Heroes

[Catwalk]

About item slots
It's possible to mess about with item slots for heroes quite easily. For example, as shown below, I want to give Taki 3 ring slots since warrior monks don't use weapons or armour. And Theria doesn't use shields or heavy armour, so she gets 1 weapon slot and 2 ring slots. I'm really interested in the possibility of the following hacks:
1) Distinguishing between shield and armour slots (we could do this as a self imposed rule)
2) Giving some archer and warrior-mage heroes 1 bow/sword or staff/sword slot AND 1 sword slot (can also be done as a self imposed rule)
3) Letting some warrior heroes get 2 sword slots and 1 armour slot (2-weapon combat)

Suggestions for item slots, skills and fame level
In general, I want to remove random skills from most 0 and 5 fame heroes as that can unbalance early heroes significantly.

Code:

Barbarian      0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Thrown 3, Blade Master
  item slots: W+W+A
   spells:
Bard           0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Legendary, Charmed, Lucky
  item slots: W+A+R
   spells:
Beastmaster    0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Pathfinding, caster 5
  item slots: W+A+R
   spells:
Dervish        0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Noble, 1x Random
  item slots: W/B+W+R
   spells:
Dwarf          0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Constitution, Mountaineer, Wall Crushing
  item slots: W+A+A
   spells:
Healer         0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Healer, Caster 7.5
  item slots: W+A+R
   spells:
Huntress       0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Blademaster, Forester, Long Range
  item slots: W/B+R+R
   spells:
Orc Warrior    0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Might, First strike
  item slots: W+A+R
   spells:
Sage           0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Sage, Caster 7.5
  item slots: S+R+R
   spells:
Thief          0     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Armour Piercing, Agility
  item slots: W+R+R
   spells:
Assassin       5     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Poison, Blade Master, Web, 1x Random
  item slots: W+W+R
   spells:
Druid          5     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Purification, Regeneration, Caster 7.5
  item slots: S+A+R
   spells:
Magician       5     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Arcane Power, Caster 7.5
  item slots: S+S+R
   spells:
War Monk       5     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Super Agility, First Strike, Negate First Strike, Blademaster
  item slots: R+R+R
   spells:
Warrior Mage   5     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials:
  item slots: S/W+A+R
   spells:
Draconian     10     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Fire Breath 5, Flying, Might, 1x Random
  item slots: S+A+R
   spells:
Golden One    10     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Caster 5, 3x Random
  item slots: W/S+A+R
   spells:
Ranger        10     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Pathfinding, Caster 5, , Scouting III, 1x Random
  item slots: W/B+A+R
   spells:
Wind Mage     10     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Windwalking, caster 7.5, 1x Random
  item slots: S+R+R
   spells:
Witch         10     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -     -
specials: Caster 10, Life Steal
  item slots: S+R+R
   spells:

[b0rsuk]

Orc Warrior:

Weaponmaster instead of random fighter pick. By the point a weaponmaster hero arrives he usually doesn't matter. If there was a decent chance of getting one in early game, there would be more viable strategies and Orc Warrior would be quite distinct. Players would be encouraged to use more units, more stacks instead of just one. And with random warrior pick it's rarely different enough from the Barbarian.

[Catwalk]

Good point about having an early Armsmaster hero. Should it be the orc, though? Orcs aren't typically seen as great teachers.

[I like Serena]

Orc Warrior:

Weaponmaster instead of random fighter pick. By the point a weaponmaster hero arrives he usually doesn't matter. If there was a decent chance of getting one in early game, there would be more viable strategies and Orc Warrior would be quite distinct. Players would be encouraged to use more units, more stacks instead of just one. And with random warrior pick it's rarely different enough from the Barbarian.

I like the idea of using heroes more as support units.

I think the list of support abilities is:

1. Armsmaster
   
2. Forester
   
3. Healer
   
4. Holy Bonus
   
5. Leadership
   
6. Mountaineer
   
7. Pathfinder
   
8. Prayermaster
   
9. Resistance to All
   
10. Scout II
    
11. Scout III
    
12. Wind Walking
    

Leadership
Perhaps we could give Leadership to the Dervish?
And reduce the effect of Noble to compensate, say 5 gold instead of 10?
Right now, I usually keep the Dervish in my fortress since he's too weak to use in battle and I want to protect my goose with its golden eggs.
It would be nice if he played a more active role.

Armsmaster
We might give Armsmaster to the Barbarian.
Should we compensate?
Perhaps a maintenance of 4 instead of 2?

Armsmaster
The Orc Warrior already has Mountaineer, but I'm all for it to give him another support ability like Armsmaster.
Rationale: He sets a good example for the other warriors and he takes no nonsense from these sissies.
Think of Druss the Legend, who was also an Axe warrior.
Btw, we could always rename him and change his picture.



Right now, the abilities Holy Bonus and Resistance to All do not play a noticable role in MoM. Perhaps we could give them to heroes like the Druid, the Healer, the War Monk and/or the Golden One?
Btw, does anyone know what they do exactly?
I find the description a bit vague.

