Eirias
-
Posts
1429 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Eirias
-
-
Probably obvious, but t4 must be obtained by building the monument, not using amii monument, right?
And per @pierakor's question. You could finish the map with all master archers and then build t2-4 when the archers are already amassed, right? As long as you don't summon more of them by the time t2 is available.
Do we even need to beat the map or can we quit once t4 is up and chests are open?
Kapo and Minashigo Hiko like this -
On 10/7/2023 at 7:53 AM, shaulani said:
Looks hard. May I suggest adding a melee-units-only challenge too? (ofc spells and buildings are allowed - except for those summoning ranged units)
Unfortunately, there are many maps that require ranged attacks to beat (for example, the boss on Oracle can't be accessed by melee units). While it's probably possible to beat these maps by spamming spells and buildings, that sounds more tedious than challenging 🙂
Metagross31 and Laertes like this -
The people have spoken! Next up is pure shadow, with a slightly amended deck list.
You will win with me, Laertes and Metagross31 like this -
Howdy folks!
As many of you know, I've been streaming my "One Deck" Challenge recently, and I'm almost done with Pure Frost! If you missed these and want to catch up, you can find them in the livestream tab of my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Eirias_h4/streams
At some point I'll probably clip these videos into their own Youtube videos, but for now I'm just linking them in a spreadsheet, in case you're interested in checking out a specific map.
The rules of the challenge:
- Beat all Expert campaign maps with the same "Pure" deck (no modifications between maps)
- No Neutral Orb cards (especially Amii Monument)
- If any teammates join on the map, they also have to use the One Deck
At the moment, the only map left in my Pure Frost challenge is Nightmare Shard. I have a couple unsuccessful attempts trying to solo the map, and I'll probably revisit it in the future, but by the time you're reading this I have probably finished it with a partner and am ready to move on to the next deck!
Speaking of which, I promised I'd put it up to vote! I want to take care of the pure decks first, so that leaves Pure Fire, Pure Shadow, and Pure Nature. Vote!
I'll also include my deck lists here, if anyone wants to prepare their own decks to join me in the challenge. Since I haven't started any maps with these decks yet, I'm also open to suggestions for modification. In particular, I might need to adjust the Pure Nature deck to beat Ascension map 2.
Pure Fire decklist:
/importdeck MiFaFCNEUNSCP0MkV_KKUKMiEdIcTZXEGWLGNCGlK
Pure Nature decklist:
/importdeck MgGqFLaZFuLUMgVvGkGwGOMsPGQHQYUzMULsXELoR
Pure Shadow decklist:
/importdeck MvExENLuMRPXKdUeUKKyIEVKQrYZM8M6V9MQLBVgS
You will win with me, Ultralord, Volin and 2 others like this -
On 9/19/2023 at 3:05 PM, SunWu said:
You can try to take over scythes with parasite swarm. It's a big investment but a very good trade if it works. Pure fire is more susceptible to parasite swarm swaps than other fire splashes so your chances are good...you only have to watch out for drake/gladiatrix + eruption combos.
You're alive! Hope to see you ingame again 🙂
No extra advice to @LichterLoh but if you want to stop by the stream sometime we can get some sparring games with live coaching!
-
9 hours ago, GeneralJosh said:
It looks like the test server is what I'm looking for. Thanks everyone!
Hope you enjoy! If you join the balance discord ( https://discord.gg/FyeYNpsE ) and comment/attach replays with thoughts on certain card before they go to the real server, you can also get rewards sent do your real server account (obviously don't need them in your test server account).
Plus if you like trying broken combos, the test server is exactly the place to find out if certain cards are overtuned/undertuned!
-
On 7/26/2023 at 7:31 PM, GeneralJosh said:
Is there no solution for somebody like me?
In the early early days, we decided that for most players, the "grind" was the fun part. A lot of players said that they played until they unlocked everything, then quit. That said, there's also the test server. You get everything unlocked, fully upgraded, and can even test new cards/balance changes before they go live on the main server. Unfortunately, most people don't log onto the test server, so you'd have the coordinate with someone on discord ahead of time.
But if you want to play PvP with unconventional decks, the "grind" is still at most a couple hours, all of which can be spent doing PvP.
1. Free PvP decks can be mixed and matched with each other, or even your regular cards. If you build an even somewhat-viable deck, you'll be using at least 10 cards from a regular deck (don't pretend it's a PvP deck if you don't have basics like t1 archers, core spells, etc.)
