Irresistible magic

[Cyrox]

OK ... i see that we've all gotten warmed up discussing this subject.... but my question is... what is the point to all this polemic? I hardly imagine that someone from Nival will ever read this forum... and as we can't make a mod that would change this "feature"... I see that all this arguing is kind of pointless....

Anyway... IMO the most important here in this thread are the poll results... which are quite clear. Fans would like iresistible magic not to affect your creatures.

But I guess this is the problem with Heroes 5... and the cause of all these polemics... the fact that Nival and Ubi didn't care much about fan input...

i don't know why ppl said that Heroes 4 was a disapointment... I liked the game very much... but I can clearly state that HOMM5 is a big disapointment... for me anyway...
Why am I still here... well... because I'm a fan... but sadly... I have the feeling that all we do here...is just giving our opinion without somebody asking for it...

I agree wholeheartedly.

This thread is gettng out of hand. It's amazing how a small aspect of the game can cause such hot debate.

This thread ihas became Jolly Joker trying to convince the world about his view point and vice versa.

I dont know why you guys still continue well knowing that no one is gonna listen to your argument(s).

And its amazing how every small tiny detail in each person's arguments are so carefully scrutinised.

I mean, dont you people have better things to do?

Peace, ok?

PS: Dont you guys find it real tedious to read Jolly Joker's essays which has paragraphing without spacing? I salute u. I personally think it's bad for the eyes.

[Gaidal Cain]

This says it all, doesn't it? You don't want a "correct" analogy where everything is in the right perspective, you want a warped one. One that makes wrong assumptions like the hero would rob 50% resurrection which is not generally true, but only in special cases, I tried to correct.

No. I have said before that the point of the analogy is that there is a creature with a speciality that would suggest doing some things (like not caring whether they get in the way of a possible later Meteor shower), and a hero ability that annuls this. The analogy is actually not that good from this point: the Archangel in it still has the ability to resurrect. I've still not seen you explain why it's good to have an inbuilt conflict between specialities like this.

You are so biassed and keen on "proving" something that you don't even see that you have no point. Not one.

And you're so adamant in your beliefs that there are no points that you forget to argue why and just dismiss it with a "you're wrong".

You just claim something wild decree an answer as invalid by right of the gods, and then claim, hey, look here, no one has a valid point.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I'm going to assume that the analogy I made is valid until someone actually can show that it's not.

It's not asking whether it makes sense or is balanced. If you would make a poll about Devils and no-retaliation it would be the same, probably.

Of course not. But If you go back and read, you'll see that I, and others as well, have said that if it proves to strong with a non-conflicting IM, there are other parameters to tweak instead.

Of course the Dungeon would be stronger if the Dragons were not affcted by IM.

Of ocurse, if everything else is kept equal. I don't think anyone has said anything about that, though.

You would maybe like to base something around certain strategies, but it's the other way round: you have the main theme of the towns and the heroes and you try to combine it with the creatures.

AND the abilities of the creatures, which you try to combine with the heroes.
Having a Wizard leading the Haven units would lead to quite different tactics, right?

How about changing one of the Avenger abilities into "Change Favored Enemy" which would allow a hero to change the favored enemy on the way (you'd still need the building) and because that would be so much more convenient favored enemy damage might drop a bit in percentage.

I'd be for such a change, or for example creating some adventure map object which allowed such a thing. that's mostly because I don't like that some of the skills needs a town to be useful though.

You could all do that, but it is not possible to prove that it should be so, there is no law against a racial being harmful in certain situations (completely under the owners control. mind you).

I don't think anyone has tried to "prove" that IM can't be the way it is now, just state that there are better slotions for us and why. And there's also a difference between say artificer and IM: you can choose NOT to use artificer if you think the resources are better spent building up your town. You can't choose not to use IM if you think it's better not to blast your dragons.

