[Wintertide Red: What were you guys thinking?]

On 5/7/2021 at 11:25 PM, Fimion said:

Instead of making this card useless you could have been a little creative and give it an abillity that makes it good and original in PvE but not OP in PvP.

Or you could have simply changed it so that its trample damage only affects L and XL units.

Pretty sad if you ask me...

As a matter of fact, this is not possible. We are constrained by the technical limitations of the unit-logic that is provided by the game. There is a module called "TrampleRevengeDamage" that can be attached to units which then gain this passive ability. This module can then be modifies by several parameters, such as damage but we cannot limit it to certain types of size.

Naturally, having more control over the logic would give us more powerful and fine-grained solution but in the end, the things we can change about gameplay essentially boils down to "modding" existing logic. Everything beyond that would require reverse-engineering of the game's binaries.

[Wintertide Red: What were you guys thinking?]

17 hours ago, chickennoodler said:

Obviously, any change helping frost this way helps all the other faction playstyles overall. Expecting it to benefit Frost only in the longrun is silly. I do not count that as a Frost buff as players adapt to the new mapping, it can eventually turn out no, it benefits other factions as much if not more.

Obviously, Frost benefits much more from smaller maps because they are the only T1 which lacks a swift unit. Larger maps means that other players can get a more advantageous position and prevent Frost from building up momentum. Nerfs of Mortar and Phase Tower already resulted in Frost (and Nature) being noticeably more viable. This was best observed in the tournaments so far.

In fact, Master Archer spam coupled with Wintertide repeatedly and reliably killed Dreadchargers in the Shadow matchup. For the Shadow player it is exceedingly difficult to avoid taking damage from MA + Wintertide to the point where it cannot be stopped anymore. 

[Aura of Pain Bug]

Thanks for letting us know. This doesn't have a high priority but it should be fixed regardless.

On 1/24/2021 at 9:31 AM, Sling said:

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:I would consider buffing the card to see it in some decks. For example let the damage count as damage from the unit its put on (enrage Batariel faster, heal for Bandit units). Also the total damage could be increesed or even removed.

Unfortunately, the latter isn't possible. Of course this card would deserve a bug, but I see problems arising in pvp if we improve this card. If we buff the card too much, it hard-counters Giantslayers in T3 and if we buff it too little, I'm afraid it will remain weak.

[kobold trick in pvp is too trong]

Indeed, it is a common complaint that the building protection of frost splahes are too powerful. However, our focus in pvp lies at stabilizing all the T1 matchups at th emoment. 

Nature and Frost have some severe disadvantages that can be exploited. However, Frost and Nature also scale very well as the game goes on, so we really need to focus on the T1 before we should move on with substantial T2 changes.

[Corsair deployable units and units which have been snatched by Nightguard.]

If I recall correctly, the dropped units of Corsair used to be able to capture orbs and monuments but this caused problems in pvp.

Corsair is definitely lacking and should absolutely get a buff in the future. But it's not really a high priority to be fair.

[Introducing ... ImaginaryNumb3r, our new Balancing Developer!]

 

I'm excited in working together with the great team behind Skylords. I'm astonished at how far the game has made it so far and I hope it will get even better from now going forward. I welcome the challenges that await us and want to forge the game into the best shape it can be. Balancing is delicate and there are many conflicting visions about the game, but I want to have an ear for every voice among us Skylords.

- Imaginary

[Overhauling or rebalancing Battlegrounds/rPvE]

I think this sums up the current situation quite well.

On 10/15/2020 at 12:39 AM, Bini Inibitor said:

Everybody can think what they like on the part that Lost Souls is "too strong" compared to other factions, the solution to that "problem" is certainly not a simple nerf to a single faction, but rather adjust all factions at once and equalize their power level. It is about the highest difficulty levels after all and Bandits/Stonekin are a breeze compared to Lost Souls or even Twilight. Real strategic gameplay only starts to show if you play difficulty 10, but I will get to difficulty scaling in a bit.

Absolutely, adjusting the difficulty would be a dream. However, to me this seems like a considerable effort and I don't think this would be a realistic change. 

