Jump to content

Daily Card Discussion


Loptous

Recommended Posts

I played mainly Stonekin back in the day with a bit of pure Nature and pure Frost from time to time. This card never made it into my deck for various reasons (some of them already mentioned).
When I played Stonekin I usually started :natureorb::frostorb::natureorb: with a differing T4 for different decks, simply because there are so many amazing cards that require 2 :natureorb: orbs. Most importantly SoM and WoG in my case. What I expect from an expensive XL unit is either a great basenuke, a DPS monster, a massive tank or something for utility/mobility (flying units for example). This card doesn't deliver any of that but is rather an all-rounder. It got decent dmg, decent effective health and a decent ability but doesn't excel at any of that and lacks damage vs buildings for it's cost. IMO it's too expensive to take as an L counter when Silverwind Lancers or Drones can take care of almost any L unit for less than half the price. The waveclear is good when using the ability (green) but then I could just as well take Razorleaf which doesn't require me to sacrifice a unit (or critter) and gets even stronger when bringing more onto the battlefield (as well as that godly range). The red ability isn't bad for a bit of burst damage. But then again I only really need burst damage to nuke bases and Core Dredge, Deepcoil Worm, Brannoc or Tremor do a much better job at that.
So all in all it is a card without any real specialty (aside from being an overkill L-counter) in a game of rock-paper-scissors.
Also I don't like the necessary micro to deal with the critters and to keep them alive long enough to be sacrificed.

My suggestion would be to change the dmg buff of the red affinity to one that either affects all allied units (making it a dmg support) and buff the damage from the green affinity (making it great for waveclear). In turn the power cost or attack dmg could be adjusted accordingly.

Another possibility is to add a weakened Siege ability (~30%) making it decent in all roles and thus making it a viable option to save on deck slots.

Of course it's always possible to simply buff the stats or decrease the power cost a bit. But that's just boring and doesn't make the card more fun to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like this card and used to play it in a stonekin deck even though it is not the best choice I enjoyed it :)

Since I was never an expert for PvE I'm only talking about PvP.

It is actually usable in PvP

- ranged unit + root

- air counter (rageflame can't attack air units and stone warrior is not handy vs air)

- L Counter is pretty useful in T3

- good tank and hard to kill with support (mostly to distract opponent and not to nuke bases)

- good cc effect knocks back opponents + root

But the main problem in a stonekin deck is the heavy amount of useful cards and theres simply no room for a card thats "ok" to have even though it is not that bad. 

I made a list with all absolute core cards for stonekin with frost T1 and all possible cards you could actually play in high ranked games.

T1

1 Master Archers

2 Frost Mage

3 Ice Guardian

4 Ice Barrier

5 Home Soil

6 Glacier shell

(Lightblade)

(Frostbite)

(Glyphe of Frost)

(Frostbite)

(Wintertide)

T2

7 Surge of Light

8 Root

9 Oink

10 Aggressor 

11 Stone shards

12 Kobold Trick

(Burrower)

(Hurricane) 

(Coldsnap)

(Crystal Fiend)

(Gravity Surge)

(Lyrish Knight)

(Razorshard)

(Skyelf Templer) 

(Spirit Hunter)

(Stone Tempest)

(Canon Tower)

(Storm singer)

Those are 12 core cards and 16!!! Possible cards which are all great playable cards and also used in high ranked games. And the T3 is endless. I wouldn't actually consider deepfang a bad card in a T3 matchup but stonekin is a special case which consists the lagest number of really good optional cards in every Tier. So the choice of deepfang one of the last choices for a T3. And since you all correctly said that stonekin wants a basenuker for T3 it's no real option and a buff shouldn't change deepfang to a basenuker. I would buff his support crystals to heal more hp or an ability to summon the crystal fiends again for maybe (100e u3). Since we don't want to create a must have unit for stonekin players but more like a nice to have unit I think that should be fine.

Btw stonekin has many possible basenukers in T3 like grigori + nasty or Mo maybe + disentchant (green). Because of stonekins extremly strong T2 defense it can easily counter an early T3. So expensive basenukers don't matter really matter and you only need basenukers since you have all the counters for T3 in your T2 (if you play a big T2)

Please correct me if I missed anything.

And sorry for the new bible text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Avatar-of-Frost.jpg.c1a57510205864bc78c0

So over the past couple of weeks/months people have been requesting this card, a lot...