Lastly, here's another of your analogies. How about this one: Let's say Haven's Racial would be called Irresistable Retaliation. This would give all units the ability to retaliate with a certain percentage in a no-retaliation situation, especially when attacked by no-retal units like Cerberi, but also to counter skills like defense and so on, giving the Counterstrike racial in addition (with the basic efect that a unit could retaliate against no retal with 20/40/50% and that all hero-based skills and abilities guarding against retaliation damage would be negated or weakened). However, since this would affect the units that had the no-retaliation attack, the Imperial Griffins' Battle Dive would be affected and they would suffer up to 50% retaliation depending on the skill.
So what?

I'm not sure I follow you here: are you saying that it would do this for all units on the field? If so, I would first of all note that it doubly screw the griffin since one of their abilities is unlimited retal. Otherwise, I would like to ask: would it mean that the reatl would be simultaneous, meaning it would be full retal strength? If it's not, then I'd say that the battle dive would be to a large part unchanged, as it's usually enough to cripple the stack. If it is, then I'd question the logic of having the dive and the ability at the same time, even if there is the obvious other benefit of extra damage and possible bonus of having the griffin off the battlefield for a while.

Question: How is [brath attack] different from the IM situation? Occasionally it leads to an inability to cast the most advantageous spell onto the most advantageous location because the price may be too high

The main difference I see is that there is no conflict between breath attack and some other abilities. To take an analogy again: what if the Warlock had an ability that halved the damage done to the second target of the attack, friend or foe? One could say that it would be advantageous, as you wouldn't have to care as much about what you do with your dragons or when you're attacked by other dragons, but on the other hand, it would serve as a distinct disadvantage in most cases.
When it comes to abstracted combat tactics, there is not much difference.

[Jolly Joker]

Talk what you like, this doesn't change the facts.
The facts are, the only downside of IM is that Warlocks cannot blast Destructive spells over their Dragons without hurting them in the process.
You can try to disguise this with so many words as you like, but that's it in a nutshell - it's the only point.
Now some say, why should I invest in a skill that makes my Dragons weaker? Answer: because it makes everyone else weaker (think of magic resistancies and magical immunities plus the spell) against your magic, whether they want that or not (no defence), but you are not forced to spell-damage your own creatures, so your own creature is weakened only if you want to, not the opponent.
It might be sometimes more advantageous to do so, but there are many things that sometimes would be more advantageous to do so if there wasn't a downside.

This is my last post in this thread anymore, since all has been said more than once. Repeating the same arguments over and over again has no use, I agree there.

It has shown that moderation here is biassed. Some people are allowed to constantly make remarks that have only one purpose: to be personally offending. It's a shame that the moderation allows that. It speaks volumes about the mindset of certain people here.

I would like to explicitly take out Daemian Lucifer here whom I have learned to respect as a very fair and factual poster.

[Naskoni]

Talk what you like, this doesn't change the facts.
The facts are, the only downside of IM is that Warlocks cannot blast Destructive spells over their Dragons without hurting them in the process.
You can try to disguise this with so many words as you like, but that's it in a nutshell - it's the only point.
Now some say, why should I invest in a skill that makes my Dragons weaker? Answer: because it makes everyone else weaker (think of magic resistancies and magical immunities plus the spell) against your magic, whether they want that or not (no defence), but you are not forced to spell-damage your own creatures, so your own creature is weakened only if you want to, not the opponent.
It might be sometimes more advantageous to do so, but there are many things that sometimes would be more advantageous to do so if there wasn't a downside.

This is my last post in this thread anymore, since all has been said more than once. Repeating the same arguments over and over again has no use, I agree there.

It has shown that moderation here is biassed. Some people are allowed to constantly make remarks that have only one purpose: to be personally offending. It's a shame that the moderation allows that. It speaks volumes about the mindset of certain people here.

I would like to explicitly take out Daemian Lucifer here whom I have learned to respect as a very fair and factual poster.

You have demonstrated thoroughly how hypocritical you can be and are, bashing people for the EXACT same things you do and consider normal, being arrogant and biased to the point of being entertaining and completely incapable of accepting any arguments whatsoever unless they coincided with your own "unquestionable" opinion 100%, whenever you ran out of arguments you relied on your arrogance in stating opinion for facts or tried to change the thread to a completely unrelated topics, and refused in any way to address questions about (any) argumentation of why that is so. Additionally you have done your very best to convince people how utterly pointless it is for them to hope in changing anything and that arguing is as pointless as it gets as Nival knows best and they can do whatever they want. Your attitude is demonstrated best in:

I really have to laugh now.
You people abolsutely have no points, ro reasons, no arguments, no facts.
Nothing.
Just silly polemics.

