HoMM III: Best level 3 creature

[Banedon]

@humakt - Unless I kick them OK, they'll probably beat me no problem, but that's not the point, is it?

[Jolly Joker]

No, the Marksmen which the Griffins have as blockers - to make up for the blockers the Elves have - divert the Griffins that are attacking me.
Clearer now?

So the Oh so great Griffins does in fact not win that battle themselves but do so through the aid of the Marksmen. And yet you hold it against the Grand Elves that they lose that battle badly without bodyguards. I rest my case.

See, that's what I mean with unfair. OF COURSE the oh so great Grand Elves can rely on the help of blockers. If they HAVE blockers, they will be relatvely save from attacks from "normal" speed grunts because the blockers take the damage. If you give them Silver Pegasi as blockers it's even better because now the Pegasi cannot only guard the Elves from grunts (if necessary), they can attack faster shooters as well, making the Elves even safer. Don't you see that you use other units to make Elves great? By themselves they are too fragile.
Now, when I say, ok, if YOU use blockers (and you obviously use the unit you voted best level 1), every other unit can use them as well to make them even better. My example - deliberately - sounds absurd because Griffins are great by themselves and Marksmen aren't used as blockers. But it illustrates the point: you use another unit which makes the overall results better - and you give the Elves the FULL credit for the success and leave the dead with the nameless bodyguards.
And you can say what you want, THAT is wrong.
If we agree about the fact that it is indeed a factor that the Elves remain a threat throughout the game, then have a look at the Griffins. The interesting thing is that Griffins hardly ever die because with a Castle army an opponent has other worries, that look more threatening than the Griffins, and often won't be able to use a really high level unit to make short work of them. And when they realize that the Griffins are indeed a very numerous force and hard to stop with lower level units, it's too late most of the time. From an HP point of view the Griffins produce DOUBLE as many than the Elves with 4 more defense as well. 425 HPs per week. Only Archangels produce more weekly HPs for Castle.
If the Elves are a glaring and obvious threat, the Griffins are often an underrated one, and if the Elves may die a glorious, but early death, the Griffins will often be the last "man" standing.
If the Castle wouldn't have the cheaper and buildingswise much shorter and more economical Marksmen solution the Royal Griffins would be great units in the beginning, and the buildings as such aren't expensive either.

And quite obviously a unit alone will always suffer casualties if fighting against itself if unaided.

[Jolly Joker]

I was talking about Rgriffins blocking Gelves. How do Archangels and Mgorgons got involved, I don't know.
You really want to say, that you'll hit(melee) Rgriffins with Gelves? It's suicide and/or worthless.

No, the point is that the Royal Griffins should not get through to the Grand Elves in the first place (unless it's already past a very tough fight to get through the guards).

Think about it. In a full-fledged late-game firefight, the Grand Elves will have a minimum of three bodyguards: the Dwarves, the Dendroids and the Centaurs. To destroy all three of them is not going to be easy, yet unless you destroy them the Royal Griffins aren't going to be able to block the Grand Elves. If, for some reason, the Royal Griffins do manage to block the Grand Elves early in the battle, the Rampart player must have done something grievously wrong - in other words, he isn't using those Grand Elves properly. The Grand Elves should not get blocked early in a fight against Castle unless the Castle side flies the Archangels over to block the Elves.

In a full-fledged endgame the Rampart player mainly has to wait what the Castle player does: If the Castle player has Tactics (as well) there won't be any pre-arranging of units. If the Castle player whose turn it is then casts Clone on the Angels it's curtains before the Rampart player even gets his first turn in.

[Pitsu]

What personal rules? There is no rule saying you can't pick your hero and your bonus and your town at the start.

PS: Not starting with Ivor (unless you get to pick Kyrre, of course) is just like not learning Tactics with Stronghold. Again - it is not the fault of the Elves, it's the fault of the player.

