Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
=Feel999= But Koteiko is right. If Spectral wanted the damage to decrease by a certain amount with each cell, he would have written it that way! I don't think there's anything here that can be "misinterpreted."
Well, if the damage decreases with each cell, then everything is correct, but I forgot that the first few cells will deal full damage, so sorry, and in that case, Koteiko is really right:smile01:
Edited: OFF-TOPIC in the message
Added 14 minutes later Morning
Hell yeah!
No, but seriously. Having to position soldiers around the archer in every battle, skip turns, and shoot down melee neutrals before they even have a chance to attack is not cool. Especially in the third game, with a hero who has "tactics," it looks incredibly stupid. It's a cowardly approach. Real players charge in, using hammers, axes, and swords to carve a path.
But there will be no losses in the army if you have strong archers:smile44:, regarding "real players":smile19:, it's better not to use such words, although I myself lead troops into battle and cover the archers from a safe distance, and sometimes you just can't win without archers:smile42:
Достоинство человека определяется тем, каким путем он идет к цели, а не тем, достигнет ли он ее.;) Демократия есть одурачивание народа при помощи народа ради блага народа.(Уайльд Оскар)