Wish to contribute to the project by donating? Heads up to our Patreon -> https://www.patreon.com/skylordsreborn

Jump to content
BEWARE: Multiaccounting Will Cause Permabans! Read more... ×

RadicalX

Beta Tester
  • Content count

    255
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RadicalX


  1. I really hope the export to youtube function works, I have to upload 2 15GB files otherwise ^^

    btw. I've got more than 100 replays already, thank you guys! I will try to upload some of them on youtube & announce the award winners as soon as possible, might take a little bit of time though because of these high numbers. 

    MephistoRoss likes this

  2. What a tournament! Thanks to everyone who participated, we had some entertaining, high quality games on stream today and I'm looking forward to watch all your replays in the upcoming days. It might take a while, but I will announce the award winners here once I finished watching all games! 

     

    And our final Tournament results for everyone, who didn't get to watch it.

     

    7th-8th Place: Impossible / Fodasseman 

    5th-6th Place: Navarr / Deldrimor

    4th Place: Draken, taking the 1500 bfp price

    3rd Place: Hyp3r, taking the 2000 bfp + Juggernaut price

    2nd Place: DragonLogic, taking the 3000 bfp + wheel of gifts runner up price

    1st Place: TopS3cret, taking the Trophy, 5000bfp & a Promo Construct

     

    We had 39 registered participants and most of them also ended up showing up! Really great numbers for our community! Thanks for the games, it was a  great experience! I will try to hand out the prices as soon as possible! And please send me your replays to be considered for the award ceremony!  

    Stream might be uploaded to youtube (if the twitch export function works this time ...) and I will try to cast alot of your replays in the end! 

     

    Edit: Boosters for tournament participation should be sent by now! Please contact me, if anyone didn't receive their booster for participating

     

    Thank you and best regards 

    RadicalX

    Loriens, Ultrakool, Ladadoos and 1 other like this

  3. On 6/30/2020 at 3:02 PM, Treim said:

    Just add a rule that these agreements have to be agreed on in text fot there to be an official ruling by the TO (screenshot ingame or discord) and if any of those internal agreements are violated it counts as an instant loss. If you think someone violated an internal agreement, make it mandatory to send in written evidence (e.g. the screenshot) and the replay. Should prevent anyone from having funny ideas as the consequences are fixed and the rules clearly state in which form you have to supply evidence for the TO to do anything about it. Any verbal agreement might as well count as no rule at all from the perspective of the TO and if someone gets fluked by that he only has to blame himself.

    Only my humble opinion ofc. 

    Yeah that's reasonable. Added the rule to the main post!

    ulvfdfgtmk likes this

  4. I wanted to keep my banlist rather simple. Phasetower, Mortar and Cursewell seemed to be the most oppressive cards, especially when I think about how previous tournaments played out. 

    SunWu already gave a good explanation for my decision to ban out Mortar Tower. There also are some very powerful mortarspots on maps like Elyon where it's possible to build them protected by cliffs, while still being in range to directly hit the enemies powerwell. Nature and Frost both had very low play- and winrates across the previous tournaments and I want to support them a little by removing these very oppressive game elements. 

    When it comes down to walls I would agree with zappyx here. Walls are a very interesting strategic element, that can be used in various ways, so I don't want to remove them completely. I agree, that basewalling can be quite annoying to play against though. You can make a no-wall agreement as long as both parties are fine with that (Please play fair after making internal agreements though, as it's hard to track these things rule wise!).


  5. 1 hour ago, MephistoRoss said:

    Cool! I like that you also have creative rewards that everybody can win. I will add 10.000bfp (of my own bfp) to the prizepool for the awards. 

    Wow thank you! That's huge! Will update the main post

    And I'm also quite hyped, that we have 17 registered participants already (+4-5, that might participate aswell)!  


