Posts from - Units in Heroes 3 Auto-translated

Plus speed. 1 unit of speed should ultimately add 6-8% to a creature's power (figures are based on an analysis of creature costs).
Double Strike - a damage bonus of approximately 150% (not 2, because a counterattack follows the first strike).
Unanswerable Strike - a damage bonus of 200% (strikes twice, receiving retaliation only after the second hit).
Flight and ranged attack.
Ranged attack provides a creature power increase of 20-50%.
Flight should also provide some bonus, as well as mass attack (magogs, cerberi, liches, psi-elementals, hydras), vampiric lordism, mana drain (ghosts, upgraded imps, pegasi, mages), magic immunity (necromancers, dwarves, unicorns, ifrits, the elemental company with phoenixes, dragons, etc.), gorgonism, phoenix rebirth, and much more.

...and much more.

Well done. There are two dozen parameters that are not related to each other. If you "weigh" them correctly, you can derive some semblance of an algorithm for calculation. And then you can evaluate it.

But here's the problem: essentially, we need the formula to rank all the units. In other words, we pretend that we "don't know" who is stronger and who is weaker. Let's take the formula, apply it, and get a result...

But in reality, it turns out the other way around. We evaluate the quality of the formula based on the criterion: does it fit our established ideas about the strength of the units, or does it not? That is, we, of course, know which units are stronger and which are weaker... But we would also like to find a formula that would confirm our knowledge. And if it doesn't confirm it, what's the point of such a formula, right? :)

This is not a banal criticism; it is simply a realistic look at the situation if you read the last two dozen posts in the thread... :)

The most correct approach is in the explanation of the respected Qwerty in the post above.

1. Define the list of "built-in" parameters (combat skills and tactical abilities) of the units.
2. Determine the "weight," i.e., the importance of each parameter.
3. Combine them into a single dependency.
4. Test it...

Let's at least deal with the first two points. It's not as simple as it seems... And then we'll gradually move on. Otherwise, we'll soon go in circles... I ask you to express your opinion in the format parameter/weight. That is, like this: "retaliation/2", "blindness (unicorns)/???", "resurrection (archangels)/???", etc. Suggest a justification for the parameter; otherwise, the meaning of the evaluation is lost.

Regardless, considering the abilities, we won't be able to derive an accurate formula. The problem lies precisely in them (the abilities). How are you going to assess the strength of each ability of any unit? By eye, based on approximate ideas? That wouldn't be correct!
And if you want to test the strength of units in their internal battles, that's also not correct, because many units won't be able to use their abilities: a Pit Lord won't summon demons, a Fiend and a Ghost won't be able to drain mana from another hero... Should I continue the list? Or am I missing something, and you have a different system? I sincerely hope so...

How are you going to evaluate...

I'm not going to. :)

At one time, I tried to figure this out and came to the conclusion that this endeavor is pointless. As I have repeatedly stated... It's an extremely thankless task... Because there will always be those who disagree with any theory of determining the strength of a unit...

But if there are those who want to experiment, I'm all for it. And therefore, I suggest a methodology for the process... You know, it develops thinking... :) I'm serious.

I'm not going to. :)

Back in the day, I tried to figure this out and came to the conclusion that it's a pointless endeavor. I've said this many times... It's an extremely thankless task... Because there will always be those who disagree with any theory of determining unit strength...

But if there are those who want to experiment, I'm all for it. And that's why I suggest a methodology for the process... It develops thinking, you know... :) I'm serious.

That's exactly what I mean! I tried to create something interesting, and I did, but then there was a barrage of criticism. And by the way, it's not such an impossible task to create a unit ranking; it's just tedious and time-consuming...

The following nominations should be held: 1 vs 1 increase vs increase 1000 vs 1000 and up to two wins in each match!

We need to conduct competitions based on nominations:
1 vs 1
growth vs growth
1000 vs 1000
and up to two wins in each match!

It still won't give a complete picture. Some unit might lose to another in a one-on-one fight, even if it's 1000 vs 1000, but in an army, that unit might be more useful. + we won't take all abilities into account, as I've already mentioned...

A Pit Lord won't summon demons, and a Wraith and a Ghost won't be able to drain mana from another hero... Should I continue the list?

Here.

Then, we add a fourth discipline – a battle of 100 vs. 100 and 100 vs. 100. And the ability of Imps and Ghosts doesn't affect their strength! It affects magic, which we are not taking into account!

Then we add a 4th discipline – a battle of 100 vs. 100 and 100 vs. 100. And the ability of Imps and Ghosts doesn't affect their strength! It affects magic, which we are not taking into account!

But why not take it into account? We need to consider everything, from the blindness resistance of Trogols to the retaliation of Devils... If we don't, it won't be entirely accurate!

Why shouldn't it be taken into account?

If we distinguish between the "usefulness" of a unit and its "strength," then indeed, there is no need to take it into account, because such skills do not affect the unit's strength in any way... That is, the question "which unit is stronger" will not take this skill into account. And we have repeatedly talked about the fact that the concept of "usefulness" is very inconsistent...

You know, after losing in Heroes 8 for years, I realized that the strongest town in Heroes 3 is definitely Conflux, and let anyone argue with me! I will only accept worthy objections.

Objection number 1: Elementals are vulnerable to certain spells! For example, Storm elementals are very susceptible to lightning!

Objection noted, and now I'll explain my opinion a bit:
1) First, 50 Imps (I won't even mention their speed and ability to attack and retreat).
2) Air Elementals are the strongest of the 2nd-level creatures: 25 hit points and damage, attack, and defense stats comparable to those of 3rd-level creatures!!!
3) Then there's the well-known story with 4 Phoenixes per week (it's just unrealistic! Speed 21 (if my memory serves me right), 200 hit points, and (attack 19 and defense) – a bit weak, but there are 4 of them!!! (a very strong argument).
4) EVERYONE agrees that THIS fact is "cheesy" (unfair) in this city: 4 creatures, starting with the 4th-level (Fire Elementals) and ending with Phoenixes, are IMMUNE TO FIRE MAGIC!!!!!!!!!!!! Let's remember Armageddon! With a developed Sorcery skill, we get an effect like an atomic bomb explosion (I apologize for this inappropriate comparison)... Phoenixes always go first (even Azure Dragons won't stop them, except for fear, of course:rolleyes:), then Armageddon, and we get an invincible army (I'm not afraid to use this strong word).

YES, Elementals are vulnerable to many spells (but when your Hero is level 20 and has skills exceeding 30, you probably won't use Ice Bolt or Meteor Shower. You'll spend your precious magic on Haste or Bless)...

.... Objections are welcome

Another drawback of elementals is their weakness at levels 1, 5, and 4! Although elementals compensate for this with their numbers!

Regarding Heroes of Might and Magic III and III½, I agree. But about the Fae – NO! Having 50 Fae at the very beginning is a significant factor. I've played a lot, and I know that with a cost of 30 and an upgrade for only 1000, it's something special. Agree with me that having 80-110 upgraded Fae in the second week is a huge advantage over the others.