Further, I agree on the notion of having a "rpve 9.5" as well as purely elemental maps. But I'm afraid making new factions is even more of a substantial effort.

[Card Balancing and the Future of the Game]

On 5/24/2020 at 1:29 PM, Timestopper said:

A developer commented on this but it seems the comment has been taken down. However, I completely agreed with the statement - I don't think it is fair for us as bystanders to criticize people who've poured their heart and soul into a project for years without expecting anything in return.

They have done an amazing job reviving this game and even though I strongly disagree with some of the things they do ('nostalgia before balance' and the heavily delayed launch when we don't exploit this window of opportunity for major game changes) I still think they deserve all the support and praise we can possibly give (through patreon or otherwise)

You are completely right. It was in the heat of the moment and I got carried away...

I sincerely apologize to the people who are still doing all the maintenance, bugfixing and all other aspects that we don't notice from the outside. And it seems like there is actually some progress in making balancing changes for the better.

Thank you @Devs

[Suggestion to rework Twilight Transformation: Twilight Evolve]

I feel you. In pvp Fire/Shadow had the exact same problem with decks slots and it always felt like you were playing with only haf a deck. You miss out on powerful cards of pure faction and end up with a compromise, that forces you to patch your holes with additional cards.

If I understand you correctly you want a mechanic that essentially gives you T3 monster cards for free. Given the slot pressure, that's not unreasonable. However, I don't think this is a "be-all end-all" change. With this ability, we first must have valid Twilight units to begin with.

Realistically, the only T2 Twilight cards you play in pvp are Brute + Vileblood, of which both are mediocre. Vileblood could morph into Mutating Maniac and Twilight Brute into... Twilight Creeper? The target card for evolved Twilight units seems rather arbitrary to me. But admittedly, this is better than nothing.

The proposed alternative is that units "level up", as you reach a new tier. But here I see the the big problem with player expectation and game readability. A "T3 Vileblood" must be visually distinct from a "T2 Vileblood", this is a must (I am speaking from experience). Otherwise you can confuse your opponents with mixing T2 and T3 Vilebloods and expect them to make a bad choice, this is just toxic. You are also introducing a whole range of new de-factor cards that need to be balance and tested, which isn't trivial.

Now, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't explore this but in terms of deck building, I can't help but feel like using duct tape, rather than having a diverse deck. And again, this make the assumption that all of the Twilight Cards are worth using.

To me, it is clear that the first step must be to make the Twilight Cards viable. I have reservations against "Twilight Evolution", but I'm not fully opposed to it. However, I think with this proposal we get ahead of ourselves. The first step must be to fix the Twilight Cards, there is no way around this.

And I don't think the current "Twilight Transformation" is completely unsavable either. You are right about its issues, can't we fix those issues for the mean time? Just give transformed units full health and not make them use a charge. That alone could make it a good ability to have.

On another note: You mention "players using Deathglider instead of hurricane" -> Why don't we just buff Death Glider instead? Death Glider has essentially the stats of Mana Wing and might be the worst unit in the game. A flying S-counter with S-knockback could be a powerful tool in F/N. I don't care how strong a "T3 Evolved Deathglider" would be, I want it to be good in T2.

Back on the topic of deck slots: I think the deck-slot problem would be mitigated a great deal with more Twilight cards were like Gladiatrix. She's anti-L, she's anti-air and provides a slot-free Disenchant. If the Twilight Cards were multi-purpose oriented we would effectively mitigate the problem with free deck slots. In the Discord the idea has been raised to make Twilight Hag a T2 unit, I think she would be a perfect candidate.

Now, with good Twilight units making up for the shortcumings of F/N you might not even need to change Twilight Transformation and we could play around transformation abilities. Imagine Twilight Minions costing 50e: Suddenly, you have a cheap way of increasing the damage output of your Twilight Units. I know it costs a deckslot, but I think this is a fascinating facet of the faction that shouldn't be discarded.

In general, I think more abilities should trigger if Twilight Units transformed. E.g. if Nightshade plant triggered its effect on transformation, it would be an interesting unit for mass-CC.

