Skip to content

Posts from The most challenging maps for you. Auto-translated

5.0 (2 ratings)
In reply to medstrax
User Avatar
#211
Auto-translated
medstrax
I'm trying to defeat Xiedu and I've encountered an interesting feature. It's either a bug in the game or a bug in the map. Basically, Sir Mullich doesn't gain skills when leveling up, starting from a certain level. At the same time, there are 3 empty slots. What the heck is going on?
Apparently, the map simply ran out of allowed skills, so there's nothing left to offer.
#212
Auto-translated
They really managed to make it so dumb... Thanks, Dirty.
User Avatar
#214
Auto-translated
Chingis
I played the third game manually for the first time.
Shameful! How can you admit to that?! :smile29: Autobattle is only used to save time when encountering a small group of neutral creatures on the way!
Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
#215
Auto-translated
Marmot
if a stack controlled by the AI, under the Berserk effect, cannot reach the nearest unit, it will indeed simply skip turns until the spell effect wears off or is removed (see the same FizMig).
How can a stack not be able to reach the nearest unit if Berserk forces it to attack the nearest one? Is it because of a force field or something? Especially since it's a flying stack!
In reply to Alexdoublesmile
User Avatar
#216
Auto-translated
Alexdoublesmile
How can a stack fail to reach the nearest enemy if a Berserk unit is forced to attack the nearest one? Is it due to the force field or something else? Especially considering it's a flying stack.
Yes, there's a quirk, described in the physics engine – under the Berserk effect, the attack must be directed at the nearest enemy, but... from one side (it seems to be the right side). That is, if it's not possible to approach the nearest enemy to attack from the right (due to obstacles limiting movement), the turn will simply be skipped.
Техника в руках индейца мертва.
Справочник по НоММ-4 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-heroes-iv.html
Памятка по НоММ-3 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii.html
и HotA http://handbookhmm.ru/vyishla-obnovlennaya-pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii-hota.html
User Avatar
#218
Auto-translated
Give me some advice on which race is best to play this scenario with? And what are the intricacies of manual combat? I only know about Necromancers so far, that skeletons give you rewards after a battle.
Well, sir, you’ve slightly missed the mark with these questions: you should go here! ;) But not in "The most difficult maps for you!"! And start with "High Morale"! ;)
Regarding auto-combat; it’s strange that no one else responded; I would like to know what dnaop-wr thinks about this?! :)
And why bother with manual combat if time is so precious? There's an easier way: press Tab and type nwcredpill. And that's it! :D
quick battles are no longer interesting
Really?! Was it interesting before?
Or maybe this is just thick trolling (and I fell for it)?..
However, the person who wrote this has such high morale - I wonder how they achieved it?
Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
In reply to Marmot
User Avatar
#219
Auto-translated
Marmot
Regarding autobattle; it's strange that no one else responded; I'd like to know what dnaop-wr's horse thinks about it?! :)

However, the person who wrote this has such high morale - I wonder how they achieved it?
:smile17: The horse was probably scared by such high morale and pooped itself. Or maybe it was just too lazy to respond - because, as they say, no comments are needed on this issue.
Autobattle should probably be turned on when your hand gets tired. Or change hands. As Mayakovsky wrote, "Who's playing with their right hand? - with their left! left! left!"
Although, to be fair, there were times when, half-asleep, I accidentally clicked on autobattle - and sometimes the result was no worse than in manual combat. But only sometimes.
And regarding the birds :smile24: the question is interesting. Maybe they reproduce on their own? Judging by the number of birds, on average, one bird appeared per post. This means that in the last posts about autobattle, birds should also appear. For example, the creator of "PhysMig," AmberSoler, which everyone uses, has far fewer birds.:confused:
Техника в руках индейца мертва.
Справочник по НоММ-4 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-heroes-iv.html
Памятка по НоММ-3 http://handbookhmm.ru/pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii.html
и HotA http://handbookhmm.ru/vyishla-obnovlennaya-pamyatka-dlya-homm-iii-hota.html
User Avatar
#220
Auto-translated
If someone enjoys playing with a fast battle speed, what’s wrong with that? It actually saves time.
User Avatar
#223
Auto-translated
Chingis, after your explanation, the situation became clearer. If you started your acquaintance with the "Heroes" series with the 6th installment, then it's understandable.
"Heroes 3" and "Heroes 6" are very different games! Personally, after reading reviews about the 6th installment, I didn't want to spend money on a new video card and extra memory to play this "masterpiece": in my opinion, only the horns and hooves of a strategy remained. :( Well, this was already discussed in detail before the release of "Heroes 6".
Perhaps I expressed myself too harshly, but believe me: it's worth learning to play "Heroes 3" well - and you won't want to play other versions anymore! I, for example, rarely want to play other games. :)
By the way, did you know that in the single-player game in "Heroes 3," the timer is not used by default, and the player's turn time is not limited!
Yes, and I also wanted to note one feature of the auto-battle (I read about this somewhere a long time ago): most often, its results are better than in a "manual" battle for a human player. Moreover: they wrote that it is not possible to achieve such results even for the strongest players; usually, the losses are noticeably greater. The conclusion was that the calculation algorithm in the auto-battle is imperfect and does not take into account all the nuances - hence the difference. Therefore, the auto-battle (if we don't count "clearing" small neutrals to save time) can, in a sense, be almost equated to cheating. But I think that with experience, you will always prefer to fight enemies yourself. And win! Good luck to you on the battlefields!
Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
In reply to Marmot
User Avatar
#224
Auto-translated
Marmot