The reason I hesitated for this card, is that it's not too interesting to talk about, sure I love the card and all, but might as well get it out of the way.

Avatar of Frost, ah yes people requesting this card on trades and auctions everywhere because of it's frozen armor.

The noobie me, upon seeing this thought the card was weak as hell because of the 500 hp marker.

Of course, this card is strong in some respects, but has a lot of counters, I mean a lot. To name a few: Oink, Fallen Skyelf, Revenge, and yes... Global Warming 

Might I add, that this is a unique concept though and it can be useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again I am only talking about PvP.

I'm sorry but it annoys me a bit that people always name a lot of possible counters for Avatar of frost like spirit hunters (purple), fallen skyelf, global warming ... revenge?! Some of these cards might be playable but they are no core cards and way to specific in one matchup that it wouldn't be smart to put them in your deck. (In a serious deck)

The only real counters are cards like life weaving or treespirit (not sure if disentchant (purple) can erase the shield) because they are actual strong cards you want in a deck. 

Same problem here like before it is a good card on first view but going Pure Frost for Avatar of Frost when you can have lost grigori+nasty, soulshatter, lost vigil, ashbone, stonewarrior+timeless one or simply better xl basenukers with Mo or even Brannoc? Nope don't think so. Since pure frost doesn't have the best support for his T3 15sec is more than enough for every deck with a xl counter in T3 or simply every shadowsplash to get rid of him.

But in 2v2 matches theres definatly a place for him. Lifeweaving+cc support is really a strong basenuker. 

So I come to the conclusion that it doesn't need a buff just because splashing to shadow or nature is stronger since you want a basenuker and allready have extremely good L-counters with silverwind+timeless one. The people who want to play Pure Frost are still able to play him without wrecking their chances of winning.

The whole problem which all this "weak" T3 cards have is just because frost/shadow/x has a extremly efficient and simple T3, very strong in offense and defense but thats no reason to buff every T3 card due to that. But thats an another discussion :)

 

Edited by YaBro0
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, YaBro0 said:

I'm sorry but it annoys me a bit that people always name a lot of possible counters for Avatar of frost like spirit hunters (purple), fallen skyelf, global warming ... revenge?! Some of these cards might be playable but they are no core cards and way to specific in one matchup that it wouldn't be smart to put them in your deck. (In a serious deck)

The only real counters are cards like life weaving or treespirit (not sure if disentchant (purple) can erase the shield) because they are actual strong cards you want in a deck.

I agree. Though I'm not exactly a PvP expert I am an avid watcher of PvP replays and I have never seen Spirit Hunters (purple), Fallen Skyelf or other specific counters used against AoF. He isn't even played that often (that might have something to do with it :kappa:). The best commonly played counter is probably Juggernaut. Simply rips an Avatar apart, while being cheaper and a better basenuke. It's probably not even efficient to start a CC battle because of Disenchant. Life Weaving is actually another counter. Don't know if Bandit Stalker is commonly played in PvP but that would be another counter.

So yeah there is counterplay but vs Nature, Frost and Fire-splashes without Shadow he should be a good card. Of course there's a ton of people playing Shadow, so that's that.

4 hours ago, YaBro0 said:

But in 2v2 matches theres definatly a place for him. Lifeweaving+cc support is really a strong basenuker.

Ehm...sorry to shatter your illusion but damage reduction isn't applied to shields. -.- Otherwise you'd have a gamebreaking combo with Ward of the North. ;)

 

I think AoF is great the way he currently is. He is quite good in PvE if upgraded and usable in PvP. There are no special abilities that are in need of tweaking here (don't know about fine-tuning though) and the stats are good. He is one of the most ideal cards IMO. Simple and good but neither OP nor UP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say hi to Pure Fire decks with cards like Disenchant and Global Warming or any kind of such stuff.

Still really hard to beat him due to that Ava recast shield every 15 sec, so you may have more than 2150+500 dmg in less then 15 sec. Even Ava has the L-type attack, it give a big deal in T3 vs T2-3 fights, but it yields up to other offensive XL units like jugg, grigori, corsair, dopeworm or satanael (does it playable like offensive?). Sum to that, that Ice is never (in 80%) using an offensive tactics, so to say the Ava with L-type attack is needed to play when you have advantage in orbs which you will not lost next ~1,5 min to definitely win the game. Add here that Ava a :frostorb::frostorb::frostorb: card, so you must play pure frost deck and have no combo cards or supportive cards for your Ava. Now ask yourself "Do you want play such stile?".

