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

- if he runs out of mana, archers, and flyers, and his catapult is weak while you still have ranged units in your castle, he won't retreat. It's as if he wants to give you some experience...:cool:

As they say, "I'll poke him with a fork..." :D

Heroes 5 are annoying because when I play them, I feel like sleeping. Let me explain: making a move is still okay, entering a Castle is half the battle, but passing the turn is "please execute me." It takes way too long to wait, and that's what's infuriating.
Furthermore, there are no artifact sets. This is garbage. There is nothing to strive for in the game. In 5, you grab some "stick" that increases the Attack skill by 3 and you can just stop; you won't find anything better, let alone assemble an artifact set.
Realistically, you need to play 5 on a 21-inch monitor with high resolution (not even mentioning the GPU) just to actually increase the map view somehow, instead of constantly scrolling the mouse wheel to look around.
But 3 loses to 5 in terms of abilities. The skill wheel in 5 rules.

You know, when Heroes of Might and Magic III came out, I didn't have the most powerful computer, and we played it with all the sounds turned off and the animation sped up as much as possible. So, I can repeat your entire first paragraph word for word, but about Heroes of Might and Magic III back then. Now, it runs smoothly on four Pentium processors....
Secondly, there weren't any assembled artifacts in Heroes of Might and Magic III right away, and we used to run around with single items. )).
And thirdly, I play Heroes of Might and Magic V on a 17-inch monitor with the classic camera at maximum distance, and everything is fine...

I think the simplicity of the graphics in Heroes of Might and Magic III is what attracts me... you look at the map, and everything is clear and understandable. Why did they change the objects, skills, etc.?... bunch of nihilists... they should have taken Heroes of Might and Magic III and left everything as it was, just made the graphics 3D.

3 heroes is a classic. The graphics are the best. I'm sorry, but I just can't switch to 3D. The world is huge. There are tons of units, artifacts, spells, dwellings, and other goodies. And most importantly, the gameplay is amazing. Exciting adventures and pleasant moments await everyone in this wonderful world of 3 heroes!

a trio is a classic, and everything else is just a pathetic parody.

This is just a fairy tale.

Spartach- "a trio is a classic" I agree, I used to think: if there's no 3D, it's not a game. But after the third installment, I realized that I'll still be playing them in 20 years (just like with Quake 3). :smile41: "and everything else is just a pathetic parody" I might argue with that, the fifth installments are also great in their own way. :smile08:

I read the thread from beginning to end. To be honest, it's a rare and twisted act of masochism...
So many meaningless rants and declarations of eternal love, and so much negativity towards other projects...

Hmm...

As for the topic.
I can't play any single "Heroes" game for too long. Right now, it's "week" of the third game.
I love all of them from 2 to 4. And periodically: I feel drawn to the fifth, and I launch the first one.
Each game has its own advantages. And the fourth one is definitely not a failure. A well-made patch, which is essentially what Equilibris is, eliminates a large portion of the "shortcomings" of the fourth game. And even without Equilibris, the game is excellent.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of the third game? In my opinion, the main disadvantage is the "castle" circus: 9 factions is too much. The classic scheme: death - life, wizards - Warlocks, nature and strength first appeared in the second game and were successfully transferred with minor changes to the fourth. And since my first experience with the "Heroes" series was with the second game, then the fourth, and only then the third, it was not easy to get used to 9 factions (races - call them whatever you want), and I really didn't like this inconsistency...
Also, I used to find the interface of the third game inconvenient (again, compared to the fourth and second), but I'm playing it.
As for the advantages: dynamic, vibrant, in many ways convenient, atmospheric - all the same heroes, and this is more of a simple merit of the third game. An excellent game from an excellent series.

You're just a fan of the second and fourth games (although there are more similarities between the second and third games than between the second and fourth)... and as they say, everyone has their own opinion. And what don't you like about the nine cities? On the contrary, it adds its own flavor to the world of the third game, offering more tactics, more choices, and as a result, greater replayability (I don't even understand the meaning of the word, but it sounds good ;)) for gamers, and as a result -----> the third game was a huge success.

You're just a fan of the second and fourth installments (although there are more similarities between the second and third than between the second and fourth)...

I wrote that I love the installments from the second to the fourth (2-4), not just the second and fourth.

And what don't you like about the 9 cities? On the contrary, it adds its own touch to the world of the third game, more tactics, more choice, and as a result, greater replayability (I don't understand the meaning of the word myself, but it sounds good ;))

I already wrote about this. If you want, it's an "ideological" inconsistency. But there are enough tactics even for

I wrote that I love parts 2 through 4, not just 2 and 4.

I didn't say anything about part 3 because everyone already loves it!

I already wrote about this. If you want, it's an "ideological" inconsistency. But there are enough tactics for the "classic" scheme.

Well, that's what makes part 3 good, that it has 9 different towns. If, for example, there wasn't the Stronghold and the Swamp, I would honestly be very upset.

Well, let's just say that's one of the advantages of the third game: it has as many as 9 towns. If, for example, there were no Stronghold and Swamp, I would honestly be very disappointed.

If they weren't there, you wouldn't even know about them.

After reading the posts in the Fortress (Swamp) topic, I decided to play Heroes of Might and Magic III for the first time in a very long time... And I realized how inconvenient the interface is compared to Heroes of Might and Magic V... It was just frustrating, and my fingers were already clicking on the familiar and convenient keys, but there was no response... So, I was very surprised, but nevertheless, for me now, Heroes of Might and Magic V is better and more convenient in almost every way, with the exception of: the absence of my favorite Fortress (Swamp) and weak AI, but this is compensated by Ubi.com...

It's cool that there are a lot of utopias on random maps. What I didn't like... probably the campaign with the Dragon. It's nonsense – it's impossible to reach the Crystal Dragon in two months with such a small army, when there are so many monsters along the way...