Metagross31
-
Posts
616 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Metagross31
-
-
Btw: Is the price for beating RadicalX still available? Not that I have any chance, but Just out of curiosity. -
3002
Glad to be alive to whitness this great moment!
-
5 hours ago, Chibiterasu said:
2996
It's easy. Just type the number the previous person wrote into a calculator and press "+" then "1" and "=". Then you just copy the number shown on the calculator into the post. At least that's how I always do it
2997 did I do it right?
-
2
9
9
4 -
-
I frickin LOVE this idea! Iron Maiden for life!
But we have to make sure not to get copyright issues with this...
-
I meant what would you go for other than style points
7 hours ago, Bkingn said:So is it enough to send just one unit in let him paralyzed then all my other units can go in without the effect? Im playing mass disintegrate shadow worms with overlords its pretty fun and powerful (lost souls are the easiest maps for the deck!) And the only thing that slows me down is the willzapper thats why im asking ideas.
I remember you posted that idea somewhere here before and it sound really fun. Would you mind sharing the decklist?
-
7 hours ago, Treim said:
Overall not worth the deck slot unless you go for maximum style points.
What else would you want to go for?
-
Nox Carrier + Nether Warp maybe? Don't know, of it even works, but it is the only creative solution that came to my mind and hasn't been mentioned before.
-
2988
Guess I have to forum harder!
Volin likes this -
2 hours ago, Emmaerzeh said:
I like the idea of @Buddelmuddel for 2 different speedrun categorys.
The all is allowed and one with restrictions
F. E. like no decomposer, amii + enlightenment and if possible no well and orb sharing.
This would make everybody happy in best case.
Imo this is the best solution. It works well in other speedrunning games, too. They usuallt have a 100% category (in BF this would be the no Decomposer/amii/enlightenment category) and an any% category (where anything goes).
1 hour ago, Loriens said:Zyna said - it's not high priority.
We don't neccessarily need an ingame leaderboard for this. We can simply make a forum thread or something.
-
-
1 hour ago, Buddelmuddel said:
It would bring a little more skill into speedrunning. Maybe even add that every position has 4 orbs that they can take, and none of the other positions can take them. Additionally make ami monument and enlightment t4.
That wouldn't even work for most maps.
For example in PtD the leftmost starting position on each map usually takes the top route, where they find 2 Monuments. To whom should they be designated? Both to the left position or one to another position? But if you assign it to the bottom position, then they wouldn't take the bottom route. If you assign it to any other position, what about the middle route then? The same problem could appear in other maps as well.1 hour ago, Buddelmuddel said:When you are a new player you do think that a good time is associated with good players, but 85% of the needed time is determined from your deck, your strategy and AI understanding. Basically the last minute decides how well a team has excecuted a map, and not if they were 5 or 10 minutes faster. Although to understand the AI and play around it, does take a little skill.
If the campaings would be played properly there would be a little more diversity in ranks, and it would be more incentive to play the maps, cause not everyone could do them easily. Its a little sad, when 1 players who knows what he is doing achieves a better time, then when 4 people know what they are doing, but they play the game instead of feeding.
But then again, if it would be more known that good times do not have to be associated with good players, then it wouldn`t matter in the end. Although it would be nice if you play a map normally in a good way, people could see that you played it well. Maybe there could be 2 rankings, one with every bug abuse possible. And one where you play the map in the casual way, just efficient.
Well, if it is only about deck building and not about skill, who is it, that only a handfull of players have about every single world record speedrun? Shouldn't everyone be able to beat them right away then? I agree, that the last few minutes/seconds make the biggest difference in a speedrun - it is one thing to beat BH in under 4 minutes and something completely different to beat it in ~2:30 - but that's the same for speedruns in every game that exists. Everyone can get a time of around 5 minutes in Super Mario Bros. after just a bit of practice, but only a few people can get 5 seconds lower than that. And why is that? Because of skill and dedication. It is the same in Battleforge as well.
1 hour ago, Buddelmuddel said:Additionally I would add maybe 200 more energy on camapign maps, so that the start isnt so dang slow.
That's a completely different topic, so maybe create a thread for it on its own.
DieToPlay likes this -
-
Wait, WoG's damage buff and green forest elder don't stack? My whole life has been a lie!
-
A little thing to add to @LEBOVIN's proposal imo:
The maximum orn count achieved should be capped at 4. Otherwise people going for more orbs (e.g. 4orbs+amii mon. or Raven's wns, where more than 4 orbs are needed) would drag down the team, unless everyone goes for more than 4. Just a little detail but imo quite important.
