Posts from The eternal question: which heroes are better, mages or warriors?

I always play as a mage... No warrior can replace the enjoyment you get from playing as a sorcerer!

Playing as a Mage is cool, at least during battles, it's so much fun and exciting, because the outcome of the battle depends on which spell you cast, while for a Warrior, it depends on how high your attack and defense are.

If my experience doesn't fail me (and it rarely does), the best character is one with a well-rounded build. That is, a mage with intelligence, wisdom, two types of magic, logistics, and military skills – accuracy, attack, and a weapon master. When playing solely as a mage, you are completely dependent on mana. If the opponent uses a counterspell, that's it. A hero's army dwindles too quickly without the support of powerful water or earth magic, so a mixed build is the best. The army doesn't decrease as much, and accuracy helps (especially for the Dungeon and Tower factions – 2 and 3 ranged units), and if you're playing as the Cove faction but have a good guild in your secondary army, then you are the WINNER:smile20:

You need to know how to play, and everything else is irrelevant, so I'll take a neutral position – battle mages.

I play as Dungeon, of course, focusing on wisdom, magic, earth magic, and whatever else comes to mind, along with logistics, and the rest depends on what I feel like and what I find!

Personally, for me, the Mage is always the best hero. And it doesn't matter if he's a combat hero or not. Mass slow and speed boosts, plus healing and the town portal – it's almost a cure for all ills. And in general, there are battles with neutral creatures where a Warrior will NEVER win. The Mage can win battles where the enemy has hundreds, or even thousands, more troops.

In 1000, is it when you attack 1000 goblins with one goblin and then *boom* – explosion?! Something like that! :)

In 1000, is it when you attack 1000 goblins with one goblin and then *boom* – an explosion?! Something like that! :)

I meant that when a hero is already well-leveled (15-25), he can defeat several thousand dragons (even azure ones) with a small army, although I remember (forgot which map) – a difficult battle against approximately 5000-8000 enhanced psychic creatures (which have protection against all magic and incredibly high speed). – in such battles, a Warrior will definitely never win, even if his army is almost equal in size.

Hmm... more like a Battle Mage, although I usually just call him a Warrior. I'm leveling up a Warrior, focusing on Earth magic for massive slowing effects and City Portal, which is incredibly important for a Warrior!

On random maps, warriors are undoubtedly much more practical. Mages need to replenish their mana to be combat-ready. Battle mages... what do they have to do with it? This is only relevant if you start as a Barbarian. Yes, they are better than ordinary mages from other castles, especially Dessa and Gandalf.
All the mage's advantages are nullified by just one or two artifacts – the Cloak of Negation or the Sphere of Inhibition. And resistance reduces them. But the warrior's advantages are passive; that is, they are always with him, and his army is strengthened by his parameters.

And most importantly, a mage casts a spell once per round, trying to compensate for the magical cast with what the warrior inflicts due to his skill advantage, which is not always possible. (Moreover, this attack can be reflected by resistance).

But! On maps where hit-and-run tactics are allowed, the value of a mage increases dramatically.

P.S. Why does everyone stereotypically think that only one strong hero should be used? Train 2-3 heroes with different functions. Then, where a mage is needed, there will be a mage, and where a warrior is needed, there will be a warrior. Through such skillful management, many strong players achieve a decisive advantage.

Magic definitely reigns supreme. I first realized this when playing through the campaign as the Dragon. Of course, a warrior is more reliable, with consistent stats and all. BUT a warrior-hero needs a large army, and how many weeks would it take to gather the required number? And high attack and defense stats can't replace the possibilities of magic.
A mage, on the other hand, performs miracles with a relatively small army. Could a warrior, with 30 Titans and 6 Djinns at his disposal, defeat 3,500 Royal Archers? And you can give many similar examples.
Of course, there are individual cases where magical abilities turn out to be powerless, and I don't deny that. But in general, mages are better than warriors.

I'm for magic. Magic is like a partisan detachment against a strong enemy. Even if it's forbidden to quickly retreat, magic still almost grants an extra turn. A Warrior needs to attack, while a Mage can consolidate his army and get rid of those enemy creatures that bother him the most.

I've always preferred magic, although I've always loved swords as well (I even had a wooden sword as a child, which was originally made of plastic:D). But in all my stories (if they involve magic), I mainly describe the main characters as battlemages, so that everything is proportional, as I like it)).

Perhaps, a lot depends on the race. For example, humans don't make good mages because their magic stat doesn't increase (Light Magic increases combat skills when used, but that doesn't necessarily mean the hero is a mage).
I voted for a battle mage because if the troops are strong and the hero uses magic well, what could be better?

Can a warrior, with 30 Titans and 6 Djinns at his disposal, defeat 3.5K Royal Naga?

Easily!
Orrin has a high level + sniper bow + box with mass slow and teleport, after about 40 rounds, they'll be gone :)

Or just use a power field every other round.