  6. Hello Skylords and Skyladies! Today I want to announce the next big Battleforge PvP Tournament!

    Who is going to be the new Master of the Forge to show the world, that he mastered his decks and strategies to beat them all for fame, glory and obviously tons of bfp? Time to find out! 
     

     

    Who can participate?

    Everyone! I will be thankful for every single participant! Even if you're not that confident at reaching grand finals to get a shot for winning the whole thing, there will be lots of opportunities to win prices and I would like to stream and review as many games as possiblle through all skillbrackets! It would be great to see a large variety of decks and playstyles! 

    SIGN UP TO THE TOURNAMENT: https://challonge.com/tournaments/signup/aUNkP0atnG#/signup/205xjl4u7pp

    If you end up having problems with the registration talk to me! 

     

    Format

    It will be a 1vs1 Double Elimination best of 3 tournament, the grand final will be best of 5 (one match, no reset). Winner and losers finals will be all played on stream (the basic Toggy-format).

     

    Prize Pool 

    1st place: 5000 Bfp + Promo Construct

    2nd place: 3000 Bfp + Wheel of Gifts

    3rd place: 2000 Bfp + Juggernaut

    4th place: 1500 Bfp

    Every other participant, that shows up and plays his matches gets 1 Booster!! You don't have to reach top 4 to win something in this tournament!

     

    Awards

    There will be special awards for special and entertaining plays during the tournament. Everyone, who sends me the replays at the end of the tournament gets a shot at winning!! 

     

    -> Best match of the Tournament: By that I mean the closest and most instense games! Perfect mechanical execution isn't necessary to win this award, it just has to be super exciting! The 3 best games will be rewarded with 500bfp for each player who took place in one of the matches. 

    -> Creative Player Award: Make a creative deck or non meta strategy work in this tournament! The 3 most impressive strategies will be rewarded with 500bfp each. 

    -> There will be even more hidden awards like the Toggy Award, so stay tuned! In total I will use up more than 5.000 bfp (I might even increase that number) to reward special plays and matches regardless on how high you placed in the tournament. UPDATE: We got another 10.000bfp donation for awards!

     

    To be considered for the award ceremony you have to send me your replays! You can upload them in this forum thread or send them to me via discord (RadicalX#0952)! Please consider, that I had to change my discord account, so don't send your replays to the old one! I want to upload as many tournament replays on my youtube channel as possible!

     

    When?

    On 11.07.20 starting at 2pm CEST (Berlin time), the stream will start about 30 minutes in advance! 

     

    How to watch?

    There will be a livestream during the tournament: https://www.twitch.tv/radicalx5 

    I also want to cast alot of replays on my youtube channel and also announce the award winners: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3rZG7pzo3GYO0wR3Jx9F7w

    Will be thankful for every viewer! 

     

    Rules 

    Disconnection during a game results in a default loss. If both sides agree it is possible to have a remake!

    Not showing up to your match within 15 minutes results in a default loss. The plan is to play a round of matches every ~30 mins.

    After your match go to Challonge and insert the result. That is done by clicking on your match and selecting the winner/stats. The brackets will be updated automatically.

    The Map Pool is: Haladur, Simai, Wazhai, Elyon, Lajesh, Yrmia and Uro (same pool as in ranked duel). The first match of the round will be played on Haladur, then it is losers choice. Second round will start with Simai, third one... you get the drill.

    The brackets for the tournament will be shuffled before the tournament starts.

    Please save your replays by renaming them after you game or selecting the safe all replays option and send them to me unless your game were played on stream! 

    Internal rules like "no wall agreements" have to be agreed on in text form to be an official ruling and if any of those internal agreements are violated it counts as a default loss

    No insulting! 

    BANNED CARDS: CURSE WELL; MORTAR TOWER; PHASETOWER - using one of these cards results in a default loss. If both sides agree it is possible to have a remake! 

     

     

     

     

    Reply in this thread, if you have any questions! Big shoutouts to Yuah & MephistoRoss for donating huge amounts of bfp to make this large price pool possible! 

