Stats Revisions

[Titanus]

Hello to everybody! I'm a new poster to any forum regarding HOMM series, but I've been watching the development of HOMMV for quite some time now. I 've been playing HEROES for 8 years, starting with HOMM III and I'm an eager fan of it and in particular the TOWER/ACADEMY faction. I haven't participated in the open Beta deliberately, because I don't want to spoil the fan as soon as the game hits the stores.
When Ubisoft announced creature stats for HOMM V I was quite puzzled Many of them didn't have any logic and in addition they seemed they were selected randomly without much thought put on them, which resulted in imbalanced factions IMO, just by studing them. I believed that the majority of them needed some serious modification and because of the fact I'm a number psycho I decided to give it a shot.
My changes depend on some principles:
1) Apart from very special occasions, few creatures have overall worse stats than those of lower level creatures, especially in the same faction.

2) No creature is CLEARLY better than the others of the same level. Of course there must be preferences but nobody is going to say I don't prefere this unit because it's a total waste of money or useless.

3) Wherever is possible I follow Ubisoft's stats pattern, but in a more rational way.

4) My objections focus mainly on attack, defence, damage, HP and growth; however, there are a couple of creature powers and several creature costs that needed some modification. Furthermore, I didn't touch speed because the battfield size isn't set yet, whereas I mostly agree with the initiative stats. All in all, I wanted diversity in the stats, playing with as many numbers and number combinations as possible, given the LEVEL of units.

5) Creature upgrades are essential to winning a game, but they shouldn't be that crucuial that one can't do without them for a decent amount of time (for example Horned Demon-Horned Overeer or Zombie-Plague Zombie etc.)

6) In parenthesis I put Ubisoft's different than mine stats for comparison.


LEVEL 1
at. def. dam. HP growth cost
Gremlin 2(1) 1 1-2 4 20 22
Master Gremlin 3 1 1-2 7 20 35
1 Attack is only for special and much more justifiable cases (such as the peasants and skeletons, due to their numbers). Otherwise they're fine.

Scout 2(3) 2(3) 2-4 7(12) 12(7) 35(60)
Assassin 3(4) 3(4) 2-4 10(15) 12(7) 53(90)
They are way too few and more powerful than even most second level creatures. They ought to be significantly toned down with a respective growth increase, since their growth number corresponds to the best LEVEL 3 creatures, which is too much IMO. Note that they are still the fewest in comparison to the other creatures of the same level.

Peasant 1 1 1-2(1) 3 35(22) 13(20)
Conscript 2 2 1-2 4(6) 35(22) 19(30)
Peasants are by far the worst units of the game as they are. In order to compensate this deficiency I significantly increased their growth number and reduced the cost respectively. Thus, their total damage output is closer to that of the other units. They are still the worst unit in the game but now their numbers mean something. Conscripts on the other hand double their total damage output plus their special. Their defence should rightfully increase due to the chainmail armour they have, but their HP should fall so that they don't become that more powerful (keeping in mind their numbers).

Imp 2(1) 1 1-3 4 16 25
Familiar 3(2) 2 1-3(2-4) 6 16 45
I've made this slight modification to the Familiar's attack and damage output because I wanted the 2-4 damage output exclusively for the Assassin.

Skeleton 1 2 1-2 4 23(20) 15(17)
Skeleton Archer 1 2 1-2 5 23(20) 26(30)
I just wanted the skeletons' weekly growth to be a bit greater than that of the gremlins for diversity purposes. Three more per week, without changing their stats isn't such a big deal taking into consideration the Necromancy skill. Total cost though is the same

Pixie 1 2(1) 2(1) 6(9) 14(10) 30(35)
Sprite 2 2 2 7(10) 14(10) 40(55)
Along with the Scout/Assassin, the Pixie undergone the most changes. 10 per week is quite low for their level and their total damage output is very low (even though it's a spray, unretaliated attack). I raised their numbers in order to remain the second less populated first level unit and decresed their HP accordingly. Their total cost though is a bit higher due to their increased total damage output. The Sprite on the other hand suffered less changes limited in their growth number and cost (but not total cost), as it's fine as it is

That's it for the first level units. I won't proceed to the second level creatures tonight, because firstly I want to see reactions and secondly it would be tiring for someone to study more numbers. Thank's for any comments in advance....

[Titanus]

(in parenthesis current stats, hopefully subject to change)

LEVEL 1

Gremlin
at: 2(1)
def: 1
dam: 1-2
HP: 4
Growth: 20
total dam. output: 40-80 (20-40)
total HP: 80
cost: 22

Master Gremlin
at: 3
def: 1
dam: 1-2
HP: 7
Growth: 20
total dam. output: 60-120
total HP: 140
cost: 35
1 attack rating is only for special and much more justifiable cases (such as the peasants and skeletons, due to their numbers and the pixies due to no retaliation special). It is also needed to raise their total damage output. Otherwise they're fine.

Scout
at: 2
def: 2
dam: 2-4
HP: 7 (10)
Growth: 12 (7)
total dam. output: 48-96 (42-84)
total HP: 84 (70)
cost: 35 (60)

Assassin
at: 3
def: 3
dam: 2-4
HP: 10 (15)
Growth: 12 (7)
total dam. output: 72-144 (56-112)
total HP: 120 (105)
cost: 53 (90)
They are way too few and more powerful than even most second level creatures. I guess one should be very careful in order to keep them alive, since totally weren't anything special. Thus, they ought to be significantly toned down with a respective growth increase, since their growth number corresponds to the best LEVEL 3 creatures, which is too low IMO. Note that they are still the fewest in comparison to the other creatures of the same level and in addition they are more powerful overall (and more balanced)

Peasant
at: 1
def: 1
dam: 1-2 (1)
HP: 3
Growth: 35 (22)
total dam. output: 35-70 (22)
total HP: 105 (66)
cost: 13 (20)

Militiaman
at: 2
def: 2
dam: 1-2
HP: 4 (6)
Growth: 35 (22)
total dam. output: 70-140 (44-88)
total HP: 140 (132)
cost: 19 (30)
Peasants are by far the worst unit of the game as they are. In order to compensate this deficiency I significantly increased their growth number and reduced the cost respectively. Thus, their total damage output is closer to that of the other units. They are still the worst creatures in the game but now their numbers mean something. Militiamen on the other hand double their total damage output with the increase in their attack rating, plus their special. Their defense should rightfully increase due to the chainmail armour they have, but their HP should fall so that they don't become that more powerful (keeping in mind their numbers).

Imp
at: 2 (1)
def: 2 (1)
dam: 1-3
HP: 4
Growth: 16
total dam. output: 32-96 (16-48)
total HP: 64
cost: 25

Familiar
at: 3 (2)
def: 2
dam: 1-3 (2-4)
HP: 6
Growth: 16
total dam. output: 48-144 (64-128)
total HP: 64
cost: 45
I've made this slight modification to the Familiar's attack rating and damage output because I wanted the 2-4 damage output exclusively for the Scout/Assassin. They get a bit better offensively overall, but it's the motto of their race in the end.

Skeleton
at: 1
def: 2
dam: 1-2
HP: 4
Growth: 23 (20)
total dam. output: 23-46 (20-40)
total HP: 92 (80)
cost: 15 (17)

Skeleton Archer
at: 1
def: 2
dam: 1-2
HP: 5
Growth: 23 (20)
total dam. output: 23-46 (20-40)
total HP: 115 (100)
cost: 26 (30)
I just wanted the skeletons' weekly growth to be a bit greater than that of the gremlins for diversity purposes. 3 more per week, without changing their stats isn't such a big deal taking into consideration the Necromancy skill. Total cost though is the same.

Pixie
at: 1
def: 2 (1)
dam: 2 (1)
HP: 6 (9)
Growth: 14 (10)
total dam. output: 28 (10)
total HP: 84 (90)
cost: 25 (35)

Sprite
at: 2
def: 2
dam: 2
HP: 7 (10)
Growth: 14 (10)
total dam. output: 56 (40)
total HP: 98 (100)
cost: 40 (55)
Along with the Scout/Assassin, the Pixie undergone the most changes. 10 per week is quite low for their level and their total damage output is very low (even though it's a spray, unretaliated attack). I raised its growth number in order to remain the second less populated first level unit and decreased their HP accordingly. So it's much better overall offensively (almost triple total damage output, but less than the one of the Pixie) and a bit worse defensively. The Sprite on the other hand suffered less changes limited in their growth number and cost (but not total cost), as it's fine as it is.


LEVEL 2

Stone Gargoyle
at: 3
def: 5 (4)
dam: 2-3 (1)
HP: 16 (15)
Growth: 14
total dam. output: 84-126 (42)
total HP: 224 (210)
cost: 45

Obsydian Gargoyle
at: 4 (3)
def: 5
dam: 2-3 (1-2)
HP: 20
Growth: 14
total dam. output: 112-168 (42-84)
total HP: 280
cost: 70
This is my first very strong objection concerning their damage output. Especially the Stone Gargoyles' damage is pathetic, worse than most first level cretures, which is unacceptable. Of course they can get better with the mini artifacts but that has nothing to do with the creature as it is (by the way, I believe that the artificer should provide artifacts with limited bonuses to low level creatures, compared to the destined for high level ones, because for instance, Gremlins' and Gargoyles' power increases eponentially.
Thus, I gave Stone Gargoyle a relatively low damage output, but adequate for their level. I increased its defense rating a bit in order to fit the modifications of the other creatures (especially that of Demon/Horned Demon) and its HP for diversity purposes. Obsydian Gargoyles on the other hand are much more balanced so I only changed their attack rating and retained the damage output of Stone Gargoyles.