2. Of your remaining 10 cards, at least 5 will be common/uncommon (because most cards are). These cards cost only a few bfp. Even 5 minutes of queuing PvP will get you 30 bfp, so getting enough bfp for those cards is trivial.
3. For your remaining 5 cards (in the worst case scenario) they might cost up to 2000 bfp. You can sell boosters at a rate of 420 bfp per 1 booster, so 4 boosters should get you pretty much any card.
4. To get the ~20 boosters needed to fill out your deck, you can play every day and get ~1 booster just for playing 30-45 mins. You get an extra 100 bfp discount the first time you buy a booster each day. Do some daily quests and it can be even faster, but we can just assume 1 booster/day.
5. For beginners, you'll get achievements even faster than the daily quests. if you beat all campaign maps on expert one time (not a grind by a long shot), you get 16 boosters. You'd probably double that in other, smaller quests (like, 1 booster for beating any map with deck level 30).
TL;DR playing 30-45 minutes every day would get you over 50 boosters in a month, which is enough to build a PvP deck from scratch. If you use the free PvP decks as a base you should be able to make any reasonable deck in only a couple days. I see lots of players who have been here for ~1 week and have made their own modified PvP decks. It might take slightly longer if you're going for something crazy expensive like enlighten batariel in PvP, but even that can be easily achieved in a month. If 1 week of regular playing is still too much grinding, you can always go to the test server 🙂
Metagross31 and Dallarian like this -
19 hours ago, Sacriefice said:
Sure you can't shadow your faction anymore, but still stall to play your first unit . If I understand you correctly this puts nature even more at an disadvantage, which is already one of the weaker pvp factions.
No, as soon as you know what color your opponent plays, there's no need to stall. Each color tries to achieve different things (map control, early t2, etc). It doesn't matter if shadow's first card is nox trooper or dreadcharger (spoiler, it will always be dreadcharger), nature does not want to play swiftclaw vs shadow because nox trooper can be played at any time.
If nature sees that their opponent is frost, swiftclaw is perhaps the most useful unit in the deck. You don't need to wait to see the first unit, if you know their t1 color you already know what cards they have access to.
-
1 hour ago, Sacriefice said:
I don't even see how forcing to choose an orb solves pvp stalling.
This is a very minor problem, but it's actually "optimal" to stall for the 1st minute.
If you are nature, the starting unit depends a lot on what deck your opponent plays. For instance, you usually want to start swiftclaw to contest map control, but shadow's nox trooper make swiftclaw a bad choice. So a nature player usually waits to see the opponent's deck, before deciding to start swiftclaw or something else. There was actually a funny game where radicalX put a t1 nature card preview into his deck which actually started t1 shadow, to trick his opponent into starting with the wrong card.
If you suspect your opponent is nature, stalling can be good because 1. they might give up stalling and play swiftclaw into your shadow, or 2. it gives you more power to burst in an early encounter (for example, fire having 2-3 eruptions in reserve can be devastating vs nature. Nature has to play units in advance but if that happens, fire can just go t2 and clear the t1 army).
Metagross31 likes this -
What counts as a "faction" card? Would firedancer be allowed in the bandits faction (e.g. if I played fire fire shadow shadow?)
Or is it literally only pure nonsplash cards, so fire stalker would not be allowed either?
-
Fun event and nice idea, but I really dislike that tiebreakers were decided by submission time 😕
This gives such a huge advantage to players who know about the event beforehand, and heavily penalizes people who don't have the availability to play every day.
Cocofang likes this -
16 hours ago, Cocofang said:
I suppose one way to make it happen is to not grant a pre-built orb anymore. Instead the player has to build the first orb manually. With a sped up building process or even near-instant.
So somewhat of a trade-off. A less seamless start to every map for the possibility of hybrid T1s.
Or implement it somewhere in the deck itself, so your orb auto-builds even faster at the start of the map (e.g. pre-define that I want my first orb to be fire). This has a few advantages
1). New players don't accidentally start with the wrong unit and thus build the wrong orb
2). PvP stalling is reduced (this is a strategy where neither player wants to play the first card, because they decide this based on what the opponent is playing. In fact Radical recommends this to 100% of nature players)
3). No problems with half orbs or neutral orb creatures in t1
4). Additional searchability (e.g. is that my stonekin deck with nature t1 or frost t1?)Implementing this feature could be clunky. Maybe it could be an icon in the deck thumbnail (like small red circle for fire t1) which you can click to change? Or maybe give the deck some kind of border?
