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... ×


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by indubitablement

  1. 58 minutes ago, synthc said:

    pure nature actually has an advantage vs fire/frost due to its ability to mind control their drakes

    I only played this matchup once as the nature player and once as the fire/frost since beta (both rare faction to see), but I saw parasite swarm against drake quite a few times and it never work.

    If nature player use oink, you can double erupt. Because parasite swarm animation is so slow, you have plenty of time (giving you a small 5 power advantage).
    If nature player doesn't have the power to oink, you can hit once with drake+eruption (giving you a 25 power advantage).

    Ofc spirit hunter+parasite doesn't work either because of ravage and shield.

    Even if you screwup and nature gets a drake, you have shielded drake to easily deal with it, so it's not even a big deal.

    Early attack from nature with burrower+CC is easy to counter with stormsinger+frostbite. Samething with energy parasite.

    1 hour ago, synthc said:

    Pure nature vs pure fire is actually surprisingly even.

    I played nature vs pure fire a lot in the 120'000 elo range (I used to main pure nature and pure fire is very common). Even if the pure fire's trade aren't 100% efficient, a good fire player never let me repair my well and will eventualy get it down. If I could repair, it cost 100-150 power which would easily end the game. Some map with a lot of cliff dancer spot are auto lose like yrmia. Maybe I just need to get good. I need to see replays of two equality good player.

    @Kubik Sorry for ping. Do you have the win rate for specific pvp matchup like pure nature vs pure fire? For me I think it was around 20:80. :(


  2. On 8/3/2019 at 5:33 PM, synthc said:

    Magma Hurler

    The Problem:  Pure fire has no good way to deal with the War Eagle + Skyelf Templar combo and also struggles against other L threats.

    The Solution:  Make Magma Hurler a tier 2 pure fire unit.  This gives pure fire a reliable L counter that can also hit air units.  Magma Hurler at tier 3 doesn't fulfill its role very well since archers are generally not very useful at tier 3 (siege units and units that can quickly deal with threats are much preferred).

    • Change orb requirements from NNR to RR.
    • Increase cost to 150.
    • Remove M knockback.

    L units and air control is the only thing keeping pure fire from face rolling every matchup. Even with that in mind pure fire is still in the top 3 pvp deck. I agree there are problem with pure fire. Some matchup it is too strong (nature and amii) and in others, too weak (frost, but only in t2 and fire frost).

    On 8/3/2019 at 5:33 PM, synthc said:

    Stormsinger (both affinities)

    The Problem:  Stormsinger's stats are simply too high for a tier 2 splashable ranged M unit.

    The Solution:  Reduce Stormsinger's HP to put it more in line with other T2 ranged M units.

    • Reduce HP from 750 to 690.

    I don't think trying to balance cards on their own is good idea. Instead, looking at cards as part of a deck give a better idea what the repercussion of this change would be.

    • Does stromsinger needs a nerf in pure frost? No, it's a good card, but not mandatory at all. A nerf here doesn't affect pure frost.
    • ... frost fire? No, it's a core card to an already weak deck, but this nerf shouldn't hurt much.
    • ... stonekin? Yes, If stonekin's t1 become usable (phase tower nerf, semi swift unit for t1 frost), stonekin could become too strong. I think this could be a good change here.
    • ... lost soul? Yes, It could be a good idea here as well. It would help twilight without affecting lost soul's weaker matchup (pure fire) too much.

    Tbh, I was against the nerf at first, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. Fire frost would need a little something to compensate.

    On 8/3/2019 at 5:33 PM, synthc said:

    Deep One (both affinities)

    The Problem:  Deep One's stats are too high for its cost, even for a pure unit.  This causes Deep One to often be used in place of proper counters (like Spikeroot and Ghostspears) because of its exceptionally high overall power level.

    The Solution:  Reduce Deep One's HP.  Damage should be left intact because pure nature needs Deep One's damage to deal with threats quickly enough.

    • Reduce HP from 1650 to 1450. 