Based on your type and amount of "contribution" the only thing personally I can say in reply is:

Bye!

[Sir_Toejam]

It has shown that moderation here is biassed. Some people are allowed to constantly make remarks that have only one purpose: to be personally offending. It's a shame that the moderation allows that. It speaks volumes about the mindset of certain people here.

you should be a bit more careful about accusing moderators of bias.

that tends to lead to more, uh, bias, even if there really wasn't any before.

[Elvin]

A lot of people so far made my point by stating one way or another that "fixing" IM is simply asking for more power for Dungeon - what does that mean - it simply goes to say that Dungeon is better off without their racial, that the racial is not beneficial and it damn sure should be.

Bottom line - IM works a lot more against the very faction that is supposed to benefit from improving that skill and at the end of the day this is simply idiotic.

Well JJ may have a hollier-than-thou attitude but he is right about this one.First of all warlock's utilize tactics that may harm their creatures be it IM,firebreath or armageddon-they simply don't care as long as they hurt the enemy more.But it is an important racial,one a warlock depends upon.It's not just about damaging immune creatures nor countering another dungeon player:It ensures that the spells will always work no matter what.A sylvan player with obscenenely high resistance and master hunters near a unicorn would normally pwn a warlock if they resisted the first couple of castings.There won't be a chance dungeon's main strength will be negated even in rare circumstances.After all what he gets by lvling IM is too good to be ignored:Dark ritual allows for secrets of destruction,elemental vision boosts damage output,empowered spells no comment.You may say it should not have been made this way in the first place:Maybe you are right but my experience so far tells me that it's fair enough the way it is now.I can't really complain as it can still be used to your advantage and doesn't allow for abusing some strategies.And certainly the vote of many is not always in the right.

[DaemianLucifer]

The main thing is the hero, the town and racial, not the creatures. You would maybe like to base something around certain strategies, but it's the other way round: you have the main theme of the towns and the heroes and you try to combine it with the creatures.

Then why was one of yours(and many others)main argument been about dracogedon?It clearly is a strategy(no matter how sleasy,it still is a strategy).If it is unimportant,why argue about it?And Im not saying this because I support this strategy,but because you cannot say "Its about this and this,other things are irrelevant".Its a strategy game,so strategies are very relevant.

You can construct something for the other racials as well. Some of the following points are more valid than others, but the main thing to see is, that all those more or less valid points are completely inconsequential:

Academy: the racial special is forcing you (in the same sense as Dungeon is forced to cast area spells on Dragons) to block veluable resources you'd need for building dwellings: a clear disadvantage.
Sylvan: The racial is forcing you to always go back into town when you make new use of it. A clear disadvantage. Moreover you have no control over it
Haven: The racial is forcing you to let your own troops get hit to enjoy the racial.
Necro: the racial is forcing you to fight everything for maximum effect which is in itself boring and repetitive.
Inferno: that special is forcing you to a lot of micro-management in battle. Moreover the good speed of level 3 and 5 often doesn't allow making use of the racial because those creatures have to speed immediately to the front to attack and block creatures, another big disadvantage.

What?Wrong.Those skills dont force you to do anything.You have a choice.You can choose not to gate,you can choose not to train,not to construct artifacts,not to have a favourite enemy.And necromancy and counterstrike are just bonuses,that I dont see anyone would choose not to have.IM,on the other hand,you cannot choose not to use.And it forces you to use less effective spells in certain situations.

Read this example:you have your stack surrounded by some rather weak creatures,but lots of them,and tehyll kill you unless you meteor shower them.So you can either cast meteor shower and kill most of them,leaving just a small stack to die from your creatures strike in the next round,or you can cast an empowered meteor strike killing all of them,but killing more of your creatures.Thats called a choice.Now,imagine you have your dragons surrounded,and you have to strike them with a spell too.But now you dont have an option not to kill your dragons and just damage your opponents because your IM cannot be turned off.Thats forcing you and not a choice.