Frankly, I feel insulted by this. I personally see randomness at start as part of the fun and source of challenge to my strategic skills. Starting always with the same hero is kind of selling the fun of the game for the sake of victory. It is OK once in a while but generally I have forced "all random" or "random hero/bonus" to all my SP and MP games. I just get more adrenaline then and refuse to acknowledge that enjoying the game is a fault.

[Banedon]

Now, when I say, ok, if YOU use blockers (and you obviously use the unit you voted best level 1), every other unit can use them as well to make them even better. My example - deliberately - sounds absurd because Griffins are great by themselves and Marksmen aren't used as blockers. But it illustrates the point: you use another unit which makes the overall results better - and you give the Elves the FULL credit for the success and leave the dead with the nameless bodyguards.
And you can say what you want, THAT is wrong.

Give me a good reason why the Grand Elves should not have blockers. I'll be much impressed if you can name one situation where it might occur in a real game (that is, no RPG style map where you're supposed to win the map with one Grand Elf).

You say Gaidal Cain and I give no credit to the nameless bodyguards, and maybe you are right - but consider this: every creature can be used as a blocker, yet only a few are important enough to warrant the blocking. What does that show?

In a full-fledged endgame the Rampart player mainly has to wait what the Castle player does: If the Castle player has Tactics (as well) there won't be any pre-arranging of units. If the Castle player whose turn it is then casts Clone on the Angels it's curtains before the Rampart player even gets his first turn in.

How about you write in your guide that Rampart vs. Castle is game over if Castle has Clone? I don't see such a comment there anywhere.

The interesting thing is that Griffins hardly ever die because with a Castle army an opponent has other worries, that look more threatening than the Griffins, and often won't be able to use a really high level unit to make short work of them. And when they realize that the Griffins are indeed a very numerous force and hard to stop with lower level units, it's too late most of the time.

Let me bring to your attention a similar argument for Logistics specialists being NOT imbalanced. Logistics is not imbalanced because the hero with the Logistics skills will find himself tempted to move further, which can place him further away from his main castle(s), and thus find himself too far away to come back when you attack him.

I wonder if you can see the absurdity in the argument.

Frankly, I feel insulted by this. I personally see randomness at start as part of the fun and source of challenge to my strategic skills. Starting always with the same hero is kind of selling the fun of the game for the sake of victory. It is OK once in a while but generally I have forced "all random" or "random hero/bonus" to all my SP and MP games. I just get more adrenaline then and refuse to acknowledge that enjoying the game is a fault.

I'm sorry I insulted you, but I must stand by what I wrote. If you play with random heroes / random bonuses, you run the grievous risk of someone getting an imbalanced hero (ey. Kyrre) while you getting a weakling (eg. Selena). The game's over before it even begins then. It might add to the fun and challenge of the game, yes, but if you're playing seriously to win the game then there's no reason to random.

[Pitsu]

Give me a good reason why the Grand Elves should not have blockers. I'll be much impressed if you can name one situation where it might occur in a real game (that is, no RPG style map where you're supposed to win the map with one Grand Elf).

You are opposing a warlock with meteor shower.

I'm sorry I insulted you, but I must stand by what I wrote. If you play with random heroes / random bonuses, you run the grievous risk of someone getting an imbalanced hero (ey. Kyrre) while you getting a weakling (eg. Selena). The game's over before it even begins then. It might add to the fun and challenge of the game, yes, but if you're playing seriously to win the game then there's no reason to random.

There is a lot of randomness anyway (mine guards, artifacts around etc). Yes, some heroes are imbalanced, but I would rather exclude these few than exclude everyone else.

[Jolly Joker]

Now, when I say, ok, if YOU use blockers (and you obviously use the unit you voted best level 1), every other unit can use them as well to make them even better. My example - deliberately - sounds absurd because Griffins are great by themselves and Marksmen aren't used as blockers. But it illustrates the point: you use another unit which makes the overall results better - and you give the Elves the FULL credit for the success and leave the dead with the nameless bodyguards.
And you can say what you want, THAT is wrong.

