Posts from Tower tactics.

The idea is to alleviate the resource problem for the Tower.

The main issues there are with dragon scales and crystals; mercury won't solve much, and it's only 3 units short (7-4) for building 1-6.

I remember playing a tournament game with vbn once. We played all random, and he got Tower and Rizza. He leveled her up and won. Fast roads, arrow, and mysticism did their thing. So, as an alternative to Ain, it's quite suitable. But I still think that this isn't the right direction. Nella = :smile54:

Hello everyone. I don't have much experience playing against other players, so I would like to ask a few questions as a beginner. 1. When playing on an XL (200%) map, how justified is the choice of Solmyr? In my last game against Necropolis, I got beaten by Galthran :smile54:. It seemed that the mage couldn't counter him at all. 2. How justified is the choice of a mage hero in general? 3. Which of the Tower heroes is optimal for an XL map?

1. When playing on an XL (200%) map, how justified is the choice of Solmyr?

In my opinion, for 200%, it's still better to choose Ain as the starting hero, purely for earning money. And then develop another hero, preferably a warrior.

I recently played a game against Necropolis and got beaten by Galthran:smile54:

Nothing surprising, that's how it should be in 90% of cases.

It seemed that a mage can't really counter him at all.

No one can.

2. How justified is the choice of a mage hero in general?

A warrior is better because he can handle various objects like conservatories and utopias more effectively.

3. Which of the Tower heroes is optimal for an XL map?

In my opinion, Nela.

It’s better to start at 200% difficulty, as others have said, by choosing Aine (after all, 350 x 6 = 2100 additional gold in the first week at 200% can make a big difference). For leveling up, it’s best to choose someone from the purchasable heroes; the best candidates are experts in armor, logistics, or offense. If none of these are available, beastmasters or some mages (Grindan, for example, quickly gains mass slow, although his special ability isn’t the best at 350, but he breaks through everything quite easily, which allows him to level up quickly and can start clearing out resource mines earlier).

2Erhog: Are you by any chance from diablozone.net?

off-topic, but yes :)

offtopic, but yes :)

Cool! I last posted there about 4 years ago, when I was playing D2. I just recognized the nickname ;)
And off-topic is never unnecessary!

For the Tower, I always play as Toros, building 12346 + a Citadel, and placing the watchtower on 112. The goal for the first two weeks is to get Djinns, upgrade, and build a Castle. Initially, my army consists of: a stack of Gremlins one Grand Djinn one Grand Djinn a stack of Nagas one Grand Djinn one Grand Djinn a stack of Mages + a Ballista In Platinum, it's a disadvantage that Toros doesn't start with the Ballista skill; it often doesn't appear :(. My second army is usually made up of Golems and Gargoyles (for cannon fodder) to support taking valuable resources.

If the gargoyles haven't been built, there's no tempo to build a tower. Even if you do build a tower in the first week, 111 is more advantageous, in my opinion, but overall, it's not worth it; it's better to build a market or a thousand-gold building. And even with built gargoyles, you don't always have enough tempo to get a Naga in the Citadel, it depends on the respawn point.
Torosar has another small disadvantage: there are no gargoyles at the start, and if the second hero doesn't come with gargoyles, you won't be able to expand much, but at least you have Tactics and a ballista – an analgesic for gremlins.

In my opinion, Torosar is far from being the best option. He's more stable than Nela, but generally, I start with Ain and then switch to another hero (usually, one appears later).

After playing Inferno, I prefer playing as Tower (they have a more creative style). But there are problems in the game at the beginning, due to the greatest unpredictability of the landscape on the battlefield. For example: in the tavern, you might get a Miner or a Gunnar. I level up their Tactics to Expert so they can defeat archers without losses. Let's say, archers (speed 6, like Gremlins on snow), and you need to find a place for your Gargoyles to stand – there's a log or some other block, so they can't reach, and accordingly, the Gremlins get lost. This happens, so you need to be more careful!

What are your claims about the "greatest unpredictability of the landscape on the battlefield" based on?

Just some observations from my personal experience. Even if the probability is the same everywhere, and I might be wrong, I urge you to be more careful, because in such situations, a significant number of Gremlins are lost, which subsequently affects development.

I've been playing Heroes 3 for almost 10 years, and I've come to the conclusion that I'll never play as the Tower in important games. Why? Let's start with the heroes. There are no decent warrior heroes at all. And that's a fact. There's simply no equivalent to Solmyr, Valeska, Crag Hack, or the others. What's offered is just subpar, as they all have random skills. Among the mages, Solmyr is, of course, a masterpiece. But... he's just a mage. That is, if you lose the ability to use magic, you'll likely lose the battle 90% of the time. So, in general, the Tower: + Solmyr, Syra (diplomacy from the start is a nice feature, although not for tournaments) + Lots of good magic in the guild (although sometimes only elementals appear:D) - Very expensive (you need a ton of gems, not to mention the mages who want a little of everything) - Not a single warrior hero. At all. As a result, by level 20, you get a hero with stats of 2-2-15-15 and no skills like defense/attack. - Consequently, artifacts like the Cloak of Negation and the Orb of Disruption leave you defenseless. Because when Solmyr with 14-14-3-3 attacks you, you'll lose even with a stronger army, proven. Regarding the creatures: 1) Gremlins. Upgraded Gremlins are the main force at the beginning of the game. By the middle of the second month, they are useless. Compared to centaurs or pikemen, they're just meat. In general, in serious battles, they're just meat. "-" 2) Gargoyles. Meat. They have weak stats, lose to dwarves, archers, harpies, but they can fly. There's not much more to say, "±". 3) Golems. Lots of HP, decent defense, resistant to magic, but low speed. Good for defending the castle and as cover for titans/mages. In general, compared to similar creatures from other castles, "+". 4) Mages. A great unit. Good stats, no melee penalty, they reduce the cost of magic, and there's no penalty for obstacles. Definitely, "+". 5) Djinns. In a word, garbage. 40 hit points for a level 5 melee unit and low defense is a joke. My gorgons are laughing quietly in the corner. They can fly and cast spells, which partially saves the situation. "-", definitely. Their place is on the fourth level, but not the fifth. 6) Nagas. This is the Tower's main strength. They don't quite reach the stars in terms of stats, but their retaliatory strike, 110 HP, and 30 damage (!!!) more than compensate. The best level 6 unit, even a little stronger than the Death Knight. "+", of course. Even two pluses:D 7) Titans. A very ambiguous unit. As giants, they're not bad; the cost is quite commensurate with the quality. But as titans, not so much. The undeniable pluses: 300 HP, 60 damage (!!). The minuses: very expensive, average attack/defense, low speed. For the same money, archangels look much more attractive... as do the creatures of the Citadel. But I'm nitpicking, "+", albeit with a stretch. In conclusion: an unreasonably expensive development, no good warrior heroes, a good mage hero (Solmyr), only two really good units (nagas and titans), and outright meat in half the slots (hello djinn, gargoyles, and gremlins)... I've long since given up on this castle. There are too many variables that can simply ruin your game (like various orbs, cloaks, and a poor map). Maybe I'm missing something, but I'd rather play as Castle/Dungeon/Swamp...