    Yes, the card is strong, but is pure nature too strong? Honestly, pure nature is competing with bandit for worst pvp faction. What's the point of this change? Is deep one causing problem in any pure nature matchup? Just to show how silly this idea is, lets look at deep one in every pure nature matchup:

    • Pure frost: Well balanced matchup already. We should try to keep it that way. Deep one isn't a big factor here.
    • Fire frost: Bad matchup for nature. Nature lose in t1 and t3. T2 is bit more even, but still hard for nature who can't deal with drake (double eruption is an efficient counter to oink+parasite). Deep one isn't a big factor here.
    • Stonekin: Deep one is bad here.
    • Lost soul: Bad matchup for nature. Nature lose in t1 and t3. Deep one is bad here, because of nightguard.
    • Pure fire: Insanely bad matchup for nature. Deep one is the only card that give nature a glimmer of hope in this matchup.
    • Fire nature: About 40:60 in favor of fire nature. DO is great in late t2, but not an oppressive card by any mean.
    • Bandit: 50:50 matchup. For nature it's all about cc and burrower. DO is irrelevant.
    • Amii: Very bad matchup for nature. DO isn't playable, because of nightguard. Even without it (in theory, because amii always has nightguard), amii has the tool to deal with DO.
    • Pure nature: DO is irrelevant.

    In conclusion, this change has no effect for most matchup or makes hard ones even more one sided. Every faction has the tool to deal with DO in it's current state.

    If you want to change nature, first look at SoM and energy parasite. They really limit the design space with pure nature. Then, give nature proper M counter. Finally, if DO+heal overshadow going t3 for pure nature like it is now (this is only true because of SoM and pure nature t3 isn't great), consider buffing nature t3.

    On 8/3/2019 at 5:33 PM, synthc said:


    The Problem:  Enlightenment was one of the most heavily nerfed cards in the history of the game, having its power cost increased by 90.  For PvE, the card is still very useful, and actually single-handedly makes pure decks inferior in PvE, since you can just go double nature and play any cards you want with enlightenment.  For PvP, on the other hand, the card is too expensive to be realistically used in most high level matches (even in 2v2).

    The Solution:  Make enlightenment a pure nature card and reduce its cost back down to 150.  This means that you actually have to make sacrifices in PvE to use this (extremely powerful) card and this creates a good reason to play pure nature in PvE.  For PvP, the card is made viable again and pure nature T3 becomes a serious contender in 2v2.

    • Change orb requirements from NGG to GGG.
    • Reduce cost to 150. 

    I like the idea. This make nature t3 the most diverse. But now we have to balance t4 for pvp. All the good t4 I can think of: 400 power construct, 350 power ice tornado, 250 power incubator?, 270 power kobold inc with MoK?, 390 power LSS, 390 power bloodhorn (probably the best option), 400 worldbreaker gun.


    All the other suggestion I like. Hopefully we can see some of them in game one day.

  3. I have this proposal:

    + Amii now grant 4 of every orb, instead of a single orb.
    + Amii can be played on t1, instead of t3.

    Make amii give 4 of every orbs on t1 for the ultimate enriched experience. It will create loads of options for possible decks and strategies that would straight up not exist without this change. It can be argued that it overshadows alternatives, but it does not remove a single one. Strictly speaking it would be a purely enriching change as far as possibilities go.

    What are we waiting for? :D

    Edit: The flaw in this reasoning is that overshadowing alternatives (even if it doesn't remove them) does matter. We can't balance anything without reference.

    Kubik likes this

  4. Trading 200 temporary power disadvantage for a permanent 80 power advange is still pretty good.

    This card has 0 interactivity. You use it and will always drop a well. Only thing to do is try to drop a well in exchange. Personally, even if I drop a well, it still feel sour that I had to do all that work to accomplish what my opponent did in 1 click.

    Basicly curse well allow you to win while staying on the deffence. It's cancer and should be reworked/removed.

  5. I like amii getting nerf, but I wish you did more. Look how superior amii is on nightmare's end for example.


    You're player 1 and just finished taking over the bottom base to secure t3 which you now have to defend along with your t1. After that fight, your t2 army is in pretty bad shape. You have two options to get t4:

    1: Make a t3 army and take over the top base. Build your t4 monument and defend it. T3 army cost 500-800 power with spells (90% refunded) and 2-3 deck slots. Monument is 300 power. Defence is 300-500 binded power. Totaling about 800 lost power, 2 deck slots and a whole lot of time.

    2: Put down amii monument. Totaling 325 binded power, 1 deck slot and 30 seconds.

    Now I know there are many way to do this map better. You could take your teammate's t2 and go straight to t4, you could defend your monument and the power shrine with one defence, etc. The example above is what an average joe would do.

    I don't think amii should cost 800 power. Maybe it should do something else entirely. An idea I saw on discord was to make amii t4 and cheaper, so it could be used as a 5th orb and orb swapping, opening many new possibilities.

    PrincessKenny and Kybo like this

  6. It'll be complete trash. Make the void to shield rate 5'000%, absorb 100% and reduce the cooldown to 45 seconds and it may see some play.

