Quote:
Originally Posted by analytic_kernel
Some of the thoughts running through my mind have been:
(1) What are good classification systems for heroes? Some heroes seem to be excellent fighters. Others are good mages. Some are mixed mages and fighters. What makes a hero stand out in its category?
(2) Suppose the best recruitable mages of a nation have a maximum level of 3 in a path (or maybe 4 with a random pick) - what would be a good minimum path level for a mage hero if it is specializing in a particular path? Something like 4 or 5 maybe?
(3) For fighter heroes, having stats higher than the best fighter recruits of a nation seems to be a typical approach. What about taking the best recruitable fighter unit types and adding new abilities to them to create new hero unit types? Does starting with magical equipment (Enchanted Sword, etc...) count towards being a hero?
(4) How close are awesome heroes such as Lugh the Long Handed to the upper limit of what is considered an acceptable hero? Should some heroes be good SC chasses? Should all fighter heroes be good thug chasses?
(5) Should a hero be roughly equivalent to a mid-game summon? A late-game summon?
|
There is really very little in terms of upper and lower limit on how good/bad a hero can be. In my opinions, the most important thing is simply for them to thematically make sense. That said, there are some guidelines might make them fit better current heroes:
*I wouldn't in general put more than 2-3 points of magic more on a hero than can be reached with nationals, or more than 4 in any particular path.
*Fighter heroes stats should mostly be the max you can reasonably get away with thematically. Usually around +5-10 hp, +5 att/df over species norms. Magic weapons that fit thematically are probably just fine.