YaBro0

He is pretty strong Statwise and has quite a decent effect (purple one) but has the same problem twillight brute has. The have quite insane stats and even are a M-Counter but get outclassed by either more utility or range. Why would you play twillight brute over ghostspears if they cover low cost M and S Counter. For Frost it is even worse since Stormsinger just outclasses almost every M-Counter in the game. Ranged Swift M-Counter with a nice ability that covers Pure Frosts biggest concern, the Air Control. Stormsinger is quite Overpowered and if she wasn't a staple in every frostsplash, Mountain Rowdy would be a solid tech option but in this case he is just a wasted slot. Not because he is bad, just because he is unneccessary.

Hey Weakl1ngs, just use the mountain rowdy more I can see where you are coming from, since Pure Frost has a hard time against Pure Nature and Nightguard with CC. Overall I don't think that nightguard is too strong and it is kinda neccessary against other units. Stone Tempest, Mountaineer or Reaver would make certain Matchups really hard and oppressive. You can already see that in other Factions that don't use Nightguard. Once it got implemented the use of L-Unit + Buffs/CC's/Heal really went down after a time when Instant T2 Reaver/Vile Blood/Deep One were one of the best and easiest strategies in the Game that got many people in the top 40 in a time when BF had a lot more players. What I want to say is, that it is weird that it does not bind power but nerf with caution, because Nightguard is keeping the abuse of other L-Units in check. And I'd rather keep the Nightguard how it is and not risk this old cheesy Tactics coming back. I think that IF you wanted to nerf her, it should be a decrease in range, this would maily impact Frostsplashes, since they have more time to coldsnap or Pure Frost can use War Eagle scream. When the Nightguard got nerfed a long time ago, when it was even used to counter EP's, there was also a big discussion about the powerbinding aspect. Someone from the dev Team can correct me but I think it is not that easy or better not worth it to implement a powerbonf to enemy units.

They Nerfed Mortar Tower snd Phasetower. I think they are still viable and strong against Nature and Frost but people stopped using them and therefore are not confident in taking an early well. This leads to (at least against nature) an unreasonable amount of instant T2's which starts at around Top 40 and gets more serious the higher you go. Even in the Top 10, there are 4 out of 10 players, of which I have not seen a second T1 Unit played against me more than once. So this is not an unrealiable beginner move. Like I said I think you can rush down on small maps against players that are weaker than you like Wazhai or Yrmia but there are way more maps where you can't and many players that aren't even that bad and still pull of the instant T2 trigger. Don't get me wrong, I think there is a nice strategic element in going for an early T2 but completely skipping T1 without even trying to play a second unit, cutting out any chance of interaction (even passive ones) in the T1 Stage should not be this effective and "hard to punish" (I think it's impossible against a decent player on more Maps than not). I think that adding another ranged M-Counter for nature would make them at least viable at defending T1 against T2. Frost T1 I think would benefit from a Ice-Guardian Shield-Cost reduction to 0-5e. That is not like he was in the old days when Ice-Guardians were super OP, cause they would get their spawn Shield even dazed near an Ice Barrier. But I think that would make T1 vs T2 defending much better and allow for a possible dazed fight besides massive MA Spam. @anonyme0273 I am sorry to say that but my whole point is that it is not possible to punish more often than not. Yes, you can do the same but it's not argument to be forced to also play an instant T2 when you can not react otherwise. It rather shows how strong this action is in the first place. I agree that it heavily depends on the Map but there is not even a handful of Maps were the distances are short enough to rush down an Instant T2. Defending is actually even harder the bigger the Well distances get since Nature is very slow to switch defending Places and has to low dps for reactive plays without a previous army in base. And Yes, it also depends on the Faction you are rushing. But I can't say where it is easier to rush than defend. Many factions are just stupid to even try rushing like Pure Fire, Fire/Nature, shadow/nature. You will not win here and defending against those as T1 is almost impossible. I am not saying that it never worked but that is due to obvious mistakes made by the T2 Player otherwise you are screwed. Overall I think that the Nerfs to Phasetower and Mortar were neccessary (maybe a bit to little) for improving the T1 Balance of Frost and Nature but it more than before shows, that their weakness lies in lack of early Map and pace Control rather than the other factions being too oppressive themselves. It certainly made Nature/Frost pretty strong.

