Decided to return to Dark Man..
Therefore, such shortcomings are a kind of "attribute" of such maps, and I personally am willing to put up with them.
Next, regarding the Grail, on some maps the AI can indeed dig it up. Usually, this is not critical, unless the author wanted to force the player to place it in Flax to learn magic. Let's just say that on this map, losing the Grail is tolerable.
Regarding the exchange of troops between heroes, I have already shared my opinion on this: usually, it simplifies the game. Instead of several, usually ALL MORE POWERFUL than us, heroes, we get several weak ones and only one strong one. By killing all the weaklings, we gain control of the map, and we will kill the strong one when we gather our armies. In my opinion, this is a common practice. Yes, if we are playing according to the author's plan, then we kill enemies as soon as they appear (this is usually the plan), and the players do not have time to exchange armies. But in my experience, such an exchange is not critical. If it turns out that all the super-powerful units are gathered on a hero with a Sphere of Inhibition or a Cloak of Negation, then we will simply leave this hero for last, nothing terrible (unless, of course, it is a quest hero). To prevent this from happening, experienced map makers usually do not put inhibiting artifacts on the strongest enemies. And any army on any hero can be killed over time.
So, with the statement
After all, theoretically, some hero can acquire such an army and such artifacts that it will become simply impossible to defeat him.
But I agree that it is possible to leave enemies without a castle, which will lead to the loss of the hero and the map becoming unpassable. In any case, the author needs to think about such a scenario; this is a significant drawback.
But I repeat, getting such a UNIQUE map as Dark Man, on which everything would be "in order," is probably impossible. Therefore, I personally put up with its shortcomings as an integral attribute.