Kilian Dermoth

I cant login, it is saying my Account isnt activated.
I typed in my forum account name without the whitespace (couldnt type in the whitespace). Is that correct?

The "booster quest" is the heart of this game. I think that is why many players come into the game every day for that reason. I think the worst decision if you take this away from us.
 
The "90 mins game" quest is too much, I think. Almost for nothing'. Somehow I wasn't convinced. Let's change things, but millions of players don't play here. Keep in mind that there aren't as many online players at the same time in the game as to not get bored at a glance. I mean playing 90 minutes every day.... a little worrying in the long run
 

The thing I am worried about is that no one will want to spend their "hard earned" points on boosters because they could end up getting low tier cards. I think there is a very high chance that players will much rather want to spend those points on the auction to get exactly what they want, which will lead to less boosters being opened. 

and dont forget the hard reset where people already feel sad because they loose all cards + upgrades , even event rewards like the egg + the jungle1 challange are taken away
 

so, no more daily boosters as rewards? only bfps? Sounds kinda sad and surely will affect on cards economy

If opening boosters become optional I'm a bit afraid of what that will do to the card "economy". Unless a booster is included in what we get from the daily stuff.

Separate balancing sounds good in theory but is impractical. Mostly because it confuses people even more than the game currently does. That's why it's better to keep the stats for both PVE and PVP the same. The good thing about PVE is that in theory you can buff underused cards to serve more of a purpose in PVE matches.
Example: for some reason Master Archers are nerfed. Northguards on the other hand are never used in PVP, so they can be used by PVEs instead if necessary. This is just an example though.
If the amii monument is doing exactly as intended answer following questions pls:
Why is it that if you play a 4 player map in single player that the other starting locations have no orbs? And the other orbs on the map are usually guarded by L and XL creatures?
Easy answer: because each tier gets exponentially more powerful. So gaining an easy way to get an additional tier level lowers the map difficulty. And on Soultree this even leads to winning the game instantly.
The card should be reworked to require 4 neutral orbs to allow 5 multicolor splashes. This would indirectly buff pure color decks because you could mix in different 1-orb t4 abilities to support your pure color creatures instead of breaking map difficulty on several maps.
Everybody stating stuff like this needs to be banned from development processes. This statement is utter ignorance.
I doubt that there is a large number of people "waiting for reset". There are new players every now and then who try PVP, get smashed by the old school players and leave.
The game has a very, very steep learning curve with all the different colors, splashes, XL units, tiers, void/power management and so on that only a small part actually stays and plays. 
There are quite a few balance issues, and some stuff like counterplay against certain units is just so counter intuitive that I doubt it's healthy for the game. The whole stonekin faction is pure cancer for healthy gameplay as an example, at least if played with half a brain cell. 
Indeed. The longer patches are absent the more repetitive strategies and abuse/exploits are found and used in matchmaking. This usually leads to most players who disagree with that leaving the game. This also applies to the stuff I wrote in the paragraph above.
I do agree on these points - but I disagree on point 2 - I doubt there will be a large amount of people to increase the community for longer time.
The issue with old games is that newcomers rarely have the chance to catch up on the old seasoned players skill wise. The longer a game is left unpatched, the more abusive the meta becomes and the more exploits are found and used to win.
BF already suffers from its steep learning curve even before playing the first match (hundreds of cards of 4 different main colors + 3 splash decks + neutral cards, how to build a working PVP deck, how to manage power, how to manage units etc.) and then there is the fact that you need to upgrade your cards to even stand a chance in pvp matches at all.
This leads to early frustration and makes people abandon the game. I encounter new players every now and then in matchmaking, and they're gone after quite short time from my impression. 
The game was made by Phenomic, and Phenomic was widely known for making RTS games who were at the border of frustratingly hard to play. 
About the card nerfs itself: 
I do agree that some cards need buffs and some might need nerfs, but in general I would appreciate more variety in the viable core cards. The game has dozens of cards that could be used for the same role but aren't because some other card is stronger. Not a little bit stronger, but so strong that it hurts. Great examples were shown in RadicalX  underwhelming Top50 topic. 
Having more alternatives automatically leads to a more healthy enviroment because 
a) players have more options to choose from (more happy players because they can use their favorite unit X more frequently)
b) games are more interesting to watch because you see more varied decks
c) certain decks may get buffed because they can mix unit types more frequently

