Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'locked'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Skylords Reborn
    • Announcements
    • Updates
    • Events and Tournaments
    • Contribute to the project
  • Support
    • Technical Support
    • Report A Bug
    • Ban Appeals
  • Community
    • Suggestions
    • General Talk
    • Media
    • Off-Topic
    • Development
  • Gameplay
    • Cards
    • New Player Help and Guides
    • Deck Building and Colour Strategies
    • PvE
    • PvP
    • Maps
    • Campaign Maps
  • Recruitment
    • Art
    • Game Design
    • Map Making
    • Community
    • Development

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start











Website URL




Found 1 result

  1. Since two other threads have begun to get a bit derailed due to this suggestion, I thought I'd consolidate the proposal here, give pros and cons (and a poll) and discuss whether this should actually happen or not. For those of you interested in the origins of this conversation, read the threads "Starting Cards" and "Removing Upgrade System from PvP" (and I won't tell you where it happens, because those threads have some important conversations in them otherwise). A brief summary of the problem (for arguments regarding the problem see those threads): 1. PvP is not viable with the normal F2P starter cards (don't even have t1 units for shadow and fire, for instance) 2. PvP is not viable without upgrades 3. For players primarily interested in PvP (such as old BF players, or players coming from other competitive RTS games like Starcraft), an inability to acquire cards and/or upgrades in a TIMELY MANNER will cause them to stop playing BattleForge before they ever get the "real" experience, i. e. playing lvl 120 decks with all the right cards. (4). Simply giving all players good cards and upgrades would destroy vital, non-PvP aspects of BattleForge. Now, on to my proposal: Each player gets a free, random, temporary, LOCKED, COMPOSED, fully upgraded deck every two weeks. After two weeks, another random one is given out. These decks will have the following properties: COMPOSED for PvP. Decks will be modeled after top players. They will be fully, 100% competitive. I may not like the faction I have during a particular cycle, but the best player in the world at that faction would have no complaints. This may encourage me to try new decks. Since the decks are made for PvP, they will not have t4 (except, possibly, in certain decks if top players call for it). These decks will be near useless for PvE, although of course there's nothing to stop someone from using them anywhere. Locked. Cards may not be added or removed from this deck. If I want to change cards so that F1 hotkeys to scavenger instead of eruption, too bad. I can't use these cards in any other deck, and I can't add any cards to this deck. They are not modifiable at all. Random cyclic. They will cycle out (like a tome deck) every two weeks (or other determined time). Each player gets one deck, and the odds of getting all factions are equal. This encourages player to try new decks, and possibly broaden the metagame. Fully upgraded. These decks will be lvl 120. A player using one of these decks can have no complaints about losing except that he's worse than his opponent (or possibly has a bad matchup). This will allow players to immediately have fully competitive access to PvP, without affecting the market (if you want to fine-tune your deck, or be able to reliably play it, you'll need to buy and upgrade the cards yourself. In the meantime, you're exposed to a wide variety of decks, so you can see which one suits your playstyle and get a feel for how things work at U3). Possible Cons: If the decks are stale (for instance, if the composed fire-nature deck always contains mauler and I know this) an artificial metagame might develop. In that example, if I think the composed deck will mean a greater than "natural" number of maulers for me to fight, statistically, I might arrange my own deck so that it doesn't have mountaineer/ashbone, but might have Lost Reaver/Tremor instead. This con might actually be a "pro" though, if we can affect the metagame to make "lame" strategies less viable. Some players might multiaccount if they don't have access to the deck they want. This would require a lot of multiaccounting though, and I don't think it will really be a problem compared to other reasons to multiaccount. Variations All players get access to all (10?) locked, composed decks. This might be dangerous, because it may remove the need for PvP players to participate in the market at all Locked, composed decks are rentable (still 2 weeks) for a comparable price to a booster. Thus buying your own cards is a more permanent solution, but you can have good access to a faction "on demand" if you want it. Individual cards within factions are slightly randomized each time. There would still be an equal chance to get each faction, but--say within a fire-nature deck--variations exist. One might start nature, while the others start fire. Some might have sunderer, some might have mauler instead. One might have earthshaker. One might have no t3 at all. Etc. These variations of course would be subject to some "board of top PvP players" and the reason for variance would simply be so that a player doesn't know what EXACT cards he'll be facing, if he suspects he's facing a composed deck. What do you think? Should this be done? Should it be done in a different way? Comment below! (and vote!)
  • 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