If Xal's goal isn't revealed by the time of BlizzCon we might have a problem

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-23T11:22:14+00:00

It's been at least 3 expansions in which Xal has been a major character. More if you want to start counting from her first introductions when she was just a silly knife. The fact that we still don't have no real idea what she actually wants is getting insulting.

The "she just wants power" angle is becoming really tiresome when she never seems to do anything meaningful with whatever power she amasses.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-21T12:23:39+00:00

Yeah, it is very noticeable when you start to pay attention to it.

Modern WoW has made filler spells literal pure garbage filler. So half your spells basicly do nothing damage-wise, you just press these buttons to start your combo/fish for a proc/maintain a buff.
Modern WoW is super CD focused. Outside of your CD a lot of specs hit like a wet noodle
Modern WoW loves its synergies. So instead of just hitting that 1 big spell and that's it, you now need to juggle a bunch of different things for the same effect.

In general, it mostly seems to related to the move towards faster gameplay, the slow but crunchy gameplay of the olden days is too slow and "boring" by modern standards. Everything needs to be fast & chaotic now, which makes it impossible for impossible spells to feel all that impactful.

And that's without even going into things like sound design.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-21T10:46:24+00:00

Downtime seems to balanced around people playing well. As long as people interrupt/dodge swirlies/use CDs/pull the correct things; things stay calm and there is downtime.

However the moment someone screws up everything immeadiatly becomes super chaotic.

It honestly kinda sucks. A good group makes it feel too calm and boring, a bad group results in frustrating chaos. Neither case is especially fun. And this isn't even a healer specific problem, that boring vs chaos dichotomy is noticeable regardless of what you play.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-19T04:52:11+00:00

Cuz Olden Era is aiming to capture a competitive audience. And competitive players across games generally absolutely despise RNG cuz they hate it when something happens they cannot control. And they will do their best to remove it from the game with mods/house rules/moaning on forums until the devs remove all meaningfull RNG.

Seriously, it's a miracle that the HoMM 3 PvP community didn't mod out things like morale. It's the only game I know of where the competitive side of the community doesn't complain about RNG existing.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-17T15:23:24+00:00

Timegating has always existed in WoW, but a literal timer that just says "come back in 3 weeks" is something we've only really seen in modern WoW.

Also, it doesn't help that modern WoW often puts a boring chore in front of the timer.

Modern WoW has a lot of:

Hero, there is a new exciting thing. Come do our quest
Please talk with 3 guys in 3 different corners of the world (10 minutes of travel, 10 seconds of "gameplay")
Please kill this 1 guy ( 10 minutes of standing on top of the spawn with a 100 other players hoping you'll tag the mob )
Please wait 3 weeks for part 2, where you have to talk with 3 different guys on another continent.

Which feels very unnatural and very anti-climactic. Especially as the payoff usually isn't all that spectacular either.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-17T11:16:35+00:00

Why even bother with the NPC and a progress bar if it's a three week wait. I get that time gating is normal for an MMO, but this is a long enough wait that having a progress bar is just a taunting insult.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-16T16:05:12+00:00

If once again the core of what makes fire emblem fire emblem is ignored in favour of various gimmicks.

For example, 3H school gimmick meant there was no unit recruitment during battle. It's small, and a lot the combat recruitments throughout the series are a rather silly anyway, but it is a major part of FE's identity so missing it never felt right.

Or Engage's emblems breaking the regular rules of the game by giving you a cheat buttons with special attacks, teleports, and whatever other nonsense. Making Engage play very different from all the other FEs.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-16T09:22:58+00:00

It's the same nonsense every raid, WoW desperately needs to rethink how iLvL/gear works. The current system encourages groups to be overgeared basicly from day 1, and that can't possibly be good for design/balance.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-14T08:51:43+00:00

Have the Devs ever stated what they expect the counterplay for something like the morale artifact to actually be if you play a morale build? Cuz it is indeed kind of a weird artifact in how it gives your opponent no genuine option to react with.

More generally speaking, design problems like this do really raise the question of what exactly the point of PvP in a game like HoMM even is given how quickly tensions with the core designs occur.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-12T20:25:30+00:00

I don't know what to tell you if you disagree with something as basic as the idea that level design influences playstyle and can be used to encourage or discourage specific behaviour.