But again, I am not completely opposed to Twilight Evolution, I think this can only be a "second step" in making Fire/Nature better. And the Evolution should be very well thought out and designed. For example, a unit should only be able to use Twilight Evolution once. Otherwise a Twilight T2 card is effectively 3 cards (T2, T3 and T4 version), which is unfair towards other decks.

But first things first :-)

#MakeTwilightGreatAgain

Edit: One thing I'm not keen on is forgoing orb restrictions. We should be making Twilight better instead of giving it more access to cards like Frenetic Assault. With Enlightenment and Amii Monument, there are already ways to ignore certain restrictions and I think adding more ways is hurting the game more than it helps.

[Card Balancing and the Future of the Game]

On 5/16/2020 at 2:46 PM, Timestopper said:

Oh it absolutely will. I have been lurking on the forum for several years now, checking each month waiting for a reset. I see no reason to keep playing until the final reset has gone through as playing more than I've already done would be wasted time.

From my activity on the SkylordsReborn subreddit I see this feeling shared very strongly in the community.

I absolutely believe you. But how many people like you are there? Certainly not all of the current players. 

And for most people, this will be the third time they need to start over from zero. Can't say that sounds like a recipe for fun. And ultimately, there is no new experience to be had.

By now, most people already had their fair share of nostalgia, there is little more to be gained from now on. And all of this only takes the veteran players into account. If the game wants to be a success, it needs to attract more players. Really, you need to keep new players as much as possible.

*Start Rant*

This can only be addressed with careful game design that should have been addressed years ago. Card Balancing is one obvious major factor, but achievements and unique rewards for trying out new and weird things also factors into this. But all I can see is a painfully slow process on a questionable re-work of the BFP income.

For those reasons, I fear the worst for the longevity of the game.

*End Rant*

Edit: Just today I decided to log on again... and nobody was hosting even a single game. It doesn't feel like there are many people left that feel in charge and do their best for the future of the game. *Sigh* And now with Kubik gone, I just don't know man... I try to stay positive, but I can't help but feel a little naive for that.

[Card Balancing and the Future of the Game]

10 minutes ago, Kubik said:

Why you think dev decided that?

Fair enough, it was made clear earlier that this decision was made by MrXLink. I am really concerned for the game and got passionate near the end.

Yes, I'm sorry for that statement. Clearly not everybody shares this same opinion in the team.

On 3/27/2020 at 6:50 PM, Eirias said:

There is a discord where balancing changes were being discussed. Not sure how to invite you though. However, MrXLink has stated that for nostalgic reasons, he wants to full release of the game to have the same balance as when the game died. 

A few months after full release, balances can happen.

Personally I don't see why we can't start making pvp balance changes now and then reset things once full release is ready, but I understand that reasoning for nostalgia.

The huge problem is that balancing is an incremental and iterative process. Many cards have a straight forward fix. Balancing some cards causes a ripple effect that ends up taking extra time. And some factions such as Nature T1 need a full blown rework.

Changing the numbers is fast but Balancing involves playtesting and testing out a new meta. This is the true time sink and you won't see any meaningful results early on. And with a game the scale of Battleforge you really need all the headstart that you can get. I see why you wouldn't tackle a big undertakging such as rebalancing Nature T1 since this can _potentially_ with the expectation of players.

But everybody wants better internal balancing so making a decks is more fun. Especially in pve there is only little you can do wrong and there are plenty of cards that simply need a points reduction.

Now, I don't claim to be an educated expert but I've been working on RTS balance for years so I know the difficulties that happen when you get your hands on balance.

[Card Balancing and the Future of the Game]

On 3/27/2020 at 7:18 PM, Darian DelFord said:

I hae been to the Discord Server some decent ideas there.  Granted I can not type or contribute but I can see it.

Correct me if i am wrong but we are currently in Open Stress which means pretty much anyone can log in and get "nostalgic"  This project has been ongoing for 4.5 years.  It is all volunteer and it does take time to relaunch old games.  However the "Nostalgia" is wearing thin for some of us.  I just do not see a logical reason to be holding back the implementations any longer.  The game needs to feel like its moving forward more so than it is.  Now I have no idea what the time table is which I understand.  However how long is gameplay going to stay.  Roll a few card changes out.... see how it works out.  There will be issues.  Much rather iron those out now than when the game is live. 