That is all about 1vs1. In 2vs2 somethings are different and hard to say what deck (of,course not a pure frost) will be better to help you with your Ava.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Kaliber84 said:

Don't know if Bandit Stalker is commonly played in PvP but that would be another counter.

Sorry for nit picking, but Bandit Stalker is an overpriced Bandit T2 unit which has no counter and does add nothing to a deck that has slot problems in general. Even if it would be played, it's the green ability because 100% more damage against beasts at least gives it a somewhat decent DPS (but it still gets countered by NC and once it is finished killing beasts, it becomes useless). On the other hand, the purple ability basically does no damage worth mentioning to begin with and even then only pierces with 50% of its damage.

It is a terribly designed unit and I felt obligated to throw that in.

 

Edited by Mental Omega
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Kaliber84 said:

The best commonly played counter is probably Juggernaut. Simply rips an Avatar apart, while being cheaper and a better basnuke.

I guess if you are able to go T3 with Pure Fire vs Pure Frost that is fine :)

45 minutes ago, Kaliber84 said:

Ehm...sorry to shatter your illusion but damage reduction isn't applied to shields. -.- Otherwise you'd have a gamebreaking combo with Ward of the North.

Didn't know that but you're right, that would be tooooo sweet.

 

40 minutes ago, Chimaka(Same) said:

Still really hard to beat him due to that Ava recast shield every 15 sec, so you may have more than 2150+500 dmg in less then 15 sec. 

That's actually not hard to pull off in a T3 everyone with an xl counter can kill AoF easily for less or same costs. Keep in mind that for the same costs you get 2 deep ones who make over 6000 dmg on xl units in 20 sec. Same goes to nearly every xl counter such as 4 lyrish knights. It's more like a mind think that the shield recovers but 15 sec can be a long time in BF.

 

12 minutes ago, Mental Omega said:

Sorry for nit picking, but Bandit Stalker is an overpriced Bandit T2 unit which has no counter and does add nothing to a deck that has slot problems in general. Even if it would be played, it's the green ability because 100% more damage against beasts at least gives it a somewhat decent DPS (but it still gets countered by NC and once it is finished killing beasts, it becomes useless). On the other hand, the purple ability basically does no damage worth mentioning to begin with and even then only pierces with 50% of its damage.

It is a terribly designed unit and I felt obligated to throw that in.

 

100% right. If it would cost like 50e it would be a must have and add some defense to the weakest defense in the game. Would love to talk about some of those cards cause this cards change could really make a diffrence in the game without going OP cause you need to pick bandits for it which is a heavy disandvantage in many many matchups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warlock_frost.jpg.05f956b4f347d03c31cec0Warlock_fire.jpg.0498949949214eef5eb0d9b

Ugh this card man, but we might as well talk about it now rather then later.

The damage is pitiful for it's auto attacks and the Witchcraft ability is not too great either, unless it can be stacked. 

Just not recommended for any deck imo, because the card is 2 orbed? Da hell?

If it was one orbed, the card would be okish but two orbs bro, I think not.

Also when I saw Warlock, I would of expected shadow card, just because the name would fit it better.

Edited by Loptous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never saw this being played. Neither in PvE nor rPvE nor PvP. Dmg buff looks good on paper but pure Fire destroyed even the slightest intention to play him.

Orb requirements should be decreased to :fireorb::neutralorb: making it available for splash decks and the power cost should be reduced (to ~50). The abilities/attacks need rework too IMO.
The dmg buff is a nice thing in theory but as LagOps mentioned it could quickly break the game in a fire deck if the card is buffed in any way. My suggestion would be to change the buffs so that they only apply to either melee or ranged units and get increased in return. That would then be something like "Melee units deal 40% more damage for 5 seconds" and "Ranged units can't get knocked back and receive 25% less damage for 5 seconds). He should lose his normal attack then though.
But that would change the card into either a defensive support or a single unit Home Soil (that keeps on binding power).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • An interesting question about this card is Why it requires :fireorb::fireorb:?
  • Still never saw it had played either in PvE, either in PvP.
  • Yes, it buffs the attack, but... does it so necessary to spend 65 En. and having 2 fire orbs to play this card? Right answer is - No.
  • I would be right if I compare Warlock with Shaman (not due to their textures) like supports, so the shaman heals because he is Nature's support (I'm kidding?)  - he needs 1(!) orb and 70 En, but the Warlock buffs attack - he needs 65 En and 2 fire orbs? You serious? Heal < Attack? REALLY. YOU. THINK. SO? Huh? I'm done EA.