Witch
at: 5 (4)
def: 2 (1)
dam: 3-6 (3-8)
HP: 12
Growth: 9 (5)
total dam. output: 135-270 (60-160)
total HP: 108 (50)
cost: 50 (90)

Blood Witch
at: 6 (5)
def: 2
dam: 3-6 (3-8)
HP: 16 (15)
Growth: 9 (5)
total dam. output: 162-324 (75-200)
total HP: 144 (75)
cost: 70 (125)
Another strong objection I have here is the very low growth of Witches and pathetic defensive stats. I can't accept a second level creature to have a stat number at 1 (defense in this case), so I raised it a bit along with their HP. I also raised their attack and modified their damage in order to be the best in attack and damage output (above Blade Jugglers) and the worst in defense in their level, but not the flea they are right now! Keep in mind that their attack is retaliated. Blood Withes however are more balanced defensively, so I added that extra in their attack as Ubi did. Total cost has remained the same though.

Archer
at: 4
def: 3
dam: 2-4
HP: 8 (6)
Growth: 12
total dam. output: 96-192
total HP: 96 (72)
cost: 50

Marksman
at: 4
def: 3
dam: 4-6 (2-8)
HP: 10 (8)
Growth: 12
total dam. output: 192-288 (96-384)
total HP: 120 (96)
cost: 80
The archer is fine apart from his HP, which I raised a bit, since it's quite low. It's still the worst of their level but closer to the others. The maskman's damage output however is way too high, topping the best upgraded third level creatures. And considering their special (close range) they become substantially powerful. Also, it's more rational for them to be precise in their shots (that's what they were trained for in the end) and consequently have a smaller gap in their damage output. Health, finally, gains the extra 2 points that ubi also added to them compared to the archers.

Demon
at: 3 (1)
def: 4 (1)
dam: 1-4 (1-2)
HP: 13
Growth: 15
total dam. output: 45-180 (15-30)
total HP: 195
cost: 40

Horned Demon
at: 3
def: 4
dam: 2-4 (1-4)
HP: 15 (13)
Growth: 15
total dam. output: 90-180 (45-180)
total HP: 225 (195)
cost: 55 (60)
More aces for the Demon, who is an almost worthless creature with no spacial. Just take a look at their current total damage output... Officially they are labaled as ruthless (thus they should have an average attack rating) and durable (good defense and HP), but not very well organised (big gap in their damage output, a feature akin to the Inferno faction after all). They aren't omnipotent :-) but they wouldn't be the waste of money they are now. Horned Demons on the other hand are much more balanced, but I raised their HP a bit (still lower than Blood Witche's and Stone Gargoyle's) and their minimum damage, plus their special to justify the upgrade. Since the upgrade isn't that much great I lowered their cost, given that their special erases them out of existence.

Walking Dead
at: 2 (1)
def: 2 (1)
dam: 1-3 (1)
HP: 17
Growth: 15
total dam. output: 30-90 (15)
total HP: 255
cost: 35 (40)

Zombie
at: 3
def: 3
dam: 1-3
HP: 17
Growth: 15
total dam. output: 45-135 (30-90)
total HP: 255
cost: 60 (65)
This is getting ridiculous...more aces for the candidate for the worst second level creature. It seems that people at Ubi didn't bother putting some thought on the stat numbers and filled second level units with aces... Subseqently, I raised its attack/defense ratings and its damage output to Zombie levels. All of them are still the worst amongst the other creatures, but now it's closer; this midiocrity should also be reflected at the Walking Dead's cost, as it should be the cheapest unit. At least it's durable. The Zombie on the other hand received the rational increases in its attack/defense ratings, plus its special, which by the way should work at 50% so that it functions more effectively. Finally, I lowered its cost, but it's still more expensive than the Horned Demon.

Blade Juggler
at: 4 (3)
def: 3 (2)
dam: 2-5
HP: 11
Growth: 11 (9)
total dam. output: 88-220 (54-135)
total HP: 122 (99)
cost: 53 (65)

War Dancer
at: 5 (4)
def: 3
dam: 2-5
HP: 12
Growth: 11 (9)
total dam. output: 110-275 (144-288)
total HP: 132 (108)
cost: 74 (90)
Inevitably the Blade Jugglers must live up to their mentality. Very good attack surpassed only by that of the Witch, average defense, but not the worst and average HP. Also, their growth number shouldn't be that low, so in general I added a little something to their stats plus increased numbers. I think their lack of special deserves these changes, let alone when they are justified, since their frailty isn't redeemed with good total damage. War Dancers on the other hand become too powerful. Their special is the best of the aforementioned, wheras the increase in their damage output gives them an even better and unbalancing advantage. Consequently, I raised a bit their attack rating and left their defense, damage output and total cost intact, making the upgrade more balanced

[WFW-PREDATOR]

and I think the same info is going to be in the manual to

[Boromir]

In many cases I do not agree with you. It is obvious that you've given a lot of thought to this, but what you suggest is in many cases making all the creatures more or less the same in terms of stats. For example: you suggest that gorgoyles' damage should be increased, blood witches defense should be increased and assasins' stats decreased while growth increased. Such changes, if implemented, would make the game boring, because every faction would be very similiar. Gorgoyles have low damage, but high health, which well corresponds with their appearance. Blood witches have low defence, but great attack, no retaliation and strike-and-return ability, which makes them an extremely useful creature. Assasins indeed have very high stats in comparison to other level 1 creatures but this is made up for by the extremely low growth rate. So the balance is more or less kept in place, while units' stats are very varied. This is very good and should NOT be changed.

[Titanus]

Hello Boromir! I am glad you replied to my post. You are a poster that in many respects I agree with your points of view in general, but this is not the case now.
Indeed I've given much thought to them for over a month now. And I' m quite pleased with the results. What I did is differentiate creature stats and make them more varied and logical. Currently they are the same and boring and on top of that they're not balanced. Take a look at how many aces Level 1 creatures have (Gremlins, Peasants, Pixies in their main stats, which equal to little variation) and Level 2 ones (Demons, Walking Deads, Gargoyles, Witches which equal to irrational stats given their level). With my changes Scouts/Assassins have become more powerful and durable totally and they are still the best Level 1 units, whereas their numbers are still the least (12 comparing them to 14 Pixies, 16 Imps, 20 Gargoyles etc). However, I tried to close a bit the gap amongst other creatures. Peasants are still the worst, but now they are in great numbers (nearly 50% more). They haven't become a power to be reckoned with, given ther low initiative and speed, but they're not useless as they are now. Imps in H3 were the worst of their level but they also came in great numbers and added variety. That's what I tried to do, without though changing the pattern the developers wanted to follow in creature stats.
Changes in Level 2 units were a pain in the a..se. I wanted no aces to any of the main stats, apart from the minimum damage of some of them. Yes, Gargoyles are tank troops mainly, but they are entitled to an average total damage output, not one of the worst among LEVEL 1 !! creatures, as they are now; it just isn't logical for their level. With Demons and Walking Deads the situation borders ridicule, with total damage output at 15-30 and 15 respectively and no specials. Plain and simple, they are worthless right now. It's logical to raise Demons' attack/defense ratings, because they show they are tough and are described as unorganised (so 1-4 damage is justified). Walking Deads ought to have low attack/defense, since they are dead corpses (even less organised than the Demons, thus their low damage output 1-3 and attack at 2) and are composed of rotten flesh. Again they still deal the worst damage but not the worst amongst all creatres of the game. As for Witches, they do have their great special but they are comparable to numbers with most LEVEL 4 creatures and they deal just good damage totally, but they fall like flies. That's why I almost doubled their numbers and improved their stats a little. Now they deal the best damage and won't fall with a pimpslap of my grandmother . Harpies and Harpy Hags in H3 had better stats and they fell just fine...

And 2 small overlooks on my part. Firstly, Imp's defense should stay as it is (1) not the 2 I suggest and secondly, the current War Dancer's dam (4-8) should be added next to what I suggest (2-5).

[Titanus]

LEVEL 3

Iron Golem
at: 5
def: 7 (5)
dam: 3-6
HP: 22 (15)
Growth: 9
total dam. output: 135-270
total HP: 198 (135)
cost: 95 (90)

Steel Golem
at: 5 (6)
def: 8 (6)
dam: 5-8
HP: 27 (20)
Growth: 9
total dam. output: 225-360 (270-432)
total HP: 243 (180)
cost: 150 (130)
Iron Golems are tank troops and as these they ought to have superior defense/HP ratings. I've given them 7 defense because they're made of iron, just a tad below that of the Footman and made them more durable (currently they're rated at 15 HP, equal to the Blood Witch....go figure), close to the Minotaur but not topdog. Finally, I've raised their cost since I consider it low for what they offer. Steel Golems gain an extra point in defense, since they're made of steel and the typical 5 points of health, but I've left their attack intact, given that their attack/damage output increase plus their special boost them exponentially (I believe initially it was meant to cover the lacking offensive potential of Academy, given Gargoyles' low performane). A cost increase is also justifiable for the great special they offer.