Point being, we have a decent amount of players now that it is extremely feasible to do this.  Nostalgia be damned, I have been playing, like most, since 2008. 

On top of this I don't think anybody who hasn't been playing in recent years doesn't even know the card stats anymore.

And what is worse, we are losing valuable players. I have seen this with so many other games... the moment a game becomes public its lifecycle begins. And the game in its current state is not sustainable. The playable cards are the game's greatest assets but 80% of the cards are utterly useless because of bad internal and external balancing.

I mean, do the devs seriously think that people feel "nostalgic" when they run into the same bugs that persisted since the game launched? I get why you the devs are intimmidated by starting the balancing process, but at the very least they can start fixing bugs.It doesn't seem like many people even care anymore. When the project and the open beta launched we had some vivid talks on the forum and it has almost completely vanished. We could have used that momentum to keep the game going.

I don't see what the devs are waiting for. The new BFP earning system? For how long have we been waiting for that? Sigh...

Edit: People have been playing Battleforge for years now and I don't think the reset will provide a big influx of players.

For all intends and purposes, the game seems "released" to the public. And if there is nothing new after the reset I don't see why the current players should come back. The nostalgia is spent and I don't want to participate in the same old grinding again.

[Possible Fixes to the Upgrade Tab]

I see no valid reason why this shouldn't be done.

From what I can tell, virtually nobody could tell a difference. This is a quality of life improvement that should have been there to begin with the launch of the game.

[New BFP Earning System: Playtime and Reserves]

I'm not sure how I can phrase myself more accurately without writing 3 times as much text. I don't think we are even disagreeing on many parts, but it comes down to understanding. However, given that nothing I say has any relevance in the grand scheme of things this is getting a bit too pointless for me. I think I just leave my points as they are. It's not like arguing changes anything.

11 hours ago, Halis said:

LSS and Amii Monument are not broken in higher difficulties. LSS has very low DP20S and is very bad against S units. For the Amii Monument, you always think about: is it worth it to waste a deck slot for that card, if you can get the Monument in the map anyways?

... no offense, but I don't think you understand the concept of balancing and the difference between viable and optimal builds. I can't continue, this is pointless.

[New BFP Earning System: Playtime and Reserves]

I appreciate the time you have put into the reply. Now, I don't question the economics behind it

On 12/19/2019 at 1:34 PM, Halis said:

Actually it has some problems currently. The most problems are caused by the current parameters.

I never claimed anything differently. I'm sure this has been well thought out and tested and I know from firsthand experience that the final parameters always require some fine-tuning. Likely, the parameters will still be adjusted after launch. So the power of the system actually comes from its maintainability.

Quote

One problem is that ~420 BFP (Booster) for 30 minutes playtime is to much. And if you play only 29 minutes you get nothing, except, that the played time is transfered to next day.

... but can't you just make Boosters untradable? It's fair to critizie that this is a clunky system and it can be improved in a myriad of ways. But a reward system that is structured into phases isn't bad per se and gives an incentive to play just one more game to be rewarded. The real issue is that, right now, the reward is all-or-nothing on a non-trivial objective.

Quote

I disagree. It took me weeks to discover the hole game. There are every now and then new community maps.

I wasn't stating a personal opinion. Among my friends I know several people who started the game and most left immediately after they finished the campaign missions since "there was nothing more to do". Yes, there is also pvp, but this has a high entering threshold in many regards. And other things like speedrunning is really just fringe-content for the diehard fans.

I don't doubt that there are some good community maps, but accessibility is just as important as quality.

Quote

Yes, and one problem is, that you get absolutely nothing after you finished your dailys. (Except gold, but anyone who plays this game for a while has more gold than he needs)

... so, I wonder, is that being worked on?

