Evaluating archers.

Lurk

With this rating, as well as by my own principle, I assigned points in accordance with the parameter that is most important to me in the game - balance. That is, the correspondence of level, characteristics, skills, and a "worthy!" cost.

Read this phrase and let's continue the conversation.;)

1. Archery are wafer units. They always die, and they die where they aren't supposed to. No damage at all. Short range for a straight arrow.

Two times 2.5 points with an attack of 6 units is not damage to you? They die, sure, but in my understanding, archers should be deadly in attack and helpless in defense.

30 Hp is not "decent" :D
Towers, by the way, shoot at whoever. That's the most annoying part. A couple of times at archers, then at shooters. On the next turn, vice versa.
To make a couple of steps with halberdiers, you always have to think about whether this will cause completely unnecessary aggression from the defending opponent toward you. You could lose your halberdiers in no time, and such losses are completely unacceptable against the computer.

Rampart.
1. No complaints. Nothing to pick on... truly a good unit. Especially among dervishes.

It's more than strange that elves are good, but shooters are wafers.;) Although growth matters here.

Stronghold.
1. A very good warrior for wiping out stacks. Normal growth. Average characteristics. The same "human" archers aren't a hindrance to them, although for some reason they get a 4 and these get a 2........ - not right ))))

The levels are different after all. I consider orcs to be lousy shooters. It's worth checking in practice or mentally: most likely even an ordinary elf will wipe out an orc chief or, at least, won't lose to him. The elf has an advantage over upgraded orcs in everything except health, and so +1 attack +1 defense +1 speed +0.5 damage. There is absolutely no reason to give them a 4. And two, excuse me, is just right.

2. Cyclopes... OH, if only there were.... crystal mines )))).... right at the beginning... I disagree with the opinion about their special ability... Damage is wild!... HP is average... but the price... 20 crystals is a lot, but it's worth it.... Again... I disagree with the author... Simply this unit is for GO... and we can't understand that... I personally haven't met people who took cyclopes instead of bears, but, to be honest, after thinking about it, I tried this tactic.... - liked it ))).... P.S. Bears aren't garbage, of course, but.... they have their own pluses )))

Usually even after a month, I have more monsters in my army than cyclopes.:D Well, that's just how it is... :)
There's absolutely no point in going to break walls; I don't go for them. My unloved orcs and cyclopes attack from a distance, storm birds with haste fly over the walls - they attack enemy shooters, then, on the next turn, return to their place. If you know heroes well, you understand how all this happens. Then I just wait until the melee units lazily come out of the castle (and holes in the enemy walls, by the way, will be completely misplaced here, as they will give them more exits from the "castle trap"). No matter how you look at it, a castle is a cage from which it's very difficult to regroup your troops for close combat if the kingdom's shooters are lost.

Dungeon.
1. No, well I understand everything... The comrade who wrote the article gives solid fours to crap..., and simply destroys good units morally... Beholders are pure tanks... this is a unit that doesn't care whether it fights in close or own-range combat... it's equal to 3rd level melee units... and why they made it a shooter - small bonus... 5 points... (except for the cost...)

Maybe I underestimated the beholders slightly, yes, possibly they could be given such a score... although 5 is a bit much. Simply, playing as Dungeon, I got the impression—no offense to fans of this Castle—of complete incompetence; sorry again for such words. Regardless of army size, I didn't feel confident. In none of the units do I see characteristics that can strongly influence the course of battle. Except Black Dragons; with a mage hero and these creatures in one slot, you can just constantly rain Armageddon on the enemy and fly back and forth from melee units. And not fear enemy magic or a hero's strike, as in 4.
Exactly except for the cost: a "tank" for such a price with damage of 4 points? I'm ready to give 3 points and agree that they are better than orcs.:D

2. Medusas... Shooters who win battles... Shooters who are part of the central segment of the army... and they get 2 points?... ))) another 5...

I could have given three, but the amount of ammunition killed it. Defending a castle was tough several times. Apparently, in their own castle, they aren't issued wagons, only tents or ballistas (I don't remember exactly).

Inferno.
1. Goggs!!! Good shooters, but Magoggs really interfere in your army's battles... (constantly spending the first turn casting anti-fire is brutal...) I haven't seen a single person in their right mind who would be willing to destroy their own army with their own units... (the dilemma is that skipping turns is not pleasant...) So it's worth separating Goggs and Magoggs....

Here I am before you. The one who destroyed his own armies with his own magoggs when it was worth it. Moreover, targets around receive 50% damage, so there's nothing super scary about it. Goggs are just too slow to take.
As you said, "constantly spending the first turn casting anti-fire is brutal"(c), a serious player wouldn't even think of that. To really hit someone in your own army, you need many magoggs, and therefore the army must be substantial. And losing a couple of devils out of 25 doesn't scare me for the cause. But, naturally, you are right - this skill would act on infernal legions like cloud of death acts on undead.:)

Tower.
1. After these phrases, there's simply nothing to say... Sir, please look at their growth and answer my question: what else, besides gremlins, do you intend to use to gather resources at the beginning???!!!... this unit is not intended for destroying crowds of devils, as you apparently decided...

Look at the post slightly above where I answered another forum member's questions. Only for capturing mines at the start, and then they are wiped out instantly. Unlike Halberdiers. You can't even use gremlins as "meat". In one word - shooters for 5 minutes.

3. Titans... yes, nothing to say - wafers... A unit not worthy of being called 7th... A seventh unit should not be seventh by principle... Titan is the weakest unit among the last + its cost... 2 points....

Here I fundamentally disagree. They are not wafers.:D (oh, I liked that word from you). Highest maximum damage for level 7? Highest health level for level 7? and of course... IMMUNITY TO MIND MAGIC... I bet that when attacking an army with 30 titans behind walls, they wanted to blind them, but it didn't work. And as I wanted to, I had to receive these shooting slaps of enormous power, and if you go into melee - it will just level you. Only "Explosions" seemed effective against them, which spent a lot of mana, magic turns, and hit 5-6 titans per turn. And you need to have the mana, plus the enemy has plenty of soldiers besides... they sit in the castle... they shoot... You are wrong, pure five points; one question: should they have been made shooters? Answer - yes, at least for variety.

Conflux.
1. Best shooters... Storm Elementals have huge damage, huge amount of HP and a huge defense parameter... and this is 2nd level!!!... 10 points out of 5.... This is the best shooter... + wild growth...

I gave them a 4 because they don't correspond to the spirit of the second level. Balance is shaken, although later in this castle it is more than smoothed over by ice and magma elementals. And most importantly - these are elementals and cannot be resurrected!!!!!:mad: This changes everything, and there are fewer and fewer of them from battle to battle...

2. Slightly weaker than Ice Elementals... But they are also slightly heavier... 7 points out of 5...

Regarding Ice Elementals, you noticed correctly - even worse than storm, although the level is supposedly higher. Again balance is broken. Moreover, I think that Evil Eyes, whom you awarded 5 points, are much better. Especially since "these are elementals and cannot be resurrected!!!!!:mad: This changes everything, and there are fewer and fewer of them from battle to battle..." (c)

... Sorry if I offended...

No offense taken, you just referred to the wrong thing, especially since this is my subjective opinion.

I will only refer to the fact that besides swamp, apparently, the person has seen nothing...

In reality, I am a fan of Heroes with 8 years of experience (mostly the third one) and probably know what I'm talking about. Although I agree that in some places my personal preferences for one race or another slip through, but overall, I think everything was quite objective and reasoned.