Welcome to Skylords Reborn

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • InsaneHawk

      Donations are back   01/17/17

      If you want more information, you can go check this topic : http://forum.skylords.eu/index.php?/topic/2790-donations-are-back/
    • MrXLink

      Future of Skylords Reborn and intro to Ardent Peak   02/10/17

      Dear Skylords, Skyladies, Skythings We have received the awesome news that we have been allowed by EA themselves to continue our project and open up many future possibilities! For all information and stream VODs, please refer to this topic:   


Alpha & Beta Tester
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Eirias

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Battleforge, Chess, Trivia, Fire Emblem, Materials Science, Creative Writing

Recent Profile Visitors

10029 profile views
  1. Yes. IMO those are the hardest people to deal with as fire nature, esp in 2v2s. Also in 2v2s, you can be losing in high power scenarios (or you enter t3 winning, and then start losing), but this card can clutch the game out (the premise being that you only enter t3 winning and then lose if the power levels are too high). But for instance, going to a generated map against someone like @Hirooo becomes nearly impossible without earthshaker.
  2. I feel like if you're devoting an entire deck slot to a card to break ultra defensive decks, you might as well take t4? (aka earthshaker). So on to the next controversial opinion: I think earthshaker is one of the BEST "t3" cards for fire-nature in a 2v2, and possibly has a use in 1v1 (if you can't break through church lamers, curse well bleeders, northstar defenders, etc.) Reasons why it's good in 2v2: As a fire nature player, nothing I have in t3 scales up well. Perhaps fathom lords do, maybe I can play brannoc if none of the other 3 players have him, but basically once we reach a late t3 stage, I'm useless. This puts lots of pressure on me to win t2, or at least be winning t2 and enter t3 before my opponents. Now with earthshaker, I have a new plan. Be aggressive, but stall out the game to really high powers (strangely enough mortar and roots is possibly approaching similar defenses to other t2 or t3 towers). Usually, a shadow frost opponent is happy to let the game go to super high power, and then I surprise them with t4. True, earthshaker isn't an insta win, but it really helps and for 1 deck slot, I can play a completely different strategy than normal fire-nature (or I can keep my same strategy, with 1 less card in t3, which doesn't really matter. Usually in fire nature if you enter t3 and need more than giant slayers, you're not going to win).
  3. Careful....you might lose rep with that statement
  4. Sun reaver is garbage. It's useless since the nerf, never use it again If Bandit lancer is meant as an L counter (i.e. defensive) why do you need more defensive options? I feel like ashbone might be better for that slot, or maybe silverwind lancers (so lancers run to each base and bomb them with sandstorm).
  5. Ahh...wrong, actually. t1 should have max charges at U3. T2 should can get away with U2 on some cards (but not on others, like oink, I've learned the hard way). On t3, the charges are more important than the upgrade itself, especially depending on the deck. In t3, you usually only devote a few deck slots--let's say you have brannoc, giant slayer, and virtuoso in t3. If each has 1 extra card, you can play 6+2+4=12 total units in t3. In other words, no matter what happens before t3, if my opponent lasts until I run out of charges, I lose. Actually, even with max charges, some decks revolve around a "defensive" t3 (looking at you lost souls and pure frost) where they stall out the game until their opponent runs out of charges, and then wins simply because of that. Almost no decks carry 4. Well, the idea is that you should make your own deck. There's nothing stopping you from doing that. IMO this whole system IS just a temptation, not forced. I don't like the idea of choosing your own deck if it's free (otherwise you choose the same one over and over). But I think perhaps the best solution is to give each player a random, free composed rental, and they can rent extras (not random) if they want.
  6. Pure fire, fire nature, fire shadow, fire frost, Pure nature, nature shadow, nature frost, Pure Shadow, Shadow Frost, Pure Frost. Of course This is in addition to everything possible atm. This rates will vary depending on how the devs scale it. However, 1 month is WAAY too long to have playable PvP. What counts as "playable" is obviously player-dependent, but the strongest PvP players probably won't be satisfied with less than lvl 100, and with options of Ultra Rare cards. I don't see this being accomplishable in under 1 month, and that might be too long for some players who are only interested in playing PvP. Imagine if there was some rule, like you have limited access to the market depending on your PvE rank (say, you can't sell/buy rares until PvE rank 8, and ultra rares until you've beaten every map on expert). If the market is your biggest reason to play BF, that would be dumb. Many PvP players feel that a dependence on cards and upgrades is a similarly dumb limitation.
