Posts from Food for thought.

Hello everyone. I recently started playing Heroes, and I came across this website, so I decided to read various threads about the Factions. What did I see? In every section, people are discussing things like comparing different Factions, units, etc., but in 50% of the threads, they present pre-arranged games without using certain types of units, spells, or abilities, and most often, it involves not attacking until a certain time. I saw a topic where they compared the balance in a pre-arranged game, completely without magic, like Knights vs. Dwarves. This is fundamentally wrong. Guys, if you really want to understand the strength of a particular Faction, you need to use all the possibilities given to us by the game's creators. After all, the strength of a particular castle is not only in the units but in the combination of units, hero, development, and spells, not to mention that different Factions have an advantage at different stages of the game. But what surprised me the most were the posts comparing units of the same level in different castles; that's complete nonsense. Let me give a specific example. This is often used to teach beginners about efficient farming, specifically how to kill 100,500 zombies with one Fury. I think the vast majority of people here can do that. But what if there are 20 Furies against 20 zombies? In that case, it's an auto-battle with no losses. It seems clear that the advantage of Furies is undeniable; it's a much stronger Tier 2 unit. Now imagine that Necromancers were offered to exchange units and give them Furies. Which smart Necromancer would agree to that? Can you imagine an Orc, a Fury specialist? Why would a Faction that relies on magic, a lot of meat, and the resilience of its units need a unit that dies in one or two hits? Although it seems that the advantage of Furies is undeniable, they are supposedly better. This example perfectly confirms what I wrote earlier. A Faction is a whole complex, from which you cannot remove or change components, so by playing such pre-arranged games, you are doing something pointless, to put it mildly. P.S. I understand that many topics here are already outdated, from a long time ago, but still, newcomers read them. Don't provide such controversial information in advance, not to mention that the number of posts will be reduced by half, and it will be much easier to find truly useful information.

You are largely correct, but since many players don't focus on skill but rather play for "fun," sometimes even against the AI instead of other players, many of these minor flaws and allowances are not a big deal. However, if you aim for a "winning game" and participate in various tournaments, then yes, it's crucial to think realistically about all these aspects.

Yes, I understand that many people play for fun. It’s just that this concept is very broad. We all play for fun, and tournaments are also fun; no one is forced to participate. I simply didn’t take into account that everyone has a different understanding of this. For example, I find it fun to play as efficiently as possible, and I don’t understand anything else, which is why I don’t understand similar topics and games that don’t provide either an understanding of the game or an increase in efficiency. However, if it brings pleasure to someone, then why not? But still, it seems to me that everyone wants to play and win, and if you try to play correctly, you will definitely not get worse results.

It’s clear that you can’t compare individual units or judge the strength of factions based on agreed-upon games or individual maps, as some people like to do. But if they enjoy playing with agreed-upon rules, that’s their choice. I’ve also played that way a few times, but it’s purely to test the central abilities of each faction. We would just play for a while, acquire the specific central ability, and then test it in a final battle.

tests are a separate matter; this is about something else. We played Knight-Dwarf without magic, and the Knight lost because the Dwarf is overpowered. That's what I'm talking about.

testing is a separate matter; this is about something else. They played Knight-Dwarf without magic, but the Knight lost because the Dwarf is overpowered. That's what I'm talking about.

That sounds funny) But it would be better to play with a Barbarian without magic; then the Barbarian would be overpowered.

Sounds funny, right? That’s what I’m talking about. Half of the topics here are like that.

Added 10 minutes later
I just reviewed the first page of the main hero section. There are fewer of these types of topics than in the faction-specific sections, but there are still some. The strongest hero, the strongest spell, the best upgrade, what’s better, strength or knowledge. These are all incorrect questions because there is no answer to them, as everything depends on the specific situation and a set of circumstances. This is what I wrote in my first post.

Added 5 minutes later
And everything would be fine if, in those topics, for example, about the most useful spell, they described which race should take which spells and in what situations. But no, the answers there are things like “Dominate” and that’s it, because it’s overpowered. And then someone reads it, takes Dominate against Necropolis, and wonders why they lost even with such a cool spell.