I dont see how to explain my point any simpler then this,so if you still dont get it,I give up.

Now what will happen if I make the poll:
Should the Rangers be forced to go back to any home town when they want to change the favored enemy of their hero?
And you could discuss this, yes, would be better, but would be more powerful as well, so this had to be nerfed somehow...
How about changing one of the Avenger abilities into "Change Favored Enemy" which would allow a hero to change the favored enemy on the way (you'd still need the building) and because that would be so much more convenient favored enemy damage might drop a bit in percentage.

Why not?Personally,Id love to have all racial not connected to cities.

You could all do that, but it is not possible to prove that it should be so, there is no law against a racial being harmful in certain situations (completely under the owners control. mind you).

The fact that nival controls it doesnt mean I haver to like it.

Lastly, here's another of your analogies. How about this one: Let's say Haven's Racial would be called Irresistable Retaliation. This would give all units the ability to retaliate with a certain percentage in a no-retaliation situation, especially when attacked by no-retal units like Cerberi, but also to counter skills like defense and so on, giving the Counterstrike racial in addition (with the basic efect that a unit could retaliate against no retal with 20/40/50% and that all hero-based skills and abilities guarding against retaliation damage would be negated or weakened). However, since this would affect the units that had the no-retaliation attack, the Imperial Griffins' Battle Dive would be affected and they would suffer up to 50% retaliation depending on the skill.
So what?

So what?Actually that is an excelent analogy.You dont see that existing of such a skill would be imensly dumb?

It can harm you, but the harm is completely under the owners control! A seemingly small, but a decisive difference. If the opponent could do anything against it, use it against you, force you to hurt yourself, I would agree. But as it is, it is completely up to you how you handle it. You still have complete immunity in terms of your opponents. You will never see your Dragons Blinded, Berserked or Puppet-mastered, nor Wizard-marked or targeted by a nasty spells. The unit is armageddon-proof, if cast by another Hero type, for example a Wizard or - later in the addon, a Rune Lord.
However, you cannot blindly cast destructive area spells anymore - even though potential losses would be less than suffered by the opposition.
That isn't exactly harmful.

I find the Haven special a lot more harmful because it will come into use only if you are attacked in a way that leaves enough of the attacked stack to make it count - but if that's the case you probably don't need the special.

The difference is that the heaven special gives you just a bonus while IM gives you a penalty as well.And while counterstrike works against everyone,IM works only against a handfull of creatures,and a few skills.And you have one of those handfull creatures.To use counterstrike analogy,it would be like if counterstrike worked only against top tier units,and in a way that it decreased your defense when attacked by them,but increase your attack on retaliation.

In practise the "harmfulness" only shows when the best use of a Destructive spell would be a) an area spell and b) Dragons would be "in the way". This is most pronounced with the Armageddon spell. However, with Armageddon doing double damage in the 4 middle squares of the battlefield and Dragons only suffering half the normal damage, the casting of the Armageddon may be highly advantageous, even though it would inflict losses on the Dragons as well.

Did you ever see armagedon cast advantageously in HV?Neither have I.Besides,its more harmfull when your opponent gangs up on your dragons and you have no option to kill them but do minimal damage to the dragons.If your small creature is ganged on you can use circle of winter.If your gargoyels get ganged on,you can use your fireball(asuming your not a warlock).If your necro units are ganged upon,you can blast them away without worry(assuming your a necro).If your emeralds get ganged on,you can use meteor shower without worry(assuming your not a warlock).If your champions get ganged on,you can blast them away,knowing your angels will resurect.

For normal area spells there are different shapes and effects, you can cast them empowered or not and it's not all about getting the most damage with the most brutal spell and just banging around with the spells, it's a bit more thinking involved, about what spell to use in what situation with the vulnerability of the Dragons against one's own Destructive spells being a factor to consider as well.

Read the above.Giving an immune creature to a race focused on destruction magic clearly indicates the use of dragons in melee surrounded by massive damaging spells.