  7. Since two other threads have begun to get a bit derailed due to this suggestion, I thought I'd consolidate the proposal here, give pros and cons (and a poll) and discuss whether this should actually happen or not. For those of you interested in the origins of this conversation, read the threads "Starting Cards" and "Removing Upgrade System from PvP" (and I won't tell you where it happens, because those threads have some important conversations in them otherwise). A brief summary of the problem (for arguments regarding the problem see those threads): 1. PvP is not viable with the normal F2P starter cards (don't even have t1 units for shadow and fire, for instance) 2. PvP is not viable without upgrades 3. For players primarily interested in PvP (such as old BF players, or players coming from other competitive RTS games like Starcraft), an inability to acquire cards and/or upgrades in a TIMELY MANNER will cause them to stop playing BattleForge before they ever get the "real" experience, i. e. playing lvl 120 decks with all the right cards. (4). Simply giving all players good cards and upgrades would destroy vital, non-PvP aspects of BattleForge. Now, on to my proposal: Each player gets a free, random, temporary, LOCKED, COMPOSED, fully upgraded deck every two weeks. After two weeks, another random one is given out. These decks will have the following properties: COMPOSED for PvP. Decks will be modeled after top players. They will be fully, 100% competitive. I may not like the faction I have during a particular cycle, but the best player in the world at that faction would have no complaints. This may encourage me to try new decks. Since the decks are made for PvP, they will not have t4 (except, possibly, in certain decks if top players call for it). These decks will be near useless for PvE, although of course there's nothing to stop someone from using them anywhere. Locked. Cards may not be added or removed from this deck. If I want to change cards so that F1 hotkeys to scavenger instead of eruption, too bad. I can't use these cards in any other deck, and I can't add any cards to this deck. They are not modifiable at all. Random cyclic. They will cycle out (like a tome deck) every two weeks (or other determined time). Each player gets one deck, and the odds of getting all factions are equal. This encourages player to try new decks, and possibly broaden the metagame. Fully upgraded. These decks will be lvl 120. A player using one of these decks can have no complaints about losing except that he's worse than his opponent (or possibly has a bad matchup). This will allow players to immediately have fully competitive access to PvP, without affecting the market (if you want to fine-tune your deck, or be able to reliably play it, you'll need to buy and upgrade the cards yourself. In the meantime, you're exposed to a wide variety of decks, so you can see which one suits your playstyle and get a feel for how things work at U3). Possible Cons: If the decks are stale (for instance, if the composed fire-nature deck always contains mauler and I know this) an artificial metagame might develop. In that example, if I think the composed deck will mean a greater than "natural" number of maulers for me to fight, statistically, I might arrange my own deck so that it doesn't have mountaineer/ashbone, but might have Lost Reaver/Tremor instead. This con might actually be a "pro" though, if we can affect the metagame to make "lame" strategies less viable. Some players might multiaccount if they don't have access to the deck they want. This would require a lot of multiaccounting though, and I don't think it will really be a problem compared to other reasons to multiaccount. Variations All players get access to all (10?) locked, composed decks. This might be dangerous, because it may remove the need for PvP players to participate in the market at all Locked, composed decks are rentable (still 2 weeks) for a comparable price to a booster. Thus buying your own cards is a more permanent solution, but you can have good access to a faction "on demand" if you want it. Individual cards within factions are slightly randomized each time. There would still be an equal chance to get each faction, but--say within a fire-nature deck--variations exist. One might start nature, while the others start fire. Some might have sunderer, some might have mauler instead. One might have earthshaker. One might have no t3 at all. Etc. These variations of course would be subject to some "board of top PvP players" and the reason for variance would simply be so that a player doesn't know what EXACT cards he'll be facing, if he suspects he's facing a composed deck. What do you think? Should this be done? Should it be done in a different way? Comment below! (and vote!)
