Wish to contribute to the project by donating? Heads up to our Patreon -> https://www.patreon.com/skylordsreborn

Jump to content
BEWARE: Multiaccounting Will Cause Permabans! Read more... ×

Matejob

Member
  • Content count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Matejob liked a post in a topic by tbpeti in Multiple Accounts   
    Actually if you are not a ack of trades player (which let's admit, there are almost none in this game who can play on the same level with multiple decks) I totally understand your point of view, but if you want to try out new decks in ranked in my opinion you with your rank should be punished for it. You're actually saying that by trying out new decks on other accounts, you'll play with that deck on your main any time at all? Unfortunately I'm pretty sure you will not... And this only means that the top ranked players will just flood the rankings and it is unhealthy for the game IMO. So with this I want to point out the mistake in your argument: the players on the top of the rankings will play with their main deck only regardless of having multi accounts or not.
    Let me introduce you to a small example: if I am the top 50th ranked player in the game how is it fair for me to be only at the 85th place in the rankings? Because the top 20 players don't dare play other things on their main accounts and thus have 2nd and even 3rd accounts and can beat me with different decks anytime because their knowledge of the game is broader.
    I think trying out new decks and mastering them is a good thing, but if you do want to take it to ranked you should be punished for experimenting and should not take the place of other players.
     
    About the decaying, i definitely remember how it worked, and i didn't like it's way, because as a high-elo player you actually did not lose any elo, only your activity-multiplier decayed. Thus even if you were top1, later afk for 2 years and came back you would get back your prime rank real fast. But that is a totally different thing, plus probably it would happen even more times if the multi-accounting would be permitted.
    Oh, and I personally know at least 2 people who left multiple games because they got crushed by others. Nobody said that in this project only those will play who once had the Battleforge as their favourite game. There will be new players as well, and they will not be so devoted to the game if they do not get a sense of achievement at all.
     
    I do not remember to the bug clearly, but it had something to do with the bfp for sure and one of the auction house or mailing system.
  2. Matejob liked a post in a topic by Lavos2018 in Multiple Accounts   
    warning: lengthy post, youve been warned!

    i was never really a PVP'er in BF when it was around, i was ecstatic when they gave us rPVE finally after so much time cus my Shadow Worm couldnt disintegrate worth crap without the upgrades reducing the lifedrain when disintegrating multiple targets, sure it could merlt tier 1 infantry stupid fast but thats not the most useful way to use Mass Disintegration cus its better to use it on higher-value targets that would present larger threats

    granted back then we didnt have Amii Monument so yeah, couldnt just throw a Shaman in there to fix up the Shadow Worm

    but that said, i think both sides have some pretty good points

    on the one hand, yeah, it sucks if your a new player getting curbstomped non-stop cus of high ranked players decieiving you with their rank by using smurf accounts

    but on the other hand, in higher-end PVP, i can totally see why some people are against the idea of not allowing it, id be pretty darn frustrated too if i wanted to test a deck type im not at all familiar with as far as function and synergy cus i havent yet explored the deck sufficiently, but i then CANT explore the deck cus i either get stomped in 30 seconds by a high level player OR get constantly booted by low rank players because they get spooked when they see your rank

    while obviously ill support whichever decision is made, i think from a logical standpoint, the latter opinion is probably better for the game in the long-term. yes it will present some issues but as people have said those issues exist even without multi-accounting due to the rating systems dropping your ELO rank if your inactive for too long which has roughly the same effect as a smurf account sadistically curb-stomping lowbies, so either way you slice it, that probably isnt gonna disappear, its a matter of which method is less problematic in the long-term

    and im all for deck variety, i think thats part of what makes Battleforge so interesting, even if we likely wont ever get new content theres enough cards in total that theres alot of things that i bet never really saw their time to shine in higher-end PVP

    and if i do get into PVP, which i likely will this time around cus ive spent alot of improving my RTS game skills thanks to games like Starcraft 2, i would prefer to see MORE variety, rather than the same few meta/cookie-cutter decks all the time, but you cant do that if people cant properly experiment in PVP under fitting conditions, so if lowbies kick you cus of your rank, you cant experiment, but you also cant experiment if you get crushed too fast merely because you arent familiar with your deck

    this is obviously an important issue to find a good solution for, and there is for sure arguments to be made on both sides, but we cant just think of the launch window of the game when we discuss this, we have to think of what each of these 2 paths will do to the game a long time from now, im honestly not super concerned in the launch-period because its not like everyone will immediatly have a giant collection of cards since BFP is not able to be bought, so people are gonna have to build up their collections over time with luck of the booster packs being a big part of it, and im ok with that, but this makes this particular issue more important because we have to consider that at some point, the people who play the game with relative consistency will start capping out their collections, so we have to consider their desires when  it comes to seeing decks played in PVP, because if it gets too stale and too static, people like that wont have any reason to stick around, their card and upgrade collection will be pretty much maxed out, and their ability to make decks will be too, and if they cant haver fun making all sorts of zany crazy decks and actually being able to properly experiment and get to know the deck, its gonna cause players to leave gradually over time as more people reach that breakpoint

