Warrior on impossible is easiest at least timewise with different playing style

[Keneth]

Europe and the States have different currencies, Warriors and Mages have the same currency with the same value. A warrior gets a bonus from Iron fist though, that's true, but it only works on human knight-type units and it's not that huge - if you max Iron Fist you can get 20% more knights, a decent bonus if you like human armies. Warriors get no bonuses for demons, iirc the only reduction in leadership requirements comes from Demetrius and a mage can use that just fine so I guess you need new glasses. Also, a mage can have well over 60 Int, buffing yours to 40 means nothing, a mage can get his attack up to 40 also and the only difference between him a and a warrior will be that the warrior has more troops and a mage can cast more spells. Good thing you tripple-posted to prove nothing that we haven't already conceded on.

[tjoepee]

Originally Posted by Keneth

Europe and the States have different currencies, Warriors and Mages have the same currency with the same value. A warrior gets a bonus from Iron fist though, that's true, but it only works on human knight-type units and it's not that huge - if you max Iron Fist you can get 20% more knights, a decent bonus if you like human armies. Warriors get no bonuses for demons, iirc the only reduction in leadership requirements comes from Demetrius and a mage can use that just fine so I guess you need new glasses. Also, a mage can have well over 60 Int, buffing yours to 40 means nothing, a mage can get his attack up to 40 also and the only difference between him a and a warrior will be that the warrior has more troops and a mage can cast more spells. Good thing you tripple-posted to prove nothing that we haven't already conceded on.

lmao either way u r completely dumb or try to piss ppl off for now I take it as the later. U don' t post any proofs and lack examples of whatever u say.

A warrior' s LD>Mage LD because my army have higher attack and usually deal the extra capped maximum damage whereas the mage same army deals less damage (hence my demon doing higher damage, not only doing higher damage the first attack but also the second third and so on). I posted it about this in the first post already I think u don' t think deep when u read other ppl post. And this LD only increase with not only the iron fist bonus but also the knight set bonus or dwarf hammer bonus. 20% discount meants more units and yes these units have higher attack also and does close to the max extra damage whereas ur mage plain simply don' t. If u buff up ur attack u will never reach the attack of the warrior, not to mention the LD u miss and hence u screw ur mage

A mage can' t cast more spells the spellbook is the same u get to caste twice for 3 turns which IMHO doesn' t weight as much as the 2 warrior specific bonusses.

And check the high score section u will see the warrior always have higher stats. Instead of thinking MAGE just rocks play the game with warrior on impossible at a high level and then talk.

to quote u in other section
Yes, the only way to get rage after round 20 is rage drain and chargers.
great way to use rage drain and chargers considering u have no rage income, lol....... u missed the post completely about using poison cloud being useless to get infinite money.

Every post of u so far I have read u only try to proof to some newbies u have better knowledge throwing words or things that u think r cool. Most of the time they are useless IMHO. At least i post few combo and tricks.

my 2 cents I won' t be responding to u anymore as u always miss the point of posts anyway.

[Keneth]

Originally Posted by tjoepee

U don' t post any proofs and lack examples of whatever u say.

I don't have to post my examples to disprove your examples. Redundancy doesn't achieve anything.

Originally Posted by tjoepee

A warrior' s LD>Mage LD because my army have higher attack and usually deal the extra capped maximum damage whereas the mage same army deals less damage (hence my demon doing higher damage, not only doing higher damage the first attack but also the second third and so on). I posted it about this in the first post already I think u don' t think deep when u read other ppl post. And this LD only increase with not only the iron fist bonus but also the knight set bonus or dwarf hammer bonus. 20% discount meants more units and yes these units have higher attack also and does close to the max extra damage whereas ur mage plain simply don' t. If u buff up ur attack u will never reach the attack of the warrior, not to mention the LD u miss and hence u screw ur mage

That has nothing to do with leadership, leadership of the mage and leadership of the warrior are the same, the difference in attack doesn't increase the value of leadership, the only thing increasing the value of leadership is the leadership requirements of the troops and the only advantage a warrior has in that area is the Iron Fist skill. A mage can wear sets and items that decrease leadership reqs just like a warrior can, with the exception that a warrior can wear an extra weapon assuming that you take a wife with 2 weapon slots. And we've already discovered that a mage can never have as much attack as a warrior just like a warrior can never have as much int as a mage, no surprise there, it's how the game was designed. An attack-oriented warrior will obviously do more damage to high-level troops with his army but a mage won't be far behind on that account if you assume the same style of play.

