Auto-translated
This is very common; I've encountered it myself many times.
Inquisitor
Posts from General discussion about Heroes of Might and Magic II.
AlexeyPank
Auto-translated
And in the second game, I really liked the atmosphere. The feeling was amazing when your heroes won – it was something special. The only drawback is the graphics – there are no gender differences among the heroes in battle. It looks funny to see a bearded female mage :)
Мугайс
Auto-translated
I also really liked the atmosphere in the second game. The feeling was amazing when your heroes achieved victory – it was something special. The only drawback was the graphics – there were no gender differences among the heroes in battle. It looks funny to see a bearded female mage :)
And in some foreign-made maps, I encountered male wizards! :eek: I don't know what they found so appealing about it :p But if I was going to play on such maps, I would change the gender and name of these "transvestites" to female ;) Because it was annoying.
Darth Saruman
Auto-translated
I also really liked the atmosphere in the second game. The feeling was amazing when your heroes won – it was something special. The only drawback is the graphics – there are no gender differences among the heroes in battle. It looks funny to see a bearded female mage :)
I agree about the atmosphere; during the game, especially at the beginning, you can feel a light, barely perceptible scent of adventure!:D
And in some fancy maps, I encountered male wizards! :eek: I don't know what they found so appealing about it :p But if I was going to play on such maps, I would change the gender and name of these "transvestites" to female ;) Because it annoyed me.
Maybe it's fashionable for them!:)
Sensej
Auto-translated
I believe that imbalance has its advantages; on the contrary, I don't really like the simplistic balance in the third game. Everything can be improved – that's not interesting. If everything can be improved, then what's the point? But in the second game, it was cool. Maybe not everyone could be improved, but dragons could be upgraded twice. And I think the upgrades were more logical in the second game. How can you improve Rocs or Hydras? They just reproduce, and that's it. Maybe breed a new breed? And in general, I don't even know why I like the second game more.
Richard_I
Auto-translated
I believe that imbalance has its advantages; on the contrary, I don't really like the simplistic balance in the third game. The fact that everyone can be upgraded is not interesting. If everyone can be upgraded, then what's the point? But in the second game, it was cool. Maybe not everyone could be upgraded, but dragons could be upgraded twice. And I think the upgrades were more logical in the second game. How can you upgrade Ogres or Hydras? They just reproduce, and that's it. Maybe breed a new breed? And in general, I don't even know why I like the second game more.
Alex_R
Auto-translated
I believe that imbalance has its advantages; on the contrary, I don't really like the simplistic balance in the third game. The ability to upgrade everyone is not interesting. If everyone can be upgraded, then what's the point? But in the second game, it was cool. Maybe not everyone could be upgraded, but dragons could be upgraded twice. And I think the upgrades in the second game were more logical. How can you upgrade Rocs or Hydras? They just reproduce, that's all. Maybe breed a new species? And in general, I don't even know why I like the second game more.
So, it turns out to be a kind of more complex balance.
It's no coincidence that the weakest Knight army has everything built up, while, for example, the Warlock has three upgrades for the Wizard and Sorceress, and the Warlock only has the 5th and 7th ranks.
Very good idea... although the developers may not have thought about it...
Sniper93
Auto-translated
I think the worst one is the 4th installment – just a collection of units (let the fans of the 4th game forgive me). And I never thought about balance.
And by the way, what is balance? How is it measured?
You are absolutely right! The 4th game is the worst in the series! (I warn you, this is my opinion:) )
Auto-translated
Has anyone encountered this? I'm playing as a Barbarian, and during a battle with a hero who blinds Ogres, something amusing happens. On the next turn after the blinding, the hero HIMSELF removes the blindness from MY Ogre. It's kind of nice, but on the other hand, it feels unfair.
Alex_soldier
Auto-translated
I believe that there are certain advantages to imbalance
By the way, it was a mistake to abandon this in later installments.
In my opinion, playing the third game became less interesting due to inflation.
If in the second game the maximum daily profit from 1 Castle was 1250 (Warlocks had another +500), then in the third game 1000 -> 2000 --> 4000 (+ dwarf treasury) is very spoiling.
Unit growth also increased.
Personally, I get a feeling of permissiveness (money solves everything).
In the second game, I didn't always build level 6 — it was simply a waste of such money! I saved for bone dragons for a week! For green ones — about two! For titans — it's almost scary to say — a month! Now that was living!
FALLOUT
Auto-translated
Rather, this is not an imbalance, but diversity and nonlinearity.
By the way, it was a mistake to abandon this in later versions.
Yes, the variety of construction is captivating, and the 2nd game is definitely interesting, but not better.
BUT GENERALLY, THEY ARE VERY SIMILAR, LIKE THE 1st AND 2nd ALLODS.
DRILL
Auto-translated
As I mentioned somewhere before, these are the second-best.
And it's especially interesting when a new mission begins, the map is not yet revealed (only a small area around the Castle is visible), there are resources near the Castle, and the Castle itself is unusually empty inside, which is cool.
Everything is well-drawn, the monster dwellings are logical, and the upgrades are also logical (mostly humanoids are upgraded), and there isn't much imbalance if you play correctly.
And there are two opposing super mages – the Wizard and the Sorcerer. The Wizard has a vast knowledge base + a library, which can be said to expand his range of spells. The Sorcerer has powerful magic and an additional level of the Magic Guild; he is a rich, evil mage who only thinks of himself.
The semi-combat Necromancer and Sorceress, who are more inclined towards magic, are also like two opposites. One is a welcoming, kind land with fairies and rainbows, while the other is a land of darkness and desolation.
And there are two opposing powerhouses: a kind, fast, and spirited knight with a sturdy Castle and useless peasants, and a stern barbarian with strong Ogres, agile Wolves, and strong morale when defending.
As stated on the oldgames.ru website:
This is one of the first games in the history of computer games whose music has not left anyone indifferent who has heard it. The animated cutscenes are also made very well and beautifully. Overall, the entire game exudes a sense of fairy tale, mystery, and beauty, even now, ten years after the release of the last game with the title HoMM II.
PReDS
Auto-translated
Does anyone know how to change the stats of units? I really like Heroes 2. But the imbalance of power (HP of level 6 units) makes it impossible to play hotseat on maps larger than medium for anyone other than Warlock and Wizard.
The first task is to change the HP of level 6 units.
Dust_HL
Auto-translated
That's a rather debatable statement; I recommend checking out the match reports on Good vs Evil.
Qwerty
Auto-translated
I really like the balance in Heroes 2!
Everything depends only on the map, its creator, and the person who controls the game: knows and can make the most of the strengths of each faction! :-)
2. I completely agree. In May, Sir Kama told me that he appreciates the second game precisely for its balance. This made me revisit my notes about the second game and generally re-evaluate the factions. The balance is excellent!
Statistics
Welcome our newest member:
recijeb