Daily Card Discussion

[SunWu]

Neat combo: lightblade-taunt a L-unit and send it through the activated phalanx. This kills the deep one.

[Loptous]

Not much I can say here, this card just isn't so good. Only air defense, when there are plenty of towers that can be both air and ground. So I do not know the true value of this card, please enlighten me about it more.

Until then 3.1/10 only good for air

[Treim]

So this card shares its problems with Lost Disruptor. I think except Phase Tower there is not really any tower that is viable for PVP just due to its immobility and the fact that you thatfor can waste a lot of power that is basically unused.

Even though its stats are kinda good the problem is that it only attacks air units. Problem about that is that generally you have way more ground units than air units, so that way this card can almost never be a defense for its own, so that way you would need an extra slot to just put this card in. On top of that you can generally put up a defense with another tower alone as there are some good options for bandit t2. Stone of Torment is pretty decent, same goes for Time Vortex and in t3 you get access to Necroblaster. If you face only air unit incomes like in 'Mo' you can use this card, even though i think i used Stone of Torment even on that map. Pretty much any Air-only tower has that problem( except Blaster Cannon which is pretty usefull in lvl 10 rPVE against Lost Souls).

While most Ground-Only towers have similar problems it doesn't hit them even close as hard as Air-only towers as Ground units are way more common and you will face those much more frequently.

This card definetly needs a change. Tbh though i am not exactly sure how to make this one good enough to really make it worth at least in some situations.

[Geradon]

1 hour ago, Loptous said:

 

Never actually played that card. Ever.

Seems super useless in PvP and PvE....

[ImaginaryNumb3r]

1 hour ago, Loptous said:

Not much I can say here, this card just isn't so good. Only air defense, when there are plenty of towers that can be both air and ground. So I do not know the true value of this card, please enlighten me about it more.

Until then 3.1/10 only good for air

One sentence would be enough to tell you everything about this card: "You know a card is downright terrible if it is outperformed by a card that is one tier lower".

This card is called Blaster Cannon. But not only is this due to the fact that Blaster Cannon has Rage, is cheaper and can already be built at T1 but Blaster Cannon actually does more damage than it is stated on the card whereas Skydefender does considerably less damage than stated.

 

 

To make things clear: Yes, AA only tower cards are absolutely useless for pvp and rpve. But I found them useful on several occasions in normal pve as quite frequently some air units will come on fixed routes and with a Blaster Cannon you have an easy way to deal with them. And the same should apply to Skydefender... only that it is inferior to Blaster Cannon.

My main deck was always Bandits and I did try it on occasions, but the damage output is insignificant, life steal on a low damage card is a bad joke and the abilities are just bad.

Solution: Make this card cost 60 power, fix the attack of this card so it does the stated damage and turn the ability in something useful. Like slowing units down, decrease their attack or a apply a damage over time.

 

This card has a niche and at least let it be good at it. Bandits already have 2 other towers, if you want a tower that covers air and ground, go for those (of course Bandit Launcher deserves a buff too). There is no need to give this card anti ground capabilities and it would be stupid let it attack air.

We could also just make it cheaper, increase stats only slightly but give it rapid construction instead. I think that would be a fun way you could make this card useful. Either way, this card needs better abilities. Both abilities are only worth it in pvp and NOBODY with a sane mind will EVER play this card in pvp. It's like purple Abomination -.-'.
 

[EonBen]

3 hours ago, Loptous said:

Not much I can say here, this card just isn't so good. Only air defense, when there are plenty of towers that can be both air and ground. So I do not know the true value of this card, please enlighten me about it more.

Until then 3.1/10 only good for air

useless card, Rioters Retreat and Bandit Launcher are so much better T2 Bandit Towers, cause both do really good damage and are able to attack ALL units while Sky Defender is useless against everything that's not airborne. There is not a single reason to put this card in your deck imo. 0.5/10

   

[Loptous]

So, I can already tell this card is good, but what affinity is the best?

The Red Affinity knocks up Small and Medium creatures while the Green Affinity Regenerates lifepoints when near the Razorshard's gifted bombing raid.

The only problem I see with this card, is that it is a slightly another version of Fire-stalker although without the siege part. 

I would most likely take the red affinity in both PVP and PVE, because I think that knocking up units is a better choice than a hp regen buff that is like 20 or something.

Anyways, I don't know what to rate this card, but I think it could have some practical use. But then again, it's artwork...could use some work....

Edited January 18, 2016 by Loptous

[Ultrakool]

2 hours ago, Loptous said:

So, I can already tell this card is good, but what affinity is the best?

The Red Affinity knocks up Small and Medium creatures while the Green Affinity Regenerates lifepoints when near the Razorshard's gifted bombing raid.

