Posts from - What are the drawbacks of Heroes 3? (What didn't you like about it?)

if everyone just expresses their opinion, it won't change the game much.

As for the game itself, it allows you to do things that you wouldn't be able to do in the real world. That's why I play Heroes, among other games. And the more well-thought-out the game is, the more it resembles life, the more enjoyable it is to play.

If everyone simply expresses their opinion, the game won't change much as a result.

At least this is true...

By the way, I don't think that all fans of Heroes would like AoW. So, ideas from there would turn many people off, I think. I like AoW and Disciples precisely because they follow different rules than Heroes. Why try to create some kind of ideal mishmash of three or four games when there are three different ones?
For example, the idea of placing a hero on the battlefield alongside units, as in the 4th installment, which works so well in AoW and Disciples, turned me off from the 4th Heroes game forever.

I like AoW. And the mishmash already exists - Heroes 4, some people liked it, and some didn't. I didn't.

I approve of the proposal regarding building destruction, but on the condition that the walls of the Castle (Stronghold, fort) are destroyed during every enemy attack and there is 1 turn (and resources, of course) for repair or rebuilding the structure. ROME: TOTAL WAR could serve as a benchmark. Otherwise, it's illogical—building a structure costs money, yet you can practically wipe it off the face of the earth and it still restores itself after the battle. After all, we are playing not just Heroes of Might, but same-and-Magic.
I do not approve of the proposal to pay for the army with gold. Let's reason this out:
1. I have an army of 10000 units, and the income from the Castle with a Capitol is 4000. I'll go bankrupt.
2. Why generate income if it's then spent on units (upkeep)?
Buying units doesn't cost pennies (it's not cheap); it is implied that you buy them "lock, stock, and barrel" for life.

That's where the "addicts" with their 10k skeletons really shine! :D

I didn't like the AI. It hardly thinks about what it's doing and just overwhelms with a large army; there's no hint of tactics in its actions. Also, I don't like the skill selection; sometimes, when leveling up, you have to choose an unnecessary skill because it's the best among the available options. But otherwise, Heroes 3 is perfect!

Regarding the unit composition, the idea is simply revolutionary for the Heroes series. If it were to be implemented, the balance would need to be adjusted from the very beginning. It would be great, but it's unlikely. As for the AI, remember the release date of Heroes III. For that time, it was a very decent AI.
P.S. And the Necropolis faction will definitely be upset:D :D :D.

Heroes 3 is like chess. It has a very strong tactical element. And the visuals are definitely better than in Heroes 4 and 5. What's the point of all these innovations when the gameplay is what matters most, and it's perfect? By the way, the only thing I liked in Heroes 4 was the hero on the battlefield, but the selection of units and the lack of upgrades turned me off and made me go back to Heroes 3. Voice acting is not the same. In 1999, such ideas didn't exist yet, and I don't see any particular advantages in this. And if walls are destroyed and then need to be rebuilt, I think it will become a routine task and distract from the battles and the magnificent world of Heroes. So, in the end, you don't have time to do anything with the 1-2 minute limit.

Forsaken you know, I can manage to do everything, even within a minute. It's true that the game becomes much more interesting; you have to think about how to manage your time, and it requires solid tactics and a lot of experience...

and also, you need nerves of steel! There were times when you waited and waited for your friends to finish their turn (if playing on a local network), you stepped away for a moment, and when you came back, your turn was already over.

2. Forsaken.
The concept of having resources to maintain buildings and units has existed since Civilization 1 and essentially only adds new aspects to the strategy. However, it is not very feasible because nothing similar has been implemented in the Heroes series so far. After all, Heroes is a tactical game, not a strategy game.

Yes, exactly! Here, all attention is focused on the battle, while the economy is secondary.

And I also don't like the skill selection; sometimes, when leveling up, you have to choose an unnecessary skill because it's the best among the available options.

This also happened in the second game (although there were far fewer skills, and there was simply little to choose from), and it remained in the fifth game. So, if this is a flaw in Heroes, it applies to all series, not just the third.
Although this system is annoying, it does create excitement – the thrill of getting the necessary skills! :D

And I didn't like the AI. It practically doesn't think about what it's doing and just relies on a large army; there's no hint of tactics in its actions.

Yes, the predictability is depressing... :( And on lower difficulty levels, it can't even skip a unit's turn and wait; it's completely idiotic. :mad:

In the 3x difficulty, the AI died immediately, but the flies are still flying around...

In 3 the AI basically died instantly, but the flies are still flying...

What an interesting image :D
But the AI there really is a bit dim. Although it's better than in 2; at least it retreats from battle in time. In fact, it does the most fantastic stupid things when it's left without cities — it should be merging armies and capturing some city, but instead it attacks one by one; and, of course, loses.
And during combat, it's completely clueless. Two things seem especially strange to me:
- if the defending computer has Expert Tactics, it will definitely charge into the moat (and gets wounded several times or even dies because of it)
- if it has run out of mana, shooters, and flyers, the catapult is weak, and you still have ranged units in the Castle, it doesn't retreat. As if it wants to hand over some experience...:cool: