Posts from Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition - Tactical Edition. Auto-translated

In my opinion, a griffin cannot be weaker than a Knight, because horses are prey for griffins. In WGE, griffins are tier 5, and Knights are tier 6, but this is just formal; in reality, they are equal in strength. Moreover, griffins are equal not to ordinary, but to elite cavalry, on elite super-heavy horses. That is, it is necessary to bring the Knights up to the level of griffins, and not vice versa.

Nargott in WGE reconsiders the game mechanics as a whole. In my opinion, we can go much further than minimal changes here.

Let's make the griffin tier 6 and the Knight tier 5! :eek:
It's absurd, but it seems logical.

Added 1 minute ago

Isn't it explicitly stated anywhere that Ashan's griffins are canonically smaller than lions? Ubisoft is extremely stingy with specifying exact sizes in monster descriptions, possibly because there are many inconsistencies with common sense.

I wasn't comparing them to lions, but to what we have, and we have griffins that have been weaker than Knights in all parts of the Heroes games

Let's give griffons a tier 6 and knights a tier 5! :eek:
It's absurd, but it seems logical.

There was a time when it was like that, but I eventually put the knights back to tier 6 because they are the main striking force of humans, and in terms of weight class, they are still heavier. But from a gameplay perspective, it's just a small formality because they are equal.
It's significantly more difficult and takes longer to develop knights than griffons, which is why, in a controversial situation, the tier was left at six, as it is more high-tech.

If the question is whether to make griffons stronger than knights, not everyone will like it, and besides, that niche is already overcrowded with other heavyweight flyers – wyverns and manticores; griffons can be a little lighter. Plus, I wouldn't want to move griffons too far away from unicorns/nightmares (they are almost equal now), which were roughly equal opponents back in the fourth part.

There was a time when that was the case, but I eventually brought the Knights back to level 6 because they are the main offensive force of the Humans, and in terms of weight class, they are still heavier. But from a gameplay perspective, it's just a small formality, as they are equal.
It's significantly more difficult and takes longer to develop to Knights than to Griffins, which is why in a controversial situation, the Tier was left at level 6, as a more high-tech unit.

Here, I definitely agree - for Ashan, it seems strange to see Griffins at level 6.

In Might and Magic: Clash of Heroes, griffins were ranked 6, which is higher than knights.

In Might and Magic: Clash of Heroes, griffins were actually tier 6, higher than knights.

Really? I'm not very familiar with this game – I watched a couple of walkthroughs on YouTube.

I haven't played it either, but I've read about it. Here's how it is for the Haven faction: Core units: pikemen, swordsmen, archers Elite units: knights, priests Champions: griffins, angels, and swordmasters If you exclude swordmasters for those who like fairy tales, it's similar to Heroes of Might and Magic V, with griffins being ranked higher than knights.

I haven't played it either, but I've read about it.
Here's how it is with the Humans:
Core: pikemen, swordsmen, archers
Elite: knights, priests
Champions: griffins, angels, and swordmasters

If you exclude the swordmasters for those who like fairy tales, then it's similar to the fifth game, with griffins being ranked higher than knights.

Swordmasters (landsknechts) also exist in Heroes 7 - I agree that this is nonsense; moreover, there is both a basic swordsman (guardsman) and an elite swordsman (justiciar); I don't understand why they added a third one.

Added 1 minute ago
In Heroes 3 and 4, there was also a crusader - using a second swordsman (elite melee unit) is not bad, but firstly, it's the second one, not the third, and secondly, it's not a champion-level unit.

Here, swordsmen are the elite infantry (corresponding to Justiciars), as they have the equipment of elite infantry. Even the ratio (a knight is twice as strong as an infantryman) is approximately maintained. However, it is unclear why they introduced basic swordsmen in the seventh game when there are spearmen (militia) and archers.
Crusaders also exist; this is what the alternate version of swordsmen is called.

ah yes, we also have those overfed peasants. I understand that in the WarGame Edition, the Monk will be reduced to Tier 4.