To the bug reporting thing:
At first the whole thing is just to complicated (giant overcomplicated template, multiple forums, 1000s of bug reports and so on) and when the open stress test began there were already over 1000 bug reports from closed beta testers that just appeared at once for non closed beta testesters. So, especially at the beginning it was hard to tell (for non closed beta testers) if a bug was already reported or not while the reactions of the staff were sometimes totally unfriendlay to already reported bugs or there were even no reaction at all (did they read, will they do anything, is this report even appreciated?). Also the reactions I have seen to bug reports that didnt use the template were unfriendly, too.
Thats why I thought: fuck it, there are others who will report the same bug, let them have the hassle with that overcomplicated template, searching the forum and the reactions of the staff.
But sometimes I just felt, maybe its a not so common bug or its a new bug, so I just wrote a little bit on discord about it and got sometimes also a bad (aggressive looking) answer by the staff about why I am not writeing in the forum? No this reaction didnt made me to write in the forum because of some of the mentioned reasons and I even thought: fuck it, next time i think twice about even reporting on discord. This happend some times and every time my interest in reporting in any way got lower, especially because the game looks very stable for me now.
Yeah thats critisism on the staff and how bug reports were handled, especially at the begin of the open stress test. I know you might have another opinion or another point of view but I am not interested in discussing this further, just take it as my (bad) experience and do with it what you want.
Another reason for not reporting bugs is that most of the bugs I encountered were common bugs where I thought I couldnt provide that much of new information, because most of them just appeared of a sudden and werent possible to reproduce. Most of them also appered while interacting or playing with other people, so maybe they did something (while I did something?) so that its impossible to reproduce without knowing what the other person did. So I just could say, hey I had that bug, but really dont have a clue why and it often didnt happen again for a while.
Other people might have other reasons for not reporting or are just lazy.
And to the message with the bug reporting. I have seen that message but if it only apeared while a specific bug happend, I just didnt recognize that bug at all, just the message.
And that discord has its own bug report section is completely new to me, I even had to check if it is really there after I have read it in this thread. Especially because of the reactions of the stuff I thought there wont be a simple way to report a bug. The section is  new, isnt it?
To the balancing thing:
PvP: should be the main aspect for balancing (until T3) because its most important here.
PvE: should only be balanced in a way so that unused cards get also used. Further than that there shouldnt be much balancing, because its not necessary that the cards are all competitive to each other. Thats not how PvE works.
Speedrunners: I wonder why they are even mentioned that much? You shouldnt care about them at all, because speedrunning is playing PvE in a (usually abusive) way to achieve lowest times. So if balancing for PvE doesnt matter that much why should it even matter for speedrunning? Especially because speedrunning is about abusing unabalanced cards. So balancing speedrunning would mean to remove that unabalance in some cards, speedrunners are using, and not to keep this unbalance in some cards. Also this would be more of a PvE and PvP balancing than a Speedrunning balance.
Even if they are affected by balance changes there is really no reason to consider especially speedrunning while balancing cards. A good speedrunner should also be good with changed cards, also this could lead to new challenges to them.