    Quick reminder, that we have a discord tutoring server. If anyone wants to prepare for the tourney, feel free to join here: https://discord.gg/dZzKexQ

    All I can do at this point is quoting Toggy: "I would love to see this community grow again and the competitive scene develop aswell. Because BF is fun!" 

    Looking forward to a great tournament!  

     

    Best regards,

    RadicalX 

    Ladadoos, LagOps, DrStrangelove and 13 others like this

  7. They dynamic for nature in 2v2 differs alot. Dryads & support spells can be utilized to very high efficiency, which makes the faction insanely strong here. Shadow + Nature (Nox-/Forsakenspam + double dryad) is by far the best T1 combination in open 2v2 combat and probably the strongest T1 combination overall, while Fire + Nature is probably ranked second as it is the most flexible combination with alot of cross map support and spell synergy (mine + root in T1 can be extraordinary powerful and win games on its own). Just the passive pressure a nature mate exerts just by threatening a potential hurricane support on 1v1 based maps like Zahadune can completely alter the T1 dynamic on the other side of the map too.  It also scales well into later gamestages as you have options to pick the strongest T2 compositions like Pure Fire + Stonekin for instance. 

    Loriens likes this

  8. On 4/23/2020 at 12:09 PM, Halis said:

    @RadicalXWhat would you recommend as balanced value? I mean, right now the PvP rank is often close to meaningless. You can get even rank 1 in the rankings sometimes, without being a Top 10 Player.

    I initially recommended 20 games, after talking to some people in the PvP community I think 15 games per month might be even better. The activity check just should ensure, that people are still playing ranked PvP so you can't sit back after reaching a high rank without playing anymore. In fact it should make ranked PvP competitive and keep players active, but right know it does quite the opposite. Base elo is the more relevant stat to evaluate a players skill (it doesn't reflect it perfectly ofc, but is still much more important than activity) and right now the ladder doesn't do this.  

    For example Draken, Bubbalo and Navarr & Hightech are players, that should be listed quite high in the ladder based on their true base elo score. All of them are quite active players and they played some ranked games during the last month (23, 14 ,15, 21). They still aren't part of the top 20 due to the high barrier (R28, R56, R57, R49). With a 15 game requirement they would be rated completely differently (R6, R5, R4, R10). When I look at the ranked PvP ladder I want to see things like "who are the best players in the game?". Right now the ladder doesn't really give me that information. It is okay to exclude completely inactive players, but I still want to be able to compare the people, that are actually playing the game.

    Halis likes this

  9. 4 minutes ago, macabi said:

    I don't think that is possible.

    Without additional power wells and at least another monument players won't last 3 minutes.

    You are welcome to experiment with that.

    It takes 3minutes and 20 seconds up until an extra power well grants you the power, you have to invest into it. You are on a power deficit up until that point. Early T2s grant a 25% difference in void, which requires you to make much more efficient trades in order to even get some kind of a lead. It is impossible to crash mortar defenses pre T2, dependend on your deck you might even need T3 on maps like lajesh or Elyon. Based on my experience it can take 10 to 20 minutes for an average player to crash a decently executed turtle strategy.

    Considering that most PvP games are decided before 5 minutes due to skill gaps between alot of playergroups, it would be bad to force people for 5 minutes into ranked games.

    I agree with Lebovin, that the upgrade issue will be solved with the upcoming changes. That said, I still think 30 games per month are too many and make the ranked ladder less representative and reaching activity requirements can get really painful after dropping to 0%. 


  10. With the current ranked participation 30 games per month are too many in my opinion. I think it is good to have an activity check, but I still think 15-20 games per month should be more than enough to see, that a player still participates in the ranked que (even during EA times the amount of games required to get back to full activity was much lower). Finding opponents is really hard and you really need to grind alot to even see your "true" rank on the leaderboard.


