Jump to content

Cheap PvP bandit deck ^^


Recommended Posts

Hello People im got a cheap pvp deck i dont know what the price gonna be but this is my cheap deck http://bfcards.info/search.php?i=deck&id=10031006100810241047110140334048400340114034101310271018102650401015503640195053 Streetking got also a cheap pvp deck on his YouTube channel ^^

Edited by SweetPotato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello People im got a cheap pvp deck i dont know what the price gonna be but this is my cheap deck http://bfcards.info/search.php?i=deck&id=10031006100810241047110140334048400340114034101310271018102650401015503640195053 Streetking got also a cheap pvp deck on his YouTube channel ^^

It does indeed have some cards I wouldn't expect. I guess you don't have many other choices when you really want to make a cheap cheap bandits deck. Interesting you didn't put sandstorm in there. I don't remember how much it was worth, but I believe it was a decent card in PvP. @LagOps can correct me on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's the best of what I could make of it ^^

Well, the first problem I see is that you have 3 ranged t3 L units. And none of them are particularly good. Ashbone, cultist master, giant slayer, soulhunter, and sandstorm are all amazing t3 cards. Shadow insect is pretty terrible, and the gunner and magma hurler aren't much better. I think soulhunter, sandstorm, and gunner would probably be the best cards for the price. Ashbone to replace gunner would be ideal also and isn't so expensive (altough it is a bit more than the others).

In t2, I'm not sure if fire stalker is the way to go. Rageclaws with unholy power are much stronger. Wrecker and scorched earth also aren't that good without sundy. I'd suggest trading 2 of wrecker, scorched, fire stalker, windhunter for rageclaws and fire drake. Fire drake I think is better than windhunter, but this deck needs L counters because there is no gladiatrix. So maybe it would be good to keep both fire stalker and windhunter.... Actually nvm, you also need the windhunter for its disenchant. So keep both fliers. I might also suggest makeshift tower because you have no mine/mortar/firesworn, so dealing the s unit spam in t1 will be difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the first problem I see is that you have 3 ranged t3 L units. And none of them are particularly good. Ashbone, cultist master, giant slayer, soulhunter, and sandstorm are all amazing t3 cards. Shadow insect is pretty terrible, and the gunner and magma hurler aren't much better. I think soulhunter, sandstorm, and gunner would probably be the best cards for the price. Ashbone to replace gunner would be ideal also and isn't so expensive (altough it is a bit more than the others).

In t2, I'm not sure if fire stalker is the way to go. Rageclaws with unholy power are much stronger. Wrecker and scorched earth also aren't that good without sundy. I'd suggest trading 2 of wrecker, scorched, fire stalker, windhunter for rageclaws and fire drake. Fire drake I think is better than windhunter, but this deck needs L counters because there is no gladiatrix. So maybe it would be good to keep both fire stalker and windhunter.... Actually nvm, you also need the windhunter for its disenchant. So keep both fliers. I might also suggest makeshift tower because you have no mine/mortar/firesworn, so dealing the s unit spam in t1 will be difficult.

Eirias It is temporary ^^ and im not a Bandit pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For T3 Bandit Gunner is actually a good choice as siege unit. However, I'd get Bandit Lancer instead of Shadow Insect as a T3 L counter.

Lancers actually have excellent stats for their low power cost and their branding ability can make a lot of T2 units surpsiringly useful in T3 (like shadow Phoenix).

I'd also advice Giant Slayers, but since you want a low-budget deck, Mutating Frenzy sounds like a good anti-XL choice as well.

Otherwise, I'd drop Nasty Surprise. Bandits dont have much health to make it a good card. Imo, a must have is Warrior's Death. It's a common spell that makes your unit basically unkillable for 20 seconds. Use it on cards which are close to die or on units that die anyway, like Nightcrawler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For T3 Bandit Gunner is actually a good choice as siege unit. However, I'd get Bandit Lancer instead of Shadow Insect as a T3 L counter.

Lancers actually have excellent stats for their low power cost and their branding ability can make a lot of T2 units surpsiringly useful in T3 (like shadow Phoenix).

I'd also advice Giant Slayers, but since you want a low-budget deck, Mutating Frenzy sounds like a good anti-XL choice as well.

Otherwise, I'd drop Nasty Surprise. Bandits dont have much health to make it a good card. Imo, a must have is Warrior's Death. It's a common spell that makes your unit basically unkillable for 20 seconds. Use it on cards which are close to die or on units that die anyway, like Nightcrawler.