To the bug reporting thing:
At first the whole thing is just to complicated (giant overcomplicated template, multiple forums, 1000s of bug reports and so on) and when the open stress test began there were already over 1000 bug reports from closed beta testers that just appeared at once for non closed beta testesters. So, especially at the beginning it was hard to tell (for non closed beta testers) if a bug was already reported or not while the reactions of the staff were sometimes totally unfriendlay to already reported bugs or there were even no reaction at all (did they read, will they do anything, is this report even appreciated?). Also the reactions I have seen to bug reports that didnt use the template were unfriendly, too.
Thats why I thought: fuck it, there are others who will report the same bug, let them have the hassle with that overcomplicated template, searching the forum and the reactions of the staff.
But sometimes I just felt, maybe its a not so common bug or its a new bug, so I just wrote a little bit on discord about it and got sometimes also a bad (aggressive looking) answer by the staff about why I am not writeing in the forum? No this reaction didnt made me to write in the forum because of some of the mentioned reasons and I even thought: fuck it, next time i think twice about even reporting on discord. This happend some times and every time my interest in reporting in any way got lower, especially because the game looks very stable for me now.
Yeah thats critisism on the staff and how bug reports were handled, especially at the begin of the open stress test. I know you might have another opinion or another point of view but I am not interested in discussing this further, just take it as my (bad) experience and do with it what you want.
Another reason for not reporting bugs is that most of the bugs I encountered were common bugs where I thought I couldnt provide that much of new information, because most of them just appeared of a sudden and werent possible to reproduce. Most of them also appered while interacting or playing with other people, so maybe they did something (while I did something?) so that its impossible to reproduce without knowing what the other person did. So I just could say, hey I had that bug, but really dont have a clue why and it often didnt happen again for a while.
Other people might have other reasons for not reporting or are just lazy.
And to the message with the bug reporting. I have seen that message but if it only apeared while a specific bug happend, I just didnt recognize that bug at all, just the message.
And that discord has its own bug report section is completely new to me, I even had to check if it is really there after I have read it in this thread. Especially because of the reactions of the stuff I thought there wont be a simple way to report a bug. The section is  new, isnt it?
To the balancing thing:
PvP: should be the main aspect for balancing (until T3) because its most important here.
PvE: should only be balanced in a way so that unused cards get also used. Further than that there shouldnt be much balancing, because its not necessary that the cards are all competitive to each other. Thats not how PvE works.
Speedrunners: I wonder why they are even mentioned that much? You shouldnt care about them at all, because speedrunning is playing PvE in a (usually abusive) way to achieve lowest times. So if balancing for PvE doesnt matter that much why should it even matter for speedrunning? Especially because speedrunning is about abusing unabalanced cards. So balancing speedrunning would mean to remove that unabalance in some cards, speedrunners are using, and not to keep this unbalance in some cards. Also this would be more of a PvE and PvP balancing than a Speedrunning balance.
Even if they are affected by balance changes there is really no reason to consider especially speedrunning while balancing cards. A good speedrunner should also be good with changed cards, also this could lead to new challenges to them.

This is a flawed reasoning, let me illustrate via two examples, one for PvP and one for PvE.
(1) Imagine you are playing checkers. In checkers you can only move forward, until a piece is kinged, and you must jump a piece if it is possible. Now imagine you set up a nice 2 for 3 jump trap for your opponent but when he falls for it he refuses to execute the jump. He says that the rules of checkers violates his "freedom" and not only should he not have to jump, and thus give you a piece advantage, but he should also be allowed to move backwards at any time. You would rightfully think this absurd as the game isn't a game without rules and freedom in the game exists only because the rules exist. Your opponent checker nihilism/relativism in defense of his "freedom" would make the game itself unplayable. This is the PvP example.
(2) Imagine you are running a 5K race. When you start the race you run the first 2 kilometers and are tied with a fellow runner. At this point your fellow runner stops, walks over to a car waiting on the side of the road, and decides to drive the next 2 kilometers. You run the fastest 5K time ever on that course, but your fellow runner unsurprisingly wins the race and "runs" faster then you, such that he know holds the course record. When you confront him afterwards that he violated the norms of the race and cheated/exploited the system by driving he tells you that "it doesn't sound fair to me to inhibit other runners' freedom by forcing them to only run in the slower way that you like". Now its obvious this person's appeal to freedom is absurd, because unless the norms of the race are enforced, then their is no reason for the competition in the first place. Additionally, his time should be stricken from the record for its exploitation to begin with. This is the PvE example, and I think its obvious to see how to fits the scenario with cards like Amii Monument in Soultree. 

Some exploits (by far not complete):
Soultree: Amii Monument
Guns of Lyr: Using cultists to destroy the building that leads to the last wave
Sunbridge: Quick Gate Switching
Convoi: The Nightguard trick
Dwarven Riddle: Flying Units which can go to the other side
Different Maps: Blocking quest units (Jorne, Bandit Walker, ...)
General: Decomposing others units, Takeing others monuments, wells, and such
 
All are exploits. Its odd that people who use such exploits usually are those that complain that maps are to easy...
 