Quote

There is still the daily boost

I completely understood that part. My original point was that I'm afraid of the concept not working so well a pull-factor that improves player motivation. Since getting a dynamic amount of BFP can't be as tangible than getting a virtual box that you can open.

Quote

Let me explain it beginner frendly: With the daily boost, you get faster. After the daily boost: the more you play, the rate of BFP will be slowed down.

 I understood the concept by a 100%. But I'm confident that at the very least not a 100% of the playerbase is going to understand it.

Quote

For me as a speedrunner, there is no favourite color

I absolutely believe you, but most people I know ingame have one. A good reason RTS games have different factions to begin with is that everybody can choose one or more playstyle they like. Which is also Battleforge's ultimate selling point. I personally can't stand being forced to play one way over another and I just can't stand the slowness of frost.

I try to be hopeful that the balancing process is going to fix/mitigate the issue. In theory, Battleforge offers so many cards to choose from but in reality a vast majority is useless or sub-average. Sure, you can get by with some random cards that you find aesthetically (or financially) appealing, but that only goes so far. You simply need an optimized deck to win higher difficulties (and I don't even mean the broken stuff like LSS or Amii Monument).

With more valid cards, everybody would win, even speedrunners.

Btw. I enjoyed the GDC talk Pillars of Eternity and Proper Attribute Tuning, if you are into that stuff. It's only partially applicable to Battleforge, but the game also suffers from the divide between "optimal" and "valid" decks.

Quote

That's not correct. For earning Gold, you need to win a map. For BFP you need to play long.

Yes, it is technically not the same, but on average both resources will correlate. It was more a critique on the resource system as a whole and I've seen other games tackle this wonderfully by making you play different parts of the game for different resources. But that is a whole topic by itself...

Quote

They are not getting unified, since you still need to win matches for Gold, while I agree, that taking the daily booster away, could take incentives further away. But you still get booster for achivements. I am not sure, if the fun to open a booster will increase, if you have less of them, but I think it will.

I think it depends on the drop rate of boosters and, ultimately, how many cards will be changed into something valid. Given all the crap cards, I'm afraid making boosters rarer just makes disappointments more bittersweet.

[New Player Bandit Deck]

On 12/12/2019 at 12:18 PM, Tebo said:

Hey all,

I started about a week ago, and (stupidly) used my first 4 - 6 packs to open and got useless stuff. Anyway I started trading pack for BF to build a decent deck and did some research to come up with a bandit deck. I was wondering where I should start saving BF for now, or what I could do to improve it from here. I could always spend BF getting duplicates for more casts but I was wondering if it would be better to save up for Shatter soul or parasite  (infect, the super expensive card) or something else. here is a link to the build i'm using

https://imgur.com/U1uRyAa

(sorry if it's not formatted correctly as I cant drag and drop images it says upload failed)

I think your deck is very solid. What you definitely need is a second T4 structure and usually 1 creature in T3 is enough (Soulhunter). Personally, I'm an advocate of Tortugun but only few people like to play with her (eats your own units if you can't micro manage her). Imho, Soulshatter is a muste have and I also recommend a late-game CC such as Amok or Frenetic Assault.

Imho, Spearmen are great for campaign missions, but not for rpve. And Bandit Soceress is an absolute niche card. Otherwise I can only repeat what my posters before me have written.

If you want a more comprehensive analysis of all the bandit cards, I can recommend that you peek into this guide: 

 

 

[New BFP Earning System: Playtime and Reserves]

I'm not a huge fan of algebraic systems, but I see your narrative behind it and given the goals you want to achieve it is reasonable and seems well thought out.

What I miss a lot is the emotional aspect of the game. I know, boosters not a good way of earning BFP, but opening them is fun. Just like opening a loot box at the end of a dungeon in Diablo is fun. I think this is also true for the trading and card selling aspect of the game, with the weak link being a cumbersome AH not not the trading itself.

Your system sounds compelling and it has the elegance of a mathematical solution. But I'm not exactly convinced of the problem you want to solve. Anyway, it all comes back to player progression. If you think about it, the game has horribly little content and it the progression itself isn't as rewarding, the player experience gets stretched even thinner.