Otherwise I like the suggestion in general
LEBOVIN likes this -
See this topic:
-
There is also a community PvP map called "Deathmatch", where you start off with 4 Orbs of each colour and have to destroy a buffed up World Breaker Gun. Maybe in this mode you can make use of this strategy.
-
Did you use it a lot of times before?
Because I think some CCs in BF have deminishing returns, i.e. when you use the same CC multiple times in a row, the duration will be shortened.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but afaik this is the case for Oink! as well for example, but not for Roots.This is put in place to prevent perma CC. It is in general a common thing in many games such WoW.
But again, I'm not 100% sure, so correct me if I'm wrong.
-
9 hours ago, shroomion said:
really worth listening!
(if you have shitty audio or boxes adjusted for more popular music with less variety in sound, then better don't bother with the next one - you need good soundquality to really enjoy their music)
Here one of my favorite performances ever:
Tool
This get's an easy 9/10 from me.Now it's my turn:
Dallarian likes this -
2 hours ago, qudekRa said:
As you said yourself you wouldn't take the ability from new players to just build the meta decks, its just about the extra gameplay process of actually creating your deck. And "few months of grinds" is shamelessly exaggerated, especially for the current skylords economy and any suggestion that was made so far
Depends on how much you get to play. If you can play everyday for a few hours it surely takes way less time. But if you can't play that much, for example some people can only play on maybe 2-3 days a week for maybe 1-2 hours, and since I have a similar amount of time at my hand right now I can assure you, that it does indeed take a long ass time. Eventhough I played a lot right after the release, I could probably not yet afford to finish up a semi-complete deck. The only way for me to do this would be to not build a PvE deck at all, but then, who should I get the gold/BfP? Grinding PvE with an unupgraded free deck is super tedious and not fun imo. The alternative would be to play PvP with an unviable deck and getting my ass beaten because I start the game with a disadvantage against people with more time to grind - also not fun.
So the choice would be:
1. Get (not only but more than it should be) default losses in your first several PvP matches because of a weaker deck until you can compete.
2. Grind PvE with a (viable but) weak deck until you get a PvP deck.
3. Grind for a very long time to get PvE and PvP decks.Imo the system we are having right now is fine in terms of deckbuilding, since there are still a lot of tweaks you can apply to the decks to make them fit your playstyle. Obviously, beginners will take some time to figure out which cards fit their playstyle most, but slight deviations from the free decks can be benefitial and thus still incentivise creativity and deck building.
The thing is I just dont want to feel like playing a game of chess, but in order to unlock your second knight, you have to play 100 games against opponents with two knights first.
Not giving access to competitively viable decks thus will discourage newcomers to play PvP. The only compromise I can see here would be to give people the cards they need without giving them the decklist, but then again, they can just look in the forums. -
1 hour ago, Buddelmuddel said:
Of course noone wants to play with perfect pvp decks except the ones who had already played enough battlfroge pvp. Everyone want to have their own ideas, make mistakes, try stuff out. Then you have incentive to try pvp out.
That's just wrong. I want to play with competitve decks right away and not get kicked in the butt for the first few months by people who grinded more. And I still think that the majority of people think that way considering how little the collection mode is played.
-
16 hours ago, qudekRa said:
Have you actually checked the current PvP decks? Most of the decks only have around 3 non twilight cards
There are still also ultra rare cards like Mounti, FireDancer and Harvester, which are excluded by your idea.
Also, the deck lists for the free PvP decks are still around, so it will only take you a few clicks to find decklists for competitive decks, which completely invalidates the point about incentivising creative deckbuilding, when people can just go for the current decks again.
-
If you have read any of the way too many threads suggesting the removal of free PvP decks, you should know, why this is still a bad idea. It will take away a lot of key cards and give you a lot of useless trash instead. Thus grinding will be mandatory again.
If you don't want to play against free PvP decks, just play collection mode. (Btw, guess why almost noone wants to play that mode lol)
Proposal: Dev-Sponsored PvP Happy Hour(s)
in Suggestions
Posted
Concerning AIs:
I generally like the idea and would love to see it implemented. The biggest problem I see right now is a missing API for programming one, I do not know though how much work it is to create one. Creating an AI afterwards will be the smaller problem I think. Especially if people can make and test their own AIs, there will be a quick development and we will probably see some decent ones quicker than we expect.
Concerning Happy hours:
I am all for that!