Posts from What were your expectations for Heroes 4?

Actually, I didn't expect the heroes to be so replayable – as ordinary units – in a way, this is wrong – because heroes are precisely the primary targets for enemy archers.

...... and they die quickly.:(

Furthermore, even after winning, it looks strange – the creatures wander around with the coffin of their leader – in reality, of course, they would, but not for so long – and they also rush into battle against enemies.

The death of a hero is precisely what is so unsettling and greatly weakens the army, especially considering that the spells in the fourth game are powerful!:rolleyes:

Furthermore, it's a pity that the developers didn't come up with a system for arranging troops as in the fifth game – this would help against archers – by placing slower units to protect the hero from arrows, and faster units closer to the enemy's front lines.

Furthermore, simultaneous attacks – so to speak, you can't avoid losses – it's a little annoying.
The rest seems quite realistic))

In the original game, even a single fairy can take down 100 Dark Knights without any powerful spells.

:) Wow, you're quite the realist. And that's why you want the attacks to not happen simultaneously? Like, the fight goes like this: first, one unit steps forward to take a hit, then lowers its guard and lets the opponent strike? :)
What kind of realism is it when A=100 fights B=100, but A goes first. It attacks B, and B is left with 50. And the counterattack is then directed at A, but with only 50 units instead of 100 :) Where's the realism in that? The point is that in Heroes, you'll definitely get a full counterattack. That's why in battles, they try to absorb the counterattack with weak and expendable units, so that the good units can attack without taking any counterattack damage during that round.

What do you mean? The mechanics are already directly in the game, something like a "one-tile" space in a location that only a flying unit can reach, and considering that a fairy only occupies one slot... :) Am I right, or did you have something else in mind?

And isn't the counterattack (if we take your example) received from 50? I think that's exactly how it works, the 50 attacks and only then does it take its turn, i.e., it attacks twice.

And the fact that people try to avoid the counterattack has always been the case, regardless of which Heroes game it is ;)

My example and yours show how it works in all installments except the fourth, in my opinion. :)
If we continue further, the next turn, a group A(50) finishes off group B(25) WITHOUT ANY RETALIATION, and group A remains with 50 UNITS!!! This is in a battle of 100 vs. 100 equal-strength units!!! What a load of nonsense. :)

Look, let's not bring up the 4th installment again, okay? :) Here's the same example for you:
1. A(100) attacks B(100). The program calculates the retaliation immediately, as if 100 will retaliate, NOT the remainder after the attack!! And in an exaggerated example where we don't take into account the slight variation in attack strength, we get after the retaliation: Group A(50) Group B(50)!!!
2. Ideally, it will be a draw - they will kill each other, and THIS HAPPENS!
3. But in reality, since there is a variation in attack strength, after the battle, the winner may have, say, from 1 to 5-10 units left alive.
Which is more consistent with common sense and reality. What can reasonable supporters of other versions object to against supporters of the fourth installment???

Can you communicate without using phrases like "nonsense"?

Okay, I understand your point, but isn't it possible in Heroes 4 that the player who strikes first wins?

I don't see the point in your answer to my question in this example. I've always done it this way: I attack a monster with a weaker unit (or one I don't mind losing) so that, logically, a stronger unit won't retaliate. This has always been the case in all parts of the game. So, in this nuance, I can easily compare Heroes 4 to any other part of the series. :)

The fact that the mechanic of retaliating and having a weak unit retaliate exists in all versions, and I didn't argue about that. The question is only about the cost. I clearly showed you with examples where the problem lies and how the fourth version differs from all other versions when it comes to retaliation. In all versions except the fourth, the more units you kill in the squad from which you are taking retaliation, the less damage the retaliating squad will inflict. Is that correct in your opinion? In the fourth version, retaliation deals full damage. This applies to melee combat where there are large numbers of units on both sides.

AND THE FACT that it is advantageous to use a single unit to trigger retaliation is absolutely true for any version of Heroes.

Well, here you're talking about a personal preference for the 4th installment, rather than any other part.

I already said that I see your point of view and that you like this particular "response" to an attack more. Fine, that's your opinion and your right. I've already written about my position.

And the fact that this is a separate storyline in the 4th installment is, I think, the creators' idea. They saw some meaning in it, and that's it. :) But then they changed their minds again, I wonder why?

From a common-sense perspective, and I've shown you EVERYTHING with examples. I believe that even the fact that in Heroes 4, the retaliation is calculated simultaneously with the attack is already an innovation, as this is not the case in other versions. And there are many other things that Heroes 4 does better from a common-sense perspective.

In other words, the hero there isn't crippled and can move around on his own without outside help, can participate in battle, and is vulnerable like any other unit, and can not only cast spells from the side or, as Pandora says, just stand aside and watch. However, don't interpret my words as simply praising Heroes 4 over other versions.

I didn't understand at all what you wanted to say and didn't understand what you were asking – what did they change their mind about? :)

Isn't this a preference for the 4th installment?

It's not about what's here and what's there. It's about you, i.e., I want to say that it's about your fondness for the 4th installment. You play all the versions, but you shouldn't say that they're all equally enjoyable for you.

You just think that these "innovations," as you call them, have a more positive impact on the game, and I think differently – that's just a matter of opinion, and we could really discuss it endlessly, but what's the point?

You did read the title of the topic, and each of us has expressed their opinion – some are supporters, and some are opponents, and that's it. Why complicate things?

What does inclination have to do with it?

I'm saying that all versions of Heroes are playable and interesting. But I'm also saying that the 4th version stands out because of its gameplay, and not in a bad way. It has many new features that significantly differentiate it from other versions, but that doesn't mean I'm inclined to only play it. I started with WarLords and K_Bounty, and I also consider them playable.

Well, you're a strange person :) And what about playing all versions equally? If I enjoy playing all versions?

Those who only play certain versions and refuse to play others, or have played them a couple of times and decided it's not for them, usually reason this way about the new features. But for me, all versions of Heroes are just Heroes.

Play all versions and achieve certain results in each of them, and then you'll understand what makes each one good.

Well, you are stubborn. To put it in your own words: "I'm talking to him about Famus, and he's talking to me about..." - you get the idea :)
What's that supposed to mean?! You're contradicting yourself. Did you even read your previous post?

And you think you've achieved something and that's why you can make such claims? Can't I determine what the highlight of each version and part is without playing it and WITHOUT ACHIEVING universal recognition?

And the graphics are bad there too. All the units look like some kind of monsters. It's not even clear what they are.