  8. I agree that it's not useful in t1 against good players. I mean in 2v2s where you can--for instance--play rallying banner+rageclaws, or maybe in combination with some other t1 when rushing, or when you're playing t2 shadow frost and you have darkelf asassins.
  9. Probably depends on the deck. I don't thinks shadow has great L counters (nor nature), so it might be useful in a shadow nature or pure shadow deck. I think it's crazy strong if micro'd well (they're basically like t3 burrowers) but gl to any but top players managing enough of them at a time. I tried them in a couple of my "for fun" decks that didn't have fire, and I used them like a giant slayer replacement. Only problem is gs only need managing like every 8 seconds, so you can check on them in multiple places. Shadow insects need managing constantly, which makes using many of them very difficult, especially in the type of high-powered t3 that shadow often gets into (maybe not shadow nature, so that's probably the best deck for it). Here's one: Why don't we see wintertide more? For instance, there are players who like to attack with DA spam, ice barrier, and homesoil. Why not add in wintertide?
  10. Well, I'm certainly not opposed to that But I feel that PvP players might not participate in the market at all, if they always have the ability to play (nearly) whatever they want. If it's one deck, then a person is forced to either learn lots of decks, or buy cards for their favorite faction. For PvP at least, that would be very similar to just giving everyone all cards at U3 (which, again, I'm not opposed to). I'm not sure the restrictions in that scenario are enough to encourage those players to participate in the market (although, IS that a bad thing?). Perhaps a bigger concern is that this might affect the metagame (although, if we're smart, we might be able to use this to make the game healthier). For instance, if I know that every player has access to a lvl 120 fire-nature deck, and I know that "basic" fire nature deck has mauler in it, then when I build my shadow frost deck, I might choose alternatives to mountaineer and ashbone pyro. Obviously this won't work against everyone, but if I'm building my deck with the knowledge that poor/new players will most likely be playing a composed deck of their choice, it will affect my deckbuilding. If each player only has 1 deck every 2 weeks, the odds that you will face a "composed" deck drastically decreases. Most PvP decks are harder to play than the easy 3 (shadow frost, pure fire, fire nature), so players who like those decks might prefer to stick with their own deck, even if it's not lvl 120, if their random composed deck was something like Pure Nature. If I always had access to my favorite deck, why not just play that all the time? IMO, encouraging players to try new decks makes things more interesting. I can think of 2 solutions here: one is to allow players to RENT additional composed decks, of their choice (so you get one free, random one, and then if I want to play fire nature, I can play like 200 bfp to get the standard fire nature deck of the season). Another solution is to slightly change each deck. For instance, there might be 6 variations of the fire nature deck (1st you would roll to see which faction you get, so if one deck has 6 variations and other has 3--cough cough pure fire--you still have an equal chance of getting each faction). One might have mauler, one might have sunderer, one might have double fire t3, one might have double nature t3, one might not have t3 at all, etc. That way I wouldn't know which particular fire nature deck my opponent had, if I did suspect he had one of the composed decks. P.S. Should I make a new thread for this? Do you think this is a thing that will actually happen (in some variation) and bears additional discussion, or right now is it more a theoretical curiosity? EDIT: Ended up making a new thread for that, here
  11. Yeah, but I'm just asking about stereotypes These are useful (for instance in my case) when you want to write a story with a character with a certain trait/personality, and if you can find a name that fits, you're halfway there UPDATE: I finished my story, and it seems that 68% of you think Kevin is a name for dumb people
  12. @ndclub I haven't seen you in a while but since this is the thread that started it all (and we're digging up the old classic threads, like Starter Cards), I wanted to officially state my change in opinion here. I still agree with most of what I've said, but having been reminded of what it's like to play the game without upgrades vs someone with upgrades, I rescind my statement about upgrades not really mattering. See, I can be reasonable; my opinions change and I'm not afraid to admit I was wrong So upgrades matter, at least enough to overcome a small skill gulf (still not sure it actually matters for beginners), but definitely returning players will be super annoyed at the beginning because they know they're better than their opponent, but they lose because of upgrades. Likewise, players highly