Yes, and I also wanted to note one feature of the auto-battle (I read about it somewhere): most often, its results are better than in a "manual" battle for a human player. Moreover, it was written that even the strongest players cannot achieve such results; usually, the losses are noticeably greater. The conclusion was that the auto-battle calculation algorithm is imperfect and does not take into account all the nuances - hence the difference. Therefore, the auto-battle (if we don't count "clearing" small neutrals to save time) can, in a sense, be almost equated to cheating. But I think that with experience, you will always prefer to fight enemies yourself. And win! Good luck on the battlefields!
This is like "hearing a bell, but not knowing where it is." The result of the auto-battle is better than the manual one only in a very small percentage of cases; the exact reason for this is unknown, but there are some probable hypotheses. And using it is quite risky in real matches because you never know what the computer will come up with in this case.
But in the vast majority of cases, somewhere around 99.9%, you will fight manually, at least as well as, or better than, a quick battle or auto-battle, because you are simply smarter than the stupid hero AI.
User Avatar
#225
Auto-translated
Juristis, I don't want to get into an argument; this has been discussed in detail, but I can't remember the source right now and won't provide a link. All complaints should be directed to the author of that material, not to me, because I personally did not verify this information. Moreover: except for one instance, I haven't used autobattle at all.
That one time was special: the author of the map "Jedi story" wrote that one location can only be passed using autobattle: the hero simply walks on water, and neutral creatures stand in his way; without autobattle, the game simply "crashes" in this location, because, according to the game's logic, a battle always takes place either on some kind of terrain or on the deck of a ship, but there is water, and the hero doesn't swim, but walks on the water.
If anyone has more accurate information about autobattle or can provide a link to it, I would be grateful.
And I completely agree with your opinion about the "stupid hero AI" and your distrust of it.
Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
In reply to Marmot
User Avatar
#226
Auto-translated
Marmot
Juristis, I don't want to get into an argument; this has been written about in detail, but I can't remember the source right now and won't provide a link. All complaints should be directed to the author of that material, not to me, because I personally did not verify this information. Moreover: except for one time, I have never used autobattle at all.
And that one time was special: the author of the map "Jedi story" wrote that one place can only be passed using autobattle: it's just that there the hero walks on water, and neutral creatures stand in his way; without autobattle, the game simply "crashes" in this place, because, according to the game logic, combat always takes place either on some kind of ground or on the deck of a ship, but there is water, and the hero does not swim, but walks on the water.
If anyone has more accurate information about autobattle or provides a link to it, I will be grateful.
But I completely agree with your opinion regarding the "stupid heroic AI" and distrusting it.
/topic/5865/ - perhaps you read about quick battle in this topic?
Yes, I didn't write this to start an argument, I just didn't want Chingis to be mistaken about the results of using auto-battle and quick-battle.
User Avatar
#228
Auto-translated
Juristis, I understand! :)
Perhaps I read about autobattle in that thread. Here it is:
Dirty_Player
It has already been discussed many times! I discussed this topic with many authoritative players via ICQ. No one understands the nature of quick battles, so players share their observations.
Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
In reply to Marmot
#229
Auto-translated
Let's continue about Xiedu. Unfortunately, the map remains challenging. I've understood many of its features, but it turns out there are still many more to discover. To those who claimed that "First Blood" is the most difficult single-player map, I can confidently say that compared to Xiedu, "First Blood" is just a light warm-up. But the main point of this post is not that. While playing through the map, I needed to take a horse stash. Of course, I took it, but then I started thinking about how to do it optimally. I propose to the experts in combat tactics a save point, the task is to minimize losses when taking the stash. We don't return to the town for reinforcements, and we don't go for upgrades. Losing momentum in the early weeks is not ideal. The ideal scenario is to play with zero losses – it seems unattainable, what is the possible minimum loss?
Attachments 1
1 file attached • Total size: 691.5 KB
User Avatar
#230
Auto-translated
2 Knights, 2 halberds. Well, that's from the perspective of an online player :D That's why I don't understand why you can't get +1 to strength.
Сейчас балуюсь этим https://vcmi.eu/download/
За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того