Honestly, I like to play the game casually and sometimes I played one more game just to get a booster and open it. Rewards for fixed time frames are much more tangible than following a mathematical system. But overall, I suppose it is an improvement to what we currently? It does add another layer of complexity to a game that is not beginner friendly, but I guess it is worth trying out at the very least.

I think what this really does is to take away an immediate incentive to play the game in favour of something that benefits you throughout the lifetime as a player. It's not a make-or-break change but it sounds like the piece of a puzzle that the game needs. I'm extremely concerned about the longevity of the game. What the game needs the most dire is additional player incentives. Once you made a 120 level deck of your favourite color, there is hardly anything left to do. Since this proposal doesn't change any of this, I really don't care much about it.

It also makes earn BFP a lot like earning gold. So while those resources were different things to look out for in the past, I'm afraid that effectively unifying them takes away further incentives. And why shouldn't I just waste time on some maps and alt-tab out of the game to earn BFP while I'm doing something else? Again, I don't think this addresses any major problem right now.

If I had to voice a wish, it was to have a system that is more wholistic. A reward and progression system which gives players incentives to play campaign maps on higher difficulties, make speed runs, try out pvp more casually and explore the niche aspects of the game. For me, the longtime player experience has always been grinding rpve 9 and to me it sounds like it will keep being this way (and I think after several years I've had enough of it). It's not that rpve 9 is necessarily the most fun, but it's the easiest thing to get going. Campaign missions have a lot of downtime between missions and don't let me get started on pvp lol.

On another note, what is to consider is that opening boosters fills your bank with lots of different cards, tempting players to try out new cards that they wouldn't buy on their own. So that falls away as well.

But who am I, those are just my 50 cents.

[Balance Proposal: Mutating Maniac]

This card is a strong contender for a buff. Since if you make this card viable, it becomes an affordable version of Fathom Lord and a key card for beginners to create a strong fire/nature deck. Keep it's XL-counter but make it as non-pvp viable as possible and reward interesting mechanics that are of little use in pvp.

In terms of stats, the only thing this card needs is a cost of 130 and you get very good stats for your money (along with a good range of fire and nature support).

On 9/1/2019 at 9:37 PM, Chibiterasu said:

1. A poisen fits the nature fire theme very well compared to a blindness or a damage debuff. The movementspeed fits too. But we already discussed this in the discord channel. Poisen + Movementspeed reduction would probably too strong in PvP and only a slow would almost be useless in Pve.

2. Also discussed in discord: S counter is almost useless in t3, M counter would only counter specific units for example silverwind or giant slayer. Both of them are swift so Mutating Maniac will have a tough time fighting against those units. L would be the only possible counter but I'm sure there were some arguments against it too. The only real possibility that we considered was siege damage. But in the end more people wanted the XL damage.

3. We wanted to keep it simple with those changes for now. A passive healing would be a cool idea but we don't know to which extend we are even able to give him such an ability.

4 & 5. Would make it even more similar to giant slayer.

6. Complete CC immunity would probably be way to op in PvP and the other ideas are overall too difficult (or even impossible) to implement.

7. Reminds me of a frost unit. I don't think it fits very well to a Fire Nature unit.

8. That would fit quite well. But again, since it's a completely new ability, it will be very difficult to impossible to implement.

9. Taunt again feels a bit odd for a Fire Nature unit imo. It may be a control ability but it would again fit better to a frost unit. I'm not even sure if there's an aoe taunt in the game right now. (Lightblade only works on one unit what makes it a different ability.)

So some of those ideas are quite good but I think within our limits, the current proposal is pretty good so far. Besides we can still adjust it later on.

I agree with all points above. But as for the ability, I think Twilight units should excel in supporting other Twilight units. Similar to Twilight Pestilence you could provide healing or a damage-reduction buff to nearby twilight units. Twilight definitely needs some love and could encourage to play fully themed twilight decks.