Back to topic: the main problem I think can be summed up in one word: repition.
To break it, you need (new) content or something that makes it feel less repititive. RPVE is one way, even if its basically always the same there is still variance, not so for campaign maps, they are always the same. Still despite the variance RPVE is the same, so that it gets boring after a while, too. Campaign maps in contrast are different, some even with unique ideas but they lack variance, because a campaign map stays always the same, no variance. One role does play the AI, because it is really stupid, basically it is: spawn this units after this time and run to this point, thats it. Everytime exactly the same way. Another way could be PVP, here you have variance because you dont know how the other person will act. Maybe its not the case on high ELO because people tend to play some known tactics after a while. But PVP has its own problems, for example the high entrance barrier.
Campaign maps, because of limited maps will always lead to repition. Especially because the AI isnt fixable, is it? Maybe it is possible to build community maps, that have some variance, like RPVE, dont know if that is even possible with the map editor. Otherwise you had to keep building more and more campaign maps to keep it entertaining. Btw. I am eagerly waiting to play the 2 12 player maps (which feal like 4 new campaign maps) again. At the end of the game at ea times i liked to play them most.
RPVE will depend on the personal gusto if its entertaining but after a while everyone will get bored, doing the same even if there is some variance. The thing is that this seems to be the main content of the game after finisihing the maps once. But people who doesnt enjoy RPVE can feel to be forced to play it because of 2 reasons. First most players are playing RPVE, it is more difficult to fill a campaign group than a RPVE group. Second you get something for playing RPVE and you exactly know before what it is. It isnt the most rewarding in average but it is still high rewarding and you know for sure what you will get.
But playing campaign maps is a bit of a gamble for the normal player (I dont car about speed runners and you shouldnt either, because they are only a small part and not representative for all players). Also it depends on the difficulty:
Standard: is easy, boring, less rewarding, almost a waste of time if you dont want to chill a bit in the game.
Expert: is to hard and time consuming for many players, especially if you dont have a good (or even specialized) deck yet and if you loose you gain nothing. And winning could give you still something bad, something less worth than rpve. Also seeing that someone else got something of worth while you got nothing of worth can lead to frustration, if you choose campaigns as main resource to boost your cards.
Advanced: Even increased problem with the rewards, because they are always less worth and I doubt that this is more rewarding than RPVE but it wil take usually a bigger effort.
So RPVE is still superior for farming for most people. Because they get for sure a good amount of gold and they can buy anything with that. You even can count the matches you need to get the upgrades you want.
I think from a psyhcological view getting a upgrade you dont have will promte campaign play more than it is now, because you will know the chances are good that you get the upgrade you want after some games, because it must drop somewhen, while when it is completely random it could happen that it even doesnt drop after 200x of play. This way campaigns would get more interest by people who like to farm their upgrades by doing campaigns than paying them by gold and it would decrease the amount of people who play campaigns because they are in average more rewarding, because you had to have all upgrades of a map first before you get gold, and not just you, all had in the group had to, to get more gold than you would get by playing RPVE. This would also slow down the gold supply for Speedrunners.
Another completely different aspect to break repitition is one of the game mechanics itself: the TCG part. A TCG should lead in people haveing diversity in decks but this somehow doesnt work for battleforge. I have nature as starter, so I put atleast windweavers and ensnaring roots in. Something else usually makes less sense. Yeah there are other ways to play nature as starter but they usually dont work as well as this combo. Or Fire as starter without Nomads (Green) or at least Mine? Frost as starter without Frost Mage? Ok good shadow can be played in many different (map specific) ways. Then i had to choose, spell based damage deck, tower / root based defense deck or unit based offensive deck? And based on this descion and the colors I have the deck should roughly be fixed if it should work. Its is finally the problem of balance among the cards that lead to this. For example: how often have you seen something else than church of negotian on bad harvest at position 3? Its really rare and if you try something else you get called out... This way the community even prohibits this kind of diversity.
Another problem in this context is that most of the cards that work a little bit different than usually and could lead to a bit diverse gameplay are often damn expensive so that you had to farm a week just for one card. I think many people begin to get bored before they can affort it to get other cards to play around.
That are two contratry points.
First you describe the skill discrepancy. But the second is that high elo players tend to stay with their working strategies. Both is bad. While you might think that multiaccounting could improve the second thing, and it might, it would also make the first point even worse.
Thats why I think that prohibiting multiaccounting is a really good thing. I didnt play much PVP since the release, just tried 2 or 3 times and got raped very quick by spitfire, juggernaut and co, while my deck level was very low and I had almost no rare cards. But in the past days I played a few PVP matches after I had almost any card almost fully upgraded and I somehow liked. But then I met from time to time a highranked multiaccounter that was matched with me, sometimes even manytimes in a row. And I began to think: "fuck that shit, I am doing something else"
So I can tell you for sure that mutliaccounting will lead to even less people getting into PVP, because it will lead to high elo players playing against low elo players, what shouldnt be satisfying as you described. But I dont see that big of a problem with people who have "ranked axiety". They are already in PVP and there is always something that is called "unranked", which would lead to the same thing as playing as low rank multiaccount with the exception that you arent necessary matched with low ranks who dont want to play against high elo players.

