Posts from Upgrade or alternative upgrade?

You can't possibly try out all the heroes!

Maybe it will have the same impact on development.

I never upgrade Peasants. Why would I? They should bring in money and be retrained into Archers. Archers with retaliatory attacks are always better. Especially good for clearing out mines at the beginning. It's particularly satisfying when the hero is Dugald and he already has 25 of them. There's usually not enough money for the third tier. So, I buy a small group of Shieldbearers to protect the Archers. Otherwise, it's good to upgrade them into Monks, because with their initiative and speed, they aren't very useful. I prefer Royal Griffons. First, their survivability increases because the Griffin spends most of its time in the air. Second, the pike attack is an excellent way to harass Archers, Mages, and low-initiative creatures. The only exception is when I have a hero who specializes in Griffons. She greatly improves them, and with Stone Skin, they become an excellent unit for protecting Archers. I like Adepts more. All the positive effects that an Inquisitor applies can also be done by the hero. But removing a positive characteristic is very useful. They also attack more powerfully, and I like the Adepts' "Dispel" spell much more than the Inquisitor's spells. I always take Paladins. A defense bonus of 4 is no joke (even if the damage is lower). And the Berserk protection + healing is always more appealing to me. The only exception is... against Orcs and Elves who don't use Dark Magic, Isabel's Knights can be more effective. Archangels, and only Archangels. Resurrection is the key to victory. And if you curse a fallen Archangel, the damage becomes ridiculously low, and you can't curse an Archangel anyway

I never upgrade peasants. Why would I? They should bring in money and be retrained into archers.

At least for the sake of their decent abilities.

Archers with retaliatory strike are always better. Especially good for clearing mines at the beginning. It's especially nice when the hero is Dugald and he already has 25 of them.

I don't quite understand what retaliatory strike is for archers...:eek:

I prefer Royal Griffons. First, their survivability increases because the griffin spends most of its time in the air. Second, the pike attack is a great thing for messing with archers, mages, and low-initiative creatures.

I think the pike attack is on the War Griffons, not the Royal ones.;)

The only thing is, I like War Griffons when the hero is a specialist in griffons. She greatly improves them, and with Stone Skin, they are an excellent unit for protecting archers.

I think both upgrades are 90% for an attacking unit... Well, maybe War Griffons are 50/50.

I don't quite understand what an "unrequited attack" is for archers...:eek:

Oops;)
I misspoke. I meant an attack without a penalty.

Pikes seem to be for combat units, not royal ones.;)

I didn't express myself correctly here. I meant an attack from above.

In my opinion, both upgrades are 90% for the attacking unit... Well, maybe 50/50 for combat units.

Royal units have 1.5 times fewer hit points. This significantly affects their mortality rate. Therefore, it's better to constantly have them flying in the sky so they don't die unnecessarily.
And combat units are excellent tanks. They have almost as many hit points as a monk. And they have rage on counterattacks.
All of this indicates their primarily defensive function, especially with stone skin.

Here's my take on unit upgrades: 1) I almost always go for Militia; stunning is a great ability. 2) I almost always choose Archers. They're a convenient unit with no range penalty. I usually don't rely on them in the endgame, but sometimes I upgrade them to Veteran Archers (their melee damage is incredible). 3) This is always a tough choice for me. Both units have useful abilities. I choose based on my strategy (but since I usually train Monks, I take a few Pikemen, and the rest become Monks, who are hard to kill). 4) Griffins usually take a while to build, so they're weaker than other units in the endgame (I don't really like them). I upgrade them to Royal Griffins so they can deal more damage before they die (Archers are good against them). 5) If I train Adepts, removing spells is very useful (they have no competition on the battlefield). Otherwise, I usually choose Imps (especially if I haven't learned Light magic). 6) Since I play Hot Seat with friends, I usually choose Isabella. I only take Paladins if I see that Dark magic will be used. 7) If there will be a lot of melee units in the endgame, I'll take Seraphs; otherwise, I usually take Archangels (resurrection, stability). That's how I do it. I'm open to suggestions

And that's a big mistake. Lay on Hands has saved me from quite a few difficult situations. Two stacks of R. Isabel are easy prey for Subdue/Berserk => they'll make life miserable for their own allies, and not just one unit.

What bothers me is when a nearly defeated Paladin retreats to the side and starts healing everyone (and Lay on Hands not only removes curses but also fully heals one creature in the unit).

I prefer Paladins for short/medium-length games (healing is very helpful when the troops are relatively small, and 5-6 Angels are a force, plus they can remove various debuffs, like plague).
Isabelle is good for the late game. The only thing that bothers me is when they destroy two of your units with Darkness. But that's just nitpicking.

Level 1: I need Landlords more often because when there are many of them, the chance of a double strike increases. Right now, I'm playing as Humans with 90 Landlords, and I've only had a single strike once (1/9), all the others were double strikes. And with Militia, IMHO, the "pushback" ability drops much more often, but if it does drop, it's great! Level 2: Always Archers!! 45 archers have a high chance of destroying a large number of troops with a single attack, and if they also have max luck))) Level 3: If there are many swordsmen, then Zealots, because 1 unit will definitely kill them))) Knights can also protect others, which is also good! But only if it's for defense. I don't know about the levels above, I haven't played in a long time, and I haven't reached them yet.

In my opinion, both upgrades are 90% for an attacking unit... Well, maybe 50/50 for combat units.

I usually only use combat units because they are the only ones who can cover the flanks of the Paladins and prevent the entire enemy army from attacking them when they charge the enemy, because the peasants won't make it (and who would attack them anyway), the armored knights won't either, and the archangels will spend a turn resurrecting the Paladins. That leaves only griffons – a large creature with good hit points, defense, infinite retaliation, and medium initiative. Oh, and they also fly relatively far.

1. Lands with dispersion, militia without dispersion. 2. Archers 3. Zealots, similar to the 1st tier. 4. Royal 5. Adept training 6. If it's an Orc, Dwarf, or Elf, then Isabel, if not, then Paladins. 7. Archangels

My build:
1. Militia
2. Archers
3. Zealots
4. Battle Gryphons
5. Adepts
6. If facing Elves, use Isabella; against others, use Paladins.
7. On XL and L maps, use Seraphims; on medium and small maps, use Archons.

well... dealing with humans is easier than with Inferno creatures, but also much more complicated...

usually, my setup is as follows:
Level 1: cannon fodder (randomly, but more often militia, because stunning strike is a useful ability)
Level 2: usually archers (because, due to my habit of fighting Inferno, I prefer attack over a solid defense)
Level 3: it depends... usually, whatever is lacking (attack or defense)
Level 4: Royal... I still have the old habit of defeating neutral creatures with griffons (in principle, it's almost like using hunting hounds)
Level 5: almost doesn't matter
Level 6: usually Knights of Isabel, Paladins only if the enemy has Berserkers or something similar
Level 7: Archangels... they have constant damage, and resurrection is very useful...

I only use Warriors as a defensive unit, for example: when defending a castle, but I use Royal units for attacking. If, for example, you place Warriors at the gates of your castle and frequently resurrect them, your castle will be difficult to capture (although it all depends on the army and spells).

the most dangerous griffons belong to Iris...
---
regarding the Battle Griffons... I agree. They are good in defense.

Added after 1 hour
upgrade Readiness and Counterattack for Iris... the Battle Griffons become real monsters...
(as do the Royal Griffons, by the way)

Added after 3 minutes
the trick with Battle Griffons is Battle Frenzy... the more you attack them, the stronger their counterattack becomes (each subsequent counterattack is 1.5 times stronger than the previous one... and so on until their turn comes).