Posts from Discussion of level 1 monsters.

That's absolutely correct; you should compare the stats based on weekly growth at a minimum!
And if you look at it on an individual basis, even then, the one with the lower growth should be stronger!
But generally, if you judge by usefulness, even the Barbarians could argue that point! :
Hobbits are useful guys!

Absolutely correct statement that you need to play based on weekly growth at a minimum!
And if you look at it individually, then even in that case, the one with the smaller growth should be stronger!!

Especially when there's a hole in your pocket.

Hobbits are useful guys!

Partly yes, as are all archers and flyers (to a lesser extent).

Well, they're all good, but I especially like the crossbowmen for ranged attacks and the berserkers for melee combat.

Berserkers used to be good... now I'm too lazy to spend money on them. They're not even good as cannon fodder, since they die so quickly. But if they manage to reach the enemy, they'll definitely attack some Gnomes:smile04:. Horrible.
Centaurs – I used to like them, but now they just blend in with the army and don't stand out. They're so gray and unremarkable. But Harpies – now those are good!))
And then there are the Gnomes... in the Castle faction, I use them in pairs with Golems to hold the enemy at bay while my hero, Djinns, Titans, Mages (if I find a dwelling or another city), and sometimes Hobbits, tear them apart. Of course, they're not as good as Golems, but they distract some of the enemy's attention. :)
Dwarves – see the previous point. They're not great as archers, but when I have extra money (and here I have both a treasury and lords:rolleyes:...), I can buy them.
Fairies and Wolves – Wolves are stronger, Fairies are faster. Wolves attack twice (which helps against something like Minotaurs), and Fairies attack without retaliation. But if Fairies get caught, they're completely useless. Well, in any case, both are good. There's also a Leprechaun mixed in, but no one is going to buy him (except maybe a couple for luck).
Orcs and Ogres: I like both. Although Orcs shoot poorly (they're not great, but they're still decent... in fact, they're quite good).
Squires and Crossbowmen – well, they're just great... they're awesome... they make me love the game:smile04:.
I can't come up with anything equally silly about the Necropolis faction because I haven't played it much:smile04:. Please don't take everything I've said, both here and before, too seriously. :)

Well, I don't think anyone chooses a faction based on its level 1 creatures. ;) So, it's usually not important which one is the "most powerful." But if you're planning to play with them, then Archers win this contest because they have the best survivability. I think if you gather about 1,500-2,000 Hobbits, they look pretty good (especially against level 4 units), and a large number of Wolves are also scary, but it's very rare to achieve that (although Wolves are easier to get). And if you just calculate the stats (1*1), I think Centaurs probably win. IMHO.

Of course, one-on-one, a centaur is better than the rest. But even in "group vs. group" battles, they are formidable opponents if the hero has the "accuracy" skill. It's just a shame that they don't have many copies in reserve... But they have plenty of health.

Regarding the power of first-level creatures, it seems like a somewhat awkward question. Perhaps it would be more accurate to talk about the usefulness of first-level creatures – specifically, from this perspective, the most advantageous and in-demand creatures are those that provide early-game mobility – such as sprites for Haven and imps for Necropolis (40 movement points). Other factions can't boast this (especially Haven and Sylvan, although at least they have stables). However, centaurs for Stronghold also look quite good, with 30 movement points. Otherwise, first-level creatures are only useful for about a week or 10 days at most – they are then used to capture the first mines...
Something like that.

Nah... a large number of halflings are useful not only at the beginning, and a large number of dwarves can at least serve as cover for the mage against archers.
And the sprites with retaliatory attacks are also pretty good. Orcs with stunning are good.
And elementals with mana stealing are good too.
And life has some great creatures!
But I still like nature the most. Well... and strength.

Nah... a large number of halflings are useful not only at the beginning, and a large number of dwarves can at least serve as cover for the mage against archers.
And the sprites with retaliatory attacks are also pretty good. Orcs with stunning are good.
And the imps with mana stealing are good too.
And life has amazing creatures!
But I still like nature the most. Well... and strength.

Hobbits, dwarves, etc. - most of the first-level units significantly slow down the army.

Of course, but it’s not necessary to have them with you all the time; just bring them to the location of the expected major battle.

In my opinion, the most useful level 1 unit in battle is the crossbowman with his powerful and long-range attack, and the most useful on the map is the thief:smile28:, as he can provide a significant material advantage from the very beginning of the game, when the armies are not yet fully formed.

2 WisTrit, the first level is perfect for tough battles. Even 300-400 dwarves won't withstand the attack of 6-7 phoenixes/angels/devils/monsters, etc., under a competent tactician, but they will take up an entire slot in the army, which is often better used for a dead hero, who will only be needed to cast 1-2 spells in battle.

I don't see the point in comparing the stats of first-level monsters one-on-one. Have you ever seen anything like that in nature, where, for example, a SINGLE brave Berserker faces a powerful army, or a SINGLE archer? Or a powerful stack of 1 Sprite bravely takes on a neutral unit consisting of 1 Dwarf? Any comparison of monster stats "one-on-one" is doomed to fail from the start – it's theoretical and has nothing to do with the game itself. Furthermore, comparing weekly growth is also inappropriate. For example, let's calculate the weekly growth of Berserkers for the Barbarian faction (19 units). But Barbarians have something called Outposts! This means that on large maps, you definitely need to multiply the number of Berserkers and Centaurs by 50% – Barbarians will certainly take advantage of the opportunity to grow rapidly in numbers. But on small maps, where everything is geared towards a 20-40 day game, it is quite obvious that no one will build Outposts. There will be a quick rush with what is available. Then again, calculating the number of units cannot be unambiguous if we are talking about Order and Life units. Often, a Lord is found in the Castle, who is leveled up to approximately the 3rd circle of Nobility and sent to guard the Castle as early as the second week. You can learn Nobility in the Seminary or University with any hero. But Order can also completely ignore the Lord, focusing on another mage or a strong melee unit. So, a conversation about the most effective first-level monster can only be conducted in relation to a specific situation. Personally, I voted for the Halfling. Here's why: In the final battle, units of the first two levels usually do not participate. Yes, Berserkers have the best stats and receive the greatest bonuses from spells (any blessing has a huge effect – aura of fear, first strike, vampire touch, cat reflexes, not to mention the strength of the dragon). But using Berserkers in the early stages of the game – in the first two weeks – is practically pointless. They need to be accumulated in the Castle for a serious battle. But taking them to the final battle is a unforgivable mistake. Any mage of the 3rd circle will be more useful than Berserkers. It turns out that the most powerful unit is not applicable at all – at the beginning of the game, we save them (just when units of the first level are needed), and at the end, they are useless, no matter how many we accumulate. But I always take Halflings to the final battle. They are an excellent tool against such powerful monsters as Phoenixes and Black Dragons. After all, in the main battle, there is never time to cast more than one blessing – you need to eliminate enemy heroes (Order, Chaos, Death) at all costs or defend yourself (Nature). The innate Slayer ability is simply a great thing when a large group of Black Dragons is flying towards you. There is almost always time and opportunity to apply General Accuracy, and the rest is just a matter of technique. Archers are good, but taking them to the final battle... rarely makes sense, only if you are playing against the AI. But against the AI, all units are good, even Troglodytes :D

Wolf, I don't know, I really like both of those bites...

Well, personally, I think it's the Berserker. Besides, he said:

Berserkers have a high HP stat and simply insane attack power for level 1 (+ double strike, so even wolves are weaker).

And this person knows what he's talking about.