Give me a good reason why the Grand Elves should not have blockers. I'll be much impressed if you can name one situation where it might occur in a real game (that is, no RPG style map where you're supposed to win the map with one Grand Elf).

You say Gaidal Cain and I give no credit to the nameless bodyguards, and maybe you are right - but consider this: every creature can be used as a blocker, yet only a few are important enough to warrant the blocking. What does that show?

In a full-fledged endgame the Rampart player mainly has to wait what the Castle player does: If the Castle player has Tactics (as well) there won't be any pre-arranging of units. If the Castle player whose turn it is then casts Clone on the Angels it's curtains before the Rampart player even gets his first turn in.

How about you write in your guide that Rampart vs. Castle is game over if Castle has Clone? I don't see such a comment there anywhere.

Frankly, I feel insulted by this. I personally see randomness at start as part of the fun and source of challenge to my strategic skills. Starting always with the same hero is kind of selling the fun of the game for the sake of victory. It is OK once in a while but generally I have forced "all random" or "random hero/bonus" to all my SP and MP games. I just get more adrenaline then and refuse to acknowledge that enjoying the game is a fault.

I'm sorry I insulted you, but I must stand by what I wrote. If you play with random heroes / random bonuses, you run the grievous risk of someone getting an imbalanced hero (ey. Kyrre) while you getting a weakling (eg. Selena). The game's over before it even begins then. It might add to the fun and challenge of the game, yes, but if you're playing seriously to win the game then there's no reason to random.

Again an example for discussing for discussing's sake, because you have no point against the points made - the arguments are all fake.
Why I don't mention it in the guide? Because there is nothing you can do about it. It's all a question of whether the CASTLE player has this or that and uses it or not. You can't guard against it.
The point made as such is of course not even mentioned or ackknowledged.

For the other thing, in game there is no reason why the Elves should not have any blockers. But if there are blockers you must credit Elves AND BLOCKERS. Is this a poll for best Level 3 WITH SUPPORT? They NEED support to do what they are supposed to do. Ergo, they are too weak ALONE. That's why IN GAME you have named THREE stacks of units getting the task of guarding them. That tells me that Rampart have troops that are weak on their own, but strong combined, all well and good, but only viable in combo or army rating, not in single unit rating.

After this was said for the umptieth time I don't see any reason to repeat it. I'm sick of trying to explain the difference between what a unit can do on it's own and what a unit can do with support and how two different things are rated when you rate Elves with support and others - like Griffins or Flies - as they are. If you don't see that, fine.

[Banedon]

After this was said for the umptieth time I don't see any reason to repeat it. I'm sick of trying to explain the difference between what a unit can do on it's own and what a unit can do with support and how two different things are rated when you rate Elves with support and others - like Griffins or Flies - as they are. If you don't see that, fine.

And I'm sick of trying to tell you that you can use the Grand Elves to guard themselves. I've written that before, I don't want to search up the post again, but there's nothing stopping you from splitting your 30-strong stack of Grand Elves into 24-1-1-1-1-1-1 and then using the single Grand Elf stacks to guard the 24-Grand Elf stacks.

I tell you, given any unknown map I'd much prefer starting with 50 Grand Elves then 50 Dragon Flies or 50 Royal Griffins, despite the Grand Elf's ostensible weakness when alone. Not only can they guard themselves, every unit you might be able to hire can serve the role of the blocker.

Why I don't mention it in the guide? Because there is nothing you can do about it. It's all a question of whether the CASTLE player has this or that and uses it or not. You can't guard against it.
The point made as such is of course not even mentioned or ackknowledged.

...because you intend to mislead your readers that Rampart actually stands a chance against Castle, or is it because you're afraid to write that, and then have another player point out a counter?

I'm dropping this point anyway since it is irrelevant. I'm also dropping the point on Meteor Shower by the way, it's also not relevant to what's unfolding.

There is a lot of randomness anyway (mine guards, artifacts around etc). Yes, some heroes are imbalanced, but I would rather exclude these few than exclude everyone else.