Yeah Nice idea Bro :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the t3 i have played in bandits consisted out of bandit lancers, gunner and giant slayers.

i cannot stress how important lancers are in t3. they are cheap, deal lots of damage and disable so many actives that would wreck any bandit deck (tremor, juggernaut (a bit tricky to avoid knockback but possible)). i just don't see ANY alternative to this card to be honest, maybe cultist master but then you would not have slayers. after i started playing them (as soon as they got buffed into a usable unit) i came to realise how essential they are to the bandits t3.

bandits may have a strong t3 (lots of good cards here), but they still lack the cc and thus cards which have high dps and cc are most welcome. lancers and slayers give you the ability to intercept and totally wreck siege units before the enemy gets any use out of them. i complemetend this deck with bandit gunner, mainly due to lost souls popularity (1 gunner + 1 bandit lancer totally destroys silverwind lancers in offense. adding a phoenix for basenuking in t3 is legit as well if it hits a cluster and/or revives). an alternative would be ashbone pyro, but there the damage spits up at clusters too heavyly and i didn't have so much sucess with it compared to the gunner. also gunner brings more utility to the table and can surprise frost players with the ability to penetrate glacier shell and the massive siege damage.

Soulhunter is also a very good card, but i rarely get the energy to use it because i really don't want to play the waiting game in t3. it is just too telegraphed and outplayable in higher elos. it wrecks in lower elos tho.

Sandstorm is kind of a mixed bag. very costly and has litle counterplay. The main issue i have with it that it doesn't teach you how to play the game, if the enemy t3 orb (or worse the t1/t2 orb) drops, they often are utterly defenseless. In higher elo you often get counterrushed as long as the orb still stands. with 230 energy (+a unit to send to the enemy base to cast it) energy down, this usually means that your base gets outright destroyed if you don't manage to somehow defend with aoc (if any sort of multi base attack is possible, this will not work). You just use 230 energy and don't have a unit standing afterwards. if you were to play soulhunter, you would at least have something to keep the enemy base pressured so he doesn't destroy your base instantly. relying on sandstorm is also very telegraphed (if you see that lonely lancer you know what is comming). in short: sandstorm is a risky noobstomper which is inferior to soulhunter in most situations. it still needs less skill than actually doing a proper offense and might net you wins vs. better players if you can surprise them. i highly reccomend to "git gud" instead of relying on this card.

I also advise against nasty surprise. your units are too low hp and you have no cc or well... anything to help you prep a good nasty. in bandits you want to have instant damage, lavafield is your bread and butter here. it cannot be cc'ed (a lone nc running off usually gets rooted by nature right away etc. etc.) and against nature it sometimes provokes panic heals which are too late/not worth it.

Warrior's death... oh boy the most toxic bandits card ever. who ever thought this card would be a good idea???

first of all: bandits have a good enough offense just with the basic cards you would play anyways. chosing purely offensive cards is very risky and will create holes in your defense. even if it is as devestating as it is, i would not play it just because it does not fill a role that needs filling in a bandits deck.

This card has only frost protects as a counterplay and in combination with rallying banner and/or nightcrawler, this is just utterly ridiciuolus. a frenzy warriors nc+assasins kills a well vs. anything that is not frost and can hardly be avoided. as soon as your well drops into the 1500 hp range it can be deleted by this very cheap combo. it is as close to a t2 curse well as you can get. in 2v2 it is even more broken since you won't be lacking defense if paried with a frost splash. this card needs a rework. it has no counterplay and is only worth it when beeing abused. it is hardly usefull in defense (what prevents your enemy from running away and letting the unit die?) and adds nothing to the bandits playstyle. it simplyfys it to a point where the whole complexity and strategy (every matchups requires a vastly different tactical approach and deep faction knowledge pays off. you can find your own style within the faction and try out new things) is nullified as long as you don't face anything with frost. usually warriror's death players are unable to play bandits propery (no offense, not beeing able to execute a faction is nothing to be ashamed about) and then lose to frost splashes anyways.

 

As a general rule of thumb, a deck should be able to include the tools to deal with all factions (as far as the faction allows it) while having the tools to overcome the enemy defense in most matchups. if you play cards which are only good in offense in your deck (especially bandits), the enemy will figure out a way to bypass your defense. If you have the tools to defend yourself, it is down to your skill as a player to pull it off. i rather have a fighting chance in defense than an advantage in offense. this way i can win by skill and don't have to face defeat against certain cards. playing strong offensive cards at the cost of defense only works well in lower elo. if you really want to play a faction at a high level of skill, avoid cheesy strategys and think about counters and deck synergy first. after you have those things covered you can start trying out offensive combos that fit the rest of the deck. you should have at max 3 slots for this.

in my own deck my mainly offensive cards were limited to phoenix and sunderer because those helped me the most in the matchups the rest of the deck struggeled with (pure shadow, shadow t1 rushing t2 and forst splashes). When picking offensive options you really have to prioretize matchups where you are at the disadvantage. I much prefer an optional card that helps me in one weak matchup over a card that helps me in 2, maybe even 3 strong matchups. If you are just skilled enough, you should be able to win almost every strong matchup without that extra card. There is just no point in having that card in the deck if you mostly win the matchup where it is most usefull anyways.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to know why people say that Warrior's death is that strong. I mean in theory this cards just sounds like garbage and seems to work only against shadow/nature & pure nature. Every other deck has a decent counter:

Frostsplashes have kobold trick/glacier and the damage steroid is not power efficient so its unlikely to get something done if you are not ahead anyways.

