LagOps

@TheLionDuck now i am curious: which other fire t1 cards are uselfull in pvp then? The guide mentioned clearly poor cards as options (strikers, nomads) and gave reasons to why they are usually not worth it. Most other guides do not even consider or mention them at all.

Well i doubt you could fix firedancer cliffing/mortar cliffing easyly. The mortar allready requires ground presence and that didn't change too much in my opinion, it is still an issue. As long as there is no way of detecting cliffing within the game's code (there highly likely is none) i do not see a change happening here.

[quote='Eirias' pid='11283' dateline='1438280303'] [...] With bandits, buffs help prevent the gs from dying long enough to get rage. I need to literally spam heals after every hit, and even then a wildfire and eruption just drops gs like flies. For a while, actually, I carried swamp drakes solely for lost grigori and juggernaut. [/quote] Well with bandits you can use the bandit lancers to block the stampete and buy some time. I play with live weaving so that does not help at lot used on giant slayers.

Hm interesting, i would have gone with cc+giant slayers (i use gs in bandits and it kind of works out vs. juggs). the slayers slow down the jugg as well if memory serves correct, you just have to make sure to intercept them early enough.I really didn't play fire/nature a lot and i guess mortar in t3 is not as pointless as it seems, i just never saw it beeing used to any effect in t3. I will gladly assist you with the bandits section; the deck is a bit tricky to build and play correctly and lots of things which sound great in theory backfire spectacularly. I can also give a bit of an overview about how my deck evolved just like you did, i liked that section a lot since it gives reasons why cards where picked/discarded.

Interesting, but there are some things i just cannot agree with, especially mortar in t3 vs. ashbones and juggernaut? I just don't see it happening...

[quote='SunWu II.' pid='10246' dateline='1438036869'] Fire / Shadow: - Lava Field is optional like phoenix but you definetly need one of them - Skyfire Drake / Windhunter: while skyfire drake is core, windhunter is optional (LagOps might be able to tell us what affinity is actually better) - Unholy Power is optional - Warriors Death is optional, too, i dont remember wich affinity was the better one... - Scythes core maybe ? I'm not totally sure, but they are pretty awesome in bandits ! - bandit spearmen are a good choice if someone finds the deckslot [/quote] -I play both lava filed and shadow phoenix. bandits often want some direct dmg which isn't telegraphed in defense to avoid getting oblitterated. If you chose 1, go for lava field. Shadow phoenix is very strong in bandits since you can easyly revive it if you are doing a banner based attack. it can keep up the pressure and is essential for beating frost splashes at clusters. I wouldn't say it is core, but it at least is very close! -Windhunter affinity is green, because a) the Windhunter can disenchant itself against coldsnap (you have to be fast, but it works if you predict the coldsnap) as well as stormsinger and totally obliterates pure nature (can't be cc'ed or swaped for 10 seconds usually means well down). It also b) lasts so much longer than green disenchant. -Disenchant affinity is purple because a) you do not have strong single unit basenukes in t2 (flying units too low hp overall) and b) you need it to at least have some fighting chance vs. harvester and lost souls with double buffs. I also think it is core (or at least almost core) despite having windhunters. -Unhowly power is indeed optional since it makes bandits even more susceptible to cc than playing live weaving. I tried playing it, but was not very successfull so i play lived weaving even if i start fire. Maybe it is stronger at lower elos where players tend to cc poorly/carelessly. -Scythes are not core and i did not play them for most of the time. They are a good unit, but assasins handle s units very well. Assasins usually struggle against nature splashes, but so do scythes in my experience. They give you some more offensive options in some matchups but i would much rather have a phoenix for instance. They are strong vs. pure nature (the m counter is s and you can prevent the swap with windhunter for instance), but the best matchup for bandits is pure nature anyways in my opinion. -Warrior's death is a freewin vs. some decks and generaly a broken card. used with nightcrawler+frenzy (at rallying banner for maximum counnterplay reduction) it can almost take a well down vs. anything that isn't a frost splash. The affinity with 75% dmg reduction (i think it was frost) was definately the better one. I do not reccomend playing this card since it will not teach you how to play bandits and reduces the complexity of the deck heavyly. -Bandit spearman while beeing very strong, do not contribute a whole lot to a bandits deck. I am not sure which affinity is better, but the card is very suceptible to cc (mele s unit...) which makes it hardly usable in defense. There are better options so it is an optional card, but i would not reccomend it. Edit: thugs in t1 were very common after the buff and they help a lot vs. shadow and a bit in a fire mirror matchup. Due to shadow and fire t1 popularity considering them core would be possible, but fire t1 can be played without them without too much of an disadvantage. I would say they are optional, but that is debatable.

[quote='Hirooo' pid='9068' dateline='1437650984'] This is a videogame where people want to play against each other and both people want to have a chance at winning by playing better than their opponent. Cliffdancing is based on maprng and heavily swings the game in favor of the cliffdancing player without him having to play better than his opponent. [/quote] This exactly the point about cliffdancer. You don't have to play better than your oponent to win the game and certain maps. This is not what pvp should be about. Cliffdancing is just very very frustrating to deal with and (near)autolosing is not acceptable in any game with a well made pvp.

vileblood in shadow-nature would propably be very brutal. an l unit with heals and shadow buffs. pure madness.

curse well is broken and adds nothing to the game. it only promotes defensive laming in t3. this is the only card in the game which is so bad that i doubt it could be saved somehow. i agree on removing this nonsense from the game.

In pvp it propably was brannoc. strong unit with an even stronger ability.