    so yes, we have to consider this carefully, i dont feel either side is either right or wrong, but neither side has a "home run" point either

    so i think further discussion should be done, and i think people should try to approach it with an open mind
  3. wertyy liked a post in a topic by Matejob in Multiple Accounts   
    I am sorry if my English is not good enough to understand but if you fully read it , i said "people who cant play the game for fun and cant take a lose cus they want to experiment" That was ment for the ones that do smurf that they should take a lose if they want to try something why "punish" another lower rank making him lose vs a smurf or more of them , while he is maybe at his peak rank playing it normally . Like i dont want to lose to somebody thats similar to my elo i also dont want to lose vs somebody that a lower elo than me , but i dont even want to PLAY vs somebody thats a higher rank , unless im willing to practice (sparring grounds was kinda made for that) vs him in the first place, playing vs people who are hiding behind an alt is no fun , not cus it might be a loss but cus it can hardly be a win.
  4. NedDeppat liked a post in a topic by Matejob in Multiple Accounts   
    I did in both of my comments thats why i downvoted yours i guess u might not be reading i didnt downvote theirs cus at least they are explaining, defending it Your comment was like . Meh im not gona be close to those ranks so it doesnt effect me at all and i dont care.
     
  5. wertyy liked a post in a topic by Matejob in Multiple Accounts   
    I am sorry if my English is not good enough to understand but if you fully read it , i said "people who cant play the game for fun and cant take a lose cus they want to experiment" That was ment for the ones that do smurf that they should take a lose if they want to try something why "punish" another lower rank making him lose vs a smurf or more of them , while he is maybe at his peak rank playing it normally . Like i dont want to lose to somebody thats similar to my elo i also dont want to lose vs somebody that a lower elo than me , but i dont even want to PLAY vs somebody thats a higher rank , unless im willing to practice (sparring grounds was kinda made for that) vs him in the first place, playing vs people who are hiding behind an alt is no fun , not cus it might be a loss but cus it can hardly be a win.
  6. Matejob liked a post in a topic by nofearek9 in Multiple Accounts   
    people who cant play the game for fun and cant take a lose .... shouldn't even play the game
    (not my words)
  7. Matejob liked a post in a topic by wertyy in Multiple Accounts   
    agree with Matejob soooooo multiple accounts should be allowed
  8. NedDeppat liked a post in a topic by Matejob in Multiple Accounts   
    Meh i guess its hard to convince people that were already just way to used 2 multi-accounting that it takes time to improve doesnt matter if you lose quick if you give up as quick as u lose than i dont know how to even try to defend my point with the over exaggerateing of the time i would lose in , that doesnt mean you would experiment with the deck that means the second u would lose your lead you would give up. As nofearek said it wouldnt effect his game that only applies to people who dont PVP at all , even you being in 3 lower rank games effects a lot of people cus remember you arent the only one doing it , im not saying you take up all the elo alone but remember if you arent the only one doing it you effect the other ranks . @nofearek9Downvoted cus you gave a really short answer that didnt really have any meaning to it for the community as a whole if you arent effected doesnt mean that other people wouldnt be .
     
  9. DuellLord liked a post in a topic by Matejob in Multiple Accounts   
    Honestly, no form of multi-character/accounts should be allowed, people who cant play the game for fun and cant take a lose cus they want to experiment or so-called "tryhards" shouldn't even play the game if they are playing it for elo and not for the game itself. If you want to play the game and if you are really good (using this as a best example) . Cant you just lose 2 games while trying the new deck , analyze what u could have improved on , cool your head by playing with your main deck to bring you elo back to your average/peak and after that try the experimental deck a few more times , and just repeat that.
     
  10. DuellLord liked a post in a topic by Matejob in Multiple Accounts   
    Honestly, no form of multi-character/accounts should be allowed, people who cant play the game for fun and cant take a lose cus they want to experiment or so-called "tryhards" shouldn't even play the game if they are playing it for elo and not for the game itself. If you want to play the game and if you are really good (using this as a best example) . Cant you just lose 2 games while trying the new deck , analyze what u could have improved on , cool your head by playing with your main deck to bring you elo back to your average/peak and after that try the experimental deck a few more times , and just repeat that.
     