Minotaur
at: 7 (4)
def: 5 (2)
dam: 4-7 (2-7)
HP: 25
Growth: 6
total dam. output: 168-294 (96-168)
total HP: 150
cost: 120

Minotaur King
at: 7 (5)
def: 5 (2)
dam: 4-7 (2-7)
HP: 30
Growth: 6
total dam. output: 168-294 (120-210)
total HP: 180
cost: 200
And the crescendo of unbalancing units in the Dungeon faction goes on! 2 defense rating, equalling that of the Blood Witch's!!....yea...right. Minotaurs are entitled to be one if not the the strongest, toughest (their skin should be quite hard to pierce) and more durable units of their level, let alone when their numbers are quite low again (but fine this time). I've also raised their minimum damage since they wield two axes and the least damage they can deal, with one axe that is, is 3.5. Minautor Kings on the other hand are in no need of further physical enhancements due to their great special.

Footman
at: 4 (3)
def: 8
dam: 2-5 (2-4)
HP: 18 (14)
Growth: 10
total dam. output: 80-200 (60-120)
total HP: 180 (140)
cost: 90

Swordsman
at: 5 (4)
def: 9
dam: 3-5 (2-5)
HP: 24
Growth: 10
total dam. output: 150-250 (80-200)
total HP: 240
cost: 130
Footmen are the epitome of defense. But their race needs that little something in total damage output too. I don't say that they should surpass that of the Archers/Marksmen, but they could be closer to them; that's why I've changed a bit their damage. Another reason is that I didn't want them lacking offensively comparing to the modifications I've made to other creatures' attack rating (Blade Jugglers/War Dancers and Wood Elves/Grand Elves for example, that initially equalled or were a bit stronger than them). Finally, I've raised their HP, narrowing the gap between them and the Swordsmen, given they're already clad in all that piece of armour. Swordsmen on the other hand have received the extra attack rating that the developers initially wanted and a tiny increase in their minimum damage.

Hell Hound
at: 7 (6)
def: 3 (2)
dam: 3-6
HP: 17 (15)
Growth: 8
total dam. output: 168-326 (144-288)
total HP: 133 (120)
cost: 115 (110)
Special : No retaliation

Cerberus
at: 7 (6)
def: 4 (2)
dam: 5-9
HP: 17 (15)
Growth: 8
total dam. output: 280-504 (240-432)
total HP: 133 (120)
cost: 160
Hell Hound is the first creature to which I've added a special. It's one of the cases that an upgraded unit is so much better than the unupgraded one, sth that I didn't want. Cerberus is clearly the better creature but reasonably better now. I've raised its attack rating to make it the strongest creature (along with the Minotaur), its defense (because I keep the 2 for another creature of this level) and its HP (since I wanted to retain the initial difference in HP between it and the Horned Demon). Lastly, a +5 gold increase each is absolutely justified due to the no retaliaton special. Cerberus didn't need any other changes except for their becoming a little tougher than their unupgraded brothers.

Mane
at: 6 (4)
def: 5 (3)
dam: 3-7
HP: 8
Growth: 9
total dam. output: 162-378 (108-252)
total HP: 72
cost: 105 (100)

Ghost
at: 6 (4)
def: 6 (3)
dam: 5-7
HP: 12
Growth: 9
total dam. output: 270-378 (180-252)
total HP: 108
cost: 140
Manes have received the most radical changes statistically. Offensively, Necropolis isn't anything special up to the previous level. Yes, it does have Skeletons, but their increasing number (which leads to better total damage output) is part of the race skill, not the creature itself. Walking Deads/Zombies are far from adequate for this purpose too, so I had to give a boost to the offensive potential of the race in the face.... of Manes/Ghosts. Furthermore, they shouldn't be lacking defensively either, since the're ghosts and ought to be hard to hurt. To further augment their toughness I've suggested an increase in the chances the incorporeal special has so as to work. Currently, I think it functions at 30%, which becomes more random to turn up than it shoud be IMO; what I suggest is an increase at 50% (I hold my reservations though, since I don't know if the Luck skill raises its chances to kick in more regularly). With these modifications the +5 gold for each creature isn't that absurd. As for Ghosts, they are fine with my changes in attack and the developers' changes in damage/HP; I've only made them a little tougher by adding an extra point in defense.

Wood Elf
at: 5 (4)
def: 2 (1)
dam: 4-7
HP: 14 (10)
Growth: 7
total dam. output: 140-245 (112-196)
total HP: 98 (70)
cost: 125

Grand Elf
at: 6 (5)
def: 4
dam: 6-8 (4-8)
HP: 18 (14)
Growth: 7
total dam. output: 252-336 (140-280)
total HP: 126 (98)
cost: 190
More aces even at this level? I don't think so, that's why I've raised Wood Elf's defense rating at 2 (which I still deem low but let's say that he isn't as tough as Blade Juggler/War Dancer. Nevertheless, I didn't want the duo to be both tougher and more durable than him, so I've added 2 points in his health). One point in his attack rating in order to be a bit stronger than the Footman and Blade Juggler and we're set. Grand Elf is better balanced, so I've retained his initial defense rating and increased his attack as the developers did. The developers wanted his HP to equal that of the Footman's so I've given them 4 extra HP. Lastly, I've raised his minimum damage, since he's an exceptional marksman and he's not likely to miss a target on a regular basis.

[Titanus]

I have re-written my comments concerning 3 LEVEL 1 creatures taking into consideration the special buildings that increase their growth rate. Stats wise there are minimal differences, exclusively regarding total damage output.

Peasant
at: 1
def: 1
dam: 1-2 (1)
HP: 3
Growth: 30+5 (22+5)
total dam. output: 35-70 (27)
total HP: 105 (81)
cost: 15 (20)

Militiaman
at: 2
def: 2
dam: 1-2
HP: 4 (6)
Growth: 30+5 (22+5)
total dam. output: 70-140 (54-108)
total HP: 140 (162)
cost: 23 (30)
Peasants are by far the worst unit of the game as they are. In order to compensate this deficiency I significantly increased their growth number and reduced the cost respectively. Thus, their total damage output is closer to that of the other units. They are still the worst creatures in the game but now their numbers mean something. Militiamen on the other hand double their total damage output with the increase in their attack rating, plus their special. Their defense should rightfully increase due to the chainmail armour they have, but their HP should fall so that they don't become that more powerful (keeping in mind their numbers).

Skeleton
at: 1
def: 2
dam: 1-2 (1)
HP: 4
Growth: 20+6
total dam. output: 26-52 (26)
total HP: 104
cost: 17

Skeleton Archer
at: 1
def: 2
dam: 1-2
HP: 5
Growth: 20+6
total dam. output: 26-52
total HP: 130
cost: 30
Skeletons are just fine and the only thing I've changed is their maximum damage, making it identical to the Skeleton Archers', which is logical, given their undead and as a result unorganised state. The Archers on the other hand needed no improvements at all.

Pixie
at: 1
def: 2 (1)
dam: 2 (1)
HP: 6 (9)
Growth: 13+4 (10+4)
total dam. output: 34 (14)
total HP: 102 (126)
cost: 28 (35)

Sprite
at: 2
def: 2
dam: 2
HP: 7 (10)
Growth: 13+4 (10+4)
total dam. output: 72 (56)
total HP: 119 (140)
cost: 44 (55)
Along with the Scout/Assassin, the Pixie undergone the most changes. 10 per week is quite low for her level and her total damage output is very low (even though it's a spray, unretaliated attack). I raised her growth rate in order to remain the second less populated first level unit (Scout/Assassin being the lowest, that is 12*2=24 with Citadel, Pixie/Sprite being next, that is 13*2=26+4=30 with Citadel and Blooming Groove and Imps being the third less weekly growth rate, that is 16*2=32 with Citadel) and decreased her HP accordingly. So she's much better overall offensively and more balanced (2.5 times more total damage output and closer to the Sprite's, that initially was ocerpowered compared to its unupgraded brethren damage-wise, plus its spellcasting ability) and a bit worse defensively. The Sprite on the other hand, suffered less changes limited to only to her HP nad cost (but not total cost).


LEVEL 4

Mage
at: 10
def: 6 (10)
dam: 8
HP: 25 (15)
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 400
total HP: 125 (75)
cost: 250

Archmage
at: 11
def: 8 (10)
dam: 10 (8)
HP: 31
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 550 (400)
total HP: 155
cost: 340
The only change I've made to the Mages is a little reversion. I've decreased their defense making it the worst of their level and increased their HP. Mages are frail old men that should be easy to damage, but their energies should make it more difficult to put them down (thus their upped HP, which is still nothing special after all). Archmages on the other hand should be better offensively and damage-wise, still one of the best of their level and a bit a little tougher, but again, not on a par with their initial defense. These changes are more logical than necessary and improve him only slightly overall.