[(Suggestion) Detailed HP Bars]

I see, very nice job! It looks much cleaner to me now, the adjusted health bar size is also an improvement. Still, I would try to increase the small lines to 250. And maybe slightly lower the size of the small ticks. At first, you think that the Avatar of Frost has as much health as he does shielding. Don't want to sound nitpicky, but in games details do matter

May I ask how you have implemented this? Can you actually control every pixel of the health bar or are you just applying some kind of texture on the health bar? I wasn't aware you could control such details.

[More new cards]

7 hours ago, Chimaka( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) said:

Priorities: From top to bottom*
>Reach Server stability upto 99,999% (no random crashes here and there)
>Gameplay stability and confortability, which includes: economics (gold rewards, quest rewards and quest themselves, achievements), game content (cards you get, boosters), possibly some UI improvements, etc in those regards
>New game content. Includes: New cards, New maps/scenarios, Card rebalance, Gameplay mechanic improvements (if possible, but hardly imaginable), etc.

It's a distant future content, sadly. Can't be helped. Let alone we'd need someone to make those new "cards". They (cards) consist of: texts, cards, animations, models, textures, special effects, mechanics. We are lucky if game uses some sort of 'part-compiler' or 'constructor'. Like some spare parts of a car. You can add and take away some of them, change exterior, interior, inner mechanical parts like engine, gearbox, levers, electronics, etc etc. IF it worked like that, then we'd be blessed. Otherwise... welp~...

*some intersections are possible, but not with last part.

I agree. But to be fair Battleforge already makes heavy re-use of recycling and making texts and textures (and even special effects) is not such a big deal when you got the models and animations already ingame. Special effects too are usually just textures with some kind of GPU transformation going on that can be done entirely in code (not a big deal once you know what you are doing and have a creative spark). But besides that there are still many neutral card monsters that could be turned into a playable card (just think of all the Twilight creatures. Heck, all Twilight creatures are just texture jobs anyway).

Either way, I'm more in favour of re-balancing the existing cards before adding more content. Personally, I'd love to see more unique T4 faction creatures that rewards a "pure" playstyle, but overall I think rebalancing many of the useless cards yields more merit.

[(Suggestion) Detailed HP Bars]

6 hours ago, John said:

How does this look? I think it looks fine for the S units. I noticed that the health bar of the buildings are quite small, so maybe they should be made bigger

Is this actually ingame or just a photoshop job? It took me a while to understand the numbers behind the bars, but I like the concept. However, I think the bars add too much clutter to Northguards and Master Archers. We would need to see this in action, naturally.

While cool, this feature should be added with a lot of care. Imho, such a feature should be use-case driven. For exmaple, fire T1 would benefit from separted health bars because it helps determining when an Eruption results in an instant kill. The same applies to other factions (like heals for Nature). Which leaves the question what the optimal box-size is. I think 250 is too smal for a single bar and 500 is too big. I guess the option of customizing your health bars would be a sensible option as well.

Is it actually possible to adjust the total length of the health bar for individual units? Imo, it would make sense for Rifle Cultists to have a visually larger health bar than other units. I'm afraid that many small bars next to each other for s-creatures will lower readability.

On another note: This would be extremely useful for units with an "ability bar", such as Death Rays or Tortuguns. If you could quantify their bar you would make reasoning about their abilities much easier. In fact, I think this feature is best served for ability bars (also including the Avatar of Frost, as op stated). Health indication is rather secondary.

Just my 50 cents.

[(New Card Suggestions) Frost/Fire don't go well together? I say nay!]

If you want to solve the issues with Frost at the start of the game (lack of swift units), you would seriously need to re-think how the faction works in T1. Right now, the slow start of Frost is one of the things that stops the faction from being too good in T1. It's not ideal, but it's not entirely broken either. Another possibility would be to balance the maps and diminish the early game advantage of swift units. But that should be a topic of its own and should involve people such as RadicalX.

As for the main topic: If a Fire/Frost faction would be made, it would realistically consist of re-skins of existing units (for the most part at least). I explored this idea many years ago and made some "coule-be" Fire/Frost cards accordingly. In case somebody's interested here are some of the edited cards and the link to the topic with all the cards I made.

