Rating of 2 heroes. Auto-translated

How would you rate part 2?

Added 1 minute ago
Personally, I gave it a 5+.

Personally, I really liked them, even though the graphics and storyline are "terrible," but still, what year was it! :D By the way, I downloaded them on my phone, so now they are always with me ;)

I can't rate it higher than four. The sphinxes and caves with monsters are confusing, and they can be solved by save/loading. Also, the Knights lack a decent level 1 monster. How can you spend gold on warriors whose stats are all equal to 1? If, for example, 50 peasants couldn't deal less than 50 damage, that would be a different story. But they can deal even less.

Gave it a rating of 4. But if you look at it in more detail... In the context of today, it's a 3. There are much more interesting parts 5 and 6. In the context of when the game was released, it's a 5 (but I can't give it that rating because there are two huge imbalances: peasants for the Knights (a complete disaster, they are simply completely unnecessary) and there was also a neutral creature that could be bought for free for killing, which was needed in any situation and any army). These two units are a huge oversight, in my opinion.