Posts from Heroes 5.5 WarGame Edition - Tactical Edition.

Yes, I keep forgetting about the map size. And even so, +50% attack bonus for Phantom or Emerald units – there’s a difference. And the Sylvan faction will be grateful for such a gift. Wingas were banned precisely because of this. Dancers with 15 initiative can stall and go again.

Yeah, and what will these "dancers" do without spellcasters with elf-like physics? Will they fall apart? This isn't the original; here, the most powerful units in terms of physics are those with low initiative and slow speed. The purpose of high initiative is to quickly retreat and choose favorable moments to focus on the enemy (several attacks before the enemy gets another turn). If they engage in a head-on battle without focusing, high initiative will always lose to powerful units with low initiative. All other things being equal. Moreover, the defeat is so convincing that at first, it will seem that the most overpowered units are those with low initiative because it's simply not worth attacking them.

regarding the energy rune for the bears/jarls (if they are present in the mod in a form close to the original), I think it's also worth considering in this context.

Dwarves have low initiative (and, by the way, there isn't a single dwarven class with a chance for Logistics higher than 2%), but all their power is concentrated in their resilience – I don't think a dwarven rush based on Logistics and Rune of Energy will be more dangerous than a rush of the same Orc or Demon based on Logistics and Morale.
Of course, a 10/20/30% bonus to Attack Bonus (ATB) for Logistics is a skill that primarily enhances rushes, and there's nothing wrong with that (because several skills in Logistics will also enhance rushes – +1 speed, +1 initiative, and Keen Mind for +30% ATB for the hero). The problem is when rushes happen with units reaching the enemy on the first turn and dealing huge damage at the same time – it will be difficult to develop such ultimate rushes as they were in the original (Dwarves have Rune of Energy, but no high damage; the other races don't have that much speed, except for flyers – who also need a good speed boost).
In any case, you'll have to invest fully in Logistics, Speed, and Tactics (which means less will go into damage) – and in the original, you just take a simple Speed Aura from the Combat branch of the Leader skill and reach the enemy with half your army, while pumping up the rest into damage.

Added 55 minutes ago
That's the beauty of initially low speeds (or large map sizes). You can enhance rushes as much as you want, increase attack damage to 10/20/30%, create strong damage boosts for spellcasters (with a direct dependence on magic), add skills and perks that boost not only speed but also initiative, as well as the starting ATB of creatures. Because all of this works well when there are no initial conditions for a rush, and when you have to specifically and fully invest in them, and it usually doesn't involve a massive rush on the very first turn (which means the opponent will have a chance to react, play counter-spells, go into defense, dodge a direct attack by moving, attack the approaching units first, etc.).

Added 33 minutes ago
In this regard, I like the balance of fast/initiative-based and slow units in Heroes 3 (with the exception of Tier 7).
Objectively, some of the strongest units at their tiers are the Serpent Riders (Tier 3), Pegasi (Tier 4), and Efreeti (Tier 6).
Because these units are more effective with skillful management, including in breaking through enemy lines.
But most players consider completely different units to be the most powerful, for example, in Tier 6, it's some unfortunate Nagas.
A great example of a unit that will defeat anyone in a head-on confrontation, but despite all this, Nagas don't even make the top (they are somewhere on the level of a Unicorn or Cavalier, I don't remember).
Precisely because Nagas are relatively slow (low initiative) and you can do anything with them except attack head-on.
Here's an example with Dancers, who use Morale with their initiative of 15 and reach the enemy on the second turn – this is an example of an Efreeti, who will rush to the Naga on the very first turn, what will happen to it – that's right, it will get completely wrecked, the Naga won't even be able to retaliate.

You're comparing apples and oranges... A Dancer to a Naga... We used to save up for Nagas back in the day. Too bad we didn't manage to get one. Although, the Psionic Guildmaster was considered one of the strongest heroes of the Sylvan faction – teleporting into enemy territory and destroying their base (probably why the developers didn't give Elves a "Surprise Attack" ability). High attack, good initiative, and area-of-effect damage.
As for Dancers... I'll bring back my old "polpiss" (not a typo). "Polpiss." Someone on the old, blue Nival forum made a typo, and now "polpiss" is a sign of belonging to those times. And where are Nitho and Valiant? They're gone, just like the old blue forum.