  11. Alot of PvP players just stopped playing for multiple reasons. The reset didn't happen so far (alot of people don't want to farm for all cards and upgrades twice), potential balancing changes got postponed, unbalanced matchmaking because of large skill differences, very longs searching times etc.

    Right now there is 1 player with full activity when there used to be roughly 150. I think the best chance of rebuilding a solid PvP playerbase is proper promotion and work around it after the reset.  

    LagOps, Ultrakool and felkin like this

  12. I think removing the daily boosters is good for the economy. It completely removed the reason of buying boosters in the game to regulate the total bfp amount, which is kind of important with no existing regulation at the market. I think I didn't buy a single booster during the entire CBT phase even with some people selling them for sub 400bfp. 

    I also do like the general idea of removing the hard cap as some people seemed a little dissatisfied, when they did their daily quests and there was nothing left to do. The reserve system is a good solution to add some extra bfp for being dedicated without creating a massive income gap, but as Vovano already stated, it highly rewards people, that are able to play multiple times on each day and therefore shouldn't reward people too heavily. 

    From my first impression the bfp/min numbers are looking a little bit too low, especially for players that don't play the game as frequently. The biggest gap in bfp income will occur through abusing the instable market prices and not the actual reward system.  Removing the daily boosters is a good step into the right direction here, but doesn't remove the issue. People who don't use that income source for various reasons like lack of interest or experience will be much more affected by a lower daily bfp gain.  

    Without knowing the actual data, I assume, that the percentage of players with a daily 90min+ playtime is really really low. I agree with Halis that this number looks really really high. And there are alot of people, that can't play the game every day leading to a high loss of potential bfp income without a method available to compensate. 

    This leads me to the following proposal: 

    -> Limiting daily boost time from 90mins to a lower number (45mins with 5bfp/min gains sound alot better for me, exact values might be discussed)

    -> Slightly lower the reserve refill rate to put less pressure onto players to play multiple times per day

    -> Let daily boosts stack up once or even twice, so people can compensate with high playing time at a single day for being unable to play on a daily base. 

    Ultrakool and Karl Lavafeld like this

  13. I don't see how this would help the PvP balance to be fully honest. As long as I didn't miss anything, there are 9 non swift melee creatures with (I exclude Sunderer here as it is faster than T1 ranged units already and not an essential part of the counter system as a siege unit). 

    -> Thugs

    -> Wrecker

    -> Northguards

    -> Ice Guardian

    -> Imperials 

    -> Spearmen

    -> Executor

    -> Wrathblades

    -> Skeleton Warriors

    Imperials are supposed to contest Scav & Dreadcharger, who also are melee creatures, a MS change would have no effect here. So 8 cards affected by the change are left here. Out of these 8 cards I'd argue that 4 cards are in an acceptable balancing state already (IG, Wrecker, Spearmen, Wrathblades), 2 cards too strong (Thugs, Skeleton Warriors) & 2 cards too weak (Northguards, Executor). I don't see a necessity for a global melee buff here tbh. I think it is possible to buff some of these cards to create a better matchup balance in general. Wrecker buffs can compensate for a Mortar nerf, IG buffs could help Frost to survive dazed fights and make a late compensation for the 2013 homesoil nerf, Wrathblade hp buffs could help Shadow to contest Thugs at high number fights etc. 

    I would clearly prefer balancing changes aimed directly at critical cards rather than global changes.

     


  14. Thanks for the comments! I edited the main post. I included the aspect of creating a larger playerbase for better matchmaking.

    @LagOps I agree with the Nature & Frost part, we probably need a larger set of changes with compensation nerfs to reach an acceptable balancing state for T1. The ideas I initially posted were aimed to support T1 vs T2 scenarios. I removed this part from the main post, because I think it will be better to discuss specific ideas within the actual balancing threads/discord. I don't think, that T1 is too ranged heavy though as ranged units mostly are more micro demanding and I feel a decent amount of melee units are in a decent state. The only thing that might need to be adressed at some point is the opressive single unit spam in some matchups (Frostmagespam, Fireswornspam, Dryadspam). 

