I should have been more specific and say I did not like the appeareance of the monsters. Generally, low level monsters may look funny - goblin in KBAP, leprechaun in hmm4, but high level monsters should look powerful and respectable. But my hmm4 examples - behemoth, phoenix did not. I do not remember being too impressed with thunderbird or mechanical dragon, or poison spawn? either, to name a few. That's why I did not "feel" the game.But there's more.
after over a decade of playing mainly turn based strategies (gosh, remember Fantasy General? I never conquered it on highest difficulty. But I was rookie then
) I know what must be present in the game to attract me:
-very few melee attackers may reach the opponent in one turn, otherwise it is a hack'n'slash slaughter with strategic element - buffing, slowing, debuffing etc. reduced. Typical example is haste rune on magma dragons in hmm5 exp. Brutally powerful dragons with magma shield, dragon breath, blind imunity, fire imunity have a weakness - they're slow. With haste rune they are unstoppable. (i hope i got it right
)
- element of luck kept at acceptable minimum. Whereas KBAP pirate units have 30% evasion, it is ok, because they are very low level, and 30% is acceptable. But minotaurs in hmm4 had 50%!! evasion against all kinds of attacks. too much.
- non-existence of chance to hit%. This simply silly idea which may ruin your strategies appeared in disciples2. otherwise great game. KBAP is ok, no chance to hit, but chance to do critical damage, lot better.
- non existence of too powerful skills. Examples being hmm4 genies mirror image on titans, sea monster swallow ability to name a few.
I also mentioned very limited income in hmm4 - 1000g/turn/castle. creators must have realised it was not good, so they went back to 4000g/turn as in hmm3