The eternal question: which heroes are better, mages or warriors? Auto-translated

I always thought that mages possessed immense power, but then I realized that warriors are not much worse!

Conclusion: you need to create a fighter from a mage. Max out the mage's air and earth magic skills. Expert attack, expert defense ;) the rest depends on the circumstances.

the conclusion is that you need to make a fighter out of a mage.

I share the same opinion! :)

In my opinion (from the perspective of an average player), it's not so much about which hero you have, but rather what skills they possess. Even a powerful mage looks much less impressive without logistics than with it.

In my opinion (from the perspective of an average player), it's not so much about which hero you have, but rather what skills they possess. Even a powerful mage looks much less impressive without logistics than with it.

Instead of logistics, a "powerful mage" should have magic... at least the Dimension Door spell.

a "cool mage" should have magic...
at least Dimension Door instead of logistics

And who said a cool warrior with logistics can't have Dimension Door? :D

In my opinion, Warriors are best, especially those with either Air or Earth affinity. They are strong at all levels. Mages, on the other hand, can ruin the entire game if they don't get the right spell.

My favorite hero is Necr, who also levels up Death Knights. Unfortunately, I've forgotten the hero's name. He's primarily a mage. With him, the Death Knights become something truly terrifying, capable of crushing almost any opponent of their level. You can make him a very effective mage, and even if his magic is reduced to level 3 with an artifact, it's not critical for a Necropolis hero. Slowing and other important spells remain, and most importantly, resurrection does too. Throughout my gaming experience, I don't recall ever losing to a warrior. The option of finding an artifact that completely blocks magic, combined with the power of the "steeds" and skillful play with vampires, levels the playing field even against a well-developed warrior hero. I'm definitely in favor of mages; without a blocking artifact, warriors are easy prey for mages. Sorry, but that's a fact. For example, I played against a very experienced and strong player. It turned out that his hero was developed more as a warrior, although he also had decent magic. But he also had three times the army size. And that's because there were three times more human castles on the map than Necropolises. Only such a huge numerical advantage decided the outcome. But when I asked my opponent to make his army at least twice as large as mine, I crushed him. For warriors, the option is to block magical abilities; without an artifact, there's no chance, or you have to be a clumsy mage. Regarding skills. If you're playing the campaign, it's one thing; if you're playing against a live player or in a single game, it's another. For example, in the campaign, I rarely level up logistics and sometimes don't level up intelligence because there are plenty of magic points during the campaign anyway, and logistics aren't needed because you can teleport and reach anyone anywhere on the map. Against a live player, Earth Magic, Wind Magic, Intelligence, Logistics, and Wisdom are essential for a mage. Water Magic is also useful, but not critical. If the map is large, I take Diplomacy. Then, from the remaining free slots, I prefer to develop attack. I never take Eagle Eye, healing, or other useless skills.

Unpredictable, don't talk nonsense and read the HeroesWorld rules

...Well, when I asked my opponent to make his army at least twice as large as mine, I crushed him.

Maybe you should have asked him to teach you how to play. I wonder, do you play at the "pawn" level against the computer too, or do you also have to beg?:D

on the one hand, warriors are not bad (with resistance or some kind of artifact...)\ \ on the other hand, raising a good warrior is even more difficult than raising a mage...\ and besides, for his advantage, a warrior needs an army!\ for a mage, a more important resource is mana (thankfully, there should be enough!!) and spells (there should also be enough - if you are hunting for some special spell, you can easily lose. the mage's skill is to manage what you have, but also to know what you are striving for)\ \ but if the mage is completely inept as a commander, then the advantage with a smaller number of warriors fades away. and you need to hire them, build... no less! because soldiers will die like flies, no matter how skilled the hero is in magic!\ \ therefore - balance (mage-warrior)

Personally, I play as a Lord from the Dungeon faction and rarely use spells, only to finish off a weak unit.

Yes, I personally like all of them! You just need to know how to play with each one!

I usually play as Necromancers and Death Knights (considering that Necropolis is my favorite Castle:)). I can say that a Mage is good in the later stages of the game (when the expert skill is developed), while a Warrior is good in the early stages. But with Necromancers, everything is simpler, in my opinion, than with the others (due to the specific features of the Necropolis): earth magic is paramount (raising undead - slowing - portal). I haven't played with portals for a long time (in my opinion, it spoils the game), but air magic is also desirable - acceleration - gate. Nepredskazuemiy

My favorite hero is Necromancer, who also develops Death Knights. Unfortunately, I forgot the hero's name.

Isn't it Tamika?)) True, she is not a Necromancer, but a Warrior. But her Death Knights are really strong. However, Haart has the most powerful Death Knights (if you disable the lock) haha.

I am definitely for Mages; without a blocking artifact, Warriors are just cannon fodder for Mages.

In fact, there are a lot of blocking artifacts, that's one thing, secondly, as I said, a Mage is good in the later stages, when magic is at the expert level, and thirdly, Warriors are usually given logistics more often, which is a very important factor, so perhaps a Warrior is still more advantageous than a Mage on small maps. P.S.: Sorry if I don't understand something, but why are Battle Mages placed in a separate category? :-/

P.S.: Sorry if I don't understand something, but why are Battle Mages put in a separate category?:-/

Perhaps, by the term "Battle Mages," they wanted to define something in between Mages and Warriors. I think they take a Warrior as a base and pump him with all sorts of stuff (:), like Earth Magic, Air Magic, Wisdom.

Perhaps the term "Battle Mages" was intended to define something in between Mages and Warriors. I think they take a Warrior as a base and pump him with all sorts of stuff, like Earth Magic, Air Magic, Wisdom.

Well, if that's the case, then a battle mage (or mage-warrior? ;)) is definitely better... But I think a poll would be more interesting in terms of preferences – mage or warrior...
At first, I mostly played as mages, and then I switched to warriors – attack and defense still rule (especially on maps without city portals and dimensional gates).