skilled in other RTS games might come to BF and leave, because they can't immediately be competitive (not sure if that problem can really be fixed though, because cards still need to be had). As I have stated in several places, I think the true genius of BattleForge comes from the PvP, and I do think PvP would be better if all players had U3 of all cards. Sadly, I am in the minority in this opinion that PvP is the best part of BattleForge. All that said, I would like to propose a new compromise, inspired and originally put forward on other threads. Specifically, I think we can overcome this "barrier to PvP entry" by utilizing the "locked deck" mechanic. We have the U2 tome, which I previously declared was "good enough"--maybe it is, maybe it isn't but this solution is better (for this specific problem). My proposal: When the tomes are distributed (every 2 weeks) players receive TWO free decks. The first is the randomized tome. It works the exact same as the old one: all cards are U2 with charges, and rarity ratios are the same. These cards can be mixed and matched in any deck to strengthen decks with less than U2. The other deck is LOCKED and COMPOSED. The devs will put together a certain number of PvP decks (say, 10, and this decision will be informed by top players to be as absolutely competitive as possible). These decks will automatically be lvl 120. The only problem is that this deck will be locked. You can't change the cards, you can't use the cards in another deck, and you can't change the order of cards. But for 2 weeks, you have a deck identical to some player in the top 20, possibly upgraded even higher. And in 2 weeks, you randomly get another one.
  13. @Asraiel I don't see the purpose of giving all players all commons, but making them untradable. Originally I was for the idea of having all commons, but people have since convinced me otherwise. Regardless, common cards should basically be free, so I'm not sure what restricting trade does. It's only the uncommon+ where it makes sense to restrict trade. I'm not sure what you mean by point 4, but if the cards are not upgraded, I don't think there is much point to using them for the purpose of "competitive" PvP. My original explanation was that random tome would be "good enough" at U2, and I think that's still a consideration, but having locked level 120 decks would be better for the purposes of competitive PvP. Also, I'm not sure if you understand. The locked, level 120 premade PvP deck would be like the tutorial deck. The cards can't be changed, the order of the cards can't be changed, upgrades can't be added or removed, and the cards can't be used in ANY other deck. Even a level 120 PvP deck will be worse than a U0 PvE deck, because the deck compositions are completely different. Is it even possible to beat most PvE maps without t4, even if t3 is U3? So you don't need to have any worry of players using the lvl 120 PvP deck for PvE.
  14. Basically. Rarity is definitely the most arbitrary quality of any card. Well, the argument was made by several people (@ndclub started it) that it's impossible to play PvP at a certain level without upgrades. Those people felt that newcomers would feel too discouraged to play, because not only are they playing against players with more skill than themselves, these players also have fundamentally stronger cards. My goal in creating a starter pool of cards was to find the best combination of cards that allowed PvP to be played at a basic level (because PvE is playable at a basic level with basically anything), in a way that gives every faction equal possibility of being played (in the old starter deck, nature or frost were the only t1 possibilities), and without making one deck composed of starter cards stronger than the others. Obviously there were other goals, like giving new players a sample of the variety available and not messing up the market, but there you go. With the old F2P cards, there exists the possibility that I would run into a noob and get crushed for silly reasons, such as if he spammed frost mage or nomads. These strategies are not really counterable with the F2P decks, and when I was a noob, lead to great frustration on my end. These starter cards are a step up from that, but as ndclub was saying--if there is, say, a top level Starcraft player who is introduced to the game, he will probably increase his PvP skill really quickly and will soon be held back by upgrades. Then quit. The idea of this "locked" level 120 deck is so that there are 0 PvP barriers to a skilled newcomer. If he's good enough, he can learn a new deck every two weeks and climb the ladder with that until he can get his own upgrades. This locked deck would also give noobs an idea of what kind of cards are typically used in PvP decks, and it would let them try out a variety of decks and options, and possibly influence their next purchase (note that this isn't a huge plus imo, because tome decks do this).
  15. haha Is Home Alone the first thing you think of when you think of Kevin?