Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition - Tactical Edition.

I also had an idea to completely get rid of all dragons, because we buy them on par with ordinary peasants, like pets - it's only a question of price and growth. That is, I was thinking about replacing TE-dragons with hydras (a manticore could go in their place), LE-dragons with phoenixes, necro-dragons with wraiths (and death knights in their place), and gnome-dragons most likely with thans (I didn't have many ideas here). After all, I am inclined to see a DRAGON closer to Smaug or Balerion, in quantities of one or two, rather than 10-20.

Well, ugh, the problem here is the mathematical expectation. Yes, such a game is risky (at this pace you can run into bad RNG and fall slightly short), but the point is that in 80% of cases, people still manage and defeat their more leisurely opponents. Therefore, it is quite natural to hurry as much as possible and maintain the pace.
In this regard, Nargott's mod might even be good, because the game in general is geared towards earlier timeframes, meaning people won't need the favor of RNG to play fast enough and not get wiped out in every fifth/fourth game on neutrals. Well, that's what I hope for.

Another option -- phantoms (but maybe it's already used, I don't know)

Dampires are terrible. How can you upgrade a pureblood vampire into a half-breed and then back again? It's nonsense ) And the word itself seems to parody a vampire.

For quite a while, I have been observing professional StarCraft 2 as a benchmark strategy. I plan to transfer key and successful concepts from StarCraft to Heroes 5 to recreate a competitive "StarCraft" in turn-based form.

Much of what is written below has been repeated before; the post essentially serves as a collection of key guidelines whose relevance must be constantly maintained. Along with a deeper understanding of StarCraft over time, the understanding of what ideal Heroes should be grows, and the concept is updated.

Dynamics
StarCraft is one of the most dynamic RTS; the average game time is about 10 minutes, while early access to top technologies is possible around the 5th minute, and the development of secondary bases can start as early as 1-2 minutes. Rushes are already possible at 2-3 minutes.

In the reality of Heroes, access to top technologies should be at the end of the first - beginning of the second week. These timeframes are also interesting because a "demographic explosion" (weekly growth) occurs at the 2-week boundary.
Based on this, the average game duration should be about 15 days. If one tries to stretch these timeframes further, there are risks of losing the strategic component.
Continuing the analogy, active interaction between players (scouting, rushes, diversions, minor skirmishes) should begin as early as the 3rd day of the first week, meaning the distance between starting locations should not exceed 3 days of movement. The nearest secondary cities should be within 2-3 moves.
Since the game should be dynamic, passage guards need to be removed completely. Nothing should hinder active scouting and the discovery of new locations. We are for the freedom of hero movement across the map.

Time per turn:
2 minutes - blitz
3 minutes - fast time control
4 minutes - normal time control
5 minutes - slow time control

How the minimum time per turn is calculated: normally, a player can control/build in 3 cities and 6 heroes; that's 9 active objects, each requiring 10-20 seconds. Manual combat should be conducted once a day and at the end of the turn (outside this limit); other battles should be conducted via auto-battle. The "blitz" format is the fastest format that still allows for normal development on the map. Then come formats with an additional time reserve; with normal or slow time control, it is sometimes possible to conduct 2 manual battles per day.

Estimated time for a manual breakthrough battle - 1-2 minutes. Turns are sequential, as simultaneous turns will not work with early player interaction. Thus, the total time per turn will be:
2 + 1 = 3 minutes for blitz
3 + 1 = 4 minutes for fast control
4 + 1 = 5 minutes for normal control
5 + 1 = 6 minutes for slow control

And the total time per game should be around:
3 * 15 * 2 = 90 minutes for blitz + 30 minutes for PvP battles = 120 minutes, or 2 hours
4 * 15 * 2 = 120 minutes for fast control + 30 minutes for PvP battles = 150 minutes, or 2.5 hours
5 * 15 * 2 = 150 minutes for normal control + 30 minutes for PvP battles = 180 minutes, or 3 hours
6 * 15 * 2 = 180 minutes for slow control + 30 minutes for PvP battles = 210 minutes, or 3.5 hours

The game should become one of the most dynamic among turn-based strategies with full development, and the blitz format is aimed exactly at this.

Early Interaction
In StarCraft, interaction between players begins early, as soon as 1-2 minutes (scouting). And this is a very important point; scouting should be fully played out from the very start of the game.
Therefore, as written above, the distance between starting locations in Heroes should not exceed 3 days of travel, and guards in passages should not stop/slow down scouting. As in StarCraft, a strong player should be able to end the game early if the opponent is significantly inferior in skill. There is no point in dragging the map for 2-3 hours if a weak opponent can be defeated in half an hour.

Strategy Options
In StarCraft, it is impossible to develop normally in everything at once; a certain style, technologies, and troop composition with which the player plans to win are always preferred.
Therefore, in Heroes, cities must by no means be built out completely; there should be healthy competition between the income branch, troop production, and magic. Not all troops should have time to be built; there should be an emphasis on certain types of troops upon which the victory strategy is built. For this very reason, the time for city development is compressed to 1-2 weeks; the player must make a mutually exclusive choice in favor of certain buildings.