 

:kaboom:

Edited by Chimaka( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think the card is kinda useless in a fire deck. you already got that much damage that you generally do not need this card. I am not that sure what to make out of this unit. I dont think that buffing units in attack is a very fire-ish thing to do. I would much rather see some kind of burn damage on its auto attack. Does that make the card viable? probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that I am glad that this unit is useless. If it would be a valid card, pure fire receives a massive buff in one way or another. And really, I can only see this unit making already very strong units like Enforcer or Firedancer even stronger.

The card does too little at a too high price. There is no reason why I should not summon an Enforcer at -5e cost instead.

I think raising its stats would hurt nobody and this way the unit could at least contribute to a small degree. Also, I don't think this unit should be exclusive to pure Fire in any way.

But I came to think about the card and what if we would increase the duration of the buff considerably? I am thinking about 25 seconds, perhaps even 30 seconds but in return, it can only buff units all 15 seconds. That could apply buffs to key units in some interesting ways and you would need to choose carefully what you want to be stronger. We could also exchange the current buffs with more utility focused abilities as suggested before.

However, to make that work I suggest giving this unit a counter so it can also fight to a certain degree. You probably want to have it in the background, buffing units from safety but in case it fights along some other units it certainly shouldn't be dead weight. I think S-counter would be appropriate. It is not overpowered, due to the low damage it couldn't replace true dedicated S-counters and fire has no splashable S-counter anyway.

Oh, and a fun fact about the card: It actually deals even less damage than stated. Slowly I get the impression that was made purposely by Phenomic as a running gag.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twilight-Creeper_shadow.jpg.4d98f4c383adTwilight-Creeper_fire.jpg.ece51d6b59e532

I don't know who's in charge of the of the allcards.bfreborn.com but, it forgot to mention these effects that come with the card. At first I thought to myself, "Wow this card's affinities are just colors?" So I decided to get a closer look and found these:

Affinity: Infused

If the unit dies it will release infectious parasites into the environment that befall up to 2 hostile units. Infected targets deal 30% less damage for 10 seconds. The parasites may pass over to other available targets within a 15m range and spread the infectious among up to 4 units.

Affinity: Tainted

If the unit dies it will release infectious parasites into the environment that befall up to 2 hostile units. Infected targets take 30% more damage for 10 seconds. The parasites may pass over to other available targets within a 15m range and spread the infection among up to 4 units.

So this card seems ok to me as far as stat lines go, but I think the orb cost is a little high to me. I feel this card could be :fireorb::natureorb: 125 power cost creature with a lower base line, but that's me speaking out loud. Actually, the orb requirements and power costs seem more fitting the more I look at it. 

To tell the truth, I like this card and it's design. Useful abilities by the looks of it since it can spread to multiple targets, opting in for some decent wave clears.

Not sure what affinity would be better though. Anyways good card and has some uses.

Edited by Loptous
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haven't looked at it in detail so I don't know about the upgrades but I think it should get a buff to the abilities by upgrading (dmg reduction or amplification goes from 30% => 40% at U3).
Maybe a little buff to it's base stats. I'd only buff health rather than dmg if the abilities get buffed. If the abilities don't get buffed I'd buff the attack damage so that the ability is more useful.

Maybe a Swift ability would fit if it needs buffing apart from it's base stats and affinities. There aren't many T3 swift units so that would be a nice variation. Though every pure element got a swift unit at T3, none of the hybrid ones have. There's only Razorshard and Bandit Stalker at T2 and only one of those is a useful card as we know. Twilight getting a swift unit at T3 would be good I think but correct me if I'm wrong.

Aside from all that it's a decent card that I wouldn't change too much if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Loptous said:

Twilight-Creeper_shadow.jpg.4d98f4c383adTwilight-Creeper_fire.jpg.ece51d6b59e532

I don't know who's in charge of the of the allcards.bfreborn.com but, it forgot to mention these effects that come with the card. At first I thought to myself, "Wow this card's affinities are just colors?" So I decided to get a closer look and found these:

Affinity: Infused

If the unit dies it will release infectious parasites into the environment that befall up to 2 hostile units. Infected targets deal 30% less damage for 10 seconds. The parasites may pass over to other available targets within a 15m range and spread the infectious among up to 4 units.