[quote='SunWu II.' pid='3092' dateline='1436113036'] Eventhough i would love to see 500 viable cards in PVP, i would still be very careful about buffing. This is especially important for cards that tend to scale dramatically like ,,X-times void = damage'' or anything that doesnt bind power in combination with powermanipulation. When useless backlash became buffed, it was OP all of a sudden and there was no way around it if you were an ELO-greedy skylord. Sunken temple is really strong wit SoM, it's just that out of the 3 pure nature players nobody tested it or found a slot for it. It's also the last card needed in a faction with already UP early T2 and OP late T2. Cards like rippers and northguards are cards that aren't too weak in my opinion, they simply have not the right concept to fit in the deck they're supposed to belong. Northguards for example have amazing stats, but unfortunately MAs and frostmages outshine them, buffing them might leave them OP in some scenarios and still useless most of the time. Same goes for rippers: DAs > any S-counter in a shadowsplash. I read earlier that shadow insects were useless !? With support from fallen skyelfs ability they could almost instantly kill a Juggernaut ! I think there might be 50 - 100 cards that had the lable ,,useless'' but were infact relatively strong, just outshined by ,,easier to use'' or even stronger cards. I would be really carefull about buffing one of those. Also with such a low highrank population there wasn't enough testing going on. Even if there's the chance to balance weekly or monthly i would still be very cautious and take a approach like:,,how to balance this faction?'' instead of:,,how to make this card see more PVP?'' I find the thought of having a new ,,freak of the weak'' after every buffing quite unpleasant. [/quote] I agree with you in genreal, but we should also allways ask if a card is simply toxic with litle to no counterplay. there are cards in this game which make the gameplay experience worse and we should definately not buff them until they actually are usable. shadow insect is a good example there. it is up on it's own right now, but any buff could turn this card into an "i win" button. this means we should better not touch it at all for the sake of fun and interesting gameplay. There are also super situational cards (global warming etc.) which counter 1 thing super hard. they usually don't get played due to deckslot reasons and buffing them would not make them see more play, but just more abuse. "I have card x so your card is entirely usless" is not really fun to play, as long as we are talking about 1 click counters. In my opinion it should [b]never [/b]be the goal of balancing to make as many cards as possible "viable". we should only make those cards viable, which would improve the gameplay or at least don't make it worse. if cards have crappy designs (wich a major part of cards do have!), we can't change that.

there is a big topic about this allready, you better post there since a lot of argumets have been made. [url=http://bfreborn.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=98]klick[/url]

can we plz at least pretend not to derail the thread? yes? thank you...

the only way which is NOT valid is going by win/loss ratio! curse well has a low win ratio? buff it! warriors death propably has a low winratio as well! buff it! pure fire is a noobstomper and propably has high winrate, nerf it? pure nature is in general weak, but deep one is in nearly every nature deck, does it need a buff maybe? but players are asking for a nerf? bandits t3 has a high winrate? better nerf corsair! cards which are core to the factions in general have the same win/loss ratio as their respective factions. maybe they are super broken? maybe they are just entirely fine? maybe they are week, but there is hardly an alternative to them? how could you know by looking at the numbers at all? also going by winrate does not account for broken cards, such as curse well and warriors death, which nearly have no counterplay and are either brainless "i win" buttons ore just totally useless. if you really want to balance battleforge, looking at numbers won't cut it. looking at cards won't cut it. looking at a single faction might not even be enough either. one has to be aware of the metagame, common builds and faction matchups. statistics are helpfull as an indicator, but their relevance is higly questionable.

[quote='Ze751' pid='2539' dateline='1435767145'] Holy shit, is this real life? [/quote] either it is, or i am halucinating for weeks. i hope i man not having issues^^

in terms of speed and latency, i feel we can only do better. there were entire weeks where the server was so laggy, it was impossible to play. on the onther hand we have entirely new server side code, so expect some multi threading issues (shared resources beeing locked for long times, deadlocks in general) which typically are very hard to fix, as well as random crashes. untested code is typically full of bugs and hardly all parts of the code will be tested, especially vs. multi thread related issues. just expect tons of bugs and glitches early on as this can hardly be avoided (at least in public alpha/beta).

[quote='kestas3' pid='2236' dateline='1435384968'] nomad is also viable as a fast unit especially due to the fact that if you noticed nomads have a quicker summon animation and will run faster towards a well or orb. this is because when scavenger is summoned he roars and then moves which is a 1-2 sec delay [/quote] no! scavanger is a must have! it is an important s unit counter, it is cheap and it helps a lot to kite for low hp units with its passive. there is NO place for nomads in pvp.

howly mother of god, what a marvelous job you did. here have my upvote! i will certaily use this as a refernce for new players once the game is running again.

[quote='SunWu II.' pid='1467' dateline='1434991709'] curse well, anyone remember ? frost protects plus this spell made frostsplash T3s OP because theres no counter to a one-click-well-destruction. Glacier/kobold/shieldbuilding made a counteroffensive near impossible. That was the most unbalanced thing to me (because mathces with frost splash contribution werent unusual to reach T3) [/quote] i feel the same. curse well is super toxic, especially in a frostsplash. i have seen players turtle into t3 and then abuse this with shield building as well. impossible to do anything until you lose with most decks. i am usually not a player who is in favor of bannigs cards, but curse well is just braindead and i see no way to fix this. luckyly it was not that popular... overshadowed by those grigory bombs maybe?

HEY! The deck name meme was mine! (i actually saw someone with a deck named yes, this was NOT even staged) nice to bring it back, i did search for it but could not find it anymore :(

[img]https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/341x473q90/540/KdwyQ7.jpg[/img] taking wells on haladur /w epic tutorial deck trolling! [img]https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/228x473q90/537/4N33PC.jpg[/img]