I'd say McLongDickson is (basically) right.
There is an imbalance between the game modes. But because most players are frustrated when something gets nerv'd, I'd say you should strengthen the loot distribution of the campaign missions. If a player gets a guaranteed upgrade he doesn't have yet (out of the upgrades available on a specific map) then the appeal to play campaign missions would be higher. On the other hand, it might lead also to a ceased player base, just because you get your upgrades faster.
If you buff campaign on this way, then there should be a bug to PvP, too. But I do not play that, so no idea how to do so.
As a side note; the way BF is conceived it has an end! (Only random mission intercept this a bit) The campaign missions are (very) limited, so is the card pool, too. Probably a new Orb color could buffer this. I am playing roughly since 9 month and I have collected almost all cards...

Would it be possible to add booster, just like any other card into the AH?
This would make it easier to sell boosters and let people that decide to open a lot of boosters have a nice selection of discounted boosters compared to the 450 store bought ones. 

Also, ALL cards are obtained from boosters.
Booster packs have a fixed price of 450 BFP.
So if all the expensive cards gets manipulated to be worth 5k+, then people would make a fortune from boosters. 
 
 
But if i would want anything to change with AH, is to add a 1-2 week option so that cards can stay longer than 24 hours and keep the prices more stable.
We don't got enough players to naturally keep the market competitive with 10+ sellers of each card, so by increasing the auction limit, people will be in more competition and make the prices drop/be more stable.

Healing close buildings: works as intended and like it was at ea times...
Expanding the afk time? One of the worst suggestions I ever read. Beeing afk for more than 5 min is totally disrespectful to anyone you play with. Ok it can happen that there is something in real life that makes that necessary but then you should live with getting kicked, especially because you are the one that dont play and why should you even get rewarded by being pushed by others while you take energy wells and monuments but dont do anything in return? I even suggest to decrease this time to 1 or 2 min. And if being afk happens on a regularly to consider bans.

Healing close buildings: works as intended and like it was at ea times...
Expanding the afk time? One of the worst suggestions I ever read. Beeing afk for more than 5 min is totally disrespectful to anyone you play with. Ok it can happen that there is something in real life that makes that necessary but then you should live with getting kicked, especially because you are the one that dont play and why should you even get rewarded by being pushed by others while you take energy wells and monuments but dont do anything in return? I even suggest to decrease this time to 1 or 2 min. And if being afk happens on a regularly to consider bans.

Giant Wyrm might be stronger but Lost Spirit Ship can attack while moving, Giant Wyrm cant.

True that a Lost Souls Ship is only strong with multiple enemies around. It is really weak against single enemies compared to many other units.
But even 2 Wyrms (energy cost: 600) win easily against 3 Lost Souls Ships (energy cost: 720). Plus the wyrms retain their damage output against single targets and can even focus against single targets in a groups, so that they have to fight lesser enemies.
So the pure damage is NO advantage of the Lost Souls Ships, almost any other T4 unit is better here.
Besides the ability to attack while moving there is another advantage: it attacks fast and can attack multiple units at the same time. Melee units for example can attack very slow and only unit by unit. So if you have multiple units standing far away of each other the Lost Souls Ship will be always quicker, even if the melee unit would do more damage.

