On artifactheroes.com, there's "In Search of the Sword." It's located in the Campaigns section for HoMM3:AB (
link). However, the archive numbering seems to be incorrect there. The correct campaign order is:
In Search of the Sword.
The Magnificent Four Return.
Resurrection of the Necromancer.
Might and Mind. Mind and Might.
On the website, "Resurrection of the Necromancer" is in archive maxim1, and "In Search of the Sword" is in maxim3. Someone must have mixed them up >_<.
For me, Maxuta-Phoenix's creations stand somewhat apart from everything else. His maps provided unforgettable hours of enjoyment, showing "Heroes" in a completely different light – a game with weakly realized potential. But it can shine with all its colors; it just needs a masterfully crafted map.
Do you remember the wonderful swamp-water mission (the landscapes are stunning), where there's a war for control of the beacons, and the rogue Vaska constantly drinks away all his earnings with the brothel owner, Karasucha? Or the mission in a distant snowy land, where there's only one checkpoint and countless recruitment locations, and similarly, a winter map from the second campaign with a Stronghold consisting of three castles for the player and three parallel portals. Or playing for the first time as Karasucha on Might and Magic, where there are 20 Necromancer castles, and any smokehouse blocks a quarter of the surface at once. You have to wage war in the dark, slowly, without logistics or pathfinding, with a bunch of useless skills. Only after reaching the end of "The Magnificent Four" and looking at your opponent did I understand what true cunning is... For the first few minutes, I couldn't even think, just – how…? Naturally, I had to play it all over again.
In each map, you can feel the love and enthusiasm of the author; interesting ideas are constantly being implemented. Sometimes we spend the entire mission building a capitol in a republic known for its large number of gang formations. Sometimes we fight simultaneously in four local areas. Standing at the entrance to the bay and the subsequent reinforcements from hell evoke a smile, as does running in circles from the old woman with a scythe (a reminder that no matter how cool a hero is, they can't hold a large territory alone; in the end, they will always yield to numbers). And the seventh, final mission of "Resurrection of the Necromancer" creates a feeling of a real war, which can only be waged with legions against legions. Even in some small details, you can feel the individuality. For example, a sign is carefully placed next to a grove of underground mushrooms with the inscription "Garbage. Do not consume more than 50 pieces at a time," or a funny dialogue between the aging Lord Max and a vampire appears. And how, after a few offers, lonely gnomes voluntarily enlist in your ranks (after refusal, they are publicly beaten), the last one suddenly joins our ranks with joy.
As I played, I noticed that thanks to the well-thought-out landscape and the many different objects, it feels like I'm not playing on Might and Magic, but at least on a larger map. And based on many of the maps, you can create interesting scenarios for playing with other people. I wish the author would create a multiplayer version based on the swamp-water map; it's such a great idea with the beacons! Can you imagine a 2v2 battle on it? But no, we have randomness, and people play random games. Honestly, I can't watch the creations of the computer's artificial intelligence without cringing. Maybe someone can explain to me why, in a game where a good map is basically the foundation of everything, a mediocre generator is so popular, creating sometimes simply terrible maps?
I've always wanted to play, for example, on an XL map with a Dungeon. Let's say 48 castles (even that) on top and bottom