Asymmetric Development
A key feature of StarCraft is the asymmetry of races, i.e., their fundamental, structural difference from each other.
Therefore, city schemes, creature strength, construction time for specific creatures, and their dependencies on each other must fundamentally differ for each race. There should be no standards in this regard.

Troop Selection
In StarCraft, no one builds all types of troops simultaneously; a choice is always made in favor of certain combat units.
Accordingly, in Heroes, not all production buildings should have time to be built. Full development of production capacities (7 tiers + 7 upgrades + fortifications + prerequisite buildings) should end no earlier than the end of the 3rd week, while on average the game should end much earlier.

Resources
In StarCraft, there are fundamental types of resources: minerals and gas. Minerals are spent on economic development and basic troops (primary resource), gas - on technologies and high-tech troops (technological resource).
In Heroes, 2 types of resources play a similar role: gold and building resources (which can be conventionally grouped together). And they should play fundamentally different roles: gold - spent on buying troops, and building resources - on the development of cities and production bases. Based on this, all gold prices for buildings should be significantly reduced; city development should be limited by resources, not gold.

Economy/Production/Army/Technologies
In StarCraft, all 4 sectors are important and compete with each other. It is impossible to rapidly develop several of them simultaneously; a choice must be made, or pace must be sacrificed.
In Heroes, similar sectors should mutually exclude each other; for example, there should be different strategies for maximum increase of production capacity and strategies for rapid access to maximum troops here and now. All this is important to consider when designing city schemes; there should be no universal optimal development paths.

Counter-units and Counter-strats
StarCraft is interesting because every unit has a counter, and any strategy can be countered by another strategy.
Accordingly, it is important to maintain certain ratios of units, for example: slow infantry shreds fast flyers but gets wiped by shooters. In the original Heroes 5, this rule is not quite maintained, as fast troops are too over-buffed and often exceed slow troops in combat power, which is why rush tactics are so popular (in RTA).
The presence of counter-strategies should mean that even standard, measured development should be killed by specialized strats. For example, if one player evenly builds production capacities, while another player bets on maximum troops here and now and attacks the first, such an attack should win the game. There should be no special leniency for the defense; the player should be interested in actively scouting the opponent and adjusting to them in time, rather than just developing standardly. Player attacks should be deterred exclusively by the defensive forces of the players themselves, not by guards in passages. If a player wants to attack here and now, nothing and no one (except another player) should prevent them from doing so; no crippled strats like "I'll save up to break through the guard."

Relevance of Basic Units
In StarCraft, basic units most often form the main core of the army; there are technologies that allow them to remain relevant even in the late game.
In Heroes, there should be strategies that allow for significantly boosting the growth of low-level troops, betting on them. This role is assigned to fortifications, which, unlike the original, boost the growth not of all troops, but specifically low-level ones.

Macro and Micro
StarCraft is a game with a balanced ratio of macro and micro, in which it is important to pay a lot of attention to both components of the game. Macro game is the development of the economy, increasing production capacities, troop production, and technology development. Micro is the conduct of specific battles, where the outcome of the battle fundamentally depends on the player's actions.
In Heroes 5, macro suffers significantly because the player spends most of the time in PvE battles. It is important to shift this balance in favor of macro. The time for breakthrough battles should not exceed the time the player spends on city development and moving heroes across the map. Ideally, the total time for breakthrough battles should not exceed the time for PvP battles, since only PvP battles have a developed tactical component. PvE battles should recede into the background as the least interesting element of the game, devoid of interaction between players. This is exactly why the concept of 1 manual battle per day is supported; PvE should fundamentally be present so that the player doesn't get bored in the intervals between PvP battles, but in minimal quantities. The role of neutrals is to be beautifully defeated by the player and motivate them to build armies to grab treats on the map. Breaking through them should not present significant difficulty for the player, as it is a secondary element of the game.
The difficulty of the game in terms of development should lie not in how to break through neutrals, but in how not to lose in the process due to the counter-actions of the opponent, for example, from rushes or timing attacks.

Key Components of Strategy:
Scouting
Early attacks (rushes)
Development
Expansion
Urgent attacks (timing pushes)
Diversions (harass)

Each of these StarCraft components should be fully played out in Heroes. There should be no restrictions on scouting, rushes, diversions by "roaches", expansion into several cities, or urgent attacks (at any time). Gameplay on the map should be something more than just development and hero leveling.

P.S. Technically, the possibility to play simultaneous turns has appeared even when crossing player areas, and thus, the overall dynamics can be accelerated almost 2 times (in blitz mode from 2 to 1-1.5 hours per game). However, this needs to be tested before deciding to implement such simultaneity into the game.

Heroes adjusted for grades?