The only problem I see with this card, is that it is a slightly another version of Fire-stalker although without the siege part. 

I would most likely take the red affinity in both PVP and PVE, because I think that knocking up units is a better choice than a hp regen buff that is like 20 or something.

Anyways, I don't know what to rate this card, but I think it could have some practical use. But then again, it's artwork...could use some work....

the signature lame card of Stonekin. So I would probably rate it 11/10

[Geradon]

1 hour ago, Ultrakool said:

the signature lame card of Stonekin. So I would probably rate it 11/10

+1

[ImaginaryNumb3r]

2 hours ago, Ultrakool said:

the signature lame card of Stonekin. So I would probably rate it 11/10

Absolutely.

The unit might not appear very strong at the first glance, but it is far too gimmicky. Especially for a macro-driven faction just like Stonekin.

Stonekin has always been a strong faction but lacked assets in several areas, however that was fine because the faction had strengths in other areas to compensate for that.

But if we look at Razorshard...

Stonekin used not to have anti-S units and the faction was fine. Razorshard provides you with anti-S.
Stonekin used not to have artillery units and that was fine. Razorshard has a long range ability.
Stonekin used not to have fast units and that was fine. Razorshard is a swift unit.
Stonekin used ot have Stone Tempests for medium knockback... now you can also do it with Razorshard.

Also, from what I remember the unit is bugged and has a rate of fire of 4 seconds, rather than 5 seconds. This gives Razorshard effective stats of 1050 / 705 (due to 15% protection). The unit is a no-brainer and its low costs mean that you can spam long range M knockback.

Also, the comparison with Firestalker is unfair as Firestalker does LESS damage in siege mode. One would think that the same should apply to Razorshard.

My suggestions: replace M-knockback with something else, bring damage to a reasonable level, increase base stats and let it only be swift near friendly structures.
 

Edited January 18, 2016 by Mental Omega

[Loptous]

First let me say this, the card on the Google Drive folder is called Searmen not Spearmen just fyi.

This card also has pretty decent stats that could probably transfer well into the mid-game with a lot of M units being thrown around

Anyways, this could be a great counter for early game nonsense such as Nox Trooper, Ice Guardian, etc. Also the upgrades for this card are pretty nice, with more damage comes greater value from this card. 

I used this card a lot on PVE missions coupled with Windweavers and Shaman, is such a nasty combo for a high price, but was totally worth it.

The only thing that I can see that would pose a problem for this card is: Frostmage. This card could seem to have a great advantage over higher cost units especially; KoC or Enforcer.

Overall, this card is pretty good and has it's use: 8.7/10 Great card.

[Ladadoos]

1 hour ago, Loptous said:

First let me say this, the card on the Google Drive folder is called Searmen not Spearmen just fyi.

The typo should be fixed.

[Loptous]

As far as the affinity goes for this card, it is totally up to player preference. This card was soooo good on PVE for the amazing DPS and especially RAMPAGE ability. Having these paired with like Mo, Fireworm, etc, could provide excellent results.

I remember the cost being extremely high price like around 2500-4000 depending on the affinity and for a very good reason, it provided Fire users an option for a tankier more overloaded T4 unit that could bring some massive value.

[Treim]

Never had that card sadly. I generally saw that one paired with Fire Dragons though not many people used it. Can't really judge to hard about that one tbh.

[ImaginaryNumb3r]

25 minutes ago, Treim said:

Never had that card sadly. I generally saw that one paired with Fire Dragons though not many people used it. Can't really judge to hard about that one tbh.

Yeah, I don't recall many people playing with pure fire and I think fire without good splash support just isn't that great in T4. It has some good cards, like Fire Sphere, Fire explosion and Batariel but in pve you just won't achieve much if you can't keep up a consistent army. Nature has heals to help you in the macro game, shadow can just offer units to summon new ones and frost splashes are hard to kill in the first place.

And while Batariel is arguable the best fire creature in T4, you can summon him with Enlightenment and buff/heal the crap out of him.

Even when just going 3 colours Frost, Shadow and even Nature have much more to cover their weaknesses. Irconclad is a good XL/XL unit and Shatter Ice is really devastating. Shadow offers charged Death Rays (8000 ATK) and has great utility options with Offering, Rifle Cultists and Unholy Hero. Even Colossus gives Nature an edge to an already strong deck due to all kinds of CC and heals.

But with Fire, most fire T4 cards just don't bring enough stats. They deal a lot of damage, but health is a thing too (after all HP * ATK = total power of a unit).

Thunder Wagon is no exception. Despite costing 260, the stats of Thunder Wagon doesn't even come close to a Bloodhorn (4700 / 5000 for 240) and the abilities are a bad joke. If anything, it should have siege by default and "Tainted Death" does too little damage for a faction that needs its units alive as long as possible (in regard to their low estimated live span).