Thank you to the moderators for the edits; it’s just a cry from the heart; I don’t know what’s wrong with me

I don't see anything wrong with comparing units from different factions. After all, people discuss the strengths and weaknesses of various creatures. This is especially useful for beginners who think that the main strength of an army lies in high-level units, although discussions make it clear that the strength lies in the details, and it is sometimes better to sacrifice building Archangels in favor of training an additional hundred archers. And accordingly, for such an army, the "Bless" spell from the first level will be more useful than, say, "Meteor Shower." So, even by taking things out of context and making various assumptions/limitations, you can discover a side of a unit that you wouldn't notice in a normal game.
As an example, I'll share my own experience. I played a very interesting single-player map where an area rich in artifacts was guarded by a hero of maximum level with stats of 100/100/100/100 and an army of 999/999/999... black dragons, and he was called "The Law." It was assumed that it was impossible to defeat him and that you just needed to choose the right moment to avoid meeting him. A Necromancer with a couple of Vampires and a fight to the last turned out to be too much for such a monster. When raising the dead, the unit's hit points decrease to 1, and when a Vampire reaches this level, it becomes almost impossible to kill it. The dragon hits it with tremendous damage, but one Vampire still remains, counterattacks, and there are two of them again. And the Vampires attack the dragons in such a way that they both retaliate and burn each other through. The battle was epic and allowed me to see new aspects of the game mechanics in action, although in an online game with a live opponent, it is unlikely that you will achieve such an effect.

As an example, I'll write about my own experience. I was playing a very interesting single-player map where an area rich in artifacts was guarded by a hero of maximum level with stats of 100/100/100/100 and an army of 999/999/999... black dragons, and he was called "The Law." It was assumed that it was impossible to defeat him, and you just had to choose the right moment to avoid encountering him. A Necromancer with a pair of vampires and a fight to the last turned out to be no match for such a monster. When raising the dead, the unit's hit points decrease to as low as 1, and when a pair of vampires reaches this level, it becomes almost impossible to kill them. The dragon hits him with tremendous damage, but one vamp still remains, counterattacks, and there are two of them again. And the vampires themselves attack the dragons in such a way that they attack each other and burn through each other. The battle was epic and allowed me to see new aspects of the game mechanics in action, although in a multiplayer game with a live opponent, it is unlikely that you will achieve such an effect.

It's better to use pairs of ghosts, though

The battle was epic and allowed me to see new aspects of the game mechanics in action, although it's unlikely you'll achieve such an effect in a multiplayer game against a live opponent.

These aspects are old; in multiplayer, everyone still plays the standard strategy of focusing on damage output, using Vampires with Blade Dance, Magicians with Blade Dance, and other similar tactics. I don't understand what this has to do with identifying the strongest unit.

Added 8 minutes later

It's better with level 2 Spectres, right?

How so?

Is that why?

There's a chance to miss, but you always hit vampires.

There's a chance to miss, but they always hit vampires.

But ghosts don't consume corpses. To defeat a million skeletons, you only need 2 vampires. The battle will take a week, but that's a different story. You can't do that with ghosts, or am I missing something?

Well, if you heal manually... Although there won't be enough mana (the Necromancer's mana regeneration depends on his health, and he has very little).

yeah, that's what I think too... because, firstly, you won't have enough mana to heal manually in the given example with that many creatures, and secondly, when will the hero have time to deal damage? you won't gather enough spirits with a single unit))

Added after 7 minutes
but in general, it's good that they cut down on all these cheesy features in the TE mod. so I urge everyone who doesn't know what it is to try playing at least a few games with this mod. yes, it will be difficult at first, you will be cursing, so you need to play exactly a few games to get into it. if you feel the game on TE, you won't want to go back to the original. proven.

But ghosts don't consume resources. To defeat a million skeletons, you only need 2 vampires. The battle will take a week, but that's a different story. But you can't do that with ghosts, or am I missing something?

Can one vampire deal enough damage to raise a second vampire?