Rider
at: 9
def: 8
dam: 7-12
HP: 40
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 225-450
total HP: 160
cost: 300

Ravager
at: 11
def: 10
dam: 7-12 (7-14)
HP: 60
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 308-525 (308-616)
total HP: 240
cost: 450
Rider is perfectly balanced and Ravager isn't bad at all. The only modification I've proceeded to is their decrease of their maximum damage, which I find superflous, since their specials are already great; on top of that I didn't want them to top Hydra's/Chaos Hydra's maximum damage.

Griffin
at: 9 (7)
def: 7 (6)
dam: 5-10
HP: 30
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 225-450 (175-350)
total HP: 150
cost: 260

Royale Griffin
at: 9
def: 9
dam: 5-15
HP: 35
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 225-675
total HP: 175
cost: 360
I've only modified Griffins' attack and defense ratings, since they were low for their level IMO and in total Griffins were far worse than their upgraded brethren, considering also the latter's fabulous special. Their defense should be one of the worst, because they are just oversized birds after all, while offensively they ought to be quite decent, since that's what they're cut out for. As Royale Griffins, the added special and damage output on one hand and the armour they wear on the other justify their remaining at the same attack rating and their raised defense one respectively.

Succubus
at: 8 (6)
def: 8 (6)
dam: 6-13
HP: 20
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 240-520 (180-390)
total HP: 100
cost: 240

Infernal Succubus
at: 10 (6)
def: 8 (6)
dam: 6-13
HP: 30
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 300-650 (180-390)
total HP: 150
cost: 330
Radical changes for the Succabus/Infernal Succabus in their offensive/defensive ratings. They're the only range creatures of their race and they should rightfully be more powerful than that. Now, Succubus is average in the attack department but that suffices, given their huge damage range, whereas they still remain week defensively considering their low HP and average defense rating. Infernal Succubi just needed a boost to her attack rating and become a force to be reckoned with. This would add an extra element of battle tactics, since her chain-lightning special could become a double-edged knife, by hitting her teammates if there aren't enough enemy creature stacks to strike (something similar in a way stands for the Mage/Archmage too) while in addition it makes the extra cost sound more reasonaple.

Vampire
at: 10 (6)
def: 9 (6)
dam: 6-8
HP: 30
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 300-400 (180-240)
total HP: 150
cost: 240

Vampire Lord
at: 10 (9)
def: 10 (9)
dam: 8-11
HP: 35
Growth: 5
total dam. output: 400-550 (360-495)
total HP: 175
cost: 350
More attack/defense ratings at 6? Again too low for the level and the creature itself. Vampires are extremely experienced warriors and they're entitled to enhanced stats. Once again, (as with Griffins/Royale Griffins) an upgrade is far better than its unupgraded brethren offensively, which is another element of unbalncing (just take a look at the initial total damage output of each, seen in the respective parenthesis). And instead of having the worst defense rating I've made them having one of the best; in the end, according to legends, they're very difficult to hurt. As for Vampire Lord, he needs no enhancement offensively, given their great increase in their damage output, while he gains one extra defense point, compared to Vampire's initial stats. I believe that these changes make the units more balancing, considering that the life force they draw from other creatures in order to replenish their's is half of the damage they inflict.

Druid
at: 11 (7)
def: 7
dam: 7-9
HP: 34
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 308-396 (196-252)
total HP: 136
cost: 310

Druid Elder
at: 12
def: 9
dam: 9-12 (9-14)
HP: 43 (33)
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 432-576 (432-672)
total HP: 172 (132)
cost: 400
Druids are ranged units, and should rightfully be very powerful offensively and a bit lacking in toughness. Whatsmore, their growth rate is less than the LEVEL 4 standard (along with that of Riders'/Ravagers'), thus I've made them the strongest unit of the lot, while the rest of their stats have remained the same. On the other hand, Druid Elders retained their initial attack/defense ratings, but I've lowered their maximum damage to equal that of the Riders'/Ravagers'. Now, the difference in total damage output between Druids/Druid Elders isn't chaotic any more. Finally, I 've corrected their durability, since I find absolutely no reason for their HP to drop when they upgrade. Their lower numbers and HP of the Rider/Ravager duo (whose growth rate is the same) surely demands it.

[Titanus]

LEVEL 5

Genie
at: 12
def: 17 (9)
dam: 12-16
HP: 33
Growth: 3+2
total dam. output: 720-960
total HP: 165
cost: 480

Master Genie
at: 12
def: 17 (9)
dam: 16-22
HP: 40
Growth: 3+2
total dam. output: 960-1320
total HP: 200
cost: 700
What is this? the gathering of the twelves? Too many twelves for this level and for no reason if you ask me. Genie would have been just an above average creature with the random spellcasting special (hence not very reliable), the lowest attack rating, great numbers (5 with Treasure Cave, compared to 3 of other towns, apart from Nightmares/Frightful Nightmares) and good damage if not for the combination of an asinine defense rating and laughable HP. No, it can't stay like this for an overall undignified creature, which on top of that falls like a fly; it's imperative that it should have either its defense or its HP changed. After much thought I've decided that since Genies are semi-solid, it's suitable for them to be very difficult to hurt, but when hurt they shouldn't stay around for long, thus I've raised their defense rating a whopping 8 points (and I wasn't generous) and retained their HP. As for Master Genies, they didn't need further statistical changes apart from the above mentioned.

Hydra
at: 12 (14)
def: 14 (12)
dam: 7-14
HP: 73
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 252-504 (294-588)
total HP: 219
cost: 750

Chaos Hydra
at: 14
def: 14
dam: 9-14
HP: 100
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 378-588
total HP: 300
cost: 1000 (900)
What I've done to the Hydras is make a logical inversion between their attack/defense rating as I deem they should primarily be a tunk troop as Hydras and only after the upgrade should they have the element of increased total damage. I've also increased by 100 gold their price; after all Level 6 HP and decent specials should be reflected at the amount spent.

Priest
at: 13 (12)
def: 12
dam: 10-13 (9-12)
HP: 54
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 390-507 (324-432)
total HP: 162
cost: 600 (650)

Cleric
at: 16
def: 15 (16)
dam: 10-13 (9-12)
HP: 80
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 480-624 (432-576)
total HP: 240
cost: 900
Along with the worst attack/defense rating Priest has average minimum and the lowest maximum damage making him quite a poor range attacker with average defensive charactristics. As a result I've tried to improve him by adding one point in attack and one point in min-max damage without disturbing the pattern (10 is still average and 13 is still the lowest but he becomes slightly better, which he desperately needs because he's an average unit overall). Defensively he's entitled to be the worst of his level, but he's not entitled to his price which seems quite high for what he offers, that's why I've lowered it by 50 gold. Cleric on the other hand is fine in regards with his attack rating, his new damage and his HP, but a little more than he deserves defensively (hence the 1-point reduction), coupled with his very high health, while his price as a tough ranged spellcaster sounds reasonable now.

Nightmare
at: 14 (13)
def: 14 (13)
dam: 8-16
HP: 47
Growth: 3+1
total dam. output: 448-896 (416-832)
total HP: 188
cost: 500 (480)

Frightful Nightmare
at: 19
def: 18
dam: 8-16
HP: 57
Growth: 3+1
total dam. output: 608-1216
total HP: 228
cost: 666
Since Priests and Unicorns are rated at 13 attack, Nightmares should be a notch stronger, as well as tougher than Unicorns as per initial stats. Nothing else needs modification, except for their price, which ought to be a little higher than Genies', given the latter's greater weekly growh and the former's absolute superiority over it. As for Frightful Nightmares, they're perfectly balanced IMO.

Lich
at: 15
def: 15
dam: 12-17
HP: 45
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 540-765
total HP: 135
cost: 650 (600)

Demi Lich
at: 18 (19)
def: 16 (19)
dam: 16-20
HP: 50
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 864-1080 (912-1140)
total HP: 150
cost: 950 (900)
This unit really racked my nerves! I' ve tested many combinations and sth always went wrong, particularly with its defense rating. Finally, I've persuaded myself that a creature comprised of bone and wearing a robe with pieces of armour plates on it is worth its given (15) defense rating. The ony further modification I've proceeded to is an increase in cost by 50 gold, since I deem it clearly better than the Priest, a ranged rival himself. Demi Lich on the other hand was a pain in the butt. This is the first Necropolis unit that is adequately toned down. Her attack rating was equal to Frightful Nightmare's (which I wanted to avoid by lowering it a bit), but having the best defense of all upgraded Level 5 creatures ...already being a great Necropolis shooter and spellcaster? And the developers have had the semi-solid bodies of the unreliable Genies/Master Genies with a defense rating at 9...go figure again! Ok then... the bones remained the same, the robe changed colour and only the padding got slightly better than the Liche's, hence... defense at 16 after a hell of a thought. She should also be more expensive than most creatures (what's this perseverance in 900 gold for 4 out of 6 upgraded critters by the way?) by dint of her versatility and exceptional power.