In case you're wondering Pitsu I can't respond to this post because I can't see how I can do that without offending you more

[Pitsu]

I'm dropping this point anyway since it is irrelevant. I'm also dropping the point on Meteor Shower by the way, it's also not relevant to what's unfolding.

What is unfolding is that grand elf type low HP no-retal/high damage units are favorable targets to direct damage spells. And not only because you want to kill such units, but because DD magic is most efficient on them. Although magic resistance isn't often high priority, it IMO still is a relevant factor in judging a unit "bestness".

[Jolly Joker]

After this was said for the umptieth time I don't see any reason to repeat it. I'm sick of trying to explain the difference between what a unit can do on it's own and what a unit can do with support and how two different things are rated when you rate Elves with support and others - like Griffins or Flies - as they are. If you don't see that, fine.

And I'm sick of trying to tell you that you can use the Grand Elves to guard themselves. I've written that before, I don't want to search up the post again, but there's nothing stopping you from splitting your 30-strong stack of Grand Elves into 24-1-1-1-1-1-1 and then using the single Grand Elf stacks to guard the 24-Grand Elf stacks.

See, now you are talking sense. And you don't need to look it up because I know you wrote it and I acknowledged it already.
But if you split your stack of Grand Elves that way, you'll lose some of them - they will wither away, here 1, there 2, another 1 another 2, and they will do so FAST - otherwise you fight insignificant stacks that Orcs could beat easily - which is exactly what I say: by adding support you transfer the losses that the Elves would suffer to the support, and this is by no means a trait the Elves have in them as a natural ability. If they HAD this ability: summon a stack of 1, err, Dryad or something to cover all free hexes around them, yes, THEN you had the unit you see.
Moreover you cannot make a case for the Elves by picking a hero; as I said, the hero has nothing to with the troop as such, otherwise why stop at having additional units through the hero (which you can have with other heroes as well)?

[Banedon]

If you don't need to look up the post because you still remember it, something must have been seriously wrong with your thought process when you kept saying that Grand Elves are, somehow, unsupported even if they're on their own.

But if you split your stack of Grand Elves that way, you'll lose some of them - they will wither away, here 1, there 2, another 1 another 2, and they will do so FAST - otherwise you fight insignificant stacks that Orcs could beat easily - which is exactly what I say: by adding support you transfer the losses that the Elves would suffer to the support, and this is by no means a trait the Elves have in them as a natural ability. If they HAD this ability: summon a stack of 1, err, Dryad or something to cover all free hexes around them, yes, THEN you had the unit you see.

Yes, and in return you beat stacks you could not have otherwise. 50 Grand Elves split in such a manner can beat Crusaders, Minotaur Kings, Vampires, Centaur Captains, etc with little casualties. 50 Royal Griffins cannot, neither can 50 Dragonflies.

If you say the Grand Elves are going to wither away fast, Dragonflies and Royal Griffins are going to wither away faster, because they have no choice but to take the retaliation of whatever they're attacking. 50 Grand Elves split in such a manner will have little difficulty taking down 20 Thunderbirds (minus possible morale boost), but I'll cringe at using 50 Dragonflies for the same purpose.

What is unfolding is that grand elf type low HP no-retal/high damage units are favorable targets to direct damage spells. And not only because you want to kill such units, but because DD magic is most efficient on them. Although magic resistance isn't often high priority, it IMO still is a relevant factor in judging a unit "bestness".

Pitsu just put one past me again

I can't argue this except by saying that it's worth it nonetheless.

[Jolly Joker]

If you don't need to look up the post because you still remember it, something must have been seriously wrong with your thought process when you kept saying that Grand Elves are, somehow, unsupported even if they're on their own.

But if you split your stack of Grand Elves that way, you'll lose some of them - they will wither away, here 1, there 2, another 1 another 2, and they will do so FAST - otherwise you fight insignificant stacks that Orcs could beat easily - which is exactly what I say: by adding support you transfer the losses that the Elves would suffer to the support, and this is by no means a trait the Elves have in them as a natural ability. If they HAD this ability: summon a stack of 1, err, Dryad or something to cover all free hexes around them, yes, THEN you had the unit you see.