    If we compare it with it's closest competitor (stone shell + regrowth) it's still not impressive.
    Shrine of martyrs:
    Cost: 125 binded power + lets say 500 void power (need to keep that number high).
    Effect: 5000 hp shield on 5 units, or 4170 shield on 6 units, or 3570 shield on 7 units, etc...
    Other: You can't tell when the shield is about to break and you have to keep track of one more cooldown which people who play more than one frost orb (also known as noobs) may have trouble doing.

    Stone shell + regrowt:
    Cost: 210 power that you can get back from void immediately (to be fair, void manipulation needs a nerf).
    Effect: immortality

    edit: added CoLoR

  7. 7 minutes ago, ImperatorSK said:

    Already voted for:
    -Yrmia (already voted for remove)

    Are not able to vote for:
    -Wazhai (not 100% sure atm, but i think remove it since Phasetower, Mortar, Cliffing is to strong on this map)
    - +1 generated maps

    Same here. I would vote for: -Wazhai/Yrmia and +random map.

    Make nature t1 great again
    (and frost too, but who cares?)

  8. 1 hour ago, Kubik said:

    did you consider rPvE?, or PvP? :thinking:

    Of course. Rpve is the best way to farm gold, if you don't have a friend to do cpve speedrun. Pvp only give pocket change.

    • Rpve 20 000 gold/hour.
    • Cpve speedrun 40 000 gold/hour.
    • Ranked pvp 3 000 gold/hour, if you are Radicalx and have 100% win rate. 2 250 gold/hour with 50% win rate.
    1 hour ago, Kubik said:

    "-Easy to implement." how you come to this conclusion? :thinking:

    Tldr: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Right now, I assume we have something like this: "convert x card (Enlightenment) to y gold (3500 gold) when z condition is met (player who got the upgrade already has it)". The way I see it, you would only have to remove the condition to give gold all the times. But, this is just a wild guess and you know way more than me on how hard it is to implement.

    1 hour ago, Kubik said:

    #1 I read it as double the rewards for cPvE :thinking: am I correct? if yes, then my answer is no :P they are too high already.

    It would only double the reward for the first few times you complete the map. Keep in mind that doing multiple different cpve map will require multiple upgraded decks and learning multiple strategy to complete the map in a reasonable time.

    If you think cpve give too much gold, you can still implement my suggestion, but lower the disenchant reward of upgrades. I agree that cpve is by far the best place to farm gold, but only if you have friends to speedrun one of the 4 maps that reward up to 90 000 gold/hour. Most cpve map reward is on par or lower than rpve 9. For the majority of people, cpve isn't efficient to farm for upgrades/gold. It's only there to have fun and aint nobody got time for that. For example, when I do casual 20-30 minutes Bad harvest expert with strangers, I can expect 2 000 gold. I could've done 9 500 gold in that time with rpve.

    The big issue I have with cpve is that new player not only make the map harder/slower(I'm fine with that. I like a challenge.), but also decrease the reward at the end. You can carry 3 new players that have lvl 10 decks on bad harvest expert, but don't expect more than 1000 gold at the end.


    Btw, I really appreciate what you've done with battleforge. I'm only arguing because I think it could be even better.:)

  9. At the time of writing this, there are 3 main ways to farm gold:

    • If you don't have friends: Grind 4 players rpve with strangers. Average 20 000 gold/hour.
    • If you don't have friends and hate yourself: Grind "The soultree" over and over again. Average 22 000 gold/hour.
    • If you have a friend or more: Grind the same cpve map (usualy "The gun of lyr" or "Bad harvest") over and over again. Average 40 000 gold/hour.

    The reasons why this is:

    1. Playing with stranger is a gamble. They might not know how to play the map and might not have the upgrades the map grant, thus reducing the reward at the end.
    2. Playing different cpve map is disincentivized, as you often have to buy and upgrade a different deck for each. As well as learn each map.
    3. Most cpve map don't have a good enough reward. Best farming gold per hour rate by DJ_Blyatman.


    My suggestions:

    1) When winning a cpve map, each player gain the gold from the upgrades. Even if the upgrades are not duplicate.

    -Incentivise playing different maps, as the reward is bigger the less time you have played the map. (You gain both gold and upgrade early on, but only gold latter on.)
    -Doesn't decentivise playing with new player that don't have all the upgrades already.
    -Reward is more equal between players. No more one player gain Havester u3 while everyone else gain pocket change.
    -Easy to implement.