    @Kubik Thanks for your input here! If we get to apply changes to just one server at some point though, is there a chance of just testing balancing changes before the wipe? Even if nothing goes to the main server pre reset, testing several proposals can help alot to improve them. As this is quite time consuming, it would be great to start as early as possible. 

    And do you know anything regarding the possibility of changing activity requirements?


  15. I am fully convinced, that PvP in Battleforge is a fantastic gamemode, but has certain flaws, that we might need to adress in order to make the game mode more attractive, especially for newer people. I want to make a longer post to get a discussion going about what we can do to get a more attractive gamemode and a larger playerbase, especially post reset. I'm following the current thread, where new player experience got discussed, which mainly focussed onto reward system, so I will move away from that in this thread, trying to adress some other problems and possible solutions. If you are looking for the discussion it is linked below. 

     

    Balancing

    While there was alot of dicussion in the seperate balancing discord, we haven't seen any progress for a while, because access to the testserver has benn denied. In terms of PvP balancing we somewhat got to a consensus about what needs to be adressed, but it was hard to find a solution that really fixes the problem. We really need access to the testserver in order to make a progression, so we can implement changes, that make the majority of players happy 

     

    What I'd like to talk about the most is the T1 diversity. With Nature and Frost being very underwhelming, alot of deck variety gets shut downed, especially for 1v1s. With only Shadow and Fire T1 being consistently viable at a high level, the amount of T1 matchups we can watch, consists of:

    Fire vs Fire - Shadow vs Fire - Shadow vs Shadow

    This is only a small part of what would be possible. If all T1's would achieve a "viable state" we could see 7 additional T1 matchups:

    Nature vs Nature -Nature vs Shadow -Nature vs Fire  - Frost vs Frost - Frost vs Nature - Frost vs Shadow - Frost vs Fire  

    In order to win with Frost or Nature you either have to play much better than your opponent or abuse the enemies inexperience with the matchup, which just is not a consistent win condition, especially if you want these factions to be played more frequently. With a static gamestate alot of people get frustrated about the current balancing situation. 

    In addition to that, there are 3 T2s (pure Nature, stonekin, pure Frost), that completely get shut downed by this deficit. Their T2 strength is actually decent, but you just don't want to play that frost or nature T1. 

     

    Back then I really advocated nerfs to mortar and Phasetower and I'm still fully supporting this idea. It is not possible to make healthy balancing changes around these two cards with their current stat cost efficiency and an almost nonexisting building counter system in the early stages of the game. That said, in order to fix the entire T1 issues, we need to adress more than just these two cards (but that would make a good first step). 

    Nature is too weak at defending a +1 well situation. Even after taking a lead in initial fights, you won't be able to well up as split attacks are just destroying the faction, that can't fight on low unit number with these units being super expensive. Similar issues occur once you get into a T1 vs T2 situation with more bound power than your opponent. The dps/power against M and L units is just way to low in order to allow healthy defences. 

    Frost got gutted through Homesoil getting nerfed and the faction can't fight on open ground effectively. You always need a power well close to your unit in order to contest. Against Mortar and Phasetower you can't even win these close well situations making things alot worse.

     

    Current proposals from the skylords balancing discord:

    Phasetower: 

    Nerf idea 1: Decrease the damage by roughly 20% 

    Nerf idea 2: Increase the cost per Tower by 10  

     

    Mortar:

    Nerf idea 1: Increased costs by roughly 15 power 

    Nerf idea 2: Cooldown increase 

    Nerf idea 3: Adding an initial cooldown to weaken the card against high tempo. 

     

    These are different single nerf ideas and NOT a single combined proposal!  