I wouldn't say so; dancers are one of the least dangerous units; they only have high initiative... The most dangerous thing is when powerful damage dealers with low initiative are teleported in; one hit can win the battle.
As I already wrote, the lower the initiative, the more dangerous the threat that a unit can realize in its turn (because the more time the opponent usually has to react to it, but teleport changes everything). In this mod, the balance works exactly like that. Low-initiative units are not pushovers.

Added 2 minutes later
Sudden attack is such a dangerous feature, given the damage that some units can inflict, that it's no wonder I moved it to the Light faction; you can't just give demons easy access to such an ability. These aren't elves; they don't joke around; they kill quickly. Teleport is, in principle, an extremely powerful spell in WGE, precisely because very high damage is usually countered by the fact that it's not so easy to deliver it to the target... But with teleport, it's easy.

Let's note that down. Teleport is a damage spell delivered to a specific target.

P.S. I read Psionik's posts (especially about Sylvan. I was just looking for his thoughts on Dancers. Apparently, he didn't express them on this forum, but I definitely remember that he did). My eyes almost popped out. How is it possible to write like that? The general idea is clear, but it's hard to read.
In general, the text says: Sylvan has highly initiative-based, fast-attacking units with low survivability, except for dragons. Sylvan dragons are better than Warlock dragons (according to Psionik).

In WGE, dancers (as a unit type) have agility, which doubles their survivability at full speed, and 100% parry (not a measly 50%), so when such a stack reaches the desired location, it creates a headache for the opponent – it's difficult to counterattack, as everyone will take damage, but simply enduring the unit's attacks is also not an option.
And despite all this, there are much more dangerous units that can eliminate half a stack with a single attack, and even with splash damage.
So, even these enhanced dancers are just a minor threat.

Regarding survivability, Wind Riders and Unicorns had good survivability in the original game (not to mention Ents, which were the champions of survivability).

Added after 12 hours and 53 minutes
Update: I didn't notice that the Destroyer and Assassin share 5 out of 6 popular skills (they are too similar).
Therefore, I gave the Destroyer Spell Power instead of Logistics, and the Impaler Logistics instead of Spell Power:

Impaler 40/20+10/30% (duels 9/5+3/7) = Attack, Darkness, Chaos + Defense, Logistics, Education
Destroyer 40/10+30/20% (duels 9/3+7/5) = Attack, Darkness, Chaos + Engineering, Education, Spell Power

A high defense stat is not necessarily an indicator of survivability, unfortunately. There is magic, there is partial damage reduction, and there are ballistae. There is Orson with a huge amount of health early in the game. And it is this health that provides him with the necessary number of casts, not the defense of the Dancers. And not Archers, but Warriors.
Warriors are many times more effective than Archers in terms of damage output. It's been tested, don't argue.

Still, if the skills are all okay now, the stat distribution across classes can still be improved.
The main principle here is this: each race has one primary stat and 3 secondary stats (1 for each class).
Humans, Dwarves - primary Defense.
Demons, Orcs - primary Attack.
Elves, Shadows - primary Spellpower.
Mages, Undead - primary Knowledge.

Accordingly, for each class there is a pair of profile stats (with a drop chance of 30-40%), one of which must be primary for the race.

ATTACK + DEFENSE
Knight (humans) = 30/40 + 10/20%
Warrior (dwarves) = 30/40 + 20/10%
Overlord (demons) = 40/30 + 20/10%
Barbarian (orcs) = 40/30 + 10/20%

Obviously, 40% defense should be given to humans and dwarves, while it's logical to give 20% spellpower to the chaos factions (dwarves and demons). That's why there's this specific distribution.

ATTACK + SPELLPOWER
Huntress (orcs) = 40/20 + 30/10%
Ranger (elves) = 40/10 + 30/20%
Fiend (demons) = 30/20 + 40/10%
Assassin (shadows) = 30/10 + 40/20%

Obviously, 40% attack should be given to the physical classes—the Ranger and the Huntress—while it's logical to give the minimum 10% defense to the most fragile races (elves and shadows).

ATTACK + KNOWLEDGE
Reaper (undead) = 40/20 + 10/30%
Destroyer (demons) = 40/10 + 20/30%
Shaman (orcs) = 30/20 + 10/40%
Mystic (mages) = 30/10 + 20/40%

Obviously, 40% attack should be given to the physical classes—the Destroyer and the Reaper. Furthermore, between the Reaper and the Destroyer, it's logical to give 20% defense to the Reaper (the most combat-oriented undead class), and between the Mystic and the Shaman—obviously, the physical stat (20% defense) goes to the Shaman, while the Mystic should logically focus on spellpower (20%).

