Upgrade or alternative upgrade?

That's right! That's exactly what I do! Plus, I always try to take out neutral groups with crystals from the neutrals, and luckily, every map has them!

I agree. I do the same. But tell me, do you take Jarls with you to clear out neutrals?

In my opinion, the upgrades aren't impressive. The first Dwarves' Shield Wall is better, +5 defense. Besides, why sit there and take damage from the natives when you can go on the offensive and beat up the enemy?

Or, take the Harpooners. Yes, they have higher damage, but less health (if my memory serves me right) and a questionable ability to push back enemy units. The original upgrade looks more appealing. And it's more effective, and can even strike at the enemy's main force if needed, and most importantly, it has the Cripple skill, which is very helpful at the beginning.

Terrifying Bears... well, I don't know, giving them Orbit without Sahar and a hint of watermelon flavor... The regular bears have a better pushback on the scale than the stench from the upgraded version's mouth (10% of 30 health is not serious), and the paw strike happens more often. Unreturned attacks are valuable.

Berserkers. The originals are again better: a full-power strike and no return is great. And those who don't believe, go to the Vampire thread, and they will quickly tell you that the original upgrade is better due to the unreturned attack, even if the new Vampire is stronger.

Original Priests. Area attack. No comments. (we smile and wave to the Liches, we smile and wave). Although, I should add: the first priests are for the late game, the second ones are for a fast game.

Jarls or Earls. It all depends on the tactics. I'm not even afraid to say that the upgrades are more or less equivalent. It depends on the situation.

Original Dragons. Fire Shield, more health, more defense. If the upgraded version had more initiative, it would be worth buying. (given its stats).

If anyone can prove otherwise, I will be happy to hear it. )