Yes, and in return you beat stacks you could not have otherwise. 50 Grand Elves split in such a manner can beat Crusaders, Minotaur Kings, Vampires, Centaur Captains, etc with little casualties. 50 Royal Griffins cannot, neither can 50 Dragonflies.

If you say the Grand Elves are going to wither away fast, Dragonflies and Royal Griffins are going to wither away faster, because they have no choice but to take the retaliation of whatever they're attacking. 50 Grand Elves split in such a manner will have little difficulty taking down 20 Thunderbirds (minus possible morale boost), but I'll cringe at using 50 Dragonflies for the same purpose.

Ah, but that's exactly what's the question:
What can each troop manage, in other words, what's the "killing quota" of each unit against EACH other unit, and what's a fair and realistic "mass" to check for: 1 full populations, 2, 3 and so on (realistically it should be checked for 1 to 5 populations). Additionally it depends not only on how much opponents there are, it depends on how much stacks they will divide into - all of which makes a difference. For example, against Crusaders, if there are one or two stacks it pays to have the Elves concentrated. But if they come in 7 stacks - and they can divide so - you may produce overkill, not killing them fast enough, while for the Cerberi, for example, it would be exactly the other way round, because with many stacks stheir 3-headed special would have a not too small impact.
Additionally there's terrain and obstacles - if there is a rift on the battlefield, fliers like Griffins can easily outmaneuver slower walkers, but there may be choke points as well to place a single elf and so on.

In short: there are MANY situations and MANY opponents and I doubt that anyone can guess, how it would work. For example, against Cyclopse Kings each Cyclops King will do an average of 14.2 damage against the 15 HP Elves, while 1 Elf will only do 3.6 damage in return.
Conversely a Dragonfly will do a slightly less 3.06 damage against them (but you get 2 more of them than Elves), while the Cyclopse Kings will do only 9.45 damage against the 20 HP DF. Moreover the Kings do damage first against the Elves...

Back to your post: whether your 50 GEs will take down 20 T-Birds or not depends on how many stacks they will come in. They might come in 7 which I see regularly when I attack them with Sprites. And they do wait. If they do come so you are hosed because your first shot will kill one stack, but when it's your turn again, your blockers are dead. And they WILL have double turns. believe me.

[Banedon]

What version are you playing on? I've never seen neutrals split into 7 stacks.

PS: If you start counting the numbers, you'll quickly see that Grand Elves are self-sufficient against more creatures than Dragon Flies. Dragon Flies only have the advantage against strong ranged creatures and fast fliers. Against everyone else, the Grand Elves are superior.
PPS: Who says you must split your Grand Elf stack into 6 blockers and one main shooter? Nothing stops you from splitting into two shooters and 5 blockers.
PPPS: I'm tired, not responding anymore.

[Jolly Joker]

I play Sod version 3.2 with WoG installed, but over regular Sod with CD in the drive, and I see it regularly.
Yes, you can split your Elves whichever way you want, but it should be a specific split againt each creature.
And I'm not so sure about that - after all who ever goes with ONLY Elves in practise. Let's say you have 2 Elfen populations - 28 - against a number of Minotaur Kings. The Minos will wait, so you have ONE shot with all 28, bevor the rest of them double turns. This means that you will do 95 damage, sufficient for ONE kill. Now it's the turn of the Minos - and their special makes double turns all the more probable. So how many Minos can you realistically stop? If they don't get through to your one main stack in turn 2 you have another full shot, but only with 22 or 23 of them, albeit with full damage which will probably kill another 3, maybe even 4, but that's it. And we are on thin ice here already. Because much depends on the split and on double moves plus obstacles, but the safely makeable number doesn't look so high, before losses will be grave. One mino will do an average of 24 damage against an Elf, but only 15.6 against a DF. So basically the minos will kill douuble as many Elves than flies, while an Elf will do only 1.7 damage against a mino in melee and a DF 2.9.