DEFENSE + SPELLPOWER
Inquisitor (humans) = 20/40 + 30/10%
Avenger (elves) = 20/30 + 40/10%
Priest (dwarves) = 10/40 + 30/20%
Witch (shadows) = 10/30 + 40/20%

Obviously, 40% defense should be given to humans and dwarves, while it's logical to give 20% attack to the more combat-focused Inquisitor and Avenger.

DEFENSE + KNOWLEDGE
Veteran (dwarves) = 20/40 + 10/30%
Paladin (humans) = 10/40 + 20/30%
Alchemist (mages) = 20/30 + 10/40%
Necromancer (undead) = 10/30 + 20/40%

Obviously, 40% defense should again go to humans and dwarves. Between the Paladin and the Veteran, the Paladin is a more magical class; therefore, his spellpower should be 20%. Between the Alchemist and the Necromancer, the priority 20% spellpower logically goes to the Necromancer because the Alchemist is the basic combat class for mages.

SPELLPOWER + KNOWLEDGE
Druid (elves) = 10/20 + 40/30%
Archmage (mages) = 10/20 + 30/40%
Warlock (shadows) = 20/10 + 40/30%
Cultist (undead) = 20/10 + 30/40%

Obviously, 40% spellpower should go to the elven races (Warlock and Druid, who should not be inferior to the Avenger in spellpower). At the same time, the Warlock is more aggressive than the Druid (20% attack vs 20% defense), and the Cultist is more aggressive than the Mage (20% attack vs 20% defense).

Now, the stat distribution seems ideal. Leave comments if you disagree or have alternative suggestions.

Regarding the Huntress (orcs), I'll add that I've reconsidered my views on the effectiveness of spellpower for orcs. I think that magic resistance can be removed from the progression and built in as part of the orc racial traits (this technical possibility exists). In that case, no "side" stat bonuses would be needed, which were proposed initially (converting spellpower into other random stats). Since there's a 50% spellpower penalty (which isn't boosted by orcs, but is boosted by other races through magic school progression), this should theoretically be enough.

Added 1 hour 42 minutes later

A high defense stat is not an indicator of survivability, unfortunately. There is magic, there is partial ignore, there is the ballista. There is Orson with a wild amount of meat in the early stages. And it is exactly this meat that provides him with the necessary number of casts, not the defense of the Dancers. And not the archers, but the Warriors.
Warriors are many times more effective than archers at breaking through. Tested, don't argue.

In the original, they dealt more damage; in WGE, elves as a race are categorized as RusherTanks (high initiative with low damage). Now, under buffs, he certainly won't be weak (elven classes have huge spellpower), so an elf must definitely rush Light.
That is, you will need to level up not only Logistics but also Keen Mind for the hero to manage to cast the double/triple damage buff on the dancers (with 8+ spellpower), and then it will be dangerous.
Otherwise, half-naked guys with knives who move often are unlikely to be able to deal critical damage on their own. The exception is the blue guys, who can hit T7 units quite hard (ignoring defense via charge), but that's only one target.

Really high damage will be concentrated in these races:
- orcs (high damage, low initiative)
- demons (high damage, low survivability)
- undead (low initiative - consequently, high power)

And if we consider turn frequency (number of attacks), we can also add:
- shadows (high initiative, low survivability)

As for the question of archers vs warriors, in the original PvP, skeletal archers were very weak. With normal archers, warriors would never have been taken for the breakthrough.
If an archer is normal in PvP, then in PvE it's an overpowered unit, precisely because of the minimization of losses; there's no point arguing here, it's obvious.
In MMH5.5, for example, to partially fix this, they raised the HP of all units; I definitely don't like that solution because it slows down the battle. But directly reducing the percentage of losses during the battle doesn't break anything, yet it cuts the effectiveness of archers. In other words, this is the most effective way to balance PvE abuses.

Hello. Could you please advise? I have the game on Steam, and I decided to play it with mods. If I add your files to the Steam version, will there be any conflicts? And what other mods (files) can I add to enhance the game without overloading it?

It should not conflict. It will be 100% compatible with any mods that do not change the balance (for example, visual or interface mods).

What about gameplay on the map? In multiplayer (hotseat), scripts don't work.

Scripts don't work because you need to go into the map editor, open the map, and add any line of code to the scripts there, for example:
--
Then the scripts will connect.

When will 1.24 be released?