Posts from UNIT - Creature Balance + Visual Changes

You could give them a pattern of battle mages instead of regular/archmages. Battle mages can be confined to a box, so they only hit their own units from certain angles.

I looked at both options. And I realized that in both cases, a unicorn horn bow would be an excellent gift for archers.

Retaliation is unnecessary, because after the ranged units take damage, I might not have time to heal them, because they will kill the enemy stack (of ranged units) with a retaliatory attack.

In the second option, it would be worth giving crossbowmen 1 unit of defense, due to the large damage range.

There will also be certain difficulties in creating a box for ranged units, and this, in turn, will greatly complicate the passage of mobs, with which it is impossible to do without a box. Therefore, even despite the high damage, I will always take crossbowmen against neutrals, and most likely in the final as well. I'm afraid archers will not be very useful. Archers need to be protected, but in the end they will stand unprotected, as they will attack their own stacks if they are protected. One solution is to make it so that damage to their own units does not spread to creatures standing on adjacent cells.

It would be possible to give them a pattern that would allow them to be placed in a box, with battle mages, and not ordinary/archmages. Battle mages only hit their own units at certain angles.

Mages/Archmages have a similar ability, and so far, no one has complained. The "box" isn't an option for them; the unit was originally conceived differently.

The idea might not be bad, but then we'd get a second, smaller copy of battle mages.

Besides, the piercing shot was also introduced in Heroes 6, and it was quite effective.

Mages and archmages can still cast spells, but archers can't.

Reduced, you say? Perhaps in terms of HP.
Even before the upgrade, human archers already had above-average damage, and now it's just insane.

Isn't that an activated ability?

Why did they become wild? At long range, archers deal less damage than crossbowmen, but archers deal damage along the entire trajectory of the shot and, as a penalty, they can damage their own creatures; I think that's logical.

And yes, it's an activated ability, but it doesn't deal as much damage as these archers...

Mages/archmages have a similar ability, and no one has complained about it yet. The "box" is not an option for them; the unit was originally conceived differently.

Yes, the damage is high. But you also need to consider that there will be a lot of them. And what if it's Dugald? Either the Piercing Shot needs to be adjusted or removed.

Wouldn't a box be an option for archers? Or for mages/archmages?

Dugald was already buffing the original archers, and this didn't feel like cheating. Now, the archers will have slightly less damage, so I don't see a problem with that.
If changes are applied to the "Piercing Shot" ability, mages will face similar changes, which is the last thing I want, as I am completely satisfied with their mechanics.
And what is the purpose of changing or removing it? Units should have significant differences; each type of upgrade/alternative upgrade should have its own advantages and disadvantages; otherwise, what's the point of making them "carbon copies"? Just to have different models?

I am willing to consider other ability combinations, but for now, this one appeals to me the most. Although the first option is also not bad...

I meant that you would have to find ways around it, just like with mages/archmages.

If the piercing shot remains as it is, then I simply won't even look at archers, because killing mobs without a quiver is masochism. And I think many players will do the same. So, archers will be unusable, instead of crossbowmen.

Mages can cast spells, I never dodge.

If we're talking about avoiding extremes, increasing the range of accurate shots to 6 cells for crossbowmen while keeping everything else the same would be quite enough. And if we go even further, we could add a silencing effect for archers, as suggested here.

Increasing the range is precisely what would create a "fanatic" effect; the archers would simply become ineffective against creatures of the highest tiers, as now, complete armor negation will occur at a distance of 7 cells (1 cell occupied by the creature + 6).

What's wrong with the first option? I think it also deals good ranged damage, and the penalty is removed when shooting from close range, making it very effective (another advantage) + a defensive ability like counter-attack, or maneuvering.

Deterring these high-level creatures from approaching is also an interesting possibility. Also, keep in mind that at a longer distance (more than 6 cells), crossbowmen will deal half damage.
There won't be 7 cells. I don't know how you counted them.
Another good thing is that a direct shot will coincide with an accurate shot, at least on regular arenas.

The problem with this option has already been described by me. After enemy archers shoot at the crossbowmen, we don't have time to retreat them (only if they finish off enemies) and we end up with losses. These aren't Necropolises, which resurrect after battle. And what if the player has ranged units everywhere? Are we going to lose a hundred crossbows now because of this feature?

I consider the cells relative to the battlefield. The archer occupies the position of the closest row from the troop formation, by default. This means that one cell of distance is already subtracted from the battlefield, plus the firing range of 6 cells, totaling 7 cells.

The distance is calculated using the standard formula ((x1-x2)^2+(y1-y2)^2)^0.5. Therefore, you can observe the following scenario. A precise shot (and a direct one, respectively) will hit all enemy creatures that have crossed the red border (in the picture). Also, it clearly shows the change in damage.