Jump to content

Xanatoss

Member
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Xanatoss

  • Rank
    Fighter

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Late thanks to the tournament organizers and all participants. I had a great time and an interesting experience. Looking forward to the next tournament of this kind. Special congratulations to runner-up Dallarian, who showed an impressive development since his pvp inception a few months ago.
  2. @WindHunter Sorry for my late reply. I became a second-time father and was therefore unable to participate for some time ^^` Thanks again for your comprehensive explanation. The floating heads rationale is amusingly specific. I would avoid the hassle to implement that, by arguing that the units temporarily give up their hovering to smush these pesky bugs; like WH40k-antigrav-vehicles (like tau devilfish) could give up their hovering to ram other vehicles, crush infantry models or give cover to own units.
  3. Finally my low winrate comes in handy Will try to participate, but may get a default loss by still commuting home from work.
  4. I can understand this rationale completely. In particular, the tightrope walk between a supposedly elegant reverse engineering solution and its merciless empirical performance. But because Sunderer and Harvester are currently unique in their size-to-tier-ratio wouldn't it be obvious to add one/two points to T1-Large and T2-XL in the complexity table and scratch the artificial S-Knockback from both unit-sheets? That way potentially future T1-L-Units would automatically be rare and T2-XL-Units automatically ultra-rare while still leaving some design space _while_ being more consistent to th
  5. Was able to read the Rarity-Document now. Once again I am very impressed by the structured approaches to so many considerations regarding SR and thus had a great pleasure reading. Only thing which bugs me is the example of Sunderer "paying" twice for S-Knockback and beeing a L-Unit. Current Mountaineer would fit that kind of budget better instead.
  6. Huge respect to the developer department which, despite all obstacles, keeps pushing the live release forward. You guys are the unsung heroes of SR.
  7. That Fire/Frost tease becomes unbearable xD I like the addition of bandit stalkers to Free-Bandits. Just yesterday I had a conversation with a pvp-rookie who did not like the free bandit decks because they contain so few bandit cards. I bought that Mortar you cut out from free pvp-decks, now make it 15sec pls :<
  8. In my childhood there was this animated television series called "Gargoyles" . Highly recommend it; like Shakespeare for kids ^^ (nothing like the "3D-everyone-is-yelling-at-everyone-all-the-time"-BS kids get to watch these days). Xanatos was the main antagonist of the series. I really liked his complex character and his multilayered schemes (and of course he was rich and had an armored gargoyle suit... so basically he was Iron Man ^^) Later on I played Baldurs Gate, where one of my party members was a recruitable character called "Xan", a highly intelligent but utterly pessimistic and dr
  9. I disagree that the solution to pvp attraction is "obviously and simply" more rewards, because if that would be the case, devs would have amped it up already (and gladly i guess). The main issue is, that pvp for many players is stressful, especially 1v1 because it puts you on the spot. Nobody to blame (except balance :>, though devs doing a great job of improving it) and your opponent preys on your errors unlike the AI in PvE. As I read though, there are PvP-Modes in development which are more like Arcade (like Deathmatch Arena) and therefore less stressful. I think that is a step in t
  10. Balance Patch is almost there, so I am almost about to participate Looking forward to it anyways. Hype Hype!
  11. Yay! Looking forward to Killbuster's games
  12. I like the idea of more diversity within the free pvp decks. Especially 2v2 decks could be gateway for new pvp players, as it is considered to be less stressful than 1v1, like in most other rts-games (Starcraft is a good example for this). Additionally, each deck could come with a small description (Interface adjustment @MarcoMaar) what its main dynamics are, to guide player choice; as there is relatively few information available about 2v2 matchups and card-combos. Furthermore I support the idea of "themed" decks, like the suggested rallying banner Fire/Frost or a Soul Splicer Sha
  13. Congratz to the winners and thanks to the Devs for preparing the Testserver accordingly! Though I was really sad, that the only Fire/Frost-Matches from Master Killbuster did not gain traction :<
×
×
  • 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