I repeat: it's completely under the control of the owning hero, so it's harmful only if you want it. You could say, the hearth is so hot you can burn yourself, if you are not careful. But you can burn yourself, for example with the fire breath of the Dragons as well, if you are not careful. By the way, this point still stands: if you are not being careful with your units and Dragons, the opponent may move and attack a small stack so that the retaliation of your Dragons will hurt your own troops. This is potentially harmful as well, and you can reread on page 20 again, how GC tried to explain that this could be used against you, if you were not careful, sure, but that it was so stupid that you could not fly your Dragons into the thick of battle and follow up with a Meteor Shower - which is basically the only point that is there: we cannot fly our Dragons into the thick of the enemy and follow up with a Meteor shower (unharmed).

But the same is exactly true for two-square attack as well: you cannot just fly somewehere and attack with the Dragons and move and attack with the rest of your units as you would like to because you have to take into account that an opposing unit might move and attack your Dragons with the retaliation then being harmful. So have to take consideration and this might lead to an inability to move and attack the way it would be best - but for the Dragons's Breath attack.
The same is true for the racial.
So?

Dragons breath affects everyone,not just MR creature.Thats a significant difference.

[mr.hackcrag]

Nicely put Elvin. You said everything that I wanted to say and saved me the trouble of typing it. At first I thought that IM shouldn't hurt your own troops, but now I think the other way around. Dungeon places a lot of emphasis on destruction, and it seems not even their own troops are spared from it.

[DaemianLucifer]

Yet inferno troops are spared from the succubi chain attack,and undead are spared from death cloud,even though mechanical units arent.Go figure.

[Naskoni]

A lot of people so far made my point by stating one way or another that "fixing" IM is simply asking for more power for Dungeon - what does that mean - it simply goes to say that Dungeon is better off without their racial, that the racial is not beneficial and it damn sure should be.

Bottom line - IM works a lot more against the very faction that is supposed to benefit from improving that skill and at the end of the day this is simply idiotic.

Well JJ may have a hollier-than-thou attitude but he is right about this one.First of all warlock's utilize tactics that may harm their creatures be it IM,firebreath or armageddon-they simply don't care as long as they hurt the enemy more.But it is an important racial,one a warlock depends upon.It's not just about damaging immune creatures nor countering another dungeon player:It ensures that the spells will always work no matter what.A sylvan player with obscenenely high resistance and master hunters near a unicorn would normally pwn a warlock if they resisted the first couple of castings.There won't be a chance dungeon's main strength will be negated even in rare circumstances.After all what he gets by lvling IM is too good to be ignored:Dark ritual allows for secrets of destruction,elemental vision boosts damage output,empowered spells no comment.You may say it should not have been made this way in the first place:Maybe you are right but my experience so far tells me that it's fair enough the way it is now.I can't really complain as it can still be used to your advantage and doesn't allow for abusing some strategies.And certainly the vote of many is not always in the right.

You obviously don't find it funny that Dungeon special (I guess everybody in the thread more or less agreed on this one) acts more like a break than a real benefit.

Yes, you mention Sylvan - true - it plays a role there, but what about the other factions as there are such without ANY resistance or immunity to damage spells? You picture IM in its very best light but draw the big picture please as it is hardly useful that often and unlike Sylvan which you might or might not fight at all BDs are with you all the time, no (well if you play long enough to reach tier 7)?

As for IM acting as a brake - the biggest concern and problem seems to be Armageddon, which just so happens to be very easy to fix, simply make it do physical damage so that no one can save himself from it and it will never be abused in any way!

Another proposal - make IM apply only to Empowered Spells - great idea, you get a choice and you have to pay with double the mana cost both for more damage and the IM effect, but you still can take full advantage of your BDs immunity if you feel so, your price will be that you won't be able to cast Empowered then - how can this be a bad solution provided Armageddon is dealt with as pointed above?

Another proposel - leave IM as it is but make it beneficial as well as to make it fully balanced - make it penetrate imunity in order to buff, with reduced efficiency of course - just as it works for damage spells - buff or raise or resurrect if you are crazy enough to take light magic but do so at 50% of the normal efficiency at expert IM. What's wrong with that too? How is that going to ruin the game?