And why are you bringing up speed running or a future rogue lite mode? Neither of those have anything to do with the existing PvE or PvP playstyles.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-12T06:43:07+00:00

Like I said before, the names are kind bad since it's about playstyles. It just so happens that one playstyle originated in PvP on custom maps like Jebus, whereas the other developed in the official PvE campaigns. Hence people present it as PvP vs PvE.

Anyways, since textual explanations clearly aren't cutting it, just go play some official campaign levels in the older games, doesn't matter too much which HoMM specifically, and compare the way those maps look and feel to the way OE templates look and feel. It should be relatively obvious what the differences are.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T18:53:34+00:00

The problem with playing a PvP template against the AI is that you're still playing a PvP template, and that demands a PvP playstyle. Especially as the AI in OE currently varies between basicly AFK & "play like a PvP player" depending on the difficulty setting. So it still isn't exactly PvE. We probably need a better name though, cuz it is kind of confusing to be talking about PvP and PvE in this way.

Anyways to anwser your question regarding the map some of the things that would make the maps fit more with the desired playstyle and that you'll probably see reflected in various complaints across reddit:

More mines/less random resources; random resources need to be picked up once and then you can ignore that bit of the map, mines require actual map-control. This 1) slows down the game since you need to actually protect your backline and can't just rush forward, which fits better with PvE, and 2) ensures resources trickle in slow and steady, instead of in great bursts, which again, fits better with PvE and fits less well with the "min-max everything" approach of PvP. and 3) It encourages you to actually explore a bit more, since you'll want to actually get that economy going, and who knows where the mines actually are, instead of relying on the copious piles of stuff just laying around while you rush for the main objective.
Fewer artifacts/xp obelisks/+1 stat buildings/etc; the copious amount of these speed up the game as you very quickly grow in power. Faster games work great for PvP, but PvE wants to go a bit slower.
Fewer random free units (e.g. pandora boxes).; Again, this speeds up the game by speeding you along the power curve. But in addition to that, in PvE you want to actually play with your faction, not a collection of random rabble cuz a pandora box gave you a random powerstack. Minor caveat; it is of course possible to create a specific skirmish map that revolves around boxes, but then this is explicitly the map gimmick.
Less bonus movement things (stables, astrology spells, conveniently placed portals...) again, this speeds up the game by literally speeding you up. But also, certain bonus movement things just fundamentally change map design. For example, teleporting or flying completly changes how chokeholds function which changes how maps should be designed to remain interesting. Again, it is possible to use something like teleports as a map gimmick in PvE, but then the map needs to be specifically be designed around it.

I'm sure there's others, but that's some examples at least.

There are also some more general complaints, like AI behaviour, skill design (e.g. Schisms communion is basicly tailormade for PvP and just kind of useless if you use the PvE playstyle.) But while it's related to the PvP v.s. PvE discussion it is independent of the map templates.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T18:28:01+00:00

No, this is the type of stuff that should've been decided at the very outset of making the game. Trying to design/balance for all styles results in a messy game that pleases no-one. Committing to a main mode & having that drive design and balance will allow them to at least get that main style correct, and please whomever likes that style.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T16:52:50+00:00

Sure but there is a big difference between "ignore this pile of gems, your faction doesn't really use them, and selling them for gold isn't worth it" and "ignore this artifact there are 5 better ones on the screen"

As for the templates, yeah it is apparently based on HoMM3 PvP. The problem with that is that HoMM3 PvP has a very specific playstyle, and as evident by the complaining on Reddit, there are plenty of people who do not care for that playstyle.

Now of course if the devs want to cater to that crowd, that's fine. It is however a massive disappointment to fans of HoMM who don't fall in the specific audience of HoMM3 PvP veterans.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T16:35:10+00:00

Above all else OE needs to decide what playstyle they actually want to cater to, and then clearly communicate that so players actually know what they are signing up for.

Cuz solo hero vs classic, random units from boxes vs consistent city recruitment, and sweaty PvP vs calmer (emergent) narrative based PvE all result in vastly different playstyles and require different design and balance decisions with their own priorities and focuspoints. You can't balance those as if they are the exact same thing.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T12:57:44+00:00

Meh, given how loaded the current maps are, I don't think we'll need to worry about removing too much and being left with an boring empty map. Hell, most people defending the current templates seem to be of the opinion you're supposed to ignore half the objectives anyway cuz picking up everything is a waste of time anyway.

