Posts from Your first faction.

My first race was Nature, and the game was Heroes 4. In fact, I chose it solely because of the name. Death sounded too gloomy; Life, Order, and Strength had already been picked by my friends, and I didn't like the name Chaos either. And I wasn't disappointed playing as Nature, although I remember the first time I was wiped out by level 1 neutrals, and then the computer came and took my castle. The map was Small – Dangerous Thicket. Those who have played it know that you can reach the opponent in 1-2 days. I remember being very impressed by Nature's creatures – tigers, wolves. They were beautiful; I liked them very much. Overall, it's the most positive, kind, and calm race compared to others (Chaos, Death, Strength). That's why I chose it initially. I remember the indelible impression the Magic Dragons made on me when I finally saved up enough money and built them ). The ability to destroy the enemy from a distance with lightning without fear of retaliation, and Confusion, simply stunned me! Subsequently, I tried to learn how to play Nature well and defeat all other castles. And later (excuse the tautology), I tried to learn how to play and defeat everyone using any race. But Nature remained my favorite. On one hand, it is peaceful, but on the other, it can quite well stand up for itself and wipe out any opponent. And if you look at the Campaigns, Nature (Rampart, Sylvan) never started a war first; it was a guarantor of peace and stability, but if it got involved in a war, it simply crushed both demons and necros (of course, in alliance with Order and Life).

I read a lot of comparisons between Heroes 3 and 4. Strangely enough, I started playing with Heroes 4, trying to figure out the nuances of balance and game tactics, trying to understand the advantages of each race. Then I sat down to play Heroes 3. And I very quickly reached a definitive conclusion: Heroes 4 is much better, more interesting, and more balanced! It wasn't even about the graphics (or the music) in the third one, which immediately caught my eye and was worse than in the fourth. It was about the game itself. After developing complex tactics and schemes in 4, after, so to speak, a sea of gameplay options, Heroes 3 seemed gray to me. I remember comparing them and thinking: wow! It turns out that in 3, units don't hit each other simultaneously like in 4 (which seemed logical to me, because in a battle you don't just stand and watch while you get hit, you fight simultaneously, in parallel), but they retaliate after they are hit! There is no such concept as a first strike! Everyone basically has a first strike by default. And morale allows you to move twice! And initiative during battle decides everything, because whoever is faster hits first, which means after the strike, the enemy stack will be so weak that you don't have to fear the response. I remember playing Rampart against Castle. The armies and heroes were roughly equal. But the archers, as expected, went first, the hero cast a general haste on everyone and... by the time the turn reached my dragons, I no longer had an elf stack, and everyone else was very weakened. Meanwhile, the archers moved twice due to morale! And I thought then: where is the balance?!! Then I compared the combat tactics and realized that in 4 there are far more different tactics and techniques. The battle sometimes unfolds unpredictably and not as straightforwardly as in 3! In 3, it's simple for heroes: level up your four main parameters and you're on top! But without an army in 3, a hero is nobody; no matter what level they are, if they only have one troglodyte, they will lose to a level 1 hero who has, for example, an angel. In 4, it's not like that, and one hero is a warrior in the field ). There was one case. Another friend of mine and I started exploring Heroes 4 with open mouths and played at a good level. Another mutual friend had never played Heroes 4, but for many years (when Heroes 3 came out – in 1996/7?) he played Heroes 3. So, when we perfected our technique in Heroes 4 and sat down to play against this friend of ours in Heroes 3, it didn't take long, and despite the fact that we had played 3 for almost no time at all while he had played much longer, we easily started wiping him out. And all because the game strategy in 3 requires less mental effort than in 4. We were used to solving complex problems: how to position troops and heroes, which combinations are more effective to use, how best to develop and who to build, how many heroes to buy for the army, etc. And therefore, playing 3 was easier for us. I believe that Heroes 4 is much more interesting, more complex, and has far more different development options (especially on large maps) than Heroes 3. The larger number of Heroes 3 fans can be explained by the fact that, firstly, when Heroes 3 came out, they were simply super for their time and won many hearts; secondly, people who had played one strategy in Heroes 3 for 3-4 years, knowing and being used to one set of game basics, could not immediately and quickly switch to a completely different system of combat and development. That's why Heroes 4 met such a cool reception! And people who started playing with 4 (though there are few of them), like me, immediately appreciated the advantages of the new game; they had no "bias" because they weren't familiar with 3. Those were my first impressions and memories.

I started playing the fourth game in 200? and my first faction was Necropolis. Before that, I played the third game a little. During three unsuccessful attempts to capture a gold mine, I lost almost all my troops. I played with friends, and we were all playing for the first time. So, the game boiled down to exploring the map and looking at the sights. During this wandering for a couple of hours, the only computer player was defeated, after which the war ended. Well, but I still remember the Poisonous Horrors and Bone Dragons, and Cerberuses (although later I mostly used Undead).

