Can you communicate without using phrases like "nonsense"?

Well, it wasn't directed at you; it was just an interjection.

Okay, I understand your point, but isn't it possible in Heroes 4 that the player who strikes first wins?

Yes, it happens :) But it doesn't happen that out of two equally strong and numerous units, one wins with a two-fold advantage.

I don't see the point in your answer to my question in this example. I've always done it this way: I attack a monster with a weaker unit (or one I don't mind losing) so that, logically, a stronger unit won't retaliate. This has always been the case in all parts of the game. So, in this nuance, I can easily compare Heroes 4 to any other part of the series. :)

I wasn't arguing that the phenomenon of retaliation and removing retaliation with a weak unit exists in all versions. The question is only about the cost. I clearly showed you in examples where the problem lies and how Heroes 4 differs from all other versions when dealing with retaliation. In all versions except Heroes 4, the more units you kill in the unit from which you are removing retaliation, the less damage you will receive from the unit that is removing retaliation. Is that correct in your opinion? In Heroes 4, retaliation occurs at full cost. This applies to large-scale battles where there are many numerous units on both sides. And the fact that it is beneficial to remove retaliation with a single unit is absolutely true for any version of Heroes.