I think that the AH stuff was just (maybe an important) example.
I understand him the way that he wants just statistical data or a way to query this data, this might include for example:
1. How many players are online
2. How many players are registered
3. Which cards are actually in the AH (with filtering by name, color, and so on) with which price.
4. How many player have solved all PvE maps on standard, advanced, expert.
5. By how many player was map x solved at which times.
6. How many boosters were bought in total, today, yesterday, ...
7. How many BFP do the players actually have, in total, average, median, ...
8. and so on.

Hello,
I have a proposition (i dont know if it was proposed early)
about increasing the amount of time the card is in the auction house before it returns to you. Right now maximum time is 24h which is a little small and its annoying having to place the cards in AH every day.
How about increasing the time for 1/3/7 days while also increasing the amount of gold to pay for it. Or when the card gets back to your mailbox add a function to place it at AH again.
 
I know now the most important things are the game server stability, but for future maybe.

This is brilliant, we can take this even one step further to improve the game. So let's do the same with Enlightenment. Make it T2, 400 power, one nature orb.
Someone feels that T2 isn't enough for him, and can allow to spend 400 power to nuke the board with T4 units? Take some useless T2 cards and actually boost them for at least matching their rarity (yes, Ice Age, Lost Shade, Mountain Rowdy, Vileblood, Banditos, Twilight Curse, Lost Priest, Revenant's Blessing, ALL Lost Souls actually, I'm talking about them). It doesn't matter that this will lead to an unending power spike, unevenly distributed throughout all factions. Because on the other side, we don't even need to balance T3 cards. All that needs to be done is doing cosmetic changes and don't address broken cards. See? Everybody wins.
Indeed, there are many replies from both sides but I can only see one side actually putting forth some arguments.
Note that "just leave it", "why you hate Amii Monument?" or "let everybody play how they want" don't exactly count as arguments it. They are just personal statements or questions. While other, more in-depth, reasoning (such as made by Treim) could still require some counter arguments.
Note, I hope not to hurt anybody's feelings with this post. I would prefer this topic to be elevated to a more objective level, without personal assumption about the other person's emotional state. It also feels somewhat unfair if well thought-out posts are completely ignored. It is a lot of work to explain why certain cards become problematic from an overarching perspective, as this is a complex game with many factors involved.

I'm not quite sure why some of you seem so keen on forcing all game modes to have a "reason" to play them. Shouldn't it always be up to the player if they want to play a certain game mode or not? Making certain rewards exclusive to certain game modes doesn't really make sense to me - If they're so boring/uninteresting/whatever (I don't really think they are, but that's the assumption), why make players slog through them for no reason? A hardcore PvE player most likely has no interest in clearing the entire campaign. Same goes for a speedrunner who literally couldn't care less about PvP.
I say we reward players for doing anything. A reward proportional to playtime more or less solves that. If a player wants to grind for 12 hours a day, they'll be rewarded for 12 hours a day. If they only want to do their dailies and a mission or two (in their game mode of choice because they're playing this game for fun), they'll get a smaller reward to reward that as well. Don't strictly associate one reward with one game mode (like it is now with upgrades, for instance).
If we want to keep players logging in and playing, forcing them to do things they find cumbersome is not a very good way to do that. Rewarding them for plaything their way is what I believe to be the best solution.
That said, the reward doesn't have to be strictly in bfp. I just used that because it's the most "universal" currency.

Only freezes lead to reduced damage and most frost players use them inflationary without brain and thats the problem with them especially if you or a teammate uses damage spells / abilities (especially spell caster decks). In such situations freezes do even much more harm than any good, because those decks rely on killing before getting hit hard. If you freeze in that moment, it isnt possible to kill fast enough which also leads to increased damage you take yourself after the freeze disappears, wasted energy on your (and your teammates side) and also a pretty bad slow down and maybe even to own dead units because of a brainless freeze of a frost player...
Freezes are fine if used with brain and in some situations like the combination with stone warrior they are even really strong!
All other CCs are almost always fine.

Nailed it on both points.

