Posts from UNIT - Creature Balance + Visual Changes

Balance is a delicate matter. I am in favor of small, targeted adjustments, but only where they are truly needed and appropriate. The experience from RTA and TE is certainly a very important factor.
Writing the entire balance from scratch is an extremely complex and thankless task. Perhaps such an approach would be more objective, but it involves too much work! I think it is wiser to refine what already exists, but in a way that these refinements bring harmony.

If we're talking about "not going too far," increasing the range of accurate fire for crossbowmen to 6 cells while keeping everything else as it was would be quite enough.
And if we want to go even further, we could add a silencer for archers, as suggested here.

Seven options for crossbowmen were proposed (see page 6, towards the end); are there any opinions on this? Which option is better?

Or should they not be changed at all? (except perhaps increasing the range)

Daughters of Heaven. Previously, their "Chain Lightning" spell was replaced with "Blindness," which caused justified outrage because the spell allowed you to stun any creature, even one much stronger, for a long time.

There are several suggestions for resolving this situation:
1) Replace the "Blindness" spell with "Punishing Strike" at an advanced level. Visually, the spell looks very similar to blood magic, which blends perfectly with the image of the shaman, and a powerful enough buff will be a worthy replacement for blindness.

2) Replace the "Blindness" spell with "Summon Elementals" at the initial level. The elementals won't add much combat power but can be very useful as pawns (if they aren't water or fire elementals).

3) Return the unit's stats and abilities to their original values.

I agree with increasing the range to 6 tiles, but then they need to be weakened to compensate for the buff. Or just leave them as they are.

But how can you consider the statistics of Half-RTA when it's an incomplete, cut-down game – it's just a tournament! There's no long playthrough, weekly progress, tactics, and strategy, and many other things, especially since it has a built-in duel mode!
The fact that Half-RTA is used in tournaments is not an indicator. Also, look at the number of players. http://forum.heroesleague.ru/
It's clear that Half-RTA is not very popular, losing out to the original version, Tribes of the East 3.1.

On the topic:

1) Haven. - Slightly increase the defense or hit points of the griffins (+2 hit points). And that's it. Leave the archers alone.

Nargott, please calm down, I really didn't mean to offend you, it's just that, even from the outside, it's clear that you are advertising your mod in the thread of someone else's mod, Unit. This is, at the very least, somewhat inappropriate. Aren't you ashamed to act like this?

The problem with these kinds of requests is that everyone has their own. Some will say it's good to add +2 defense to griffins, while others will say, why did you change it? And if there are many such changes, the number of complaints also increases. At the same time, there are significant imbalances that divide everyone or the majority. These are the ones that need to be fixed first.

Okay, suggest your specific options

Added 2 minutes ago
Your experience is important, but if you are asked to demonstrate it with a specific example, why do you avoid the question?

Gremlins: grade < alt

Dancers: grade < alt, alt damage from 4-6 to 2-5

Well, that guy actually improved them by adding mechanisms to the gargoyles.

I am generally against giving magic to Orcs. And this is not an isolated opinion. The Sky Daughters would be a good fit for the Cloud of Thunderers.

Cerberuses and hellhounds were buffed not because they were unpopular, but because they were too fragile.

Okay, I'm proceeding based on the identified key issues:

Rakshasa: upgrade < alt, increase initiative from 8 to 10, and possibly swap speed (7 for upgrade, 6 for alt)
There's no need to increase their initiative and speed – they already have a decent amount. Instead, I'd like to see them slightly weakened – they are a very strong unit.
Lizards: upgrade > alt, increase alt's hit chance from 25% to 100%.
I agree.
Crossbowmen: upgrade < alt, reduce alt's damage from 2-8 to 2-6, increase upgrade's range from 3 to 4.
Either don't change them at all, or increase the range from 3 to 4 (only this).
Demons: upgrade < alt, increase upgrade's hit points from 13 to 16, increase the explosion damage by 2-3 times (or more).
It's better not to touch them – it will create a clear imbalance.
Succubi: upgrade < alt, reduce alt's initiative from 9 to 7.
I completely agree.
Skeletons: upgrade < alt, increase upgrade's damage from 1-2 to 1-3.
There's no need to increase the damage (it will create an imbalance due to the quantity); it's better to increase their HP by 10%.
Vampires: upgrade < alt, change alt's stun factor from 1 instead of 3 (approximately 30% chance instead of 70%), increase upgrade's hit points from 35 to 45.
It's better not to touch them – it will create a clear imbalance.
Dancers: upgrade < alt, reduce alt's damage from 4-6 to 2-5.
I agree + reduce the upgrade's damage by 1.
Lukari: upgrade < alt, remove direct hit or enhanced arrow from alt, and possibly swap initiative (11 for upgrade, 10 for alt).
I agree.
Shields: upgrade > alt, increase alt's damage from 1-2 to 2-2.
There's no point in changing them.
Bone Crushers: upgrade < alt, increase upgrade's damage from 3-8 to 6-8.
There's no point; it's better to add HP.
Warriors: upgrade < alt, increase upgrade's hit points from 12 to 15.
I agree.
Shamans: upgrade < alt, give upgrade 16 mana.
Either this option, or don't touch them at all.
Off the top of my head, without calculators. It's not a fact that these are the best changes. But it's almost certain that these are appropriate changes (in the right places and in the right direction).

What's good here: a minimal number of changes (1-2 per pair, a small number of pairs), there are no too drastic changes in stats (all within 20-30%), there are no insignificant bonuses that don't change much (like +2 defense), there's no creativity/arbitrariness in adding new abilities, and an ability is only removed once (where it's clearly excessive), and in most cases, the overall logic of the units is preserved (characteristic strengths are not averaged), and the key characteristic of unit perception – speed – is not changed (with the exception of the swap for Rakshasa). It's not a fact that these are the best criteria for selecting changes, but the very fact of their existence reduces arbitrariness (subjective desires) and adds to the systematic approach.

Next, a little creativity regarding the frankly failing tiers:

Wyverns (expensive, weak, and without blood): increase growth from 2 to 3, or make them available on week 1 (lower the threshold).
There's no point; it's better to add 5-10% HP.
Necrodrakes (very expensive and weak): significantly (by 2 times?) reduce the overall cost of building dwellings, both in general and for mercury.
Oh, that's a very good idea. I agree.
You can also recall units that are subjectively weaker and have weak abilities. For example, the weak flame of gnome dragons (increase it by 2 times). These things, although not as obvious as the imbalances above, have a pleasant side effect – bad abilities become better. At least, they can be considered in a vote. Plus, you can raise other subjective questions, for example, in the pair of Nightmares, is there an imbalance between upgrade and alt? And if there are a large number of votes confirming the imbalance, only then come up with a way to balance it (for example, reduce the alt's aura damage).

Furthermore, you can look at the races. We see that the Elves' 2nd and 3rd tiers have been weakened; you can increase the growth of fairies by 20% (as an option). Or, since the 4th tier of Demons has been weakened, you can make it available 3 days earlier (lower the threshold). These are not independent changes (there's no point in simply strengthening fairies), but rather consequences of the previous ones.