 

 

[Rate and suggestions for deck]

@Chibiterasu I've also played very similar decks and I changed from Grimvine to Overlord. For me, the selling factor was Healing Gardens that also boost Overlord's soul healing. As a result, you will burn through your Regrowth charges much slower. The L-counter of Overlord also accompanies Death Rays very nicely.

[Improvement to Tortuguns AI]

11 hours ago, Chibiterasu said:

I've played Totruguns for a very long time in the original Battleforge and they were my first deck I build in Skylords. A pure Tortugun Deck is by far my favorite deck because they are very strong but are a hell to manage. Perfect Risc and Reward unit. You got many things wrong about the AI of those turtles:

1. They never walk in random directions when they are in amok state. When they become hungry, they will walk to the last place you told them before their amok state and only when they reached that place (even when it's on the other side of them map), they will look for food nearby and walk straight to that unit to eat it. (Pro Tip: You can hold Shift to give your units a path they shell go with more than one destination. With that you can tell your Tortugun to walk back and forth and they will ignore any friendly units until they finished that path even when they get in the amok state right away. This way you can delay the time when they will eat your own units and time it with the amok state of other Tortuguns.) When they are in Amok state and no friendly unit is nearby, they will just stay there until you send or spawn a unit next to them.

2. They will always eat the unit that is closest to them. Not being able to eat their own kind would elimiate the most efficient way to play them. The best strategie is to cast 2 Tortuguns at almost the same time. This way they will also reach the amok state at the same time. You just have to feed one with the other. Then you got from 2 Tortuguns in amok state to 1 Tortugun with almost full stomach. Using Bloodhorn to feed them isn't ideal. Most of the time Bloodhorn isn't at full HP so the amok state is only delayed for a few seconds. Another way is to sacrifice the Tortuguns with Offering before they get hungry. That is a good strategy when you only have one Tortugun with low stomach (you can't offering them when they are in amok state though).

 In general this unit need much care. You always have to pay attention to their stomach bars and think ahead. I don't think they need a better AI. Once you know how they behave, they are very consistence and every time they eat a unit you don't want them to eat, you know you didn't pay enough attention to them 

+1

I really want to emphazise that Tortugun cannibalism should never be removed. It further limits a card that is already in a very niche spot (the way you play it as well as its orb requirements).

[Suggested card changes]

I know it's fun to speculate, but a sledgehammer approach never works when you want to improve the game. A change to a card must add something positive to the game, like allowing a faction to be more competitive, more fun or more balanced overall. Don't forget that every card belongs to a faction in one way or another (including orb restrictions + decks where it makes sense to play the card to begin with), looking at cards one by one hides the bigger issues.

Some cards are utterly pointless and need a drastic revamp, while other cards are overshadowed and a simple change to their stats will achieve nothing. And other cards might be beneficial if re-imagined and seen from the perspective of the respective faction to make this faction more competitive / balanced / fun.

Your end goal can never be to buff a card because individually it is subjectively regarded as bad or just because you can do so. Even worse, some cards are potentially toxic and buffing the wrong cards can do a whole lot harm than good.

I say this because you obviously put a lot of thought into this, but I really miss a little justification behind your suggestions. And some seem really ill-thought out: Yes, Mutating Maniac has bad stats and is downrighter inferior to Fathom Lord. But a 2660/2450 for 140 power is just absurd (sorry), because it turns the unit into one of the most power-efficient T3 units in the game. And it would only remain a boring beatstick. Without question, Mutating Maniac absolutely needs better stats. But I'd change it's abilities so it is more interesting.

Remember, Twilight also has access to Fathom Lord which has a powerful single-unit CC that combos well with it's anti-XL designation. Mutating Maniac could work as a multi-unit CC unit (and potentially become anti-L), which also debuffs units with its Toxic Cloud (no healing, damage reduction, slow enemy). It also has a transformation ability that nobody uses because it's too expensive and too situational. The transformation ability would be far more interesting if it was more powerful (like disallowing enemies to summon cards for a short time).

I'll leave it at that. I don't mean this to be overly critical, but simply informative. The game has a lot of issues, but many of them are very delicate and require special care.