Level +1
Furthermore, Leadership on the Bard always sounds nice, but in practice I feel the effect of Leadership comes too late. It is simply too much effort to get the Bard to the required level, making me discard the Bard.
Can we do something about this?
Perhaps jump-start the Bard with a higher level?
Or give her a level-bonus, meaning she will always be one level higher than the other units (assuming this is technically feasible)?

[SIZE="1"]Credits to George V.B. who made MoM pictures available at http://www.ringsofsaturn.com[/SIZE]

[Catwalk]

Leadership
Perhaps we could give Leadership to the Dervish?
And reduce the effect of Noble to compensate, say 5 gold instead of 10?
Right now, I usually keep the Dervish in my fortress since he's to weak to use in battle and I want to protect my goose with its golden eggs.
It would be nice if he played a more active role.

I don't really see B'Shaan as a leader type. Then again, I don't see him as a nobleman either I guess one goes with the other, so Leadership makes sense. High on my list is making Noble scale with level, it's really boring as is. 4 gc per level would be nice.

We might give Armsmaster to the Barbarian.
Should we compensate?
Perhaps a maintenance of 4 instead of 2?

I'm not sold on your rationale for giving armsmaster to brute warrior types. I'm not strongly against it either, so if others like the idea we can give it a go. How about Taki, and maybe rename the ability to Tactician?

The Orc Warrior already has Mountaineer, but I'm all for it to give him another support ability like Armsmaster.
Rationale: He sets a good example for the other warriors and he takes no nonsense from these sissies.
Think of Druss the Legend, who was also an Axe warrior.
Btw, we could always rename him and change his picture.

Again, I'm not a fan. I actually don't like the orc warrior one bit to begin with. Mountaineer doesn't really go with how orcs are portrayed in MoM, and thrown 3 makes him too similar to the barbarian. How about this:
Orc has first strike and might (simple combo for a simple brain)
Barbarian has blademaster and thrown 3 (combos a lot better than might + thrown)

Furthermore, Leadership on the Bard always sounds nice, but in practice I feel the effect of Leadership comes too late. It is simply to much effort to get the Bard to the required level, making me discard the Bard.
Can we do something about this?
Perhaps jump-start the Bard with a higher level?
Or give or her a level-bonus, meaning she will always be one level higher than the other units (assuming this is technically feasible)?

I don't like this much, the flaw is with leadership in the first place. It was originally intended to level up every 2 levels instead of every 3, how about restoring it to that?

[I like Serena]

I forgot to mention that all heroes should have a movement that is close to foot units.
Otherwise it is not attractive to keep stacks of foot units with a hero.

Note furthermore that MoM counts moves in half-moves.
This means a unit can have a move of 2 1/2.

Since all foot units now have a move of 2, I propose that all heroes get a move of 2 1/2 or 3.
Rationale: Make it attractive to keep heroes with stacks of units.
That way Forester, Mountaineering and Pathfinding will be of more benefit to regular units.

[luddite]

I know this probably isn't possible, but is there any way you can change it so that people have some choice over their hero? Sometimes I feel like, "wow I really want a hero with armsmaster, or pathfinding, or a mage" but it keeps giving me useless heroes that I don't want. It's not even a question of the heroes being imbalanced, it's the way they interact with the rest of your army. For example, when you're relying on mundane troops for most of the fighting, an armsmaster hero absolutely the best, but if you're trying to play with just summoned creatures, armsmaster is useless. It puts an annoying amount of randomness in the game, and discourages advance planning.

[Vagabond]

I forgot to mention that all heroes should have a movement that is close to foot units.
Otherwise it is not attractive to keep stacks of foot units with a hero.

Note furthermore that MoM counts moves in half-moves.
This means a unit can have a move of 2 1/2.

Since all foot units now have a move of 2, I propose that all heroes get a move of 2 1/2 or 3.
Rationale: Make it attractive to keep heroes with stacks of units.
That way Forester, Mountaineering and Pathfinding will be of more benefit to regular units.

I'd recommend 3 movement. I had just been thinking about posting a question on hero movement. Weird.

[Catwalk]

I forgot to mention that all heroes should have a movement that is close to foot units.
Otherwise it is not attractive to keep stacks of foot units with a hero.

I agree, but I think leaving (most) heroes at 2 moves and upping foot units to 2 moves solves this issue adequately. 2.5 moves wouldn't be elegant IMO. 3 moves would be okay too, although I like toning heroes down a bit overall and reducing their speed advantage is a big factor in that.

I know this probably isn't possible, but is there any way you can change it so that people have some choice over their hero?

I agree to some extent, but I also consider this part of the charm of MoM. One way we can alleviate this would be to tinker with the probabilities of heroes occurring as a function of how many heroes you have. So if you're low on heroes you'll be able to shop around much more efficiently. Imagine that you have a 32% chance of getting a hero at 0 heroes, 16% at 1 hero, 8% at 2 heroes, 4% at 3 heroes, 2% at 4 heroes and 1% at 5 heroes. Combine that with raising the cost of summon hero considerably, making it cost efficient only when you already have a bunch of heroes.

Or possibly more interesting, let the cost of the hero scale with how many heroes you want (if possible).

[luddite]

That would definitely help. It would be more practical to wait for the hero you need, if your strategy really depends on getting a particular type of hero.