Originally Posted by tjoepee

A mage can' t cast more spells the spellbook is the same u get to caste twice for 3 turns which IMHO doesn' t weight as much as the 2 warrior specific bonusses.

Most fights are done in 3 turns, hence having more spells after that doesn't make much of a difference, does it? The whole point of this discussion is whether 3 spells equal the extra damage of the warrior's army, they might or they might not, doesn't really matter at this point since the difference is marginal either way but your efficiency comparison was ridiculously overstated as far as I'm concerned.

Originally Posted by tjoepee

And check the high score section u will see the warrior always have higher stats. Instead of thinking MAGE just rocks play the game with warrior on impossible at a high level and then talk.

The people on high score tables don't focus on their stats when playing mages, they focus on increasing their mana, int, and spell damage output. A warrior compensates for these by having higher stats hence their total is higher in average. And I don't think mages rock, I actually prefer playing with a warrior, I always have.

Originally Posted by tjoepee

to quote u in other section
Yes, the only way to get rage after round 20 is rage drain and chargers.
great way to use rage drain and chargers considering u have no rage income, lol....... u missed the post completely about using poison cloud being useless to get infinite money.

If you're stalling the battle, it means that there's a stack of enemies left, if you're lucky it's gonna be a reasonably large but weak stack on whom you can use rage drain repeatedly without killing them. Each use of rage drain gives you more than enough rage for a set of chargers which give you both rage and mana. For someone who keeps going on about others not thinking things through, you sure don't mind being a hypocrite and doing the same, do you?

Originally Posted by tjoepee

Every post of u so far I have read u only try to proof to some newbies u have better knowledge throwing words or things that u think r cool. Most of the time they are useless IMHO. At least i post few combo and tricks

I always think twice about what I write and I never use words and things just to "sound cool", if you find my use of proper english hard for your understanding, spend some more time learning it. I'm sorry that you find my posts useless but I won't sweat having one person that doesn't appreciate them. And I don't post "combos and tricks", that seems right up your alley, seeing how you apparently know everything.

[Gatts]

Guys, please NO further senteces like " xy is either dumb or ..." - if anyone feels offended -> you can always report such content to admins, or if you want to solve it yourselves like big boys - continue via Private Messages (even in private messages is offensive language not tolerated - so please do not misuse it for dishonesting comments)

Everyones view/knowledge of anything, games also, is subjective and may greatly differ -> it is normal that people with strongly oposite opinions can end in "fireball" thread, if you don't want your posts deleted, or even ban, you should try to control yourself a bit.

I believe that Keneth shown is awareness and good intend by his normal and non-offending reaction - and I would like to call this type of "fireball thread" CLOSED - anyone who would like to continue in non proper and too personal manner, should expect consequenses...

Please do not misuse that this forum is quite tolerant, and try to argue using facts from the game, not irrelevant and offending remarks about others. Just that other have other opinion does not mean he is bad, or stupid. Of course some of us have "spicy" reactions - but we are able to tolerate it, can't we?

Keneth's post #21 was not stupid nor it could offend anyone as he very objectively described the ways of warrior's iron fist and compared towards mage skill - and there was nothing wrong/non-true in it.

tjopee - I like your thread as I like to see contradiction towards other threads where mage is considered owerpowered

my opinion : I played all difficulty level for three heroes, easy diff. could look like better for mage (at least first half), later in the game may look warrior better suitable, at least for players relying on manpower... I personally never had the feeling that my game is much easier just because I play paladin/mage/warrior - I had always very tough time playing any of them... (I mostly choose warrior, but use undead army - so I do not use iron fist at all, but I personally mostly like paladin, even if his ressurection does not seem to be making the game easier, I just like him... that is all)

Also I am sure that no one on this forum is or was dumb, sometimes it may look that using irony/or "spicy" language may be misused... but Keneth's post #21 does not bear any of these IMHO.

tjopee - should I play competition game (in HOMM IV - game was modded so saves does not work - you could only start it with HOMM4 - Tournament -> and if you finished the selected map - you sent your save to the Equilibris masters - who very objectively decided who did better, this is way how to compete in single player mode/games) I would go for warrior - but I am sure I would not have much easier game than if I would go for any other class...

My awareness from reading/participating on this forum shows me only that we all like KB (some more, some less) so if we like to argue - it has not reason to argue about oursevles - let's keep the topic KB, ok?