 

In a nutshell: Thunder Wagon is not a good card. It's fun and okay but does not bring enough power to make F/F/F/N being able to compete with other colour combinations.

It has too bad stats, costs too much power and its abilities are abysmal. I grant that the ability lets you have a fast unit in T4 is nice to have, but there the positive aspects of the card end.

 

Still, if you only do rpve 9 you won't have big issues with clearing the map in time anyway but do not expect to have an easy life if you happen to get Lost Souls as enemies. I'd rather get one shadow orb and take Bloodhorn instead.

 

My suggestions would be: Lower cost to 240 and give both affinities siege (one affinity having 50% siege and the other one having 100%). The affinity with 50% siege should keep its "Tainted Death" ability but deal far more damage (at least 2000 per target if not 2500). In any case, increase health to 5000 so the unit actually has some decent stats too.
 

[Treim]

1 hour ago, Mental Omega said:

Still, if you only do rpve 9 you won't have big issues with clearing the map in time anyway but do not expect to have an easy life if you happen to get Lost Souls as enemies. I'd rather get one shadow orb and take Bloodhorn instead.

On the other hand: What struggles with rPVE lvl 9? You can do it with t3 only or Tempest's and Rifle Cultists only and not having any issues.... so i guess we should get away of taking lvl 9 as a standard, cuz you can do that with pretty much any deck that has some t4

[SunWu]

2 hours ago, Mental Omega said:

Despite costing 260, the stats of Thunder Wagon doesn't even come close to a Bloodhorn (4700 / 5000 for 240)

Here's something that crossed my mind: I think it's not really accurate to compare damage-over-time units like thunder wagon and melee units like bloodhorn statwise. I'm not talking about the advantages a range attack has (wich aren't too many in rPVE) but that annoying moment when your bloodhorn/abnomination/any melee XL takes a last stomp/swing to finish of a unit with only a few HPs left. That sounds like it wouldnt add up to much, but if you send in melee XLs only that's many thousand damage points wasted per base. You're right, though, fire wagon isn't really strong. It's mostly loud and fun.

[ImaginaryNumb3r]

1 hour ago, Treim said:

On the other hand: What struggles with rPVE lvl 9? You can do it with t3 only or Tempest's and Rifle Cultists only and not having any issues.... so i guess we should get away of taking lvl 9 as a standard, cuz you can do that with pretty much any deck that has some t4

I just didn't want to sound like you should never use this unit under any circumstances. The card might not be very good, but there are far more terrible cards in the game.

37 minutes ago, SunWu II. said:

Here's something that crossed my mind: I think it's not really accurate to compare damage-over-time units like thunder wagon and melee units like bloodhorn statwise. I'm not talking about the advantages a range attack has (wich aren't too many in rPVE) but that annoying moment when your bloodhorn/abnomination/any melee XL takes a last stomp/swing to finish of a unit with only a few HPs left. That sounds like it wouldnt add up to much, but if you send in melee XLs only that's many thousand damage points wasted per base. You're right, though, fire wagon isn't really strong. It's mostly loud and fun.

You are right, but if we really examine this more closely, Bloodhorn has even more damage than stated.

A great example why this is the case is to look at ranged units. Assuming we have a unit that deals 200 damage with a rate of fire over 20 seconds, we have 1000 ATK (200 / 4 * 20 = 1000). But that is actually not the whole truth. It would be correct if this unit had a charge-up delay of 4 seconds before shooting, but as it is ranged units start shooting as soon as they get in range.

In other words, they already deal 200 damage at time 0.
So we get: 0s = 200 dmg, 4s = 400 dmg, 8s = 600 dm

g, 12s = 800 dmg, 16s = 1000, 20s = 1200

And for melee units it is just the same.

So, the shorter the rate of fire is, the less a unit has of this "hidden damage", which plays part in fighting as well.

 

Assuming, this ranged unit with 200 damage attacks a different unit with 1 HP left. Of course, this will be an overkill of 199. But don't forget that they get "free" damage to begin with. Therefore in a realistic scenario units dealing continuous damage are equal to units dealing "spiky" damage at best.

Now, of course we could think of situations where the flamethrower is stronger. Like when fighting units of 50 health, the flamethrower would dominate and kill hordes, while the Bloodhorn struggles... but when does that ever happen?

Just wanted to point that out, most people don't know that you can't just translate the damage from one rate of fire to another that easily.
 

