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.
Or, the opposite might happen: you rely on luck, but it doesn't work out. In my humble opinion, everyone is on equal footing.
The imbalance isn't about luck being a weak or strong parameter. The imbalance is that 100% luck has too drastic an effect. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't – that's a big difference. And it's even more significant with more powerful, but rarer attacks, like in Warlords of the East. This is a balance issue not so much of luck, but of randomness. And there's simply nothing to counter such randomness, unlike morale.
I gave an example above with typical damage from an attack. Is it normal when, with luck, almost an entire stack is wiped out? And if a damage dealer hits or attacks a vulnerable unit, then double damage means an entire stack is eliminated at once. That's why I'm interested in the players' opinions about this situation: is it acceptable or not?
Разработчик Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition. Сайт проекта - пока неактивен Автор Асимметричных шахмат