Jump to content


Beta Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RadicalX

  1. Frost Sorc dp20 is lower than displayed (210/225/250/275)* 

    Cannon Tower dp20 is higher than displayed (1750/1825/2000/2085)

    Stone Tempest dp20 is lower than displayed (750/800/900/1030)

    Magma Hurler dp20 is lower than displayed (1500/1500/1500/1500)


    *The four numbers are the different upgrade values (U0/U1/U2/U3)

  2. @WindHunter Corpse explosion plays a big part in pure Shadow to reach consistent results against pure Fire as it provides a reliable and quick removal of the Rallying banner + Enforcer attack pattern, which helps alot in reaching the Harvester breakpoint, that ends up winning the matchup. In addition to that it also helps removing aggressive towers, that are built into an Aura of Corruption, therefore giving you more freedom to use this spell to punish things like stonekin army attacks.  

    I agree, that Corpse explosion might be not the easiest card to use, but it is by far the strongest choice pure Shadow has. I don't really understand why Shadow Phoenix is supposed to have a big influence in the Frost matchups as the card just punished heavy well clustering in offense and usually does not have many usecases into the Stormsinger based Frost splashes. Corpse Explosion is the best card to break through Frost splash defenses (I recommend watching the TopS3cret vs Hyper match from my tournament in August, where Corpse Explosion played a big part in allowing arguably the biggest comeback in Battleforge Tournament history). 

    In T3 the synergy with big nasties shouldn't be underestimated and Cultist Master also provides alot of corpses around the map, that can be utlized to break through Frost splash defenses.

    Overall I'm also not a big fan of promoting Shadow Phoenix gameplay outside of Shadow Nature since I've seen so many people just hurt themselves by trying to use Phoenix in defense that often result in negative trades since the enemy splits his army, the power well starts dropping low and then a desperation crash dive happens. The card defintely has solid use cases in pure Shadow and you can do some really nasty combos with nether warp, but that is a personal preference choice, that can be used by the editing function.  

    @ImperatorSK We do consider Towers in Fire & Shadow T1 as technically healthy gameplay components, but Phasetower and Mortar are obviously to powerful and do way more than what they are supposed to. Since I assume these cards will receive nerfs most likely just after the reset, it should leave the free decks in a well rounded place, where those towers help at counteracting against build up rush mechanics, without being completely opressive to play agianst. Frost and Nature can use their natural late T1 scaling advantage to put pressure onto the opponent by refusing to fight early on and at that point a Tower should be a viable option to back up a first move like a defensive early early well.  

    Eirias likes this
  3. I hope you all like the PvP decks. If you have any questions regarding specific card choices, feel free to ask! I will try to provide our reasonings for the decisions.


    Our priorities during deck construction were the following ones:

    -> Create beginner friendly decks, that immediately perfom well in PvP games without any changes and don't require high end micro to be playable in 80k-110k base elo range

    -> Create competitive decks, that can be played in 110k base elo and above with no to few adjustments

    -> Provide a solid overview about the current meta, so players get an idea about powerful choices in the realm of PvP and things to care about

    -> Avoid promoting too many toxic strategies (hello Curse Well) 

    -> In some very difficult occassions we prioritized card rarity*


    *(Mountaineer vs Lost Reaver is something f.e., that comes down to personal preference in deck choice, but Mountaineer is incredibly hard to buy & upgrade and alot of players were unable to use the card during the Stress-test for a very long time)


    @Eirias Fixed T3 patterns would go against our principle, where we try to make the decks as competitive as possible. In many occasions there is a clearly superior T3 path and we tried to follow that one. In the case of Lost Souls Cultist Master T3 is, while being very powerful, alot harder to execute than the current Timeless one T3 counterpart. Giant Slayer is almost always better than Fathom Lord considering that Fire Nature usually wants to use earyl T3 to quickly end games. In Shadow Nature Cultistmaster + Heal is way too powerful to be contested by anything else. Fire Frost does allow a 4 card T3 with the Fire T1 path, but ends up being more slot intensive with the Frost T1 start. Considering that double Fire works really well on 2-3 T3 slots, while TImeless one T3s often start to perform better around 4-5 T3 slots it doesn't make sense to follow a fixed pattern here, which might weaken the deck on both ends. 

    @Cocofang In regards to no T3 choices there are decks like Fire Nature, that could work really well without a T3 and we also discussed this aspect, but it requires a certain amount of strategic experience (what map positions and power wells do I need contest to punish T3 accordingly) and a solid level in terms of micro management to execute these type of strategies. We did not think this is beginner friendly enough to be proposed for everyone. The "small T3" choice still performs very well in high elo games, but makes games much more consistent in mid to low elo matches, therefore we wanted to stick with that. Stonekin has alot more tools to fight against T3 though even without the highest level of micro. The deck also has many viable cards in T2, therefore the extra slots generated by cutting T3 work extremely well here. 


    If you have some personal preferences the edit function will be very valuable of course and quickly provide a playable deck for everyone without too much effort in terms of gold/bfp grinding. 


  4. We might be able to talk about this in a few years, but right now it would create more problems than solutions for balancing.

    Only a few decks do have sufficient options, that really improve decks at higher slot numbers. If almost every deck has 35+ truly viable cards for PvP, an increase might be an option, but for now most decks would just overload their T3's or add oppressive conditional strategies rather than providing more interesting game dynamics.  