Unicorn
at: 13 (12)
def: 13 (12)
dam: 14-20 (10-20)
HP: 57
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 546-780 (360-720)
total HP: 171
cost: 700

War Unicorn
at: 16
def: 16
dam: 14-20 (10-20)
HP: 77
Growth: 3
total dam. output: 672-960 (480-960)
total HP: 231
cost: 900
As I've mentioned before, Unicorns' attack needed a little boost in parallel with differentiation from number 12. Being equal to attack, defense rating naturally follows. What I don't get though is the wide damage range (which if I remember correctly is identical to the Unicorns' in HOMM IV). IMO Unicorns/War Unicorns are the personification of sturdy and reliable melee units and as such they should deal at least good damage; therefore I've raised its minimum from 10 to 14. Once more for an upgrade, War Unicorns are well-thought, with the exception of the corrected minimum damage.

[theGryphon]

I hope Fabrice is at least reading these. It seems like you've given a lot of thought on these, and I would be sorry if it goes vain.

[Boromir]

Yes, there's a lot of though given to this and I agree with 90% of this (including Titanus's reply to my last post ). However, I think still some points are missed. The point is, that it is difficult to compare creatures only by their statistics. One should play a lot with the unit to know exactly how worthy it is. For example, when You (I mean, Titanus ) compare Liches to Priests, you should take into consideration one thing which gives Priests a huge boost: they take only one square, while Liches take 4, which is generally highly negative and extremely negative for a shooter.
Also I wouldn't agree on the Hydras - if you increase their cost, you should also give them some boost (for example in HP, as they are ultimately huge), because Hydras are not as good as they seem to be - possibility to use their ability to attack many targets at once comes quite rarely because of their speed and size (4 squares) and therefore is not as good as in previous HoMM games.
Some special abilities in HoMM5, which also appeared in previous HoMMs, are less useful and some are more useful, so you have to be careful while revising units with special abilities. For example, the dragons' fire / acid breath is FAR better than in HoMM3, because of far smaller battlefield and far higher proportion of damage to hit points among most of the creatues, which makes the tactics of "fly to your enemies and attack them as soon as possible" far better than before (often the first strike with Dragons makes you win the battle because you kill 50% of enemy creatures at once). This, as well as the case of Hydras, is just an example, but it shows clearly that one needs to play with the creature a lot to know exactly, how worthy it is.
Nevertheless, still I claim that I agree with 90% of Titanus's thoughts.

[Titanus]

Thanks Gryphoneheart for your comment! As for Boromir's reply...

As I've said I had been working on the stats for more than a month before sending these posts and I changed some of them again, even while writing the posts. What you are telling me about the comparison between Priests and Liches is in many respects correct. Indeed, Liches take 4 squares and are more difficult to defenrd with other Necropolis creatures. Furthermore, I haven't played the game at all and as a result I don't know how difficult it is to place a stack of creatures in front of a 4-square shooter in order to protect it. Since I guess you were a BETA player, your thoughts on the subject (along with the comments you've made regaring the special of acid/fire breath) is from your experience with the BETA. The battlefield size during the BETA stage of the game was 8*10; however, after recent announcements, it's been set to 12*10 now, meaning it's grown exactly 50%. That's a huge increase. Of course creatures' speed is going to change accordingly (or isn't it...?, at least for all creatures), but the battle tactics will be in many respects completely different now. With a larger battfield unit sizes will still play a significant role during battles, but they won't be as crucial as they used to be. As you know, a greater battlefield promotes shooters, who they won't be that easily reached now as they were during the BETA phase (that's a logical assumption of mine but I could very well be wrong if developers make radical changes to unit speeds). If this is the case though, they will be more free to act, without having an enemy stack in front of them constantly; and if a shooter has more chances to freely act whar will he/she do...?
They will shoot at the enemies and that's where Liches/Demi-Liches are decisevely superior to Priests/Clerics. The difference in total damage output, according to my revised maximum stats, is (765-507) / 507=51% greater than Priests' and (1080-624) / 624=73%... for Demi-Liches over Clerics. If I hadn't changed the stats Demi-Liches would be (1140-576) / 576=....98% more powerful than Clerics. This difference is plain and simple ENORMOUS. If you add the fact that Liches can't be stopped by mind spells (Forgetfulness, Blind etc., whereas Priest/Clerics can) and while Priests/Clerics may be blessed, the range of their damage output is the least possible amongst LEVEL 5 creatures, hence it won't be that much better, Liches' superiority becomes even clearer. Of course Clerics are more durable than Demi-Liches by a good margin (80 HP vs 50 HP respectively, but with iferior defense rating, especially the initial one, that is 16 vs 19 respectively), but Priests' advantage over Liches' isn't that great (54 HP vs 45 HP respectively, still with iferior initial defense rating, that is 12 vs 15 respectively).
Regarding Chaos Hydra's cost now, I haven't raised it because it's a fully exploitable creature, but I took into considearation firstly their huge HP, secondly their regeneration (think of it like this; in the early stages of the game, when Chaos Hydras will be few, even if after an attack or multiple attacks at them the HP of the top creture drops to 1, when they have the chance to play again their HP will return to full) and thirdly the other fact that unupgraded Hydra's cost is 50 gold greater than the second more expensive creature, the Unicorn. What I did was to follow the developers' pattern and add a little variation to inexplicably identical costs, which could very well expand farther.

That's it for now. Tomorrow will follow LEVEL 6 analysis, which has the least changes and sometime next week I will present LEVEL 7 IN-DEPTH and RADICAL modification , which by the way took me almost...15 days to finish (not counting further recent changes).

[Beholder]

I think that instead of changing the stats you should make it so that all creatures of corresponding level are equal. This way it wouldn`t make any difference which town you play. IMO you should rather check the town balance itself. You can have the worst 1,2 level units, but strong level 4 units to compensate this, and therefore the town would be as strong as others.

[Boromir]

Yes, I was beta-testing a lot, a few hot-seat games and lots of duels, particularly with Dungeon, where I lost only once against Inferno and never lost against other factions (not including Dungeon itself) - particularly smashing the Academy was a piece of cake. The "dragon-charge" strategy always grants you success.
In case of the battlefield size" indeed, there is the change you wrote about, and now we can only speculate on the relation between speed and size and therefore it is incredibly difficult to estimate the exact usability of particular creatures.
By the way: if you haven't played HoMM5 beta at all, some of your statements might be totally wrong (although I'm not suggesting that they are don't get me wrong ), because playing makes you realize that pure numbers are not everything. My views on unit stats have changed heavily since I started playing - particularly on Hydra and Titan, whom I considered great judging only by stats.
Apart from this, the game balance includes also buliding consts and heroes' special abilities - if one unit is clearly better than one another, maybe the building is far more costly, which drastically changes the strategical usability of the unit for a particular faction. Sometimes the heroes' impact on the battle is so huge that it totally changes the usability of many different creatures. The particular case of this is Academy, where two most powerful creatures are... Gremlins and Gorgoyles, whose damage can be multiplied by 7 or even 8, if you have a good hero, not including the increase in initiative, attack or luck, which increases total damage output too. Titans, Rakshasas and Genies are completely useless and only Magi remain of some usability with their spells. This is the case where you cannot judge only by statistics, because the "reality" turns out to be totally different - balance could be brought back only by increasing the strength of high level units and decreasing the bonus to damage gained from artificer ability.
If I were you, I would try to get access to beta version and spend some time playing - without this you cannot avoid some serious mistakes.

[Titanus]

Starting with Academy... When I first saw Academy creature I thought to myself '' what have they done to the faction...'' Judging only by the numbers I was extremely disappointed firstly by Genies/Master Genies (although later it was revealed that with Treasure Cave their growth increased by 2) and secondly by Giants/Titans; sadly, after repeated BETA players' comments I was confirmed in both cases. What would you expect from a walker, with no particular specials, 142 HP and the worst initiative of its level, whose later revealed dwelling cost amounted to a terrible 20.000 gold, being the most expensive of all, while Green Dragon's dwelling for example was half of that (not to mention Titan's dwelling cost, which is off the charts)? And what do you expect from a faction that promotes immensely LEVEL 1 and 2 creatures with its special (artificer), judging by players' comments, while high level units become almost useless as you also say? However, not even one battle has been ever won by LEVEL 1 and 2 critters throughout (my) HOMM history, no matter how strong. These units will make one, tops two good attacks, but their numbers will drastically dwindle after one, maximum two decent enemy attacks. This is not the case with LEVEL 6 and LEVEL 7 creatures that have the ability to soak great amounts of damage without losing their numbers easily. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to assess that a special that promotes Level 1 and 2 units, like artificer, compared to specials that promote all creatures with one or another way (Gating, Training etc), you will find Academy severely lacking in effectiveness. In the end, in my post concerning LEVEL 2 and particularly in the Stone Gargoyle/Obsydian Gargoyle analysis, I have specifically stated that I deemed necessary that the artificer should provide artifacts with limited bonuses to low level creatures, compared to those predestined for high level ones, because for instance, Gremlins' and Gargoyles' power increases exponentially, quoting my phrase.
It would be at least silly on my part to think that the game will be perfect and balanced if only creature stats change and nothing more! Developers should correct so many aspects of the game, including of course special skills function (Necromancy or Artificer for example, etc). What I have been commenting on for the last few weeks though is only creature stats, abilities, along with every aspect that has to do with the creature itself (not hero skills and abilities) and how logical and balanced they are comparing one to another; on that grounds I want to be judged, nothing more nothing less.