Naturally, Haven was the first faction I tried, since I started with the tutorial :D
Before that, I was an avid player of the third installment, and when I saw the fourth game, I didn't recognize it at all. At first, I was extremely annoyed by the lack of a strict, "grid-based" structure in combat, and the fact that one unit could be attacked by four or five enemies at once. I didn't like the appearance of the monsters – I didn't recognize them at all. I started playing the campaign and kept losing to all the AI opponents because the tactics and strategy had to be completely different, not like in the third game. In the end, I decided that the fourth game was too difficult and not for my brain, so I abandoned it for about a year :D
Then, somehow, I decided to start learning it, and I quickly completed the campaigns for Haven, Order, Might, and Necropolis. The campaigns for Sylvan and Chaos seemed impossibly difficult to me for a long time (now, of course, I laugh about it), and I only completed them two years ago. I suppose Haven was the first faction that I learned to play at a decent level. The second was Might :smile10:

I played it for the first time at a friend's house.

And what about a poll?
I played Haven for the first time. I randomly clicked on the first scenario I saw and... ruined the whole game.

I played as Dungeon for the first time. I've always believed that you can solve any problem with brute force, especially in Dungeon, where the heroes are so tough that nothing can defeat them. One hero with good equipment can easily take on 10 Chaos Knights.

this is if there is no tactic, and there are only five heroes helping him, and for ten creatures, you need a very strong hero.

Alexsander13, I used to think that way.
Secondly, it's not that great. :D Level 40 with 2 potions can easily defeat them.

Level 40 cannot be reached in a regular battle; the maximum is 18-20. But level 40 is a very strong hero, and even without potions, he can probably defeat anyone, with or without equipment.

of course :D it's unrealistic to reach level 40 in a regular battle, but in some quest-based, large maps, like "Crown" or "Druid," it's more challenging to complete the map, let alone reach level 40...

My story is as follows. I remember a long time ago, I gave a friend a Heroes 4 disc (the regular one) for her birthday. I learned about the existence of Heroes through her, and she really liked them. But the game wouldn't install. A couple of months later, I went to her house, and she was playing something. It turned out to be Heroes 4. And she started telling me all about it. She was playing the campaign... the one with the sorceress, who looked like Fiona from Shrek. So, we started playing together. I got hooked quickly. It's a shame that her copy of the game doesn't work without the disc. But then another friend had it, and it worked without the disc, so I quickly installed the game. At first, I played the same campaign as her, but I couldn't beat it. So, I decided to play the scenario. I chose Nature, because the first Heroes game I played was Chronicles of Heroes: Dragon Battles, and you had to play as Nature in that game. But then I got tired of playing as Nature, and I started playing as other factions. At first, my favorite was Death (because of the Devils), and then Chaos (because of the dragons). Now, I usually play as Chaos. It's the complete opposite of the first faction I played, Order!

I started playing as Sylvan for the first time (since it was my favorite faction in Heroes of Might and Magic III), and I used tigers, unicorns, and phoenixes. Later, in Heroes of Might and Magic IV, my favorite factions became Chaos and Haven, creating a kind of opposition.

I played as Haven in 2004-2005 (but not the tutorial). It was my absolute favorite. At first, I mostly watched my older sister play, and when I tried it myself, I lost immediately (although, how could I lose with 6 golems and a hero against about 20 halflings?). Then I started getting into it. I started printing out maps around 2006-2007, and although they weren't very good by general standards, I enjoyed them (after all, you don't play for perfect execution or beautiful landscapes, but for the process and the fun). I didn't play for a while, but then I missed it.

I started playing and chose the Humans. I liked the angels (though the beard isn't great), and the Crusaders...
P.S.: I especially liked the campaign for Lord Lysander.

I started playing Heroes 4 when I was given this disc. During the tutorial, I appreciated the "Order" faction and started playing as them. I played through single-player scenarios or scenarios like "Absolute Elf" and "Saving from the Giant's Games" – these maps are somewhat like standard RPG maps. But I couldn't complete the Campaigns at that time. I managed to get through the first scenario of the Verjak Campaign (yes, I had very little experience back then) until I reached the snowy lands, but by that point, I was being defeated by either neutral creatures or enemies (the other campaigns were lost very quickly). Then I stopped playing the game for a year or so. But after that time, I gained experience, and I was able to reach the third scenario in the Verjak Campaign. And then everything went smoothly. That's pretty much it. P.S. To be honest, I started playing Heroes 3 at my neighbor's computer. I played as the Human faction. I didn't like the gameplay tactics in Heroes 3 at all. Because everything was decided by the strength of the hero's army, and not by their abilities, as in Heroes 5 or 4.