    Stonekin is the only exception right now as it has many different unique and viable T2/3 cards, that are not used for slot reasons. Adding them would improve options in T2 and allow different game styles (Attacking f.e. can revolve around different core units, that work against specific factions: Burrower, Mountaineer, Stonetempest, Crystalfiend, Stormsinger, Razorshard) or stick with current options, but with an actual T3.

    Standard meta deck Lost Souls has a very solid core deck structure, that wins scaling games consistently once you are ahead of the curve. This playstyle would be totally unaffected by increased slots, you just increase the options of getting that little lead throughout the game by adding counter cards like Lost Reaver, Lyrish Knight, Skyelf Templar and solidify the raw T3 power level by slot increase (6 slots are really powerful). 

    Some decks Like pure Pure Fire could add something like Global Warming or Spitfire, but these cards don't really add anything and don't reduce any core issues. Relative to other decks pure Fire gains nothing new, while facing some more versitile decks with specific counter units (Twilight Brute, Skyelf Templar) and much more oppressive attack patterns (heavily supported L units, undead army etc.). 



    Playing off meta decks is always possible, but people usually prefer to stick with the most powerful and most well rounded strategies. 25 slots won't change this. They won't randomly start playing things like Tower of Flames + Architechts call even at 40 slots, because these things are bad and not situational sleeper combos, that are restricted by slot investments. Stuff like Enlightment + Earthshaker might be more realistic, but that's just another toxic basenuke.


    PvE implications are also huge on a sidenote, since it makes deck building much more efficient and alot of speedruns are affected by this too. Makes the game much easier in that department. 


    Creating more strategic options through card balancing and removing opressive matchup imbalances should be current priority. If we ever reach that goal in a couple of years and get to a larger healthy card pool, slot increases might be reasonable as a result of this. 

  5. The Award Ceremony is here. I watched more than 100 matches, so things were kind of hard to decide. Alot of replays will be cast on my channel at some point in time, since there were alot of great matchups! Thanks for making this tournament great an I hope to announce another one at some point (can't really tell a date though, might take some months). But let's get to the awards:



    Award: Most intense match of the tournament 


    #5 Fodasseman (Shadow Nature) vs Showaren (Shadow Frost) (200bfp for both players)

    #4 Ultrakool (Fire Nature) vs thelight288 (Shadow Frost) (Shadow Frost) (300bfp for both players)

    #3 TopS3cret (Pure Shadow) vs Hyp3r (Shadow Frost) (400bfp for both players)

    #2 Fodasseman (Shadow Nature) vs Killbuster (Fire Frost) (500bfp for both players) 

    #1 TopS3cret (Pure Fire) vs DragonLogic (Shadow Frost) (1000bfp for both players) 


    Most creative deck builds:

    #3 ndclub, playing an interesting off meta pure Frost deck around White rangers (250bfp)

    #2 DrStrangelove, the only player who did play Bandits in the tournament and he even went off meta here utilizing stationairy buildings to compensate for the weak defense. (500bfp)

    #1 Blueberryboy, with a massive pure Frost deck going up to a massive T4 combo, replay will be uploaded soon. (1000bfp)


    Starcraft Award (Highest APM peak)

    #3 Ultrakool with 123 APM (250bfp)

    #2 Zappyx with 151 APM (500bfp)

    #1 Duelllord with 177 APM (1000 bfp)


    Hyperaggression Award (Fastest well kick in the Tournament)

    #3 TopS3cret 2:20min (250 bfp)

    #2 Ulv 2:07min (500 bfp)

    #1 Quickshift 1:59min (1000 bfp)


    Spam Slam Award (Most cards played of the same type)

    #3 Hyp3r 21 Forsaken (250bfp)

    #2 Navarr 22 Silverwindlancer (500 bfp) 

    #1 Draken 24 Silverwindlancer (1000 bfp)


    Toggy Award (most eruptions used in a single game):

    #1 Impossible with 12 Eruptions in his game against Blodir (1x Wildfire)


    Lowest deck lvl on stream award:

    #1 Navarr with 114 (yes, everyone else was actually higher)  - (2x boosters)


    Hirooo likes Grigoris award sponsored by Hirooo (Most Grigoris played in a single match)

    #1 BKGurke with 6 Lost Grigoris in his match against Niq (1x Lost Grigori)


    Stonekin Award: Longest game of the Tournament 

    #1 Hyp3r (Lost Souls) vs Afrobrook (Stonekin) with 19:34min playtime (500bfp for both players)

  6. 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
  7. 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 


    Ultrakool, Ladadoos, Loriens and 1 other like this
  8. 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
  9. 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!).

  10. 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)!  

  11. 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! 



    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!



    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!



    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! 



    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,


  12. 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
  13. 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
  14. 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%. 

  15. 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.

  16. 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
  17. 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 Emmaerzeh like this
  18. 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.


  19. 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?

  20. 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. 



    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:


    Nerf idea 1: Decrease the damage by roughly 20% 

    Nerf idea 2: Increase the cost per Tower by 10  



    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!  




    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, 


    LagOps, Emmaerzeh, felkin and 2 others like this
  • Create New...

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. Terms of Use