beijingguy

If I’m ever actively playing again feel to message me and we will set up a spare match, Chorba. Glad to hear I’m not the only one who enjoys that particular T3 I haven’t played in ages but I will try to find time to play in the Fight Club sometime, sounds really awesome. Unfortunately this week is not going to work.

Hey Chorba Windhunter was kind enough to reach out to me and let me know about this post. It really warmed my heart to hear you have fond memories of watching my replays back in the day and still remember to this day. Windhunters suggested deck is pretty close to what I'd play but there was never really any final version of the deck. I will try to share my favorite iteration of the deck. T1: Meta: Windweavers, Spearmen, Dryad, Shaman, Roots, Hurricane, Surge of Light Off-meta: Werebeasts, Amazon(Green), "Primal Defender" Windhunter already mentioned that it is actually not a super strong deck so every small advantage you can find matters. I liked picking Werebeasts over Swiftclaw because it felt easier to trade it more cost efficiently for enemy units. Swiftclaw while hitting like a truck is also an easy target and at the time the only two factions you would play against in T1 was Fire and Shadow both of whom loved to play a S/M as a second unit. Green Amazon doesn't actually counter anything you would encounter in T1 but they boost Werebeasts regeneration and any healing they might receive from a shaman, combined with the aura from Dryad it can pretty brutal. Primal Defender is far from mandatory but really good at punishing an enemy that is too greedy buying wells in T1 or force out an eruption thereby building a tiny advantage. It looks like a pretty giant T1 but the three spells scale incredibly well into T2 and the three support units are also really helpful in keeping Spikeroot alive(Green Amazons also works on Spikeroot). Not that you would necessary summon them in T2, but if they happen to be the units you have left over after the T1 fighting is done you are very well set going into the midgame. For most other T1 units, as soon you reach T2 you are more or less looking for any reason for them to die so you can reclaim that power and summon stronger units. T2: Meta: Ghostspears, Spirit Hunters, Spikeroot, Oink, Parasite Swarm, Root Nexus Off-Meta: Living Tower You can argue that Spikeroot and Root Nexus are off meta but since we are talking about a root network deck I feel like they are obvious meta-picks so the only non-meta pick in T2 is actually Living Tower. The standard root network attack strategy for me was always Living Tower into Root Nexus into Spikeroot built with the distance between them so Spikeroot could hit whatever Well or Orrb was the intended target while the Living Tower was so far away they would have a hard time contesting it being built. On some maps that meant you could build the Living Tower next to your own Well/Orb while on other maps you would build it in the middle of nowhere but it still gave you a fallback position. You could do Spikeroot into Root Nexus into another Spikeroot but its 50 power more expensive, does not give you any protection from air attack and is vulnerable to Aura of Corruption. T3: Meta: Razorleaf Off-Meta: Timeshifter Spirit Rarely will a game be decided in T3 but Razorleaf combined with any remains of the T2 Root Network counters pretty much everything, put in a Timeshifter to give you a Spellblocking aura around Razorleaf and you can pretty much take on the world. That's 19 cards, leaving the last slot open since I might have forgotten some mandatory card, if I did not I would probably add Mana Wing in T1 just to increase the chance of getting some small advantage going into T2. I apologize if some of the information is outdated.

denmark, fok ye

[quote='Aazrl' pid='2076' dateline='1435260907'] And it will come to a moment, where main pvp cards will be nerfed, because they were the strongest cards on PvE. Would you like to play fire and get nerfed few important fire cards because they were quite strong in PvE? Or would you rather have a possibility to say that it will not be cool for PvP players? [/quote] I think you misunderstand me, PvP balance should always trump PvE balance since it has a far greater impact on other peoples enjoyment of the game. My point was that if a card happens to becomes less viable in PvE due to a nerf aimed at a PvP problem why is that really a problem for PvE players ? It just gives you the opportunity to beat the game all over again without that specific card.

I still don't get it from the PvE perspective. Everyone you are "competing" against/with use the same cards, if one card gets nerfed its the same for everyone and everyone have to adjust. If i was playing PvE id want people to regularly nerf the strongest cards so i could have the opportunity to find a new way to beat X map.