Hello fellow Skylords, I didn't know where to put this since it should suit more in the balancing section but is not a card problem. I have played quite a bit in the last week and something that feels like hasn't happened that often before is occuring almost every game now. The Instant T2 in PvP to avoid a possible early loss or abuse a certain T2 scenario seems to be around quite a lot. I know it might be because I started playing nature recently and people are scared of dazed fights against nature. But... for the record. After facing an uncountable number of Instant T2's this week, it reached it's peak with 13 (!) Instant T2's in about 2 and a half hours of play today. So this is definately a rage Post So what's the problem with that? 1. T2 Matchup abuse. Matchups like Pure Nature vs Fire/Nature, Bandits vs Burrowerspam, Pure Fire vs Pure Frost, are historically very onesided and even an advatage in T2 is rarely enough to overcome those matchups. By skipping the more balanced and skill reliant T1 which can at least overcome certain matchups by very good micro, it becomes a rock/paper/scissor from the start which is often unavoidable. 2. T2 Map abuse. I am talking about possible cliff spots at the starting base for cards like Mountaineer, Firedancer... on Wazhai, Simai or Maps were taking those positions is very liekly needed. But I am also talking about center map abusing like on Elyon or other generated Maps. This is in my oppinion the reason behind Frost and Nature T1 still being overlooked and outclassed by shadow and Fire T1. They are very flexible and swift in controlling the positions early and can therefore possibly punish an Instant T2 more reliabily than the other factions while also abusing that control against them. For example playing a frost or Nature T1 on Elyon against an Instant T2 Fire or Shadow Player will always result in a loss of Mapcontrol and that control is a huge advantage on some Maps. You can rush lower ranked players but the higher the ELO the less likely your success until it becomes unneccessary to even try. Of course I have my bias towards T1 since I enjoy playing it, because it requires more precision and mistakes have bigger impacts. But wouldn't you agree that the only time a certain T2 Matchup has a good chance on winning is the T1? I would suggest something like a 2-3min Delay on the first Monument in PvP (stole that from Ultrakool^^) or an increased power cost to 180 overall. But my favourite would be to make scorched earth a neutral card What is your oppinion on that Topic?

I really like this Idea for PvP. You could play a double T1 and choose based in the matchup with which one you wanna start. But I think it gets kinda OP in T2 because giving a strong splash deck like stonekin or fire/nature acess to SOM or EP just sounds crazy to me. It could open up a a whole PvP era, where no one really plays T3 but rather use pure cards to boost your T2. Sonething like shadow/frost with harvester or shadow/nature with shadow mages and heal spam and so much more. While it sounds increadibly interesting, I think it would be to strong in PvP with void manipulation.

No worries my friend. People love our toxic relationship ❤

Actually this is kind of the same mechanic that was in the original game. Phenomic introduced playtokens at some point, which you could also have farmed and is basically the same system as with gold rn. I am not sure anymore, if you needed a small fee of about 100BFP to be able to disentchant for tokens but this was actually the most effective way for upgrade farming and more rewarding than the current system. So the concept is nothing new, just different package.

I wanna say something as a pretty much PvP only Player. While I enjoy the gameplay of PvP the most, I have to admit that the card collecting aspect became almost irrelevant for PvP Players like me. And this is quite the defining aspect that makes this game what it is. While I absolutely diagree with taking away ones free PvP Deck after a certain time, I think that a derease in accessability (is that a word?) to free PvP Decks would certainly help to encourage the card collecting aspect more. The biggest issue I see with the current system is a) it lets you choose 2 Decks and b) you can change Decks every week 1. Suggestion: Only one permanantly set Free PvP Deck. Cards are Set only for PvP and cannot be traded but still be used in other PvP Decks. Let's face it, most PvP Players mainly play their one go to deck and enjoy playing others from time to time. You wouldn't take away the competitive aspect of the game since people can play their main Deck from the start on lvl 120 but need to take part in the card collecting aspect to get the experience of more decks. 2. Suggestion: Random Deck Rotations. I would suggest the same system as right now but instead of taking 2 Decks you can strike 2 Decktypes or 4 Decks, you really don't want and then get 2 Decks randomly every week. This would let you play from the start on equal footing but for you to be able to play what you really want, you need to get cards and upgrades. It would also make sure you get at least one Deck that is competetivly viable since getting something like fire/shadow and shadow/fire in one roll is pretty unfair for most people. What do you think?

Very nice of you! So no BFP for the kindhearted Dallarian *check* I will wait for your Replays. No pressure!

Good evening fellow skylords, As some might recall @Eirias and I did some commentaries on PvP matches quite a while ago on Eirias YouTube Channel and on the Official SkylordsReborn Channel. Since the game has entered the realm of the living again, it is also time for me to wake up from my slumber and start annoying Eirias again. Sadly our only way of communication is through the commentary of PvP Replays. I am currently still pretty rusty and even though I played some games against top 20 players, many weren't that interesting. Because there is no real source of new Replays, I wanted to asked all you guys to post or send me or Eirias your PvP Replays for YouTube. If you have any good, special or weird games you want the world to know about, just give them to us. Rewards: 100 BFP for each Replay that ends up on Youtube (on top of the fame ) for the one sending the Replay to us. I hope we can make something work and flooooood the World with Skylords! Love YaBro0 ❤

@LagOps Well the fire T1 is obviously the "better" choice since it has no downsides in T1 compared to the sometimes map gamble frost T1. I agree with Radical in the Harvester part. While disentchant on a buffed harvester is great, a very versatile distration is much better. The harvester is easy to kite for stormsingers and drakes so the harvester has to go for the well and lightblade stops him from the best he can. But overall I don't think that this matchup is so horrible for fire/frost that having a lightblade in T2 is a huge upside compared to gladiatrix. Against a strong shadow/frost I'd rather have an aggressive fire T1 than anything else.

My goal -> After a long desease finally doing the 220 pounds squats again