He's actually been there for a long time. And instead of overfed peasants, there's a normal militia (in the old published version with the old balance, the peasants are still chubby). See the ratio of creature strength:

1 = goblin (+basic militia)
1.25 = gremlin, fairy
1.5 = militia (upgrades), imp
1.75 = skeleton
2 = guard, pikeman, zombie
2.25 = demon, gargoyle
2.5 = assassin, archer
3 = dancer, berserker, ghost
3.5 = succubus, shaman
4 = beast, brute, swordsman
4.5 = cerberus
5 = hunter, golem, centaur
6 = monk, druid
7 = minotaur, mage
8 = bear, predator, priest
9 = nightmare, unicorn
10 = vampire, knight, leader, witch, griffin
15 = lich, djinn, wyvern
20 = balor, reaper, rakshasa
30 = hydra, ent, than, angel, devil, necrodragon
60 = light/dark/dwarven dragon, titan, cyclops

I highlighted humans in red. The basic militia is weaker than the upgraded versions because it was considered after reproduction (the Reserve ability), not at the beginning of the battle. The true "masters of the sword" here are the dancers and beasts; for their weight class (elves are lighter and weaker than humans), they perform miracles, fighting almost on equal terms with armored knights in elite armor and huge orcs, who are three times their weight and strength!

Let's give griffons to tier 6 and knights to tier 5!
It's absurd, but somehow logical.

As I understand it, knights are originally placed on tier 6 not because they are cavalry.
You can notice that human commanders are also, in essence, just guys on horses, but according to the balance, they can take down a dragon with one hit if they level up.
That is, the point here is more about how well-trained this type of unit is (with a fantasy twist), and the presence of a horse is more of a consequence.
In this whole story, I was more concerned that such "commandos" are not available in all factions, and somewhere they are replaced by non-humanoid creatures, as if they cannot train their "commandos" to the same level.
By the way, I consider swordmasters in the seventh game and Clash of Heroes to be strange for the same reason. Apparently, the idea came from the second game, but it seems that the developers simply couldn't come up with normal fighters for humans again.

As I understand it, the Knights are not placed on tier 6 in the original game because they are cavalry.

Knights are knights, and heroes are heroes. You can't have super-knights in your army without having regular knights. Because super-knights come from the ranks of regular knights.

It's worth noting that human commanders are also, for the most part, just guys on horseback, but according to the game's balance, they can take down a dragon in one hit if they level up.

A commander is not necessarily a great warrior. In WGE, it is impossible for a hero to take down an entire dragon in one hit, except through leveling up "unstoppable force" or "deadly strike." Without leveling up "heroic attack," even a tier 6, high-level hero cannot take down a dragon in one hit. The combat abilities of a level 1 hero are practically the same as those of a regular knight.

That is, the point here is more about how well a particular type of unit is trained (with a fantasy twist), and the presence of a mount is more of a consequence.

Knights are "very well" trained by default because they are elite professional warriors who can afford the best equipment (foot soldiers in plate armor are also well-trained, but they are slightly weaker and poorer and cannot afford a warhorse). It is unclear what "fantasy twist" means here – is it the mandatory addition of magic, miracle potions, or enchanted armor?
In my opinion, knights should be what they are – knights, without any addition of magic (except for paladins, but they are less combat-oriented).
In the Middle Ages, knights in different countries could vary in the quality of their equipment and training; in general, heavy cavalry is significantly weaker than it is portrayed in WGE for humans. For whom it is assumed that in this kingdom, military affairs are thriving, and swordsmen and knights undergo the highest quality training (otherwise, swordsmen and heavy cavalry would be about twice as weak, no better than current archers and monks). Historically, an archer is often valued more than a simple swordsman.
But in the game, human archers are, on the contrary, mediocre due to the lack of specialization – otherwise, the transition to crossbows would not be justified (specialized English archers would not be inferior to elven archers, due to the greater power of the bows and better protection).

In this whole story, what bothered me more was that such "commandos" are not available in all factions, and in some places they are replaced by non-humanoid creatures, as if they cannot train their "commandos" to the same level.

In WGE, there are many such "commandos" comparable to knights:
8 = priest (dwarves, magic)
8 = bear (dwarves, cavalry)
8 = predator (dark elves, cavalry)
10 = witch (dark elves, magic)
10 = knight (humans, cavalry)
10 = leader (orcs, infantry)
10 = vampire (undead, infantry)

It's unclear what "fantasy adjustment" means here – is it a mandatory addition of magic, miracle potions, or enchanted armor?

Perhaps it's some of these things, or all of them together.
Because in real life, your skills are more limited, and a person with a sword on a horse wouldn't be able to take down... let's say, a hippopotamus (I think that's a good equivalent to the gnomes' Godzilla). But a commander in Heroes of Might and Magic V can.
I'm talking about the original game as an illustration of this point; of course, you can balance your numbers very differently (and that's perfectly fine).