How come the Hydra doesn't hit frendlies around it (for example) - why is it selective in applying its special thus giving you only the positive side and none of the negative while IM gives only the negative when it comes to your own units (dragons)? Why did Nival give the "most" immune creature to the faction that specializes in negating that very immunity? Why do you suffer more the more you raise IM provided that IM is useful vs two factions and none of them have got as much to lose as BDs, isn't it? How come IM makes you play your BDs as if they didn't have any immunity?

Why don't people understand that there are ways of both fixing IM and NOT making Dungeon any stronger and that making Dungeon overpowered is NOT the the idea here? Why not - beats me to be honest...

[Gaidal Cain]

Now some say, why should I invest in a skill that makes my Dragons weaker? Answer: because it makes everyone else weaker

Wrong. It makes Black Dragons (both your own and your enemy's), Gargoyles, Golems, Gold Dragons, Unicorns, Phoenixes and Elementals weaker, as well as a very few skills and a few artifacts (and a few of these only marginally so, as you can easily switch to another spell to get around their resistance). It's very, very far from "everyone".

It has shown that moderation here is biassed. Some people are allowed to constantly make remarks that have only one purpose: to be personally offending. It's a shame that the moderation allows that. It speaks volumes about the mindset of certain people here.

I'll have you know I went through this thread to check this. While there were a few things that slipped through, I saw plenty of "Mod notes". And you know what? Most of them basically said "argue in case, not against JJ as a person". There should perhaps have been a couple more, but then you would probably have had a couple of posts removed as well. Whether that makes moderation biased is not for me to decided though.

Speaking of moderation, but aimed in other directions: Keep on subject, and post stuff that adds to the discussion. Three letter abbreviations certainly don't.

[PhoenixReborn]

Irresistible magic is very effective. In my mp game it meant that I could ignore the magic resistance chance of the unicorns in my friends sylvan army. It ignores inferno resistance to chain lightning. It ignores the academy magic resistances. It bashes enemy black dragons. And there are plenty of resistance skills and artifacts so I'm sure it could bash through a necro hero too. It's effective against all the factions.

In my mp game I chose to meteor shower right over my hydras...I was able to kill all the enemy units and prevent the enemy from fleeing even though I lost a few hydras. I would have done it if it was a black dragon too. I think that's a reasonable choice to make in many situations. It isn't the worst thing in the world.

[Elvin]

You obviously don't find it funny that Dungeon special (I guess everybody in the thread more or less agreed on this one) acts more like a break than a real benefit.

Yes, you mention Sylvan - true - it plays a role there, but what about the other factions as there are such without ANY resistance or immunity to damage spells? You picture IM in its very best light but draw the big picture please as it is hardly useful that often and unlike Sylvan which you might or might not fight at all BDs are with you all the time, no (well if you play long enough to reach tier 7)?

Not really like a break,more like a double edged dagger.By the time you get black dragons the opponent will likely have luck resistance plus resistance artifacts and from then on every single resisted spell could be a disaster.Dungeon creatures can't stay around for long,destructive complements them and ensures their survival.Jeez a resisted empowered implosion on several hundred marksmen is too painful to even imagine!As for the other racials not being harmful,what can I say?Dungeon is unique!

@mr.hackcrag:You welcome!

Edit:
Sorry PhoenixReborn I didn't see your post earlier.I guess you had already covered my point!

[DaemianLucifer]

It ignores inferno resistance to chain lightning.

Really?I never noticed they are resistant to chain lightning.