[quote='Aazrl' pid='1958' dateline='1435188392'] That's why I enjoy buffing over nerfing. If you buff A card, the B card will not be removed completly from the game and there will be option to play A card over B card. If you nerf A card, A card will not longer be useful anywhere. [/quote] Really want to stress a point here nerfing a card doesn't mean it will become useless. But to argue your point, say card X is very strong to fix it you could either nerf card X or buff card Y+Z+X+B+N+M to get them on the same level and actual be viable options. The easiest and safest route is to jsut nerf X and see what happens next, if you start buffing 5 others cards to match X's strength you might end up with Y+Z being too strong and X actually being inferior.

@Titan: Can you please enlighten me how you can destroy balance in pve ? I don't understand that concept unless a map actually becomes unbeatable following some balance change.

[quote='SunWu II.' pid='1750' dateline='1435093976'] i think microskills aren't important in that matter. Intelligence, experience (knowing the meta as good as possible) and objectivity are more important. Of course the players in the council should have some high-rank experience, though. I don't think the forum would vote for a beginner, the best PVP players are widely known. To ensure that every faction is represented, there would indeed have to be some kind of ministry for each one. Luckily there are a lot of quite highranked players who know every deck or at least more than one. Edit: :D last sentence wasn't a pun in your direction, i always used to be a fan of your rootnetworks ! [/quote] All the qualities you mention are important and if you add a criteria of having high-rank experience i'm sure that would entail enough micro to satisfy what i was asking for. I think its fair to assume people wouldn't vote for a beginner but you cant expect the majority of voters to actually inform themselves about all the candidates and what views they might have on balance. You might end up with a council where one half just wants to do minor changes and the other half wants to do the major changes Mental Omega suggested. No offense taken about the "pun". Pure nature and proud ;)

Nice to see you guys Ndclub and Marbslonk :D First of ill sign any petition to remove Curse Well from the game. Secondly about Mental Omega's suggestion to vote people into the council. My biggest concern about elections is twofold. First of all, the voters, should everyone be allowed to vote ? If so how do we prevent people from using multiple accounts to vote for themselves or someone they agree with. Secondly should everyone be allowed to run ? If so you might end up with people who doesn't have the micro/skill to play the game at the highest level. On top of that how do you ensure that the council is mixed properly, you might end up with two pure frost players and having none on the council that plays pure shadow.

[quote='Aazrl' pid='840' dateline='1434729291'] Nerfing a card forces me to play another card. Buffing a card gives me a possibility to try other card, but my card is still as playable as earlier. That's why I feel that buffing cards is better option, but require much more work. [/quote] Sometimes nerfing just one card will make several other cards viable. A card like Lyrish Knight used to be a cost efficient counter vs pretty much all S/M/L units alike but after it got nerfed people have to bring several other cards instead. Another example from the newest version of Battleforge is shadow t2, everyone who had access to a shadow orb by t2 would bring Darkelf Assassins and Nightcrawler. You could try to make other cards stronger than those two but by doing that you will just replace but if you nerf them it might open up a handful of different cards than could fill their role. But you still have a point there are a lot of cards that will never be viable if they aren't buff

Imagine we nerf XYZ card because its too strong in pvp, and because of that nerf XYZ isn't strong enough to do speedruns with anymore. Did that break pve speedruns or fix it ? Does it really matter ? If XYZ isn't good enough everyone have to find a suitable replacement. I'm not sure what you want balanced in pve tbh. For a speed run there is an optimal deck and if you nerf any card in the deck something else is going to replace it and your gonna have a slightly different version of the original deck.

I don't think anyone else mentioned having elite players voting on the suggestions the "Councils" proposes. For cards like Wheel of Gifts and all basically all T4 cards i think it would be fine if everyone were allowed to vote, but for important pvp cards including almost all of the t1 and t2 cards i don't think someone who doesn't play high level pvp should be allowed to vote.

My suggestion: Have 3-5 high level players be in charge on making balancing suggestions. Any suggestion they agree upon will have to pass a vote before they can take effect. The only people who should be allowed to vote are people who are top 20 1v1 and top 3 2v2.