WGE is full of such "commandos" comparable to knights:
8 = priest (dwarves, magic)
8 = bear (dwarves, cavalry)
8 = predator (dark elves, cavalry)
10 = witch (dark elves, magic)
10 = knight (humans, cavalry)
10 = leader (orcs, infantry)
10 = vampire (undead, infantry)

And where are the options for Dark Elves, demons, and mages?

Perhaps some of these, or all of them together.
Because in real life, your skill is still more limited, and a man on horseback with a sword is not capable of taking down... well, let's say, a hippopotamus (I think that's a good equivalent to the gnome's Godzilla). But a commander in a party of five can.
I'm talking about the original game here, as an illustration of this point. Of course, you can balance your numbers very differently (and correctly).

A fiery Godzilla will be stronger than a hippopotamus (the closest analogue to Godzilla is a 7-ton Tyrannosaurus Rex, which could take down 12-ton Triceratops), so a hydra, which is twice as weak, is closer.
It's pointless to talk about the original game here, because the heroes there had a fantastical strength (what about Krag, who takes down 2-4 dragons per hit?).
As for the limitations of skill, why should it be different in fantasy than in real life? This isn't a Marvel superhero universe. Humans, unlike elves or vampires, are not long-lived and cannot hone their skills for centuries. Accordingly, they have no basis to hone their skills significantly better. Magic? Well, you can justify anything with magic, but is it worth it? If you overdo it with magic and make it easily accessible everywhere, the overall level of technology will move far away from the Middle Ages, and it will be a world of magic, not of swords (just as it is now a world of technology, not of swords).

In general, I've thought a lot about the coolness of knights and came to the conclusion that historical accuracy is needed here, not superheroism. Since this is a historical unit.
At the same time, you can approach elven dancers differently. Historically, a naked man with 2 swords will become mincemeat for a heavily armored soldier. But in the case of elves, this may be justified, given their racial agility and vast experience (longevity). Also, because an elf is smaller and weaker than most opponents, while armor/shields are only effective in the same weight category and will not save from too heavy blows. Therefore, a lightweight elf cannot rely on armor, only on his own agility and skill. This is precisely the prerequisite for elven light infantry to be so good that they can compete with human heavy infantry, because they have no alternative.

And where are the units for Light Elves, demons, and mages?

Light Elves do not have cavalry in their army. But if a knight dismounts (although this is not possible in the game), he will lose half of his strength and be comparable to an elven hunter.
If there were winged pegasi (with riders) as in Might and Magic III, I would put them in the same category as knights and griffons.
Unicorns don't really need riders as combat units, but if they did, they would be roughly equivalent to predators (i.e., slightly weaker than bare unicorns).
Mages rarely participate in battles personally (1 unit out of 7), summoned creatures do the work for them, so there can be no racial commandos here.
Demons are too powerful, their commandos are higher demons, balors, and devils. Which are many times stronger than the above.

Added 3 hours 1 minute ago
There is another contradiction that needs to be resolved: brutes and chieftains. The difference in size is huge, the former are 2 m tall, 150 kg, and the latter are 3 m tall, 400 kg. And this is the same race. If the sizes vary so much here (or orcs grow throughout their lives), then where are the intermediate options (and why are there no giant shamans)?

The most plausible version is the use of pharmacology (growth hormone, anabolic steroids, etc.). Pharmacology provides accelerated, intensive growth of muscle mass and skeleton, so an orc who has taken a course reaches maximum size relatively quickly. A side effect of such active use of pharmacology is sterility, so young orcs who have not yet had offspring do not use it and remain at their natural weight (150 kg). The second consequence is that once an orc takes such a heavy course, he will no longer be able to voluntarily stop it, as this will lead to disability or death (atrophied muscles after the course ends will not be able to adequately support the body of the giant). To maintain his form, the orc-giant is forced to participate in wars of conquest all his life, enriching himself at the expense of others and spending the money on pharmacology. Hence the aggressive policy of orc leaders.

Pharmacology (in general, not just steroids) also perfectly explains their racial skill. Orcs are not stupid. Orcs are strong. And shamans are smart. And they built an entire civilization on pharmacology (in everyday life known as "blood magic"), surpassing all other races, including mages.