[Kilop]

... I continue to believe IM should affect black dragons... even if dracogedon is balanced, player will just make dracoshower, and it would still be effective, if dungeon player has enough gold to surrender.
I begin to think that if soo many people like this immunity of dragons, is not because of logic , or gameplay , but feelings.
This is funny, but nonetheless borring, yes blackies always had this advantage, yes, it was cool , no in previous heroes, empowered spells didn t exist.. get a grip, dungeon is strong enough, not to have this feature removed ( of yes of course, DL, this feature is harmfull toward dungeon, but is that SO important ? )

You can choose not to gate,you can choose not to train,not to construct artifacts,not to have a favourite enemy.And necromancy and counterstrike are just bonuses,that I dont see anyone would choose not to have.IM,on the other hand,you cannot choose not to use.And it forces you to use less effective spells in certain situations.

right, you can choose not to buy any troops at all either, nothing forces you! [/code]

[DaemianLucifer]

I continue to believe IM should affect black dragons... even if dracogedon is balanced, player will just make dracoshower, and it would still be effective, if dungeon player has enough gold to surrender.

Sure,like we are seeing spamming of circle of winter now?Or fireball from wizards?Yes,many times I wnet in with just furries,and when the enemy came close,I just circled them with ice,then I surendered.Its such a common tactics.And just putting your gargoyls and fireballing them to death.Soo common.And tripple ballista combined with MS and emeralds really ruins the game.Its such a cheap and cheasy tactics.In fact,lets ban it.And lets ban circle of winter.And fireball gargoyls.Oh,and spamming raise dead is also overpowered,it should be banned.Oh,and we should ban benediction as well.And mass slow,mass haste,berzerk,hypnotise,and all those overpowered spells as well.Tactics using them are so cheap.Lets ban battledive as well,since its so cheap..................

I begin to think that if soo many people like this immunity of dragons, is not because of logic , or gameplay , but feelings.

Yes we do,and so what?Would you like heroes to be an RTS?Or a FPS?Why not?Is that based on logic?Gameplay(hey,RTS can have excelent gameplay too,and so can FPS)?No,its based purely on feelings.

This is funny, but nonetheless borring, yes blackies always had this advantage, yes, it was cool , no in previous heroes, empowered spells didn t exist.. get a grip, dungeon is strong enough, not to have this feature removed ( of yes of course, DL, this feature is harmfull toward dungeon, but is that SO important ? )

Yes it is.

right, you can choose not to buy any troops at all either, nothing forces you!

Yep,you can choose not to.But you still cannot choose not to use IM,even if you are level one.

[Kilop]

sorry , i cannot choose to not use bonus to retaliation, and, that is UNFAIR I can use it just when i get hit...

And tripple ballista combined with MS and emeralds really ruins the game

actually a good idea, never thought of that, let s bring sylvan artillerie.

and all those overpowered spells

yes, overpowered, but not empowered ...

Oh,and spamming raise dead is also overpowered

careful in your argumentation please, raise dead has been already nerfed, but maybe you were serious here ...

No,its based purely on feelings

dear me !! I thought it was turn based to enhance logical and tactical decision, but no !! Just emotional ones... that makes me cry

Yes it is.

no, it is not

[Naskoni]

sorry , i cannot choose to not use bonus to retaliation, and, that is UNFAIR I can use it just when i get hit...

Problem here is: there are absolutely NO disadvantages or negative feats associated with improving that skill, which is NOT the case with IM, no? Yes - you take advantage "only" when you get hit, because you get hit so seldom, isn't it? Plus a bonus of 25% to pure damage for free for all of your units is like nothing - who needs it? <-sarcasm

[DaemianLucifer]

sorry , i cannot choose to not use bonus to retaliation, and, that is UNFAIR I can use it just when i get hit...

Thats a bonus to your retal.Honestly,like youd ever choose not to have it?I already stated that that one and necromancy are only bonuses,and you dont have to spend resources to get them.

Oh,and spamming raise dead is also overpowered

careful in your argumentation please, raise dead has been already nerfed, but maybe you were serious here ...

But not corectly.Someone mentioned that when you reach 1 HP you can use it forever.If true,then its bugged as well.Besides,you can use it just as much as empowered MS,because warlocks dont have infinite knowledge.

dear me !! I thought it was turn based to enhance logical and tactical decision, but no !! Just emotional ones... that makes me cry

If it was real time it would be even more logical(stacks arent really that logical,even though they are neat),and it still could be very tactical.

[mr.hackcrag]

Yes it is.

no, it is not

This is the funniest thing ever.

I wish all debates were like this.