[Boromir]

Well, my aim was not to tell you you're wrong, but just to encourage you to try to get the beta version and play a bit, as even the wisest man cannot be 100% right in his thoughts if he didn't play the game himself. As I wrote before, I agree with 90% of your thoughts.
And by the way: yes, this is an obvious fact, what you say about casulaties among low level creatures compared to high level - this was particularly useful in HoMM2, where every city could be captured with Titans and Magi almost without casualties, because all towers attacked Titans, leaving Magi untouched. However, the disproportion between strenght of gremlins and Titans in HoMM5 beta is so huge, that this Titans' advantage deoes not make up for it any way. It is always better to buy new Gremlins / Gorgoyles or Golems, than to spend 50000 on upgraded Titans' dwelling, unless you have so much cash that you can afford both of them easily. However, the idea of Academy being the most expensive, as almost all dwellings there are most expensive among corresponding levels in all factions, is good - it makes factions more differentiated, which is always good. However, then the units themselves should be stronger to keep balance.

[Titanus]

To Borioir:
I'm 2 levels before completion. Just wait till the last level because now I'm dealing with the first wave of the heavy hitters, LEVEL 6 units!

What I want to add as a comment here is a little change in calculation I've proceeded to. It won't help as much this creature category as it would have better helped LEVEL 5 and especially LEVEL 7 unit comparisons. This change has to do with total damage output calculation, which now is based on creature production AFTER Citadel has been built, essentially doubling total damage output among other creature aspects. Now Master Genies for example don't become the strongest units totally, but the third strongest (by a slight margin though, litterally). However, on LEVEL 6 and particularly LEVEL 7, due to great damage output for each unit, the differences become more visible, if we compare for instance total growth and stats of Bone Dragons/Spectral Dragons and the rest of the units. I'll make the appropriate corrections in total damage output, total HP and total growth to all creatures in a single (more edible) post, after I' ve finished last LEVEL, with minor corrections in very few stats.

LEVEL 6

RAKSHASA
at: 25
def: 20
dam: 23 (15-23)
HP: 95 (90)
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 2300 (1500-2300)
total HP: 380 (360)
cost: 1600 (1400)

RAKSHASA RUKH
at: 26 (25)
def: 20 (22)
dam: 30 (23-30)
HP: 110 (100)
Growth: 6
total dam. output: 3120 (2300-3000)
total HP: 440 (400)
cost: 2100 (1900)
Let's not kid ourshelves...Rakshasas are clearly an identical version of Nagas and as such they should be comparably strong...very strong. Beside that, they're summoned warriors, wielding two swords and as such their skill at fighting with them should be unsurpassed. That's why I've ommitted their minimum damage. I've also raised their HP, along with that of Pit Fiends for reasons that I' ll explain in Cavaliers'/Paladins' entry. The price increase is also justified due to their significant improvement. Rakshasa Rukhs on the other hand have changed thorougly. Their initial attack remaining the same, while Wraiths' strength equalled it? Not a chance...I wanted them to be the strongest LEVEL 6 creature dealing the most total damage, since they're fearsome and experienced warrior spirits, so I've raised their attack rating at 26. Their initial defense didn't change either, while it got equalled by...Matriarchs'. Now I don't say that they should be the toughest LEVEL 6 unit along with being the strongest, but having as tough a skin as the Matriarchs' is at least degrading. I justed wanted the difference between their defense rating and Dungeon's upgraded creature to be the same, hence the 2-point increase. The same reasons issue for their HP; accomplished warriors are supposed to withstand a hell of a beating due to their indomitable spirit before falling, therefore Rakshasa Rukhs' health ought to be among the best, better than the Paladins'. Their only drawback remains their relatively low initiative, until the dash ability kicks in (by the way if anyone could provide me with information as to how it works, it would be appreciated) and their raised price by 200 gold (because now they have become a true force to be reckoned with). In the end Academy should start becoming competitive in the upper class, because till they offer much less firepower, which the faction desperately needs.

MATRON
at: 18
def: 18
dam: 17-24
HP: 80
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 1224-1728
total HP: 320
cost: 1500

MATRIARCH
at: 20
def: 20
dam: 17-27
HP: 90
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 1360-2160
total HP: 360
cost: 2000 (1900)
A perfectly balanced creature, which in fact was the standard in which I' ve modelled other units' stats. Only Matron's cost has been reduced due to the fact that I deem her worse in almost any respect than Balor.

CAVALIER
at: 20
def: 20
dam: 20-30
HP: 85 (80)
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 1600-2400
total HP: 340 (320)
cost: 1400

PALADIN
at: 24
def: 26 (24)
dam: 24-30 (20-30)
HP: 100
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 2304-2880
total HP: 400
cost: 1900
No real problem with Cavalier. I've only raised his HP, because being on a par with Matron's, a woman and a witch, seemed a little wierd. In addition, Cavalier's HP increase was the reason why I' ve raised both Rakshsa's and Pit Fiend's HP, that is to retain the 10 HP gap between the former's and the latters'. As for Paladin and apart from variation reasons (initial defense rating equal to the Wraith's), just take a close look at him; besides being clad in all that armour, he also carries a shield, providing him further protection; he certainly deserves the 2 extra points to his defense rating. On top of that, a Paladin should be more effective in battle than his unupgraded brethren, thus I've raised his minimum damage by 4 points (look at my pattern concerning the attack rating and minimum damage of each creature). Other than that he is well-done unit.

PIT FIEND
at: 22
def: 21
dam: 13-25
HP: 95 (90)
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 1408-2200
total HP: 380 (360)
cost: 1700

BALOR
at: 22
def: 23 (21)
dam: 19-31 (13-31)
HP: 110
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 1672-2728
total HP: 440
cost: 2000
Pit Fiends are fine units and the only thing I've changed is their HP for reasons I' ve expained in the Cavalier/Paladin entry. Balor on the other hand is another story. W h a t i s t h i s d a m a g e r a n g e?!! Ok I know that it's typical for the Inferno faction to have wide damage ranges, but this is absurd; maximum damage is almost 2.4 times greater than minimum! This is totally unacceptable! That's why I' ve retained the damage range of Pit Fiend at 12 (max-min=25-13 and 31-19 for Pit Fiend/Balor respectively). Finally, I've increased by 2 points his defense rating in order to retain his initial better tougheness compared to that of Rakshasa Rukh, while it's still worse than Wraith's.

WIGHT
at: 23
def: 22
dam: 20-25
HP: 73 (83)
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 1840-2300
total HP: 292 (336)
cost: 1500

WRAITH
at: 25
def: 24
dam: 25-30
HP: 80 (90)
Growth: 4
total dam. output: 2500-3000
total HP: 320 (360)
cost: 1800
A few maths for this entry and nothing more, as I believe that Wights/Wraiths are well-balanced. In Manes'/Ghosts' entry I' ve mentioned that the incorporeal ability functions at 50%, according to my changes, in relation to the current 30% chances; that's because I want it to kick in more frequently, that is not beng that random as is the case now. In Manes'/Ghosts' case though HP was initially extremely low for their level, therefore it didn't need any modification. Wights/Wraiths though is another story. They're already very powerful and their remaining at the suggested by the developers health, while their incorporeal special functions at 50%, would disturb the faction balance. After all, Necropolis is already powerful enough with my changes. So:
83+30%*83= 83+27= 110 would be the Wight's health without the special. If x=the new health with the special working at 50%, then we have x+50%x= 110 =>x (1+0.5)= 110 => 1.5x= 110 => x= 73 HP.
90+30%*90= 90+30= 120 would be the Wraith's health without the special. If x=the new health with the special working at 50%, then we have x+50%x= 120 =>x (1+0.5)= 120 => 1.5x= 120 => x= 80 HP.

TREANT
at: 19
def: 27
dam: 8-18 (7-17)
HP: 120
Growth: 4+1
total dam. output: 760-1710 (665-1615)
total HP: 600
cost: 1200

TREANT GUARDIAN
at: 19
def: 29
dam: 11-21 (10-20)
HP: 120
Growth: 4+1
total dam. output: 1045-1995 (950-1900)
total HP: 600
cost: 1500
Treants and Treant Guardians could very well remain intact, but I just wanted that extra point in maximum damage that would make them a tad stronger totally than the Unicorns and War Unicorns. It's a matter of prestige... The wide damage range is logical since they're not exactly the best fighters in the world and could very well miss an opponent while trying to strike him/her with one of their branches.