BTW: No need of commenting if anyone got or did not get any "point" as my "point" may have argue value for me, but not for others - if they do not agree with my point, does not mean they did not get it - my university time teached me that physics is much more beutiful as any other subject - two professors may have totally different opinion, still both may be true ... trust me - even these "grown" ups (I do not believe that scientists ever grow up) could not cease their argues, and we are in 21st century, when almost everything is revealed, and we should have much greater tolerance/ better behavior (not like in the movie obout the lost underworld full of prehistoric creaters, where the full scientific audience openely outluaghted the poor guy who wanted to proove that dinosaurs still ive - also he was saying that evolution does exist - what was actually the source of dishonour) But how can one human proove to other human being the real behavior of black hole, only be wathing it through space - here was the problem, even as both saw the same each of them explained it differently.
How can anyone tell me if I like warrior or not - it is my own opinion - it is my way of seing warrior usefull... I have my own value table and my own play style... also I can't tell anyone that he does not like mage - he knows he likes mage and that's it.

[Calinda]

Originally Posted by Keneth

That has nothing to do with leadership, leadership of the mage and leadership of the warrior are the same

Leadership of the mage and warrior are NOT the same; Warrior gets 60*Level from leveling; Mage gets 40*Level (and Paladin gets 50*Level, for completeness). If you picked Leadership at each opportunity you had, i.e. every even level, that is 4800 leadership difference, for level 30 character.

And attack, rage and leadership augment each other in terms of doing damage from troops, so they do increase each other's value in terms of damage. Rage is the least important of the three.

[bilsaboob]

Well, I just wanted to say that there actually is some meat to tjoepee's resoning that the difference in leadership between mage and warrior is not as simple as comparing X vs Y number of troops.

Concider this:

Mage:
100 troops with attack power 10

Warrior:
100 troops with attack power 100

Concider giving additional 50 troops to the Mage, since the attack power of the troops is low anyway, the additional troops is not that valuable.

Now concider giving additional 50 troops to the Warrior, since the attack power of the troops is so high, this will have a great impact.

So to sum this, not only does the difference in leadership mean more troops for the warrior, but from the warriors perspective the value of the additional troops will be higher than to the mage.

You could say it like this:

Mage:
-----------------------------------
100 troops * 10 attack = 1000 value
150 troops * 10 attack = 1500 value

Troop increase: 50%
Value increase: 50%

Warrior:
-----------------------------------
100 troops * 100 attack = 10000 value
150 troops * 100 attack = 15000 value

Troop increase: 50%
Value increase: 50%

Warrior relative to mage:
-----------------------------------

5000 warrior value increase - 500 mage value increase = 4500 value increase warrior relative to mage

Value increase warrior relative to mage: 900%


Lol, just to explain that the increased troops for warrior is an overall higher value than the same increase for the mage.

[Dredman]

Hum I am a new member here and I try to read all posts here about Kings Bounty and must say this is the first post I not understant. But anyway I have an Idea about that bubling about mage and warior. Because that is an easy when I play my warior on hard I ussualy equiped items with def,atk or some with multi bonuses and while I will be play mage in my second play I think I will equip some items with int,mana,def or also some multi bonuses because I have less trops so I need some dmg spell to get bonus dmg from spell + from troops. So in my opion there will be always big diferent for me because when I play mage i want to be good at spell and when warior at meele dmg and so on. But at the end I want to say hello to all here I am from czech republic and this game is realy great it is realy better than Homan for me now I love it now I starting play Armored Princess and I love it even more the princess is so nice and always bonus in leadership in every level this should be even greater diferent here maybe. After I finish it I start play Legend again on Impossible with all three class so I hope i got also some nice score to post here. I find here so many information and strategic for all class i must try them all. So thanks.

[Vilk]

Hello Dredman, welcome to the forum. I wonder why you wake up this old thread. About bilsaboob post, I have the same feeling the you, I don't understand a word but I feel I see roughly what he means.

About this topic, and last posts it's an error to compare warrior and mage only through leadership and skills available. That's a wrong way to look at the problem because there are the runes requirements. For example a mage won't be able to get all warrior skills at max level when it's very easy for a warrior.

All warrior skills require 42 mind runes when all mage skills require 65 mind runes. That's more complicate than this simple comparison but in practice, it's much more easy to fill the warriors skills and pick the very useful paladin and mage skills than to try with a mage to fill mage skills and pick very useful paladin and warrior skills.

Anyway, there are ton of details and differences but the real point is that the game balance is better for the warrior than for the mage in impossible mode. But that's just a global balance it's quite clear that for some battles and combinations a mage will perform better than a warrior.