Discussion about Sylvan (Wood Elves).

I'm just saying that I personally like to post replays as proof – like, "look, this is a purely Russian strategy, see how well I play," and yes, you're right. Replays are one thing, but the real situation is completely different. And Chaos Dungeon isn't an argument against a well-developed Elf. In general, neutral creatures aren't an argument. And I didn't actually give you a negative rating, so there shouldn't be any questions about "something being wrong," right?

Mdance, I'm not willing to consider the database system as an evaluation of a post because it's full of speculation. Words are, after all, closer to the truth. :)
As for neutral creatures, they are a very large part of the game. What can you say, but it turns out that heroes are 90% of the game, with neutral creatures and experiments on your own mind, and only 10% with an opponent (everyone can put in their own numbers). I gave a combat situation from the game. A real one, not fabricated.

Further on the topic. Neutral creatures are always an argument. Some people grab the maximum Utopia on the third week, some break through to the treasury on the fourth week with a monster of strength 45 – these are all quite weighty arguments. From the topic, it seemed to me that not everyone realizes that there are advantages in the Emerald Mines besides the attack range, whether it's five squares or two – it doesn't matter. So, I tried to share some strategic insights. Sorry if it's not interesting.

By the way, regarding neutral creatures, maybe taking the maximum Sunken Temple isn't an argument either? ;)