-
On 3/23/2022 at 12:20 PM, Toggy said:
Everyone bans 2 of those maps, the player with the higher base elo bans first. The remaining two maps will be played.
As in, higher elo bans 1, lower elo bans 1, higher elo bans 1, lower elo bans 1?
The typical way to do this is ban order 1-2-1 and it's generally considered that the player banning last has the advantage. Since leagues are specifically trying to match elos, I wouldn't use that as the basis of granting an advantage.
I would recommend using "/roll 1" to generate a random number 0 or 1, let other player choose which one wins (it's just a coin toss). Player who wins the roll gets to choose whether they ban first/last or mid, in the 1-2-1 format.
Who hits "ready" first?
-
Quote
Accumulating that much XP is a feat of tenacity, not of speed.
Originally, XP was related to clear times and it was actually impossible to have the max pve rank unless you were a speedrunner. Obviousy the team has done away with that requirement, but just a little FYI about its legacy.
Kapo and Metagross31 like this -
@Volin I think you misunderstand everything I was trying to say lol. My bad.
I am simply pointing out that, given unlimited time, 4p maps would essentially have 100% winrate (besides restarts or if all 4 players have no idea what they are doing), while 1p maps will never get there. 1 player can absolutely pull the whole group in lvl 10 if time wasn't an issue, and I suspect that beating 4p rpve 10 with 1 player and unlimited time is actually easier than beating 1p rpve 10 with unlimited time.So, it is "fair" to give 1p essentially unlimited time, and give 4p a time limit such that it will result in a similar overall winrate as 1p. This my only argument. Whether or not it was achieved is a different story, but I'm just saying it makes perfect sense to give 4p a much shorter time limit than 1p.
Trust Radi's data more than mine for this, I have to get my data 2nd hand for winrates of the expert maps, and this was just labelled "Rpve 4/1 Player." Entirely possible that I was given rpve 9 instead of rpve 10, or an average of the two. Regardless of whether the data is 9 or 10, the point is that 4p maps have close to double the winrate of 1p maps, and this holds up in campaign as well.
Regarding
On 2/21/2022 at 3:25 AM, Volin said:I want to reiterate here, a good 10% more time would not just make the mode 10% easier. It would make it a little easier and a little fairer, yes, but it truly would not be a trivialization of 10s.
I want to point out that this is not necessarily the case. As we have established, many (most?) 4p maps lose because of time, not because they are wiped out. So if you looked at the distribution of players, it's possible that *most* teams who lose, lose by <2 minutes. Thus, by increasing the time by 10%, it is possible that the winrate changes from 22% to something >50%, which effectively "halves" the difficulty.
I'm not arguing for or against anything, just pointing out the nature of the game mode. Also possible my perception is skewed because I've never seen a casual group attempt 10s in NA timezone, so my experience is that I'm usually carried even when I fail, and if we lose it's just because we barely ran out of time.
-
On 2/16/2022 at 8:19 AM, arabikaa said:
There is in general very little reason on why you have ~40 in 1p, ~30 in 2p and ~2 in 4p or at least I didn't see it.
Lots of other good comments, but I just want to weigh in here:
For a player at my skill level, this is exactly the right amount of time for each map, so that I win ~75% of the time?
In 4p, its very easy for 1 good player to carry the rest, especially if you use tactics like letting one player go t4 and take all wells while other stay t1, or use decomposer etc. If one player dies instantly because they're rushed, the other player can take their wells/orbs.
Or, if you make a mistake and lose some wells/orbs, it's not that big of a deal because there are other players to pick up the slack. If your t2 gets rushed in 1p, it might take 5-10 mins to build an army to retake t2, without a teammate to help you.
Thus, the only way to decrease the winrate (assuming winrate = difficulty) is to add a time limit. 4p is also strictly easier than 1p imo, because its always obvious how the map is laid out and you don't typically get reinforcements from a weird angle. (In other words, I think it would be easier to beat a 4p map with 1 player and no timelimit, rather than a 1p map with no time limit).
For players who know what they are doing, time constraints are pretty similar for 1p and 4p maps. More than 96% of wins occur with more than 1 minute ( <95% of total time) remaining in 4p rpve 10. Thats pretty similar to the number of players who win before 95% of total time in 1p rpve 10.
However, winrates are still very different between the two, with 1p maps having 50% winrate and 4p maps having 85% winrate.
-
17 hours ago, Chorba said:
the nomad thing sounds really cool. i'll try, thanks!
if you could watch the replay Dallarian uploaded; i did many of the things you did there.would love insight
Did you play this on the regular server? I can't run it.