Affinity: Tainted

If the unit dies it will release infectious parasites into the environment that befall up to 2 hostile units. Infected targets take 30% more damage for 10 seconds. The parasites may pass over to other available targets within a 15m range and spread the infection among up to 4 units.

So this card seems ok to me as far as stat lines go, but I think the orb cost is a little high to me. I feel this card could be :fireorb::natureorb: 125 power cost creature with a lower base line, but that's me speaking out loud. Actually, the orb requirements and power costs seem more fitting the more I look at it.

To tell the truth, I like this card and it's design. Useful abilities by the looks of it since it can spread to multiple targets, opting in for some decent wave clears.

Not sure what affinity would be better though. Anyways good card and has some uses.

Originally I wanted to make a daily card discussion for this when you were away but the problem is that this unit has a completely wrong description.

Ingame it is an enitrely different unit. I even asked Ladadoos to send me the correct ingame description, you can see it here:

 jgu0av.jpgPlease correct your original message or people will post their opinion on a card that does not exist in the game...



 

Okay, now for my opinion. This is actually one of my favourite units. The few times I played Twilight, it was always part of my T3.

Best comparison is Magma Hurler, as both are L/L cost 100e and have 1500 attack (yes Magma Hurler has 1500 damage, not 1700). However, I think Twilight Creeper is just more fun to use. I admit, I wouldn't take this unit for rpve 10... but neither would I take Magma Hurler (most likely).

The drawback of this card is that it is actually a melee unit while the "Creeper Spit" is only a supporting long range attack which fires automatically. But in return, it also has more health and mass debuff is really good too. If you build 3 of them, they can apply debuffs to a whole camp. Nice!

From a mathematical point of view the red affinity is better, since lowering incoming damage to 70% is better than improving damage by 30% and it is also my affinity of choice. Making basically all enemies deal 30% less damage is huge. Add that to the already good stats and you see why this unit is viable.

However, if you have enough power and bring SoW (which you should) I can totally see the red affinity work if you use it together with Inferno. As the red affinity could improve the damage from max 7200 to 9360. It might be a lot of power, but I am sure you won't have any problems claiming your orbs in pve and rpve 9.

As for rpve10 I'd probably just use Enlightenment and summon an Abomination... or two.

I think this card is in a fine spot and honestly, I would not change anything. It already brings a lot of value for just 100e.

 

Edit: @Kaliber84 you probably want to reconsider what you posted, as there was wrong information about this card. Also, now know the upgrades ;)

 

Edited by Mental Omega
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Loptous I am not sure, but you might have a wrong version of the allcards.bfreborn.com site. If you hit 'reset all' in the top right corner your site will update to the newest version, by deleting your cookies, I thought. But care: all your decks that you might have built are gone then, so you might wanna save them first or something.

Edited by SilenceKiller99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This card was pretty decent tbh. It doesn't need a buff or anything.

The Spit damage was pretty good and i would use this card any time i run Twilight.

Other Cards can work as well( Giant Slayer, Fathom Lord, Deepcoil Worm),  but i do not feel they do the job as well as Twilight Creeper. Generally you want a small t3 with a single unit and some spells that can also be used in later stages of the game. That means you want a t3 unit that is good in everything. Twilight Creeper offers that in the best way. You got decent damage, decent enough HP, Anti Air. Fire Nature has okayish damage spells in t3 with Inferno and Thunderstorm, but its not the greatest thing ever, especially as they are so expensive. 3-4 Twilight Creepers can clear any t3 with a bit of support. It was even in lvl 10's pretty good.

I'd probably always play this card over any other t3 card in fire nature t3 unless i play some weird shit like Giant Slayers in t4 or something similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mental Omega Ok yeah that changes my opinion. The one time I don't review the card ingame. XD
I don't agree with your point of taking the damage reduction one. With Nature you already got heals to keep your units alive and the Fire part of your deck will greatly benefit from the damage amplification. In the end it's simply a question if you look for prolonged fights or burst damage and for many maps and especially for rPvE the latter one is more important.
For everyone who doesn't care about that and who doesn't know that your units will be healthier with the damage reduction ability I'll quickly do the math.