Fire splashes can use disenchant, which works as a decent counter - at least the purple one is efficient (especially against a buff reliant deck).

Pure shadow has knight of chaos with his ability (would recommend the blue one).

The pure nature player tends to take not many wellcluster & often relies on cc to defend efficient, so warrior's death seems to work against that pretty damn well, but otherwise I dont see reason to pick up this card.

That said I didn't play the card myself & don't have alot of experience with it. I'm just curious since many players seemed to think of warrior's death as a valueable card. Maybe there is some interaction I don't know or sth. like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lancers actually have excellent stats for their low power cost and their branding ability can make a lot of T2 units surpsiringly useful in T3 (like shadow Phoenix).

I don't get it. How do lancers and phoenix work together ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I much prefer an optional card that helps me in one weak matchup over a card that helps me in 2, maybe even 3 strong matchups. If you are just skilled enough, you should be able to win almost every strong matchup without that extra card. There is just no point in having that card in the deck if you mostly win the matchup where it is most usefull anyways.

 

I agree with this statement so much. Remind me to quote this somewhere in my guide.

@LagOps, how would you characterize the bandit deck as far as the metagame goes? Like pure fire is about aggression, stonekin is patient strangulation, pure frost is about the one-hit-wonder war eagle, etc. I'm trying to fill out the metagames for the different factions in my guide, but I don't know much about bandits. If it's alright, I'll PM you what I have?

Supposing you have 100-200 bfp to spend on a bandits deck, what would you take? And would it be playable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this statement so much. Remind me to quote this somewhere in my guide.

@LagOps, how would you characterize the bandit deck as far as the metagame goes? Like pure fire is about aggression, stonekin is patient strangulation, pure frost is about the one-hit-wonder war eagle, etc. I'm trying to fill out the metagames for the different factions in my guide, but I don't know much about bandits. If it's alright, I'll PM you what I have?

Supposing you have 100-200 bfp to spend on a bandits deck, what would you take? And would it be playable?

Characterizing Bandits is not as easy as it seems. While it has a good offense and lacking defense, i tend to play a very different style depending on the matchup.

Against pure shadow for instance, i immediately rush with buffed sunderer (in this deck mainly for this single matchup) as soon as the match goes t2 to prevent a harvester camp in most cases. This playstlye is limited to this single matchup and i don't use it in any other case.

Against pure frost i try to make multi base attacks with windhunters (i do not even try to kill a well, just harassment to force the enemy to make sykelfs and use cc/protects). If there are enough skyelfs, the enemy won't be able to rush me if i go for an early t3 as soon as i come out with more energy in the pool. This playstyle is also limited to this matchup, but radically different to the first one.

Against stonekin i take defensive wells in such a way i cannot be attacked at multiple bases and draw out the match. In most stonekin matchups stonekin wants to get a big army and permaheal+cc (they usually don't go agressive right away and are fine with just taking wells). But against bandits this will backfire hillariously as aoc+lava field wrecks the slow stonekin units. If you manage to take it to t3, your t3 will be vastly superior to stonekin t2 (as long as you are not playing vs. stonekin with t3 and this brannoc nonsense) and the game should be an easy win at this point. If i get burrower rushed as soon as i go t3 (happens most of the time. the enemy will also have tons of void after failing an offense), bandit gunners will stop the burrowers from running around. this forces a cc every time and a single gunner stalls the burrowers at your well long enough to catch up with previously spawned units. If the enemy stonekin player goes agressive in t2 and knows what you are trying to do, your chances of winning are slim (the aura tactic is not going to work here).

 

So in just 3 matchups, i play 3 different styles (extremely agressive, multi base harassment and defense until t3). Also the choice of units and spells is entirely different in every matchup. It is hard to break this down easyly. "Bandits is mostly rather agressive, but there is a lot of varitey in the playstyle. There is no one hit wonder in the deck and you have to adapt to win" might be fitting.