     

     

    Maps

    I've seen many players (especially newer ones) complaining about the map pool and also some people seem to dislike map X for various reasons. Just to give some examples. 

    -> Lajesh has Walls close to the main base. Once you make a mistake and give one up to the opponent, he might win the game of that, especially in lower elos. 

    -> Some people seem to dislke Yrmia for making some matchups very difficult to play

    -> Alot of people dislike Whazai as you can cliff onto the main base.  

    While there is the issues of generated maps not being included to the ranked pool for some reason, I think it might be a good thing to just widen the map pool rather than reworking the existing PvP maps. I think we could work out some more balanced, fun and interactive maps to get less repetitive games. High ranked players could work around some balanced maps and we've got really good map creators, who could easily create those maps if they're willing to work with us here. After some testing you could consider which new maps might be introduced into the new ranked pool, which would give us some fresh, new content. 

     

    What does a good map need? 

    I think we need some different maps, that adress different kind of win conditions to give different decks and playstyles small advantages or disadvantages. Battleforge has very low RNG based components in the game, so games might feel repetitive on the same map, if you play the same matchup or player many times in a row. 

     

    1) The amount of Monuments 

    I think having a range from 7-8 is the best number for orbs on 1v1 maps. 

    2) Orb placement

    I think T2 should be easily achiveable for both parties. Maps like Uro do have this poor condition, where Frost doesn't get to T2 without contesting it, which is really bad. T2 should be uncontestable, for T3 the case can be different. Lajesh for example has good orb placements in my opinion. If the map is played without offensive wall action, it can provide strategically interesting gameplay. 

    3) Well distance

    Needs to be carefully selected as there are alot of components, that make matchups either toxic or snowbally 

    4) Center of the map

    Can grant a strategic advantage due to shorter attack paths, but shouldn't be a win condition itself as some colors simply can't contest in these early fights. The center on Simai is a good example for a healthy  center positioning.

    5) Terrain/Cliffing

    Choke points are very important to increase the value of cc and AoE, while open space allows more micro management based fighting. In addition to that, important well & orb positions shouldn't be accessable by cliffs to avoid long range Sieges without proper counterplay. 

     

    There are more important aspects, but this could be discussed internally with the people, that are willing to work on these kind of map creations. In the end there could be community votings, if a finished map should be included into the ranked PvP pool. Maybe there could be specific tournaments to promote and test these maps beforehand.    

     

     

    Activity requirements

    I think they are straight up too high. 1 match per day is way too much for a game like Battleforge in order to stay relevant in the leaderboards. Right now alot of players are inactive and aren't motivated to play 30 ranked games with long que times, lower game quility compared to current sparring matches & the low comparability based off your current rank. There are probably about 

    Suggestion: Lower the acitivy requirements to about 10 games per month. This makes the leaderboards alot more interesting and meaningful, because you can compare yourself to a much larger playerbase as base elo is the much more relevant stat. Since we are a rather small community I feel like this is important to keep people motivated after dropping inactive.

     

    Player Base

    We need a higher amount of players to enable fairer matchmaking. There are large skill gaps in and they lead to very snowball based games. Top 5 base elo beats Top 20 base elo with 90%+ wr, Top 20 base elo beats Top 50 base elo with 90%+ wr etc. leading to very frustrating game experiences between stomping and getting stomped. Games are very fast and you don't really get to enjoy the game, especially when you haven't experienced the great games of PvP, that happen upon facing an enemy on a similar skill level. 

    Ideas for improvements: 

    -> Increased game promotion to attract newer players 

    -> Support the current Tournaments like the Stress Test Open 

     

     

    Overall it would be nice to collect some ideas on what we could do, to give people a better experience while playing PvP, especially post reset. So let me know your ideas, so I can implement them into this thread.