    2) Two cpve maps of week with 25% gold boost. One for a random 2 or 4 players map and one for a random single player map.

    -Incentivise playing different maps, but not always the one you want to play.
    -Merge the community on the maps of the week. (Faster to find a group.)
    -Unnecessary work, if suggestion #1 is implemented.

  10. From first to fourth row:

    1. Gold/hour, if all players already have the upgrades. Doesn't include chests.
    2. Average gold per match. Single player map give 2 cards and multiplayer map give 4 cards, unless done solo.
    3. Average time per match. Based on the faster speedrun plus 2 minutes, unless the map is on a set timer.
    4. Degree of difficulty. Based on my experience of the speedrun I have tried.

    Spreadsheet format in the source below.

    [gold per hour] = [average gold per expert match from disenchant] * 60 / [fastest speedrun afaik] + 2

    Ranked PvP
    3000 - Gold/hour
    500 - Average gold per match
    10 - Average time per match
    Hard - Degree of difficulty

    The Guns of Lyr = Medium (Very good farming spot)

    King of the Giants = Easy
    Sunbridge = Easy (Decent gold if you can't do The Guns of Lyr)


    Xientie, Navarr and RadicalX like this

  11. 7 minutes ago, nofearek9 said:

    in old times ,first you played all the maps to understand the game get cards and upgrades and later start pvp games.for all f2p players pvp happened much later after they started playing the game.

    How popular was pvp in old times? I doubt there were many f2p pvp player.

  12. 7 hours ago, wertyy said:

    One of the purposes of the game is the collection of the cards ,buying them all from 1st month will not be so fun to play it.

    I agree that collecting card is part of the fun, up to a point. What I would like to bring attention to is that "chase" or "hunt" cards are also necessary pvp card. Futhermore, before you can play pvp you need a pve deck with upgrades to farm gold and daily quest. Together this is gating pvp behind hours of grind.

    wertyy and nofearek9 like this

  13. 1 hour ago, Treim said:

    The market will stabilize once there are a few more copies of those cards flowing around in the market.

    When the devs are able to fix the multiaccounting problem, supply will be lower. I've heard of someone creating 59 accounts for the 2 starting boosters.

  14. When you sell your Shaman for an Harvester, something is wrong.

    Some notable cards include:


    • Windweavers 150 bfp
    • Forsaken, Sunstriders, Master Archers 30+ bfp


    • Coldsnap 450 bfp
    • Shaman 900 bfp
    • Skyfire Drake 200 bfp
    • Frost Mage 500 bfp
    • Root 250 bfp
    • Lyrish Knight, Burrower, Darkelf Assassins 100+ bfp


    • Hurricane 250 bfp
    • Motivate 150 bfp
    • Home Soil 400 bfp

    For example, a relatively cheap deck like fire-nature is going to cost about 3000 bfp for the essential.


    2 Sunstriders 100 bfp
    1 Scavenger 80 bfp
    2 Firesworm 200 bfp
    1 Mortar 50 bfp
    1 Ghostspear 35 bfp
    2 Gladiatrix(green) 200 bfp
    1 Scythe Fiends 200 bfp
    3 Skyfire Drake 500 bfp
    2 Burrower 250 bfp
    2 Ensnaring Roots 500 bfp
    2 Hurricane 550 bfp
    2 Giant Slayer 300 bfp



    What do you think?

  15. 1 minute ago, Kuuhaku said:

    So i get logged in, like it loads me in and as soon as i see the game it tells me i already lost connection, friend got the same issue, is that for more guys right now? is that a language issue maybe? or is it just the servers arent prepared for that level of stress testing? :D

    Last time I've heard from the dev, nobody could login, not even the dev.

  16. On 2/3/2018 at 7:54 AM, Hirooo said:

    And you really dont want to use purple night guard against frost in any case. That wont help you against MA spam.

    edit: disregard this. I was very wrong.

    • Damage-wise, purple Nightguard is 10% more efficient than Nox (11/power vs 10/power) and has 5 aoe.
    • Nox have 17% more healt per power (7.7/power vs 9/power) and counter Ice Guardian.

    I would argue that purple nightguard are better than nox againt frost with the following statements:

    1. Damage is more important than healt, because you want to kill as many MA as possible before your opponent cast Home Soil and Wintertide.
    2. MA are often clumped together making 5 aoe quite useful.
    3. Ice Guardian should be ignored, by microing your units away from them, untill there are no MA left. Coutering Ice Guarding is somewhat irrelevant unless they are on your well or dazed.
    4. Nightguard is still useful in t2.

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.