Oh and before anyone says it i will be pre-ordering the forthcoming game from Stardock

Most people view number 3 as the classic, definative version. I was always a bit partial to number 4, if only because I felt there was a tonne of variety in their different campaigns and I really grew attached to some of the characters in those. However the general opinion from the long time HoMM fans is that of Bomberross' and as 4 was the first one I played that probably biases my view. Also I can heartily recommend the recenetly released modern King's Bounty; the origional of which was the forerunner of the HoMM games. You just have one hero, but the combat system is pretty identical, and there is no city building\defending in it (although there are still cities to be attacked and to recruit troops from, you just don't have direct control over them). It also has an incredible sense of humour; for example in one quest you are asked to find a spell to turn a man's wife back from being a zombie; however after you have the spell you can instead buy her off her husband if you wish, and then turn her between zombie and human at will. Your wives can even have children that give you combat bonuses.

True. I love the way they have treated dragons:

- the one who want you to bring back its princess. Nice twist on the dragon - princess classical story

- the one about the dragon under the orc castle in Liberty Islands. The line about dragons gathering treasure to ensure that food come to them is too funny

And you can't miss the LotR allusion when you spoke about the ring to the zombie wife

So you think Kings Bounty should be the one i go for then?

How about system specs... I only have a laptop.

Specs: -

Will my system run the game ok?

To give you more of an idea of the scale; when I first started playing I thought the first zone was going to be all there was to it. Needless to say the subsequent continents made me very very happy. But not as happy as the recent announcement of an expansion.

Ditto what Lord Reliant said, on all counts.   HOMM3 was the bomb, together with Shadow Magic and Armageddon's Blade (or was that HOMM2?).   I haven't gotten around to HOMMV yet to know, either, but also that's because the gamers magazines gave it good-but-not-great reviews.  But HOMM3 might have gotten the same were it released in 2008.

To be honest, if you're looking for a strategy fix, go with Age of Wonders 2 or if you want more puzzle-ish strategy, maybe King's Bounty.

The problem I had with HoMM 5 was it's very much a puzzle game with tactical combat. You MUST do things in a fairly linear order because you won't be powerful enough to tackle certain areas initially. There's really no Explore, Expand phases in HoMM. You're very restricted on where you can choose to go initially or what you can eXterminate.

Unlike a true 4x strategy game where you are more or less free to expand and explore how you wish. HoMM isn't bad, it's just not a 4x game. The Disciples I and II games were similar. You HAD to progress in certain ways and usually reload after a bad battle because there weren't enough low level bad guys left to rebuild your troops levels after a defeat.

HOMM2 I've played quite a lot of, and it's good, but also too difficult in my opinion. HOMM3 I played the demo of and was impressed. HOMM5 I played the demo, but somehow didn't like it - the new storyline and redone factions smelled a bit too Warcrafty for me. King's Bounty I was partway through and enjoying, but it's since taken a back seat to Fallout 3 and a second run through of Mass Effect.

i hate that the nerfed the implosion spell though

in Homm 3 it was the spell to cast

in Homm 5 it doesn't do jack

3 and 5... but 3 is the ultimate, i place 3 in a separate class of game w/ gc2. The rest of the gaming world should bow to their imaginative glory.

Defining factors for me is although 5 has exceptional artwork and wonderfully realised factions, the scale is just not satisfactory... no matter how big of a map I choose it still feels like I'm playing in my backyard. Coupled with this is the fact that to temper this, they have paced 5 to play ALOT slower... I'm currently playing a six faction large map that I have failed to finish on 5 separate occasions...It's just so darn slow you feel like the game is generating it's own heavy gravity field (I'm not talking about performance here - my performance is top notch - what I mean is creature damage/lack of gold/insanely slow level ups post 18). HOMM3 on the other hand is light, fast, unbridled in terms of character potential and growth, gargantuan maps, tons of artifacts, the graphics are somehow timeless and you just FEEL happy playing it.

Also, the music in 5 is horrendous, I had to mod every track just to play it. Which I did Now it rules...Excalibur soundtrack for the orc faction is awesome.

Enjoy HOMM!

PS: Note how niether H3 nor GC2 would be considered balanced for multiplayer. I think this is what keeps them interesting tbh, diversified challenges.

I started playing at HOMM4, which I liked a ton at the time, but now I'm strictly playing HOMM5.  The demo didn't do it justice.  I played through it twice and was still undecided, but after I bought the full game I became hooked.  I also picked up the 1st expansion download from Ubi.com for 10 bucks, and grabbed the second expansion for about 10 off eBay, so there's really no need to wait for a "Gold" edition, since it's pretty cheap to pick up all three.  The second expansion is especially cool because it adds a third upgrade for each unit. 

That said, since playing the new King's Bounty demo, I haven't touch HOMM5 since!  Wish I had the capital to fund that addiction. 

The new KB maybe is better than 3, but if you're looking to play a Heroes game, it's not.  It's an rpg with an army instead of a character.

As for the differences between the versions, 5 is basically 3, with even less balance between the sides, and 3d graphics that get in the way as much as they help.  It's completely devoid of the charm the rest of the series has, going for a darker picture, and lacks adequate space on the tactical maps to do a lot with the armies.  They do have magic versus might more balanced.  If you play 3, you'll soon find that might either hits fast, or dies horribly.

4...  All potential, no class.  3DO was going under when they released it early as a last ditch effort to stay afloat.  It's very poorly balanced, the heroes go from massively powerful to nearly worthless, and they drop like flies early on while being all but invincible by the end of the game.  You can win the campaigns by just having all hero armies after they gain the experience off the first couple maps.  Vampires are so hard to kill that you guarantee defeat if you let a necro get too many of them, I've even lost to the AI because I couldn't get rid of them, and the AI is even worse than it is in 5.  They have some very nice improvements, like caravans, but it's visibly unfinished.

Some people have said the campaigns in 5 are good, but I'm just not grasping that one.  Story maybe, but they're almost entirely script driven.  The AI is utterly incompetent, and you win or lose depending on how bad you suck.  If it takes you two weeks to run across a map because you suck, you'll survive the two weeks worth army that hits when you get there.  If you do it in one, you get butchered.  If you spend a month dicking around, it's not even a nuisance.  They're a little slow in 3, but at least they aren't just scripted encounters that reward playing like crap and penalize playing well.  The best campaign is 2, but it's seriously old school, and seriously unbalanced.

Personal preference, H3 complete, but H5 does flow a little better for multiplayer games.

We'll miss you.