Just think about it this way: For example you own a Twilight Creeper that fights a unit with the same stats (and no abilities) and the buff/debuff of your TC is enabled for the whole fight. We'll ignore the attack type for now as the relative results will be the same.
Either your unit deals 30% more damage.
The damage you deal is a_1=1.3*1500dmg=1950dmg and the damage you take is b_1=1*1500dmg=1500dmg. Both of you have 1500HP.
The time it takes you to kill the enemy is t_1=1500HP/(1950dmg/20s)=15.38s
So the damage you take in that time is d_1=1500dmg*(15.38s/20s)=1153.5dmg
Or your unit receives 30% less damage. The damage you deal is a_2=1*1500dmg=1500dmg and the damage you take is b_2=0.7*1500dmg=1050dmg.
The time it takes you to kill the enemy is t_2=1500HP/(1500dmg/20s)=20s
So the damage you take in that time is d_2=1050dmg*(20s/20s)=1050dmg
You see that with the dmg reduction ability you will take D=1050dmg/1153.5dmg=91% of the damage you'd take with the attack buff ability.
Burst damage still got the advantage if you want to clear camps for example or to take down a building that gets repaired over time, etc. Any advantage for the enemy that gets stronger over time is countered by burst damage.
A prolonged fight also got advantages. If you got power problems you will get back more void power in a prolonged fight and if you got support yourself (Shaman, SoM, Kobold Trick) or are waiting for a card to recharge it buys time that becomes an advantage for you.
This all is only a generalised model though and always needs to be seen in perspective for PvP, PvE and rPvE. You should see burst damage vs prolonged fights more in terms of ideology for a deck than immediate advantages.

Also an update to my earlier post: IMO abilities shouldn't be changed in any way, base stats could be fine tuned, but I only played this card rarely when I played a Fire splash for a change, so I don't know what's needed there. Probably'd need statistics to know what changes shold be made. I still think on paper it doesn't look quite as good as other units as it is comparable to Magma Hurler but lacks the constant long range and knockback. The swift ability could be pretty interesting for the unit if the base stats are balanced accordingly but I wouldn't change anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kaliber84 said:

@Mental Omega Ok yeah that changes my opinion. The one time I don't review the card ingame. XD
I don't agree with your point of taking the damage reduction one. With Nature you already got heals to keep your units alive and the Fire part of your deck will greatly benefit from the damage amplification. In the end it's simply a question if you look for prolonged fights or burst damage and for many maps and especially for rPvE the latter one is more important.
For everyone who doesn't care about that and who doesn't know that your units will be healthier with the damage reduction ability I'll quickly do the math.

First, heal excels even more when you have damage reduction abilities. That is the reason Stonekin units have their received damage cut by 15%. On T4 if you play blue Twilight Pestilence you basically double the efficency of Regrowth. Enemies only do 50% damage, which translates to your unit having twice as much HP. However, since heals are not affected by damage reduction their effectiveness is doubled.

Just think about it this way: For example you own a Twilight Creeper that fights a unit with the same stats (and no abilities) and the buff/debuff of your TC is enabled for the whole fight. We'll ignore the attack type for now as the relative results will be the same.

Either your unit takes 30% less damage. The damage you deal is a_1=1.3*1500dmg=1950dmg and the damage you take is b_1=1*1500dmg=1500dmg. Both of you have 1500HP.
The time it takes you to kill the enemy is t_1=1500HP/(1950dmg/20s)=15.38s
So the damage you take in that time is d_1=1500dmg*(15.38s/20s)=1153.5dmg

I think you are confusing something. If our unit takes 30% less damage, why are you increasing the damage of our own unit!?

Or your unit deals 30% more damage. The damage you deal is a_2=1*1500dmg=1500dmg and the damage you take is b_2=0.7*1500dmg=1050dmg.
The time it takes you to kill the enemy is t_2=1500HP/(1500dmg/20s)=20s
So the damage you take in that time is d_2=1050dmg*(20s/20s)=1050dmg
You see that with the dmg reduction ability you will take D=1050dmg/1153.5dmg=91% of the damage you'd take with the attack buff ability.

Here you say our unit deals 30% more damage but we deal normal damage and receive 70% of the original damage. Really, you must have mixed those two things up.