     

    TL DR;

    -> Balancing changes are important: Getting a testserver to evaluate proposals would be huge to make progress

    -> Adding more maps would be nice, maybe someone of the community map creators could work with PvP players on this

    -> Activity requirements are too high, especially when there is a rather low ranked participation

    -> We need to build up a solid player base after the reset (attract new players, keep the current ones)

     

     

    Best regards, 

    RadicalX

    felkin, Karl Lavafeld, Ultrakool and 2 others like this

  16. To give you a short answer: Yes there is an ongoing discussion about balancing. There is a separate discord server for that, where community representitives can work together to get proposals done (finished ones are already in the forums). That said, we don't have the permission to get proposed changes onto a test server yet. As critical cards like Phasetower or Mortar for instance might need iteration based balancing, we have to wait up until we can test certain changes to get to a consensus about what is good for the game, so these changes can be useful in the end.    


  17. The players at the top of bfp incomes do not reflect the efficiency of the quest system at all, because they do not generate their main income through quests. They abuse the inconsistent trading values at the market. 

    I would clearly agree, that the current quest system needs improvement. A higher questdiversity (I guess we get this after reset) and a removal of the hard cap should be really beneficial. 


  18. Great map! Looking forward to the competition. Do you have any plans on how to make the replays public in the end? If you are interested I could record and upload the winner replays to youtube either on my or the skylords community channel. 

    I've got just one question regarding the rules. Why aren't 2 replays per player allowed for the competition (1speedrun + 1style run)? 

    Ultrakool and Karl Lavafeld like this

  19. I agree, that you want to avoid having very experienced players going up against the new ones. They are way to good at snowballing games, especically after gathering so much experience over the years. These kind of stomps are really frustrating.

    I think a good idea to bring more players into PvP are beginner friendly events. Toggys Rookie Tournaments are a nice example with a solid amount of participants and there were a good amount of games, where the outcome was alot less predictable. If these kind of Events get promoted via ingame newsfeed, it might grant the opportunity to lower the entrance barrier. 


  20. 5 hours ago, Flrbb said:

    I'd suggest to remove the restrictions of spawning without beeing near to a home base. (Half lifepoints etc.) This is more radical but would support this units' unique mechanic.

    This was discussed in the discord channel too. I think it is a reasonable idea, but impossible to implement for now. 


  21.  Winterwitch

    • Card Changes

    Hp: 1350 -> 1700
    Shield value: 1500 -> 2000
    Ability power costs: 100 -> 65 

    Winterwitch lacks power that makes her worthy for a T4 card that demands 3 Frost orbs. The biggest current issues we see with this card are the low survivability in a T4 environment & the nonexistent synergy with AoE damage reductions. Cards like Ward of the North or Revenge have no effect onto iceshields. Therefore we want to increase her supportive strengh. 

    Chosen card changes: 
    The hp buff mainly is supposed to increase her survivability to get a proper positioning and good shield area placement. Regarding her ability a shield increase of 500 seems to be a low amount, but as Winterwitch provides up to 15 shields therefore it stacks up. An ability cost reduction is supposed to help players that have no access to voidmanipulation, which isn't guaranteed in a triple Frost deck. 

     


  22. Emberstrike

    • Card Changes 

    Ability dmg 1100(1650max) -> 1300 (3250max) 
    Passive dmg:  500(750max) -> 900 (2700max)

     

    There is a general issue with current L units in T4. They have several downsides to XL units such as scaling limitations through unit & charge limit, L knockback, higher vulnerability vs burst, lower movement speed, damage loss as only a limited amount of creatures are able to attack one target (melee problem only) or the inability to attack air units (melee only). There is almost nothing that makes up for these downsides leaving L T4 units mostly behid.
    The AOE increase for Emberstrike is supposed to open up a somewhat unique playstyle by using their ability more frequently in order to clear big camps alot quicker than before. In addition to that you should be able to spawn them alot more aggressively into fights with a massively increased passive.

    I might extend this thread and add some more information in about 2 weeks (I'm short on time for now).

    Best regards

    RadicalX

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.