  11. Matejob liked a post in a topic by nofearek9 in Multiple Accounts   
    i dont care if plp are using 2,3,4 characters since it will not affect my game in any way.
    Matejob:share with us the reason of your downvote........
  12. DuellLord liked a post in a topic by Matejob in Multiple Accounts   
    Honestly, no form of multi-character/accounts should be allowed, people who cant play the game for fun and cant take a lose cus they want to experiment or so-called "tryhards" shouldn't even play the game if they are playing it for elo and not for the game itself. If you want to play the game and if you are really good (using this as a best example) . Cant you just lose 2 games while trying the new deck , analyze what u could have improved on , cool your head by playing with your main deck to bring you elo back to your average/peak and after that try the experimental deck a few more times , and just repeat that.
     
  13. Matejob liked a post in a topic by Eirias in Community run YouTube channel   
    Wow, no one's touched this in a long time....
    With the recent influx of PvP players making videos (I've seen @RadicalX and @FlameForge make their own channels), we might want to decide rules for who should contribute to the community channel, etc. I think like 90% of the videos on there are mine right now....
    I like awkwardly have 3 youtube channels, and I post most of them to the community channel...which means that most people only watch the community channel ones, and ignore the replays on my Eirias_BFR channel. So I'm trying to figure out if I should cut back on posting in the community channel to let "new blood" into the community channel (which means I'd post 70-90% of my videos on my personal channel, instead of vice versa), or I can continue to post most videos on the community channel, and turn my personal channel into something for strange replays, livecasts, Smash4 and other games, etc. Why do y'all think?
  14. Matejob liked a post in a topic by vladistick in Lost Grigori   
    So, here is a painting I've made in this week. Would you like to see any other card illustrated?

  15. Matejob liked a post in a topic by InsaneHawk in [Important] Open Beta Delayed   
    Hello Skylords,
    So now, let's talk about what we're going to do after all you will have to wait a bit longer, and please forgive us for this delay.

    We have decided on a few things:
    Everyone will receive 2 boosters once the game will be in open beta (you'll still get them even after a potential reset) From the 1st of February and until the Open beta, we'll invite some players everyday to the closed beta, to increase the amount of players, progressively (Giveaways will happen anytime during the day, morning, afternoon, evening ..) You'll be able from now to pre-download the client, and we finally after a lot of discussion decided to give the client here on the forum ourselves. Want to pre-download it ? You can use Mediafire or MEGA to download it! (You cannot start the game right now, you'll have to wait for open beta, and the release of our launcher to make it work.)  
     
    INFORMATION : Giveaways for the Closed Beta will resume! These giveaways will mainly be held on Discord, but it may also happen on the forum, so keep following these two closely!
    Discord : https://discord.gg/0y3WGMGXhd5q2lXA

    With kind regards and apologies for any inconvenience caused,

    Sincerely,
    The Skylords Reborn Team
  16. Matejob liked a post in a topic by fiki574 in [Important] Open Beta Delayed   
    Sorry, people
  17. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    Yea this is because of missing API data. I changed the message.
    The devs tried implementing the new cardbase yesterday, but they found a problem with the old system that needs to fixed first. Will probably be a few days until they get it to work.
     
  18. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    @SilenceKiller99 Jesus you people make up new features faster than I can create space on the UI.
    It's implemented, check it out!
  19. Matejob liked a post in a topic by InsaneHawk in My Improved CardBase   
    That's absolutly great! When I first saw your website I found it "ok" must nothing more, right now, it's actually pretty amazing I have to say, congratulation man!
    With your approval, we may replace our actual cardbase with yours, reach me in PM  @gnomgrol
  20. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    Just got home from work. I'm glad that you guys like it! (@Matejob fixed) 
    Of course I grant you permission under the usual MIT Licence to use and modify my project in any way you see fit.
    I'll be working with @InsaneHawk to get it integrated into the official site over the next days!
  21. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    @LagOps I looked into that for a long time yesterday, unfortuanitly it is not possible. The images of the deck get created locally on your browser using a HTML5 canvas, and therefore no linking of the image is possible, since it is not saved to any server. You can however also get the deck-link and include it in your post, so people who dont know the cards well can check them out.
    Shift-clicking on a card in your deck now opens the big version.
  22. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    NP  All data comes from your API. If you gonna change the drops, youll have to change the API data  
  23. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    TESTING NEW DECK-TO-IMAGE FEATURE:
     

     
    EDIT: YEY IT WORKS
  24. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    More detailed selection options are coming up next. Will take a little longer though. 
  25. Matejob liked a post in a topic by gnomgrol in My Improved CardBase   
    Patch 1.3 is now live.
     
    - Added filters for Rarity, Affinity and Edition.
    - Changed all exclusive selectors to Multicheckboxes. You can now filter in much more detail.
    - Fixed messed up UI for smaller screens
    - Renamed remaining Back to Purple
     
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.