Burst damage still got the advantage if you want to clear camps for example or to take down a building that gets repaired over time, etc. Any advantage for the enemy that gets stronger over time is countered by burst damage.

I agree, but there is one fatal flaw. Twilight Creepers can only attack one target each, so the debuff on 3 different units is mostly wasted. It works well if there ARE high bursts of damage coming from outside like an Inferno or another high DPS card that is being played. Still, as you can see below. A unit with a 30% less damage debuff is better in a normal straight up fight.

Also, I don't think that the affinity really has a huge impact on the time you need to clear a map. There are far more important factors and we are only talking about a couple of seconds. And if you are playing a nature or frost splash you are more into a macro oriented game to begin with (that is more durability by high HP and healing vs high DPS and damage spells from a more micro oriented game style).

A prolonged fight also got advantages. If you got power problems you will get back more void power in a prolonged fight and if you got support yourself (Shaman, SoM, Kobold Trick) or are waiting for a card to recharge it buys time that becomes an advantage for you.
This all is only a generalised model though and always needs to be seen in perspective for PvP, PvE and rPvE. You should see burst damage vs prolonged fights more in terms of ideology for a deck than immediate advantages.

Also an update to my earlier post: IMO abilities shouldn't be changed in any way, base stats could be fine tuned, but I only played this card rarely when I played a Fire splash for a change, so I don't know what's needed there. Probably'd need statistics to know what changes shold be made. I still think on paper it doesn't look quite as good as other units as it is comparable to Magma Hurler but lacks the constant long range and knockback. The swift ability could be pretty interesting for the unit if the base stats are balanced accordingly but I wouldn't change anything else.

Heal excels even more with damage reduction.

But there is an easier way to show why damage reduction is more efficient.

Normal Twilight Creeper stats: 1500ATK / 1550HP / 100e
Twilight Creeper total stats: 1700 * 1550 = 2325000
That divided by the power cost gives us 2325000 / 100 = 23250.

Now we do the same with the Creeper being affected by the debuffs.

More Damage Creeper stats: 1500 * 1.3 ATK / 1550 / 100e.
Total Stats = 1500 * 1.3 * 1550 = 3022500.
Divided by power = 30225.

Less Damage Creeper stats: 1500 ATK / (1550 / 0.7) / 100e.
Total Stats = 1500 * 1550 / 0,7 = 3321428
Divided by power = 33414.28

The end result gives us values which we can compare all units together. A unit that is twice as good will have a end value that is twice as high.

Another trick to show why 30% less is better than 30% more is to see it as percentages.
1 + 30% = 130%
1 + (-30%) = 1 + (1/0.7) = 1.42887.

You can visualise it this way: A unit that has its damage improved by 50% deals 150% damage. However, a unit receiving 50% less damage can take twice as much damage (which is 200%).

On the other side, while a unit with 100% more damage deals twice the damage, a unit receiving 100% less damage is indestructable.

Of course, I'd automatically take the damage buff affinity if it would be 40% and not 30%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mental Omega First of all thx for pointing me towards the 2 sentences I switched unintentionally. :P

What follows will be a wall of text addressing the rest of what you said.

Quote

First, heal excels even more when you have damage reduction abilities. That is the reason Stonekin units have their received damage cut by 15%. On T4 if you play blue Twilight Pestilence you basically double the efficency of Regrowth. Enemies only do 50% damage, which translates to your unit having twice as much HP. However, since heals are not affected by damage reduction their effectiveness is doubled.

That is true. But my whole point is that the better efficiency of the dmg reduction isn't better than the burst damage in general. If I want damage reduction then I'll take something else with me like Dryad, Ward of the North, Crystal Fiend, Unity (whoever uses that) or Twilight Warfare (purple) which adds Lifesteal. There are tons of options for dmg reduction and Lifesteal and almost all of them are better than the Twilight Creeper because they can affect many more units (with TC at U3 that might be debatable).