 

A deck in the 100-200 bfp range is hardly playable (i doubt any faction is playable with this amount of bf). For bandits to work, Aura of corruption and giant slayers are essential and you won't be getting them that cheap. Overall bandits is one of the cheapest decks to be effective, but still you will at least have to pay about 1k bfp for important cards with charges. However, i doubt this will be much of an issue in the new Battleforge. At the point in time where you have at least some basic skills to attempt pvp, 1k bfp should not be much at all. I highly advise against playing bandits as your first deck. It requires a lot of faction knowledge if you don't want to get destroyed all the time. Small misplays snowball the game out of control quickly. If you want to play a cheap, more forgiving deck you might want to try out fire-nature. The transition from fire-nature to bandits should not be too hard later on and you should have a much easyer time gettting into the deck. 

 

ps: ofc you can mail me what you have, but i am hardly an expert on decks besides bandits. i do understand the interactions of those decks with bandits very well, but the rest might be a bit shaky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Characterizing Bandits is not as easy as it seems. While it has a good offense and lacking defense, i tend to play a very different style depending on the matchup.

Against pure shadow for instance, i immediately rush with buffed sunderer (in this deck mainly for this single matchup) as soon as the match goes t2 to prevent a harvester camp in most cases. This playstlye is limited to this single matchup and i don't use it in any other case.

Against pure frost i try to make multi base attacks with windhunters (i do not even try to kill a well, just harassment to force the enemy to make sykelfs and use cc/protects). If there are enough skyelfs, the enemy won't be able to rush me if i go for an early t3 as soon as i come out with more energy in the pool. This playstyle is also limited to this matchup, but radically different to the first one.

Against stonekin i take defensive wells in such a way i cannot be attacked at multiple bases and draw out the match. In most stonekin matchups stonekin wants to get a big army and permaheal+cc (they usually don't go agressive right away and are fine with just taking wells). But against bandits this will backfire hillariously as aoc+lava field wrecks the slow stonekin units. If you manage to take it to t3, your t3 will be vastly superior to stonekin t2 (as long as you are not playing vs. stonekin with t3 and this brannoc nonsense) and the game should be an easy win at this point. If i get burrower rushed as soon as i go t3 (happens most of the time. the enemy will also have tons of void after failing an offense), bandit gunners will stop the burrowers from running around. this forces a cc every time and a single gunner stalls the burrowers at your well long enough to catch up with previously spawned units. If the enemy stonekin player goes agressive in t2 and knows what you are trying to do, your chances of winning are slim (the aura tactic is not going to work here).

 

So in just 3 matchups, i play 3 different styles (extremely agressive, multi base harassment and defense until t3). Also the choice of units and spells is entirely different in every matchup. It is hard to break this down easyly. "Bandits is mostly rather agressive, but there is a lot of varitey in the playstyle. There is no one hit wonder in the deck and you have to adapt to win" might be fitting.

 

A deck in the 100-200 bfp range is hardly playable (i doubt any faction is playable with this amount of bf). For bandits to work, Aura of corruption and giant slayers are essential and you won't be getting them that cheap. Overall bandits is one of the cheapest decks to be effective, but still you will at least have to pay about 1k bfp for important cards with charges. However, i doubt this will be much of an issue in the new Battleforge. At the point in time where you have at least some basic skills to attempt pvp, 1k bfp should not be much at all. I highly advise against playing bandits as your first deck. It requires a lot of faction knowledge if you don't want to get destroyed all the time. Small misplays snowball the game out of control quickly. If you want to play a cheap, more forgiving deck you might want to try out fire-nature. The transition from fire-nature to bandits should not be too hard later on and you should have a much easyer time gettting into the deck. 

 

ps: ofc you can mail me what you have, but i am hardly an expert on decks besides bandits. i do understand the interactions of those decks with bandits very well, but the rest might be a bit shaky.

Hey LagOps which t1 is better for bandit Shadow or fire ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey LagOps which t1 is better for bandit Shadow or fire ??

fire is by far the superior choice in my opinion. I actually recently answered this question in detail, but the response was in german. I will quicky answer with the main reasons to play shadow:

-In general bandits need damage imediately if they are defending and they don't have any high hp units for nasty surprise. Eruption is superior to nasty surprise in a bandits deck.

-Nightguard is inferior to firesworn in bandits, because you do not have any cc or defense to prepare a swap. In addition to this, Nightguard is very suceptible to cc and thus highly unreliable in a bandits deck. Other decks can play around this with cc and/or protects.

-In a bandits deck you will need sunderer if you want to stand a chance against pure shadow t2. no matter what else is in your deck, without a sunderer you will have a very hard time in this matchup.

-Aditionally, motivate is not as strong in a bandits t2 as one might think as it just makes the deck even more suceptible to cc. it can backfire really heavyly if used poorly. spamming one type of unit in a bandits deck just doesn't work very well as there is no spammable unit which isn't highly suceptible to cc. you have to play a bunch of different units to play around enemy cc. motivate might be worth it in the future in case bandit sniper becomes a playable card.

 

to make things short: shadow cards are unreliable and often telegraphed. other decks can play around this, bandits cant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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