-
I haven't played this matchup in 1v1 since the buffs to mountain rowdy and white rangers (and nerfs to skyelf templar), but I typically faired decently (actually if I knew my opponent was pure frost, I preferred pure fire compared to fire nature).
My usual plan is
1. long t1, try to gain power advantage by making the frost player go t2 early, while you stay t1, then play defensively and get lots of wells.
2. go t2 -> t3 quickly. If you have a lot of wells then it's okay if you lose a few wells here, as long as orbs stay alive
3. juggernaut to initiate base trades and close the game
This has probably changed because mountain rowdy and white rangers are very powerful vs sunstriders, but before the buffs fire t1 is pretty effective at defending vs frost t2 on lower power levels, because frost can't outrun you to attack different places on the map. Gladiatrix just loses to war eagle, so I often find that I'm playing some sunstriders to defend war eagles even in t2. So essentially, you are going t2 only for skyfire drake and disenchant.
When you are t2, try to use as many skyfire drakes as possible. If you get a cliffing position so that gravity surge doesn't work, skyfire drake will beat stormsinger. It's really good if you can force out skyelf templars, because this makes the enemy bind power in non-offensive units which allows you to "escape" to t3 easier.
If you want to add a card to make the matchup easier, I recommend nomad (r) instead of global warming. The ability will 1-shot war eagles which lets you stay t1 much longer. Additionally, nomads are very effective at harassing frost t1.
Metagross31, Dallarian and Dutchy like this -
Excellent suggestion and I've added it to QoL queue 🙂
EDIT: not a confirmation that it will actually happen, as this may not be straightforward to implement.
-
This is in fact priority #8, according to the last list I sent the devs 🙂
But there is a shortage of people who can implement changes like this, so feel free to encourage anyone with coding knowledge to apply!
-
4 hours ago, Fimion said:
cards that should be changed but not for the sake of social justice and wokeness. I am concerned about the direction this project is heading in.
Don't think you need to be concerned about this.
The team is not trying to make a big deal about this one way or the other, but you are the one bringing politics to the table.
2 hours ago, Fimion said:nothing about this game is sexist in any way.
The world has changed a lot since 2009. There are some things (such as the stripper pole artwork) that were acceptable by most people then, but seems in bad taste now. Doubtless, these things will be perceived even less favorably in the future.
The best thing to shut down SJWs is to quietly remove their ammunition, as is happening here. We're not making some fanfare to appeal to political demagogues, we're just quietly changing a rarely-used cosmetic that many people thought was bad taste.
So instead of 1% of people noticing the icon and being offended, now we have 0.1% of people noticing the icon was changed and being offended that we cared about the previous 1%.
Regarding the choice to disco ball: that's just a re-crop of the original artwork. The disco ball was always present.
Volin likes this -
-
-
7 hours ago, Cocofang said:
Build bottom up
Pick the color you want to start with on T1. Chose cards that build onto that as T2, either using the same color as T1 or a new one. Repeat for T3. Finally look at what’s left on T4 for the color combination you ended up with.As players become more familiar with the game, I actually recommend building "middle outward."
In other words, I start by choosing the most powerful core cards I want, then adjust my t1 to play into those.
For example, in rpve I usually value resource booster, shadow phoenix, and frenetic assault as the most powerful cards. So I usually want 2 shadow orbs by t3--which gives me some flexibility about t1. However, if I play t1 and t2 shadow, this lets me use resource booster as fast as possible.
Other players might really value mine, shrine of war, and enlightenment, so their first 3 orbs will have to be fire-nature-nature. (Then the 3rd orb is probably shadow because if you use enlightenment for a powerful unit, you probably want to buff it!)
On a map like raven's end, I want a good tool to deal with powerful flying units (ravenships) so I pick a t1+t2 combination that can fit stormsinger.
Of course, if players are not confident with every t1, then your "core cards" can definitely be t1 units (especially in some campaign maps, where mine/nightguard/mark of the keeper/glaciation can be very powerful, unique tools that completely change the way you can play the map)
However, as players learn how to use different factions, every t1 works, and t4 cards are often interchangable. So it's the cards in the middle that I think should be decided first.
Skylords Reborn PvP AI programming contest - Phase 1
in Events and Tournaments
Posted
Link to the discord is not advertised? I didn't get a manual invitation to the discord, and no notification that the forum post was edited.
I had no idea the discord even existed until I stumbled onto your comment on another channel. Came here to check if it was public or staff-only.