In the end I think it's a matter of time. If you want faster clear speed then you should go for the attack buff. I agree that the efficiency is better with dmg reduction abilities in general but 30% more damage is an incredible buff to the clear speed. And let's not forget that over time camps spawn additional units which worsens the efficiency of dmg reduction quite a bit. The times that I struggled most in rPvE was when I lacked the burst damage to destroy the enemy camps or get through to them. Then I was forced back and the fight came to a standstill where both parties continued to spawn units without anything changing except my declining void pool. As I said it's dependent on the map for PvE but I'd say the dmg buff is way better for rPvE. @Treim want to comment on the abilities for rPvE please? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote

I agree, but there is one fatal flaw. Twilight Creepers can only attack one target each, so the debuff on 3 different units is mostly wasted. It works well if there ARE high bursts of damage coming from outside like an Inferno or another high DPS card that is being played. Still, as you can see below. A unit with a 30% less damage debuff is better in a normal straight up fight.

I agree with that. But how many times do you pick a fight with a single unit? :P

Quote

There are far more important factors and we are only talking about a couple of seconds. And if you are playing a nature or frost splash you are more into a macro oriented game to begin with (that is more durability by high HP and healing vs high DPS and damage spells from a more micro oriented game style).

Some speedrunners might kill you for those words. :rolleyes:
Sure, Nature and Frost aren't oriented towards burst damage but then again you need to play a Fire splash for TC. I personally wouldn't play :frostorb::natureorb::fireorb: with TC because while it's not only less efficient, you give up many good units that require :fireorb::fireorb: or :natureorb::natureorb:. If you take the dmg buff you'd also want to play a deck with good DPS in T3. The dmg reduction surely would synergize well with Stonekin or maybe even Bandit's. As I said it's more about ideology rather than general advantages. ;)

Quote

Normal Twilight Creeper stats: 1500ATK / 1550HP / 100e
Twilight Creeper total stats: 1700 * 1550 = 2325000
That divided by the power cost gives us 2325000 / 100 = 23250.

I don't know where the 1700 come from. I guess it's a typo.
From what I guess, what you want to show is a way to measure a units utility-to-power ratio. For this example it's a correct way to go about it but I don't see the difference to what I calculated earlier.

I did the formulas for damage taken (in case 1 of a fight won) and damage given (in case 2 of a fight lost). The dmg reduction is more efficient in both cases, so it's a matter of burst damage/clear speed vs. efficiency/survivability. I still think burst damage is better because of the utility but just choose for yourselves.

Case 1: Damage taken when taking dmg buff is more than when taking dmg reduction debuff. The difference is:

difference dmg taken = enemy HP / (1.3 * your damage) * enemy damage - enemy HP / (your damage) * 0.7 * enemy damage = (9 / 130) * enemy HP * (enemy damage / your damage)

Case 2: Damage given when taking dmg buff is less than when taking dmg reduction debuff. The difference is:

difference dmg given = your HP / (0.7 *enemy damage) * your damage - your HP / (enemy damage) * 1.3 * your damage = (9 / 70) * your HP * (your damage / enemy damage)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kaliber84 said:

@Treim want to comment on the abilities for rPvE please? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I feel like you guys are getting way to deep into this at least for rPVE it is pretty much irrelevant. Both affinities are rather good. For speedruns it is rather irrelevant as for a serious speedrun you would never run fire nature in t3 anyways. While the red affinity is better for a faster clear, the purple option provides more safety overall.

Generally I'd advise this for lvl 9's: If you do not struggle on any lvl 9 against anything (those rare scenarios like having a close base at t4 are excluded - get your safety by having more power to defend properly), take fire - you should be good enough to handle the slightly higher risk. If you struggle against certain matchups (most likely LS), take shadow affinity - the extra safety will help you.

For lvl 10's: Unless you are an expert player and not just casually playing lvl 10's, always take shadow affinity. General rule here: If you are not able to win against LS without much of an issue, never take red. Safety is in random lvl 10's way better than you'd expect it. Especially as you can face Bosses at your t4, so it can get messy rather quickly if you do not know how to handle those properly.

Map of the month is a different story here as you can build your deck around the map and can perfectly adjust it for the situations you will get into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windhunter_shadow.jpg.54b9b50829eff718cdWindhunter_nature.jpg.cf9f2a1f321b01f8c4

Hope you all had a great weekend, so here's a new card!

A lot of counters for this card to start out with: Defenders, Stormsinger, Skydefender, Blaster Cannon, Eruption, Parasite Swarm, Curse of Oink, Coldsnap.

Although I believe a combo could be made with unholy power or something to make it more tanky and powerful, but 220 power invested on one card doesn't seem right to me, especially when getting into Harvester range.

So I don't know what more to talk about this card so I hope you guys can

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • fiki574 locked and unlocked this topic

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