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.
Error Details:
Share Link
[ANNOUNCEMENT] Heroes 3: World Tournament - an add-on for tournament games.
Such words are often said when someone simply wants to stand their ground and isn't willing to listen to any arguments from the opponent beforehand. I can say the same about your arguments. Lider1
Even if it's on a quick battle, in case of any losses in tactical combat mode, they are easily defeated.
Ghosts, as third-tier troops, shouldn't cause too many problems. Look: if you have a group of angels, any third-level troops fall without losses (on popular random maps). However, with ghosts, having a group of angels and, for example, lacking tactics, you waste mana, even though they don't really pose a threat to you, but they still "hurt" you. The people (developers of this feature in the test environment) thought it was wrong when, no matter what advantage you have in a battle with neutrals, there's some kind of drawback. And they created a way to avoid this drawback – quick battle. But if you don't have a group of angels, and instead attack with an army of 2 weeks of Rampart troops against 50-99 ghosts, you choose: either get slightly damaged on a quick battle but save important mana, or have a precise battle without losses, but lose a lot of mana. I think the compensation is quite fair. Is that correct?;)