Posts from The Philosophy of Heroes of Might and Magic.

I noticed a peculiar feature common to scenarios: development begins, then various races wage war under different flags, and the war ends. As a result, all these races remain, but are united under one flag, meaning the balance between good and evil ultimately remains unchanged.

Is balance inherent in the world of Heroes?

I read the whole thread, thought it would be something complicated, but no! It's quite interesting! I want to point out a few things: the Stronghold is more like an Ochlocracy than anarchy, and I think the swamp is more like a "kingdom of life," while the Tower is like ancient Greece, just with a slightly off climate ;)

What is a "kingdom of life"?

Yeah, the phrase just came to mind... Kingdom, because they have a king, like Trolesk. But in general, we shouldn't forget that Heroes is just a game, and a fantastical one at that. Each castle is designed in its own unique, mythical style; there are no names, you can only come up with them! For example, Necropolis – the realm of death. Why not come up with a name for the swamp castle? Maybe you have a more interesting idea, Draco?

The game's philosophy... well, that's a grand statement. Rather, the game was created for turn-based battles, where the combination of army composition and skills equals the tool for victory. The division of factions is quite relative, although I should note that in the third Heroes game, there wasn't much balance, and the dominant factions always remained at the top, while the weakest were the Fortress (due to its unspecialized army and lack of magic) and the Swamp (weak army and weak magic). The strongest were the Tower (which, with its army and magic skills, was very powerful on expert difficulty) and the Castle (army + morale (luck, leadership)). The other factions were in the middle. In the fourth Heroes game, balance was also not found; instead, there was a very long progression system, and it took a very long time to develop your castle. The most balanced game is Heroes 5; anyone who plays it for a sufficient amount of time will immediately notice that the army and skills for all factions are aligned with specific builds. And the balance between army and magic is equal. What's missing are just good maps... Heroes 5, forward!

The game's philosophy, well, that's a grand statement. Rather, the game was created for turn-based battles, where the combination of army composition + skills = the tool for victory.

That's true, but as I understand it, this topic implies the philosophy of the world of Heroes of Might and Magic. The game contains a very interesting and engaging plot in which, based on the actions, relationships of heroes, creatures, and races, one can create an approximate picture of existence.

The most balanced game is Heroes 5; anyone who plays it for a sufficient amount of time will immediately notice that the army and skills for all races are reduced to certain lines. And the balance of army and magic is the same. It just lacks good maps... Heroes 5, forward!

I disagree with that. I played Heroes 5 for quite a long time and can confidently say that the balance is off, although it might be better in Lords of the Realm (I haven't played it yet).

As for the topic, it's quite interesting. I'll post my thoughts on it later.

It is in the Tribes of the East that a clear balance has been established (at least this part is clearly better balanced than the original version).

It is impossible to single out any obvious weak faction.