Balamut
Auto-translated
2 AmberSoler: It's strange that no one mentioned this. In The Eastern Expedition, you can recruit the hero you need (from those available) in the tavern. Of course, this only works in offline mode.
Added 2 minutes ago
Faster than lightning. Part one.
The most important resource in Heroes for me is undoubtedly... time.
Time in the game is spent on three things: technical actions (a classic example is transferring troops between heroes), tactical calculations (thinking through a turn in battle), and strategic planning (building chains, for example).
Technical actions are usually streamlined for players with many games under their belt, and different players spend roughly the same amount of time on them.
The duration of tactical calculations depends on two things: the complexity of the battle and how many moves ahead the player can calculate the situation on the battlefield. Here, the time spent on the same battle can vary significantly between different players. But again, if the players are not new to Heroes, they are experienced in battles with neutrals and think through the moves in such battles for the same amount of time. As for battles between players, such battles are usually the culmination of the game, one of its most important aspects. I like to think carefully and expect the same from others. Accordingly, there are no problems with the opponent taking a long time to think through their move in such a battle.
This leaves strategic planning. This is where players clash, figuring out "why is this slowpoke taking so long, is he asleep?".
I've heard opinions that when playing online, you can plan your turn during the opponent's turn, and then all that's left is to make your moves. This is complete nonsense. During the opponent's turn, you can only plan your turn based on what is visible on the map. If a new territory opens up during your turn, then you need to plan further development without leaving the "cash register." Good players attach great importance to reconnaissance, that is, they explore new territories almost every turn.
Another important factor in accusations of being slow is the apparent low efficiency of such time expenditures. That is, often, if the opponent spends an extra 5 minutes to ensure that five more centaurs survive out of 50 in three battles, this is met with hostility. This is a sign, if not of skill, then of a serious approach to the game. After all, you don't know in advance whether these centaurs will play a decisive role in one of the subsequent battles, or simply turn out to be wasted time. But if you are playing to win, and not just moving pieces around, then you will do the right thing by using all the chances, including those poor five centaurs.
As a result, I have developed the following position. I divide all players into three types: amateurs, athletes, and military personnel. Amateurs are those for whom the process of the game is more important than its outcome. That is, they are not ready to sacrifice their time for a possible improvement in their result. Athletes are players for whom it is important to show the optimal result. They need comfortable conditions to show this result. Military personnel are those for whom efficiency is important, that is, the result in less time (or with other restrictions). They often show worse results than athletes in ideal conditions. But they do not lose psychologically in more rigid frameworks.
In Competitive events, I think there are two ways to proceed. Either prioritize the interests of athletes or military personnel. But keep in mind that various player metrics will be measured, in one case, skill, and in the other, efficiency.
Added 2 minutes ago
Faster than lightning. Part one.
The most important resource in Heroes for me is undoubtedly... time.
Time in the game is spent on three things: technical actions (a classic example is transferring troops between heroes), tactical calculations (thinking through a turn in battle), and strategic planning (building chains, for example).
Technical actions are usually streamlined for players with many games under their belt, and different players spend roughly the same amount of time on them.
The duration of tactical calculations depends on two things: the complexity of the battle and how many moves ahead the player can calculate the situation on the battlefield. Here, the time spent on the same battle can vary significantly between different players. But again, if the players are not new to Heroes, they are experienced in battles with neutrals and think through the moves in such battles for the same amount of time. As for battles between players, such battles are usually the culmination of the game, one of its most important aspects. I like to think carefully and expect the same from others. Accordingly, there are no problems with the opponent taking a long time to think through their move in such a battle.
This leaves strategic planning. This is where players clash, figuring out "why is this slowpoke taking so long, is he asleep?".
I've heard opinions that when playing online, you can plan your turn during the opponent's turn, and then all that's left is to make your moves. This is complete nonsense. During the opponent's turn, you can only plan your turn based on what is visible on the map. If a new territory opens up during your turn, then you need to plan further development without leaving the "cash register." Good players attach great importance to reconnaissance, that is, they explore new territories almost every turn.
Another important factor in accusations of being slow is the apparent low efficiency of such time expenditures. That is, often, if the opponent spends an extra 5 minutes to ensure that five more centaurs survive out of 50 in three battles, this is met with hostility. This is a sign, if not of skill, then of a serious approach to the game. After all, you don't know in advance whether these centaurs will play a decisive role in one of the subsequent battles, or simply turn out to be wasted time. But if you are playing to win, and not just moving pieces around, then you will do the right thing by using all the chances, including those poor five centaurs.
As a result, I have developed the following position. I divide all players into three types: amateurs, athletes, and military personnel. Amateurs are those for whom the process of the game is more important than its outcome. That is, they are not ready to sacrifice their time for a possible improvement in their result. Athletes are players for whom it is important to show the optimal result. They need comfortable conditions to show this result. Military personnel are those for whom efficiency is important, that is, the result in less time (or with other restrictions). They often show worse results than athletes in ideal conditions. But they do not lose psychologically in more rigid frameworks.
In Competitive events, I think there are two ways to proceed. Either prioritize the interests of athletes or military personnel. But keep in mind that various player metrics will be measured, in one case, skill, and in the other, efficiency.