[UndeadHalfOrc]

Give me a good reason why the Grand Elves should not have blockers. I'll be much impressed if you can name one situation where it might occur in a real game (that is, no RPG style map where you're supposed to win the map with one Grand Elf).

You are opposing a warlock with meteor shower.

+1

Finally SOMEONE mentioned that spell.

That spell was outright DESIGNED to counter tight shooter-guards formation.

[Gaidal Cain]

And I'm not so sure about that - after all who ever goes with ONLY Elves in practise.

Am I the only one who find it absurd that you say this and yet find it unfair to include that fact in the rating?

If they don't get through to your one main stack in turn 2 you have another full shot, but only with 22 or 23 of them, albeit with full damage which will probably kill another 3,

This example is absurd. You've just said that the Minos have killed/blocked every blocking stack but failed to reach the main one. Either it's 26 Grand Elves (one dead, one blocked) at full damage (unless the map layout is extremely in favour of the elves), or a melee which the elves will lose unless the Minos are very few.

[Jolly Joker]

And I'm not so sure about that - after all who ever goes with ONLY Elves in practise.

Am I the only one who find it absurd that you say this and yet find it unfair to include that fact in the rating?

I suppose so. While in practise no one goes with Elves alone it doesn't make Elves+Blocker a new unit. You still can rate only one. See it this way: If you rate Elves + Blocker best level 3 you must deduct something for the blocker. The question is HOW MUCH and how much is left after you do. To do that you simply try and use Elves as blockers. You can see how much part the Blockers have when you check how many Minos, for example, the Elves can kill with additional blockers and how many with only Elves. Then you see how important the blockers are.

If they don't get through to your one main stack in turn 2 you have another full shot, but only with 22 or 23 of them, albeit with full damage which will probably kill another 3,

This example is absurd. You've just said that the Minos have killed/blocked every blocking stack but failed to reach the main one. Either it's 26 Grand Elves (one dead, one blocked) at full damage (unless the map layout is extremely in favour of the elves), or a melee which the elves will lose unless the Minos are very few.[/quote]
That may be, but I just try to give the Elves the biggest possible advantage from having as many blockers as possible.

[Gaidal Cain]

That may be, but I just try to give the Elves the biggest possible advantage from having as many blockers as possible.

How is having 22 active Elves an advantage over having 25 or 26* of them (no matter if 3 of the 25 is in one-unit stacks)?

*I thought of it a bit more, and depending on how many Minos are left, it might be better to let another 1-unit stack step in to fill the hole.

[Jolly Joker]

It doesn't matter anyway. You'd have to spend some time with thinking about how to set it up best with how many split stacks, if you want to really put this through in earnest and go ahead with some exact figures. However, for getting the rough picture one Elf more or less is not that important.

[Gaidal Cain]

Well, obviously not, several Minotaur stacks going through Elf after Elf like that didn't seem to make it a good example, because unless the battlefield is really special and you have Tactics to take care of it, you won't be able to kill that many Elves without reaching the main stack. Thus, considering the for the elves worst scenarion, you have one volley at half max strength, killing two minotaurs, and perhaps you can take another down in a melee. In the best possible scenario (without any special terrain), you have one Minotaur stack, and will get in 1 volley at half strength and 4 at full, killing some 14 Minotaurs, and have melee capabilities for another. (All this disregarding morale, which could screw up for the Elves).

I don't see 32 Dragonflies being able to kill 15 Minotaurs: Splitting 26+6*1 will have the main stack doing about 80 damage each turn, but will either have to take damage or do hits and runs (reducing average damage to 40/each turn). I'd say you'd end up with maybe 6 dead Minotaurs at best (if we consider that there are "many" minotaurs- not enough to kill the flies outright, but enough to deal some serious damage to them).

Thus, the Elves is at worst half as good as the flies, but can be three times as good. Adding some fodder into the equation (which can't be taken down in one hit) will certainly make the Elves more effective, but wouldn't aid the flies that much.