[Titanus]

As I was dealing with each LEVEL separately, I was perplexed by the minor and major statistical corrections I should make in order to ratain a balance as I had had it in my mind. Each level had its peculiarities and each creature needed a thorough review, where I should match developers' aspects on each faction's statistical destination along with my objections. Up to LEVEL 6 I revolved around certain patterns, avoiding disrupting whatever balance was meant to exist, wherever possible. However, when I started occupying myself with LEVEL 7 units I just couldn't find a model on which I could base my modiication. The reason was simple... almost every rating of one creature was identical to that of the other, with minor variations. Why on earth should 5 out of 6 unupgraded creatures have their attack rating at 27 or their defense rating mostly at 27 or 25? Why should these stats be that close or lower to LEVEL 6 units? And more significantly, why half of them had no discernable special, apart from the flying ability (which, now with the battlefield expansion, loses some of its importance, despite the fact that the battfield was meant to have variable dimensions in the beginning, therefore in battles with many creature stacks it would become large), while almost ALL units of lower LEVELS had this luxury? Why 4 out of 6 upgraded creatures' HP was at 200 and attack rating at 30, while 2 out of 6 were at 31? That's why I found it necessary to start from scratch, proceeding to a mix of HOMM III, IV and V patterns, logic, balance and differantiation (again...). The final ratings were carefully and exhaustingly thought, but I find them quite satisfactory now... Enough with the talk, though!
May I present to the forum my...

LEVEL 7

GIANT
at: 30 (27)
def: 30 (27)
dam: 40-70
HP: 202 (142)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 2400-4200 (2160-3780)
total HP: 404 (284)
cost: 3500

TITAN
at: 33 (30)
def: 33 (30)
dam: 40-70
HP: 300 (175)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 2640-4620 (2400-4200)
total HP: 600 (350)
cost: 5000 (4700)
As I 've mentioned in a previous post Giant is the only walker between LEVEL 7 units and the slowest one, mind you. Initially he had the second best attack... along with nearly any other creature, the second best defense... along with half of every other creature, the worst total HP, his dwelling was the most expensive along with the Angel's and the only positive was the fact that he dealt the best damage. No wonder why he's the best contender for the... worst LEVEL 7 unupgraded unit. First of all I' ve established attack and defense ratings at 30 as a decent average for the level, so as to make the difference in power between LEVEL 6 and 7 units more evident. This is where I place Giant's offensive and defensive characteristics. Thus, coupled with his excellent damage output, he's still the most powerful creature of the game offensively (except Titan and Black Dragon). My strongest objection nevertheless, was his HP. Can anyone explain to me how on earth a creature that is at least twice as tall as almost anything else he might encounter on the battlefield has the worst health of his level, surpassing only Bone Dragon that has a better growth rate though, hence better total HP? Just take a look at two huge creatures that are comparable to his height, Hydra/Chaos Hydra and Treant/Treant Guardian...their health is significantly beyond the average HP of their level!! Let's be serious, Giants have to be the embodiment of endurance and durability, they shout it in every possible way!! And if one might think that I overpower him by making him both the strongest and the toughest of his level, I would refute that the worst mobility and initiative he exhibits more than make up for his boost. Therefore, I' ve raised his heath by 60 points, retaining the funny last digit of his previous HP in order to further increase the 10-point difference (which I still consider low) from the second most durable, the Green Dragon.
In Titan's case I wanted AT LEAST a 20-point difference from the next toughest creature, the Black Dragon, sth that forced me to add 125 whole points to his totally unreasonable and unacceptable health of 175 (again by dint of his enormous size). Considering him another decent statistical average for his level (with 33 attack and defense ratings) and dealing the second most damage (potentially the best after he's blessed, due to Black Dragon's magic immunity), he now has become a fearsome adversary for every opponent. His precedent as a powerful unit throughout HOMM history (save HOMM IV...) and unbelievable dwelling cost do the changes justice, as does his increased cost by 300 gold. By the way, there is another aspect of the game that needs to be changed, because it really doesn't make any sense; it has to do with the available shots ranged units have at their disposal, without an ammo cart. In Titan's case for example, it's at least weird that he can deplete his personal energies after firing only 5 shots. After all, if he can't use his main power properly most of the time, why did the developers bother to give it to him anyway? other creatures' powers function with no significant liabilities in the end. Hence, my suggestion is 15 shots.

DEEP DRAGON
at: 28 (25)
def: 28 (24)
dam: 45-70
HP: 160 (150)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 2520-3920 (2250-3500)
total HP: 320 (300)
cost: 3700

BLACK DRAGON
at: 34 (30)
def: 34 (30)
dam: 45-70
HP: 280 (200)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 3060-4760 (2700-4200)
total HP: 560 (400)
cost: 4800 (4500)
Deep Dragons (silly name by the way) initially had the worst attack and defense ratings and below average HP with a reason. Their damage output made them the second strongest unupgraded unit (after Giants) and their fire breath special gives them the opportunity to attack 2 opponents simultaneously in a cramped battfield. Given the potentiality to augment them with spells, their offensive capabilities are exquisite. Their health still remains relatively low, although I' ve raised it by 10 points, on one hand to downplay a bit their second lowest defense rating (after the Devil, according to my current changes) and on the other hand to set them farther from the Bone Dragons' HP (see respective entry on this particular subject), but in the end it's not that far behind from other unupgraded LEVEL 7 units' health. Since their special may reduce the inflicted damage by a magic attack, their physical durability ought to be somewhat lower than others'.
As for Black Dragons, I' ve modelled them based on HOMM III, that is having a notch better attack and defense ratings than the Titan. Now they have become the strongest creature of the game, save possibly blessed Titans, and by far the second most durable. This is a way to compensate firstly for their relatively low initiative and as a result their absolute ownage on one on one by Emerald Dragons and secondly for the fact that they should be difficult to dispose of, given the inability to enhance them. Finally, an increase in their price by 300 gold sounds reasonable, since we're talking about the legendary and now powerful Black Dragons after all.

ANGEL
at: 31 (27)
def: 32 (27)
dam: 50 (45)
HP: 175 (150)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 3100 (2430)
total HP: 350 (300)
cost: 3500
Initiative: 12 (11)
Special : Bravery

ARCHANGEL
at: 36 (31)
def: 36 (31)
dam: 50 (45)
HP: 230 (200)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 3600 (2800)
total HP: 460 (400)
cost: 4900
Initiative: 13 (11)
Special : Bravery
Everything has changed in Angel's/Archangel's case. The problem to effect a well-balanced modification was the return of an old familiarity, that is the always blessed special (with which I totally agree to begin with). Firstly, I' ve proceeded to a 5-point increase in both creatures' damage output because I wanted it to be above the best minimum damage of any other unit (hinting Deep/Black Dragon). Regarding Angel's attack/defense ratings I' ve followed HOMM IV pattern, where his defense was greater than his offense. Hence, I' ve made him the second strongest unupgraded creature (after Green Dragon, because I wanted Green Dragon's maximum damage output to be superior to Angel's standard damage output) and the second toughest one (after Bone Dragon, since a creature that comprises of bones should be even more difficult to hurt). Given his exceptional attack/defense characteristics his HP ought to be at a decent average, above that of Deep Dragon (which in the latter's case is boosted by his partial negation of magic attacks). However, something was missing. I had a feeling that his abilities of flight and always blessed damage weren't enough to make him competitive, because on one hand flight was a special that any creature had at its disposal (save Giant) and on the other hand the always blessed total damage output was on average in the middle of the lot. I' ve decided that a unit that stems from heaven should never be subject to morale penalties (a kind of Minotaur's/Minotaur King's special) and for that matter, it should have extremely fast reaction time (even better than Cavalier's), hence the increase in initiative by 1.
The addition of the resurrection special in Archangel's case was the standard on which I' ve based his stats. His strength (better than Emerald Dragon's now, since the latter's damage output has initially risen) along with his toughness should be topdog. One mind object to his strength being overpowered like Archangel's strength and damage output in HOMM III, but I would refute that now total damage output of other adversaries is much better than his, if blessed (contrary to what was the case in HOMM III). Although I didn't want to abandon the HOMM IV pattern, while in parallel I wnted to avoid identical attack/defense ratings, I was forced to equalise them in the end, because otherwise he would become 3 points tougher than the second best (defense at 37, followed by Black Dragon's 34). Bearing in mind his toughness and his special, his health increased only by 30 points compared to his initial HP, countering his almost total offensive/defensive superiority over the other creatures. After all, he has never been the most durable creature during HOMM history. Finally, his new special is still here, while the last correction I ' ve made was his increase in initiative, in order to have him play before Paladin and clearly have the second best reaction time after Emerald Dragon.

