is on the verge of death, it has plenty of defense.

Now it may still lose a fight or get hit by an Assassin when it's injured, but that's part of the game.

 

[zup]

National units *cough* shadowriders *cough* are better than heroes mostly.

 

[Xuenay]

Luck has always been an issue in Civ, but with the sheer number of units in a fight, the side with more guys and bigger guys still always wins.

That's why you don't send out your heroes alone.

 

[Fafnir13]

I used to strictly attack at 99.9% odds. Now, in addition to that, I check for first strike, defensive strikes, and just how much greater the actual strength is. More then double seems to be working out thus far.
I also do my best to keep areas around my heroes well scouted via hawks and the like. Nothing ruins your day like an epic stack coming out of nowhere.
When it comes to heroes, no amount of security is over the top. Treat them right and they will break even the most fortified cities for you. Just don't expect them to be a solo act.

 

[Neomega]

National units *cough* shadowriders *cough* are better than heroes mostly.

shadowriders ain't that great. they get no defensive bonus.

oh yeah, on topic... I disagree with OP.

 

[Senethro]

If you're defending then you're not killing hard enough!

 

[Sarisin]

I HAVE lost heroes at 99.X% odds and can still remember that one time I lost Basium with 99.9% odds against an Infernal Longbow. It is very disheartening.

Fortunately, it doesn't happen too often and, like Fafnir, I take special care in using them now.

One has to ask if this would not help the AI though who is notorious for losing heroes. It's not uncommon to see them sending heroes out alone or using them when they are damaged or with no promotions.

 

[Darksaber1]

Don't you know Heros are supposed to only win at low probabilites? Heros should only win at less then 10% chance!

Spoiler :

And...hey, who are you people with the white jacket, and how did you get into my house? Funny Farm, what-hey-hey, get baaaccc-:beeeep:

Hnestly, though, heroes don't win enough to be heroes.

 

[phoulishwan]

Hero's are great and all but in general my game winning force consists of 4-5 carefully coddled warriors, early wars often to get them up and running asap, a lot of young warriors pay the ultimate price as expendable fodder to give my elite warriors the chance to become truly elite game winning units!

 

[smusebaer]

only in death a hero becomes a real Hero. But it would be cool if every Hero had a shrine to be build after his death, perhaps with individual effects. This could be done with a item herocorpsed, that drops when the hero dies.

 

[Homunculus]

Hnestly, though, heroes don't win enough to be heroes.

this.


I mean.. I'll often have 3-4 units with MORE XP than my heroes, because, you know.. I'll throw in a few regulars to kill something at low odds, and occassionally one wins, gets a bunch of XP, and from then on has good odds on almost everything, running off into the seriously high XP.
Whereas my heroes.. I'm definately hesitant to use them on anything but >99.9 attacks, unless those turns I'd be waiting to soften up the defense to get the odds there are *vital* (say, I only have 5 turns left to win the scenario)

The heroes are more like "wimps" in that regard, great commanders (to pick another "limited" category) are significantly more likely to be in the thick of the fight.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

Just use heroes as you will. They are just one unit. They are critical only on certain stages, after their relevant stage have passed, they are almost useless. examples:

Gilden Silveric->Only critical early game, somewhat usefull at midgame, after that you can as well disband it, everything is stronger and better.

Barnaxus->Critical early game in order to gain important promotions for your golems. After that, just keep him somewhere safe, so that you maintain the bonuses.

Bandur-> Critical early game. Can be usefull at midgame. After that, he is almost worthless, except for his ability to repair mechanical units. You can try to give him some passively beneficial promotions to keep some usefullness...

Valin-> Critical in the midgame. If he can survive midgame is a very usefull harassing and pillagin unit, depending on what promotions does he have(I usually give him commando, and if I can get it, Orthus axe + Mobility)

etc.


The Dragons are EndGame Units, so there is nothing to say about them, I do not think you have started this thread having in mind the dragons, right?

In any case, remember that you have the chance to ressurect a hero with a life III archmage, and -in the case of Barnaxus- recover his pieces and rebuild him.

So, you should take advandage of your hero when it counts most. The period on which they can be build is usually a hint for how long they will be useful.

 

[Skitters]

...this got me thinking, does the Terry Pratchett rule of making an attack "a million to one shot" always succeed count in Erebus?

 

[Methuselah]

...this got me thinking, does the Terry Pratchett rule of making an attack "a million to one shot" always succeed count in Erebus?

Considering how many times I've seen 99% fail, I'd say yes.

 

[Iceciro]

The only real thing I'd like to see done is somehow have Life III able to ressurect the religious heroes too - and not necessarily by the civ that lost them. If someone else beats you to Valin and he gets mauled, sucks that you can't build him.

 

[Thunder_Gr]

Considering how many times I've seen 99% fail...

Well, I guess 1 in 100?(1%)