Posts from Tactics for the Swamp (Fortress).
In my opinion, it's easier to play as Conflux than as Fortress. It has fast wyverns and a ranged unit stack.
I don't know, when I was playing poorly, I always suffered losses with melee units, but with ranged units, I slowed down and killed enemies, and finished them off with magic where needed. Therefore, the efficiency with mages and ranged unit stacks was always higher. But this is due to my inability to play with melee units, not because they are weaker. I think all beginners experience the same problems that I did, which is why they consider Citadel and Fortress to be weak.

Even though their magic is limited to level 3, what prevents them from capturing other cities with level 5 magic? Huh?)) When defending a castle, this is the best faction – a total of +5 armor and +2 attack, and even protection for the hero himself – it’s not a normal siege.
That’s what I think about this “weak” faction.
Gnolls in large numbers
and with a Dragon, it will be tougher than 3 Angels...
Lizards are not bad archers. 87 lizards can easily take down 1-2 archers.
Wyverns - building them in the first week is a blessing.
you can explore half the map in a month
while others need more than 1 month...
Here's such a weak castle))(c)

12 of them, that's a lot.
Are 50 gnolls better than 3 angels? Does a dragon give them +50 HP?
And a thousand peasants can defeat a hydra!
Building them on the first day – is that a good thing?
and then getting killed by the opponent
truly!
You described it well, good job!
2) Why exactly 50? The number 3, with a dragon, and the end of Arham.
3) And why not?
4) You might get killed, but a pro will just retreat (and if it's a mega-pro, they'll kill the enemy too)).
5) And isn't that true?
Lizards are poor archers. They have low speed, low damage, and a penalty in melee combat. But with the swamp creatures, it's a different story.
If you upgrade the lizards and use Vistan as much as possible (in principle, Kirr and Orrin would also be good here - just my opinion), then the lizards will surprise you a lot.
Now about the melee penalty. I don't know of any archers of level 1-2 without a melee penalty. And that lizards are weaker than Gloomwings is obvious.

Орден Феникса – харизматический :) лидер
"then lizards will surprise you greatly" I doubt it, even upgraded, they are not fast and there are not many of them coming with the starting heroes (compared to troglodytes or gremlins). Lizards are weaker than all archers of higher levels (which is enough to make them bad archers), but they even make a worse impression than level 1 master gremlins.
За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того
Lizards are bad archers. They have low speed and damage, and they also suffer a penalty in melee combat.
/topic/at/225979/
Swamp
Lizard Warrior
Damage 2-5
Attack 6
Defense 8
Health 15
Speed 5
Well, Wistan with upgraded lizards on day 1 looks very promising. Lizards are needed specifically when they are upgraded because 2-5 damage is not like 2-3. Good health and defense!
The fact that lizards are weak is just an illusion caused by the fact that they are used without archery skills and without being upgraded.
I'll try playing as Vistan. But on the first day, the lizards don't level up, so what should I do?
Dirty_Player
I read it. I didn't see any advantages of lizard warriors compared to other archers.
Added after 31 minutes
Situation with starting troops: if you play in the original Heroes 3
1) for Dungeon with Shakti, then with two native heroes, you will have at least 60 troglodytes (if the second one is not Lorelei), a maximum of 160!
2) for Tower, at least 60 gremlins (if the second one is not Pigeedram)
3) for Swamp with Vistan, a maximum of 28 lizards, but a minimum - FOUR from two heroes!
With Vistan for Swamp, the start is risky and could lead to a complete failure with the starting troops.
Maybe a hero will also come with archers.
And if you upgrade them and play with them, your opinion should change (that they are completely useless).
За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того
Dirty_Player
I read it. I didn't see any advantages of lizard warriors compared to other archers.
Marksmen (Castle) (100-150)x2, average 125 (250 for 2 shots)
Magogs (Inferno) 100-200, average 150
Lizards (Swamp) 96-200, average 168
Orcs (Stronghold) 102-255, average 178
It turns out that in terms of damage, lizards are not behind orcs (level 3) and are ahead of magogs. Lizards lose in damage to archers due to 2 shots. But if you pay attention to the fact that there are 2 shots, and the average damage is 1.5 times higher. But here, lizards have their own advantage, which is that they have 1.5 times more health and 5 more defense (!) with equal attack. Thus, lizards have more survivability, which allows more of them to survive. That's the math.