DEVIL
at: 29 (27)
def: 27 (25)
dam: 26-66
HP: 166
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 1508-3828 (1404-3564)
total HP: 332
cost: 3666 (4166)
Special : Fire Shield at 25%

ARCHDEVIL
at: 32 (30)
def: 31 (28)
dam: 26-66
HP: 216 (199)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 1664-4224 (1560-3960)
total HP: 432 (398)
cost: 4666
Special : Fire Shield at 25%
Devils along with Bone Dragons have the unique...:-) ability of flight amongst LEVEL 7 creatures. And Devils in particular teleport anywhere on the battlefield using their kingdom as an intermidiate gateway... Or are they...? Indeed, it's at least uncanny the fact that while it wouldn't raise any wave of protests if they could teleport anywhere on the battlefield, this isn't the case in the last version of the game. In the end, there is precedent in HOMM IV, and quite fitting to them I might add. These creatures are full of contradictions and that is what I' ve tried to emphasise. Statistically they shouldn't be anything special, but initially with the best attack rating, along with almost every other unupgraded creature, the second worst defense rating (along with Green Dragons') and nothing more, while being the most expensive, only marked their inferiority. So, I've made them the second weakest unit (after Deep Dragons), I' ve retained the HUGE damage range (for reasons I 'll explain soon after) and have made them be the least tough. I' ve also preserved their HP (because I liked the element developers wanted to stress regarding faction's relation to anything 'dark', that is to number 6). Being such unreliable creatures offensively (dealing from identical damage to LEVEL 6 units if cursed up to the third best LEVEL 7 damage if blessed) and defensively, there should be a way to make up for both their defficiencies, thus the addition of a new special..Fire Shield. This way, a certain amount of dealt damage is guaranteed during hand-to-hand battles (depending on the attackers' damage) and new ways of dealing with these relatively easily disposed of creatures should be made up. It's an ability that is not stranger to the Inferno faction in the face of Efreet Sultans of HOMM III and Efreet of HOMM IV (which were very fan to play by the way) and since these creatures are absent from HOMM V I thought they could be replaced in a way by Devils/Archdevils. I won't deign to comment on their absurd initial cost, which I think is an unwilling mistake to begin with. There's no other acceptable price for Devils than the perfectly suitable 3666 gold!
As for Archdevils, the pattern was nearly the same; the second worst attack/defense ratings (followed only by Shadow Dragons'/Emerald Dragons' respectively), same damage output and only a 17-pont increase compared to their initial HP (playing along with the 6 digit). Add to that the Fire Shield and Summon Balors specials (that energises only after a creature stack dies, while summoned Balors disappear from your army after the battle ends) and you have a creature that offers you many possibilities and even more limitations, that is a very interesting creature!

BONE DRAGON
at: 30 (27)
def: 33 (28)
dam: 25-40 (15-30)
HP: 140
Growth: 2+1
total dam. output: 2250-3600 (1215-2430)
total HP: 420
cost: 2400
Special : -2 Initiative

SHADOW DRAGON
at: 31 (30)
def: 33 (28)
dam: 30-40 (25-35)
HP: 150
Growth: 2+1
total dam. output: 2790-3720 (2250-3150)
total HP: 450
cost: 2900
Special : -2 Initiative
What's the reason for the existence of LEVEL 7 units if initially they're meant to be second-rate actors in a faction's line-up? Because that's what Bone Dragon is; a second-rate actor with Wights/Wraiths being the stars! Yes? No, not a chance in my LEVEL 7. A decent average for attack is normal for the creature and I extended upwards the initial best defense rating in order to correlate to the other unupgraded LEVEL 7 defense ratings, still being the best (because as I've mentioned before they are made of bones, where some attacks may pass through them and therefore they're very difficult to hurt; when hurt though they should be easily dealt with). However, their growth rate is a unique characteristic to the level, making them the most durable creature in total. Till now there are no significant corrections, but... WHAT IS THIS DAMAGE OUTPUT? In essence, totally it's lower than Wight's, which of course is undeniably wrong IMO. Hence, I' ve raised minimum and maximum damage by 10, rendering total minimum damage output above average and total maximum damage output below average, helping the inability of the faction to be blessed. The other inability to boost the faction's troops morale though, lead me to wipe out the lack of Bone Dragon's serious specials in the form of the reduction of all opponents' initiative by 2. It's not a novelty, but it would work much better than the same special of Bone Dragons in HOMM III, due to the fact that now initiative/morale plays a defining role during battles. Thus, their presence becomes essential to other troops efficiency. While average in total HP, the addition of the Incorporeal ability to the Shadow Dragon (450+50%*450= 450+225= 675 HP) makes the weekly-produced creatures be the most durable, even above Titans. I' ve retained maximum damage at 40, because at 45 the maximum total damage output would overcome the psychological boundary of 4000 points (sth that would disrupt the balance IMO) and I' ve only improved their efficiency by raising their minimum damage at 30. As a result the difference between total max. and total min. damage is less than 1000 points, less than every other unit (except Archangel's standard damage of course) to partially make up for its inability to be blessed. Finally, the defense rating has remained the same, as per initial stats and their strength has become slightly better, therefore, dealing just a tad more maximum damage than Bone Dragons and Archangels has been achieved.

GREEN DRAGON
at: 32 (27)
def: 29 (25)
dam: 30-50
HP: 190 (170)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 1860-3200 (1620-2700)
total HP: 380 (340)
cost: 3600 (3500)
Initiative: 13 (12)

EMERALD DRAGON
at: 35 (31)
def: 30 (27)
dam: 33-57
HP: 250 (200)
Growth: 2
total dam. output: 2310-3990 (2046-3534)
total HP: 500 (400)
cost: 4700
A very nice thought, very badly executed. That's what I consider of Emerald Dragon (by the way, the name echoes so wonderfully; why on earth would they change it to Gold, since the creature's actual colour is a shade of green?). But let's take things from the beginning. Green Dragon's initial attack rating was the best along with Angel's, now I've increased it 1 point so that his total maximum damage output be slightly superior to Angel's. His defense rating has been preserved to average levels (though boosted upwards to relate better with my new base for decent attack (30) / defense (30) ratings), as was the case with his initial toughness, and his HP is still above all other unupgraded LEVEL 7 units (except Giant) to compensate for his average defense (note that the difference between Green Dragon's and Angel's HP is still 20). Finally, I' ve raised his initiative by 1 because of a respective increase in Angel's case and made it more costly by 100 gold, more for differentiation reasons, beside being an exceptional unit.
Emerald Dragon has become the second strongest now (after Archangel), since this wouldn't hurt his total maximum damage being greater than the latter's, the worst defense rating, as developers initially wanted but decent HP (not the best amongst 4 out of 6 upgraded LEVEL 7 units). This serves many purposes: his extremely high initiative should somehow be countered, his dwelling is the the cheapest (along with Shadow Dragon's) and I should find the perfect health for him so that firstly it would be better than the much tougher Archangel's, but the latter's Resurrection special would compensated for the former's (not that much) better initiative and secondly his much better initiative should be balanced by Titan's/Black Dragon's clearly superior durability. Under other circumstances I would have also decreased his initiative by 1, but this would entail in modifying the moral rating of the rest high initiative-creatures of inferior levels (which I won't touch for the time being because I haven't seen how exactly morale works). I just can't accept the most powerful creature of possibly the most powerful faction to be able to act 1.5-2 times more freqently than most other creatures. And I really can't understand why Emerald Dragons should have the best attack, health and initiative, the cheapest dwelling plus their favouring in cramped battlefields special; IMO developers mustn't create another totally overpowerd Archangel of HOMM III.

[Killroyan]

Well you have definitely put a lot of work in this but I get a feeling that you have missed some pretty important parts about the creatures, namely their specials combined with certain skills. This is what makes balancing really hard to do. Archangels for example get 1 of the most powerfull abilities in the game with resurrection. You state that Balors are too weak but you forget about vorpal sword and their immense powerfull spell casting abilities. You think that the cavaliers damage should be upped but the speed of the cavaliers is higher then the crusaders one which will result in a higher charge bonus, etc....

It is a nice analysis for sure but you will have to wait for the game to see how certain things work out. Demons might be the weakest level 2 creatures statwise but they still have corpse explosion and can gate in creatures (even more with higher gating skills). If you look at them that way then they are far from the weakest creatures. Far too many factors to take into consideration.

I hope you will make the same analysis again when the game comes out and then I will join in the discussion too.

[BenchBreaker]

Hey Titanus, calm down man, it's only some numbers

seriously though you seem to have a very strong/rigid view on how the stats should be and although i agree with you that the stats are not very well done(especially lv2 demon, zombie...) there's no need to analyse the creatures by level and set a fix range on how powerful creatures of a certain level should be.

e.g the scout was one of the better ideas, being as strong as some lv3 creatures but it is balanced because it's very few in numbers. we shouldn't label a creature with it's level and say "oh, it's a level 5 so it should be stronger than a level 4" because the "level" of a creature is abstract and cost and growth rate can be used to balance a stong lv4 with a weak lv5, this is what adds variety to the game.

also, maybe it's all the number crunching making your head go big but you seem to get upset about random things, like when you made such a fuss about the balor's 13-31 damage saying it's "totally unacceptable" when the standard 1-3 damage of lv1's has a wider range, not to mention the 1-4 you gave to demons. it's obvious that the makers wanted to put "unluckly" and "demonic" numbers into inferno creatures's stats, hence the 13-31 damage, the 166/199 hp the the 4166 cost, the 26-66 damage...

you also metioned that green dragon was too overpowered yet you gave it more att/def/hp than most others, anyway, i am not dissing your work, i just think you got too carried away

[Killroyan]

The thing with the balors for example is that they will do more damage by spell casting then with their melee attack, hence their melee damage is not that important. Besides that the great spread in damage makes them very vulnerable to necropolis with expert curse, but is offset by their ability to gate in reinforcements, etc.... I guess the developpers of the game got a big headache about balancing this game.