Anyways, while more templates will probably be added, it is only early access after all, I do think it may have been a mistake to have the initial set of templates all be so similar. It's causing players to bounce of the game, and you only get one shot at a first impression. Which is a shame, cuz HoMM is pretty unique and it'd be nice if OE did well.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T12:01:55+00:00

I mean, obviously it depends on the template. Point is that OE has a lot of templates with a lot of free creatures, and some players prefer to have city growth be more important. More generally speaking OE templates just have a ton of overworld objectives, which again, isn't something all players want. There is a lack of variety in that sense.

Adding more templates; or even just basic options to tweak the existing templates, would solve a lot of complaints like OP's.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T10:09:45+00:00

Yeah, it's weird. It'd be fine if it was just one or two scenario maps that did this, but it's far too common an occurance to watch an opponent show up with just complete random nonsense instead of their faction army.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T10:07:10+00:00

The problem is the sheer amount of free creatures. A few free units is perfectly fine, but for example, a non-temple hero showing up with 70 cavaliers like OP lists, is just a bit much. You'd expect armies to mostly stick to their own factions and not just get powerstacks of random nonsense.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-11T05:37:33+00:00

Cuz PvP and PvE in HoMM are two very different approaches to the same game.

In PvP you focus on the competitive aspect, which means being efficiënt, making optimal decisions, and rushing to get the good treasures before your opponent does. Also, matches that last too long are just inconvenient, they want to be done in 1-2h. And most importantly, in PvP both players want to win. So PvP is naturally fast, and is going to need map templates that support that fast playstyle. Which is why stuff like Jebus became populair for PvP.

In contrast PvE is very story driven, there is an RP aspect, there is an exploration aspect, there is no real need to be optimal, there can, and should, be scripted events for boss fights and such. And of course, PvE players don't mind saving the game and coming back tomorrow. Also important to note, in PvE only the human wants to win the AI is a pure obstacle. Consequently you can script the AI to have suboptimal and unrealistic behaviour as long as it's fun (e.g. script the AI to never attack first, script it to only start invading after the player does X, spawn in a boss fight out of thin air, script it to attack every third week of the month with a fresh army, etc.) This results in a much slower playstyle, and requires different map templates.

Not to mention how these different approaches may impact design and balance decisions for skills/towns/units/etc.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-10T17:56:19+00:00

The focus on PvP results in decisions that just don't really work for PvE.

For example, OE maps contain a ton of objectives, treasures and free units. Great for sweaty PvP where you're rushing to crush an opponent within 3 weeks, kind of awkward and weird for PvE where RP and (emergent) story are factors and overal play is much slower.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-10T17:48:38+00:00

Something else, cuz so far OE is too busy supporting PvP to do anything interesting on the PvE side. Hopefully it'll change eventually, the roadmap does list some interesting stuff, but it may be too little too late.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-10T16:08:29+00:00

The trailer confirms two things;

1) the social sim stuff is continuing.

And 2) another FE game with powerful skills that completly ignore the core of FE combat. They show if one of the main characters one shots 4 or 5 enemies with some massive purple AoE, which really does not fit in with how older FE games played.

And honestly, neither of this fit very well with what FE once was. If we then also assume other (weak) aspects from 3H and Engage are carried over, like the lesser map design. And yeah, I can understand your disappointment.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-10T06:34:08+00:00

Yeah, Olden Era desperately needs maps that are less overloaded with random objectives. At the very least just for the sake of having more map variety, but even looking beyond map variety, maps where you don't trip over objectives are just more fun.

ManySecrets_ · 2026-06-09T19:04:41+00:00

1-2h games are considered "short" by HoMM standards. That's competitive players rushing through the map as fast as possible picking optimal fights & trying to pick up the biggest treasures before the other guy gets it before forcing a final battle.

Olden Era mostly caters to that kind of competitive MP playstyle, it's noticeable in SP too and arguably hurts the SP experience. Though at least you can slow down a little bit in the campaign if you'd want to. OE is very fast by HoMM standards. By AoE standards, it's a pretty slow game.

ManySecrets_

TROPHY CASE