My example and yours show how it works in all installments except the fourth, in my opinion. :)
If we continue further, the next turn, a group A(50) finishes off group B(25) WITHOUT ANY RETALIATION, and group A remains with 50 UNITS!!! This is in a battle of 100 vs. 100 equal-strength units!!! What a load of nonsense. :)
And can you communicate without this: "What a load of nonsense"? Why didn't you just let me read what you wrote next...
Okay, the point is clear, but isn't it the case in the 4th installment that the one who strikes first wins?
Look, let's not bring up the 4th installment again, okay? :) Here's the same example for you:
1. A(100) attacks B(100). The program calculates the retaliation immediately, as if 100 will retaliate, NOT the remainder after the attack!! And in an exaggerated example where we don't take into account the slight variation in attack strength, we get after the retaliation: Group A(50) Group B(50)!!!
2. Ideally, it will be a draw - they will kill each other, and THIS HAPPENS!
3. But in reality, since there is a variation in attack strength, after the battle, the winner may have, say, from 1 to 5-10 units left alive.
Which is more consistent with common sense and reality. What can reasonable supporters of other versions object to against supporters of the fourth installment???
In this example, I don't see the point in answering my question. I did this anyway: I attack a monster with a weaker unit (or one that I don't mind losing) so that, logically, the stronger unit won't retaliate. This has always been the case in all parts. So, in this nuance, I can easily compare the 4th installment with any part of the Heroes series. :)
