Posts from Problems with Heroes of Might and Magic IV. Auto-translated

Yes, any level becomes boring, if only because it's monotonous when playing against the AI. Play against other players!)):D

I would like the difficulty to increase from level to level not by increasing the number of enemies, but by improving their artificial intelligence. I think games should be made in such a way that...

Added 1 minute ago
In general, it would be better if, on the Champion difficulty, the computer didn't just take all your resources and force you to fight with what you have. Instead, it would be better if the computer attacked from two sides, made distracting maneuvers, and so on.

And most importantly, it would be great if the computer bought creatures from the Portal of Nature. This small detail shows that the game was abandoned before it was finished.

Basically, the fact that in the champion mode, all your resources are taken away and you're told to fight with what you have, isn't a + for the game. It would be better if the computer entered with two sides, making distracting maneuvers... and so on.

I don't have experience playing online, and I might be wrong. But in my opinion, even a person wouldn't play like that in a 4-player game. Why enter with two sides? That means dividing the heroes and units into two armies. And if the defender takes their undivided army and crushes these two weakened armies one after another?

and most importantly, you can buy creatures from the portal at Nature... this little detail shows that the game was abandoned unfinished.

I agree with that.

I don't have experience playing online, and I might be wrong. But in my opinion, no one would play like that in the 4th installment. Why attack from two sides? It means dividing the heroes and units into two armies. And what if the defender takes his undivided army and eliminates these two weakened armies one by one?

I'm saying this in the context of the diversity of strategies and tactics... it shouldn't be taken literally :) although such things only add to the game :) (for example, in Starcraft, a couple of High Templars can kill a bunch of Battlecruisers).

Now, a little off-topic.

Did you play Kohan? In my opinion, it's a fantastic game for online play.

There, units are squads of 4 to 8 people, and if even one soldier flees, the entire squad can be restored in the zone of their city.

On the other hand, if you exceed the squad limit (the more cities, the more squads), you can't build more units after they die...

And if you don't have enough money to feed them, the units will slowly start to die.

And there's also morale, and if the army fights for a long time without a clear victory, it retreats :) regardless of the player.

In general, the game is unique in terms of gameplay :)

So, I had a battle online, the opponent was pressing on my border city, the forces were equal... for about 20 minutes, we were constantly gathering armies and fighting near my city... he had an overall advantage, more units and resources... but he attacked this city with his entire army... I held him off for a long time (in the city, firstly, there are militia, and secondly, when the city is not under siege, its own units replenish their health), and he would have defeated me if I hadn't detached a couple of cavalry units and captured his cities and mines in the rear. He got bogged down at my city, and the advantage shifted to my side :)

I don't know if this is possible in Heroes... it turns out that online battles in Heroes boil down to trying to minimize losses in battles with neutrals for the final battle?

I don't have much experience with Heroes online myself :)

I don't know if it's possible in Heroes... so, does online battles in Heroes boil down to trying to minimize losses in battles with neutrals for the final fight?
I don't have much experience in Heroes Online myself :)

I think yes. Plus, faster city development, plus faster hero leveling. After that, you can stop delaying and try to pay a visit to your opponent. Of course, this is if you're not playing defensively.

this is because the passages are guarded by neutral creatures... and important passages are guarded by strong neutral creatures... so it turns out that you also have to clear the path with your main army.

has anyone used a Thief as a saboteur in Heroes 4?

Here's a question: has anyone used a thief as a saboteur in Heroes IV?

Yes, I did, when playing with the Human faction. /topic/at/105494/
There was also an instance in a multiplayer game. I cleared the map, and only one castle remained with a neutral hero (very strong and with a considerable army). Although I had about 5 castles, I couldn't capture his city. All mines were mine, but he still constantly received resources and bought troops. So, I placed a leveled-up Thief near his castle and gathered my main army not far from him. His hero would come out to fight my main army, I would capture his city, move the Thief away, and buy the newly available units. The AI had to return to retake the city. In this way, he didn't replenish his army and couldn't leave the city. A month passed after which I managed to defeat him, albeit with difficulty.

Besides, it was used when playing against another person. http://forum.heroesworld.ru/showpost...&postcount=188

Well, that's exactly what imbalance is like. :)

Can anyone imagine... hypothetically... in what situation would a Lord perform better than a Rogue?

well, that's exactly an imbalance :)
can anyone imagine... hypothetically... in what situation would a Lord perform better than a Rogue?

For me, it's obvious that such situations exist. But what's the point in describing them? You can easily dismiss it with the word "IMBALANCE" without explaining your position.

And another thing I really didn't like in Heroes 4 was the castle siege.

And another thing I really didn't like in Heroes 4 was the castle siege.

Well, I actually liked it:)
The siege couldn't be better. Of course, if there was also a catapult to destroy the walls, and infantry to break down the doors, it would be spectacular:D

I don't like that the only thing you can destroy is the gate; that's one thing. And secondly, the city doesn't give you much of an advantage!

Why doesn't it allow that? For example, Titans on a Tower – that's an enemy hero :smile34:. The same goes for ballistas, Cyclops, and other ranged units. Due to limited visibility, the Chaos unit can't see the hero. For flying units, it's an obstacle that lasts for 2 turns. There are many advantages...

here, if you compare it to the third game:
the Fortress is beautifully drawn, it's large, and it has walls and towers. It's attacked by a catapult, not by units (imagine if peasants were removing the gates...).

Seriously, you guys are missing the point. Are peasants supposed to take a battering ram and ram the gates? Doesn't it seem strange that a hero sometimes has more dwelling slots than the dwelling itself? There are many flaws, I agree, but is that really a reason not to play Heroes 4?
Just my opinion.