Login

u/Gandalf196

Victory conditions should be session settings, not baked into maps/templates
▲ 93 r/OldenEra

Victory conditions should be session settings, not baked into maps/templates

I really like Olden Era so far, but I think the current game setup flow mixes concepts that should probably be separate.

Right now, some things that feel like session rules are presented as if they were properties of the map/template. For example, a template can appear to be tied to something like “Final Battle”. To me, that is confusing, because the map should define the board: size, layout, player count, zones, starting positions, roads, resources, neutral density, and so on.

Victory conditions should define how the match is won.

Those are different layers.

A cleaner structure would be:

Map / Template
Defines the battlefield:
Blitz
L (128 × 128)
Players: 2
Template layout / thumbnail

Hero Rules
Defines hero constraints:
Hero limit
Single hero mode
Other hero-related restrictions

Victory Conditions
Defines how the session ends:
Defeat all opponents
Tournament Mode
Final Battle
Other objective-based win conditions

The important part is that Tournament Mode and Final Battle should not be treated as map parameters. They are victory conditions that only become available when the hero rules allow them, specifically, when each player has a single hero.

So if Hero Limit is greater than 1, those victory conditions should simply be disabled or locked, with a clear explanation like:

“Requires Hero Limit = 1.”

If Hero Limit is 1, they become selectable.

This makes the setup screen much easier to reason about:

The map answers: “Where are we playing?”
The hero rules answer: “What are the hero constraints?”
The victory conditions answer: “How do we win?”
The difficulty/gameplay settings answer: “How hard and how fast is the session?”

I also think this removes the need for a separate “Game Mode: Classic” field. If “Classic” is just the normal adventure mode, then it does not need to another option of quick game.

The current system feels confusing because it makes the player infer too much from the template itself. A new player may reasonably wonder: is “Final Battle” a map type, a game mode, a victory condition, or a special rule? The UI should make that explicit.

That's my two cents.

What do you think?

u/Gandalf196 — 16 hours ago
▲ 92 r/OldenEra

One of the biggest problems with the subclass system in Heroes of Might and Magic: Olden Era is that subclasses seem to become either:

a gamble,

or an optimal solved path.

Both are bad.

If the subclass you want depends on RNG, planning feels frustrating. If there is a mathematically best path, everyone eventually follows the same build.

I think the system should learn more from Heroes of Might and Magic IV.

H4 classes worked because they felt like a natural evolution of your hero, not a separate minigame. The game basically recognized your playstyle and rewarded it.

For example: A pure Cleric with Expert Daylight Magic + Expert Battle Magic could naturally become an Inquisitor.

Not because the player “forced” a prestige path, but because the hero already evolved into that archetype.

Then the subclass simply reinforces the identity:

bonus vs undead/demons,

morale aura,

stronger holy spells,

etc.

The important part is that subclasses should reward coherent progression, not dictate it.

A good subclass system should make players think: “Cool, my hero became this.”

Not: “I need a wiki to avoid ruining my build.”

reddit.com
u/Gandalf196 — 8 days ago
▲ 98 r/OldenEra

The artifact art in Olden Era lacks a cohesive visual language: styles, saturation, and rendering fidelity vary too much between items. While readable, many icons feel generic and don’t have strong silhouettes or memorable identity. Overall, they look polished individually but inconsistent and under-designed as a system.

u/Gandalf196 — 11 days ago
▲ 0 r/OldenEra

As of now, the game has six difficulty levels, corresponding to the six classical chess pieces. However, the jump from Unfair to Impossible feels disproportionately steep. The game would benefit from a smoother progression and a couple of intermediate tiers.

Since the chess-piece system has been part of Heroes since at least Heroes II, it makes sense to extend it rather than replace it.

In 1929, Capablanca proposed two additional pieces for an expanded chess variant:

  • Archbishop (Bishop + Knight), worth ~8 pawns
  • Chancellor (Rook + Knight), worth ~9 pawns

These hybrid pieces naturally fit between Rook and Queen in terms of strength, making them ideal candidates for new difficulty levels.

Proposed difficulty ladder

  • Pawn – Easy (50%)
  • Knight – Normal (75%)
  • Bishop – Hard (100%)
  • Rook – Unfair (125%)
  • Archbishop – Very Unfair (150%) (new)
  • Chancellor – Extreme (175%) (new)
  • Queen – Impossible (200%) (adjusted)
  • King – Apocalyptic (225%) (adjusted)
reddit.com
u/Gandalf196 — 11 days ago
▲ 3 r/OldenEra

I felt the game could use more difficulty tiers (Civ has 8, for example), so I added two pieces from Capablanca Chess:

  • Archbishop (≈ value 8) — moves like a bishop OR a knight → diagonals any distance + standard L-shaped jumps
  • Chancellor (≈ value 9) — moves like a rook OR a knight → straight lines any distance + standard L-shaped jumps

For reference:

  • Rook ≈ 5
  • Queen ≈ 9–10
  • King = not comparable (game-ending piece)

So these are real “fairy chess” pieces with established values, not arbitrary additions.

u/Gandalf196 — 12 days ago
▲ 8 r/OldenEra

Tinkering with the game files (`Core.zip`, in `DB/objects_logic/cities/*_city.json`, field `array[0].magicGuilds[0].rollChances`), I found that Magic Guild spell generation is configured **spell-by-spell**, but most faction identity comes from broad school weighting.

Temple favors **Daylight**, Necropolis favors **Nightshade**, Grove favors **Primal**, and Schism favors **Arcane**. Hive and Dungeon are broadly balanced, although Dungeon has some individual spell boosts. Necropolis also has explicit per-spell exceptions: `day_1_magic_healing_water` and `day_2_magic_sharp_edge` have weight `0`.

Town Spell entries Daylight Nightshade Primal Arcane
Temple 60 40.2% 20.1% 19.6% 20.1%
Necropolis 72 18.0% 41.2% 20.2% 20.6%
Hive 72 25.3% 25.1% 24.6% 25.1%
Dungeon 72 25.0% 25.1% 24.7% 25.1%
Grove 72 20.3% 20.1% 39.5% 20.1%
Schism 72 20.2% 20.1% 19.6% 40.1%

Important caveat: these percentages are normalized from the whole raw Mage Guild roll list. The exact in-game chance for a specific Mage Guild level may be normalized only among the spells eligible for that level/rank.

Spell rolls are stored as individual spell IDs with weights | The game data is not just saying “roll Daylight at X%”. Each spell has its own `chance` value.

reddit.com
u/Gandalf196 — 12 days ago
▲ 491 r/OldenEra

Trust me; I've played ALL of them.

This is the first time in my life I've seen a game that rivals Heroes III in terms of immersion, fun, etc.

What a time to be alive, my friends, what a time!

u/Gandalf196 — 13 days ago
▲ 53 r/OldenEra

Yes.

Definitely.

We've been waiting for a proper successor to Heroes III for over 25 fucking years!

The day hath come!

reddit.com
u/Gandalf196 — 14 days ago
▲ 17 r/OldenEra

We want to know the percentages for each class, both for primary and secondary skills advancement. It is not enough to say, for instance, that clerics get more sp, and knowledge per level. How much more? For how long? Also, secondary skill advancement numbers are a must for planning.

To give a counter-example, Songs of Conquest has not provided such numbers till this day, and skill planning in that game is a total mess.

This sort of information can be in a manual, that's for sure, but one should be able to see it in-game too, maybe only when "statistics for nerds" is enabled.

reddit.com
u/Gandalf196 — 17 days ago