To add a little supporting information, good game designers recognize that when a gamer is choosing which game to play, they ask "What is fun?" When they are actually in-game, they ask "What will succeed?" When players are given a superior strategy that also happens to be less fun, they rarely analyze it and choose the more fun path. They're more likely to choose the more effective path then end up having less fun. That's why cheat codes are less of a thing than they used to be--game designers realized that gamers were ruining their own experiences. If a designer doesn't have a better understanding of fun than their average player, then they shouldn't be a designer.
Personally, I love the idea of making it 4-orb. It opens up powerful combos like Batariel + Regrowth without cutting tier 3 out of the game.

 

For nature as T1 starter I recommend Ensnaring Roots so your windweavers can easily deal with any melee unit (root, hit and run).
Btw. dont forget to focus the attack with windweavers.
If you choose ensnaring roots you wont need spearmen anymore.
Maybe put primal defender in, it is situational but sometimes it can help at T1, T2 or when soloing.
Shamans and Dryads are optional and shamans make you even slower but keep you alive.
I would take only Surge of Light OR Shamans, not both.
Ditch Frostmage for T2, there are better options or just keep your windweavers and build masses. But good other choices are: Defenders, Razorshards, Stone Tempest or Aggressor.
Also you dont necessarily need Coldsnap and Curse of Oink, if you have to do to much CC you are doing something (to less units, to bad micro) wrong and CC will slow you down in this case (especially freezes). But keep it if you have enough spare slots.
If you plan to go directly to T4 with Amii Monument you dont need Mo! If you are soloing Amii Monument is ok but in multiplayer you could have bad luck so that somebody else already built it or the other person have a problem because you already built it (which slows down the whole team). If you exchange it with a real T3, I recommend to use Stone Warrior Blue (then keep Coldsnap, otherwise take Curse of Oink).
As Damagespell there is for example Thunderstorm, which can do some decent damage fully upgraded and if there are enough units and time.
Also I would put in Revenge, this way you make also a little bit damage but the spell has a cap while Stone Shell hasnt. Put in both if you plan to fight Lost Souls and have problems keeping your units alive.
Further I recommend Wheel of Gifts, it fits perfectly into your deck. The primary buff here is the 20% damage buff which is nice because stonekins dont have that many ways to improve damage, also the healing buff is nice for your Gemeyes because they sometimes take a little bit damage and you wouldnt have to heal them anymore that way.
Btw. Adamant Skin, Stone Shell, Revenge and Wheel of Gifts stack all in damage reduction, the forumal should be:
damage taken = 0,85 * 0,55 * 0,7 * 0,8 = 26 % (all effects, at max if I remember all factors right), this way your units will be almost invincible and you usually even dont have to heal them anymore.
At T4 Grinder (only one affinity) and Gemeye (purple) are all units you need, put Grinders in one group and the Gemeyes in the other group. Let the Grinders (at least 3, later 4 or 5 if you run out of Gemeye charges and have spare energy or are fighting the last lost souls bases) move into the base and keep attacking with Gemeyes from distance, but let them come a litte bit closer so that they dont attack the first unit but shoot directly into the center of the base (or even the spawn building / stun building). To take full advantage of Gemeye you have to attack as many units as possible with its area damage over time.
For taking T3 after you have T2 only one thing helps: a big army (so stay calm and wait a little bit more) and CC/heal at the right moment. At the end you will be quicker even if you need more time to get T3.
I dont recommend Shrine of Memory as someone else recommend it to you. You need void manipulation only if you play many spells or loosing much units but for stonekins you only need very few uses of spells and you can easily keep the units alive (in most cases you even dont need to heal). If your army dies you will be done no matter you have void manipulation or not (because charges are a bigger problem here). So you wont have much void if you play Stonekin right and the Shrine would be a waste of energy and a deck slot. I play also other types of decks and some of them are built to use massively damage spells so that void can sometimes be several 100 or even over 1000 in a few seconds. In this case Shrine of Memory would be also of no use because it cant bypass the void recovery maximum of 20 per second (like warshrine for example can).
To simplify everything:
Try not to waste energy on spells (especially freezing spells because they slow you down), try to build as many units as possible and try to keep every of them alive (by using as less spells as possible), micro them right and you have a powerful but boring deck, that can (at T4) also be very quick (comparable to Bloodhorns, Cluster Explosion, Lost Soul Ships and Batariel) and works even against lost souls.