Edited January 20, 2016 by Mental Omega

[Ladadoos]

I never found thunder wagon that good to be honest. As far as I remember, it wasn't really good for targetting one single boss and his damage never really felt that strong. I'd much rather use Batariel/Fire Dragon than Thunder Wagons. In the same way I also don't like Magma Fiend because it spreds it's damage over the units and isn't able to focus a unit, which if you think logically, is worse than focusing them one by one. Needless to say though, it was fun to use Thunder Wagon but not worth an Enlightenment.

[Loptous]

Ok, I do not know so much about this one, so I will let you guys talk about it in great detail. Anyways I will just go by what I see on this one.

First off, I remember buying all of the Lost Priests from the AH and forcing people to buy them for ridiculous prices. So the stat line is very low, but since it has a low stat line, I would expect some good support buffs or something.... right?

So short story, the Red one makes enemies take 30% more damage and the purple one makes them deal 25% less damage, I mean it's an ok buff don't get me wrong, but it's just not that useful, unless it can stack of course.

One thing I liked about this card was it's attack animation was pretty cool and I guess somewhere down the line you could use this for a lost souls deck, where you need one more unit, but in most situations, this would probably not be it... unfortunately. 

[ImaginaryNumb3r]

Another useless card... basically this card is the product of 2 other bad cards having a comparably bad card as baby. Those cards are Lost Wanderer and Bandit Sorceress.

We already covered Lost Wanderer and the reasons why Wanderer is not a valid card also applies to Lost Priest. The buff does not justify the power cost and the overall stats are justs too bad.

And not only does Lost Priest have bad stats to begin with, it actually also deals less damage than stated (sigh, why did you give so many units wrong damage values, Phenomic? -.-'). So, rather than having 560 ATK, it only deals an abysmal amount of 466 (which is why I compare this unit to Bandit Sorceress).

 

After reviewing so many cards, it becomes evident that Lost Priest suffers from the same bad design decisions most of the other cards do:

• Too bad stats for too high money
• The ability is "nice to have" at best
• It is outperformed by another core card. This time it is the M/M Nichtcrawler.

I guess we should think of a name for a category for cards who have those flaws xD

And even IF those points would not matter, I still think it will be outperformed by Stormsinger in most situations.
Because who can say no to a free gravity surge?

[Treim]

2 hours ago, Mental Omega said:

Another useless card... basically this card is the product of 2 other bad cards having a comparably bad card as baby. Those cards are Lost Wanderer and Bandit Sorceress.

We already covered Lost Wanderer and the reasons why Wanderer is not a valid card also applies to Lost Priest. The buff does not justify the power cost and the overall stats are justs too bad.

And not only does Lost Priest have bad stats to begin with, it actually also deals less damage than stated (sigh, why did you give so many units wrong damage values, Phenomic? -.-'). So, rather than having 560 ATK, it only deals an abysmal amount of 466 (which is why I compare this unit to Bandit Sorceress).

 

After reviewing so many cards, it becomes evident that Lost Priest suffers from the same bad design decisions most of the other cards do:

• Too bad stats for too high money
• The ability is "nice to have" at best
• It is outperformed by another core card. This time it is the M/M Nichtcrawler.

I guess we should think of a name for a category for cards who have those flaws xD

And even IF those points would not matter, I still think it will be outperformed by Stormsinger in most situations.
Because who can say no to a free gravity surge?

That was pretty much on point.

I'd suggest to pick a card that has some more talk potential for tomorrow. I don't really care what just something that is a valuable card or at least was.

[Loptous]

22 hours ago, Treim said:

That was pretty much on point.

I'd suggest to pick a card that has some more talk potential for tomorrow. I don't really care what just something that is a valuable card or at least was.

Your wish is my command!

The damage is alright for the basic attack and can hit multiple targets, if I read correctly but, the hit points are so freaking low. 

Obviously the main function of this unit is to steal an opponent's creature or whatever. It counters a decent amount of creatures as well ranging from Mountaineer, and some T2, creatures with a 150 power cost or less. Very unfortunate this card can not take over Harvester, because that would be pretty cool imo.

Now counters for this card, hmm... where do I begin, oh yes pretty much everything like manawing except, in the stage in the game this is played, there would be more counters such as Shadow mage and makeshift towers.

But I am not sure if it would work, but if there is one unit left of this squad, could it still mind control? Also this card could have some use, but it would have to be played the second you can before any real counters start going up.

Also Stormsinger says hi to this card!

[SpiritOfTheAbyss]

Parasite Swarms are a better m counter than you think. Especially nature that lacks a good m/m counter, I used to use these quite often, if you've got two at once going  and zapping away it's a good m+L counter. You just need enough power for cc's to back them up. Also no they can't hit multiple targets at once. With one unit left it can mind control ye.

Who doesn't want flying brains in their deck ?

 

Edited January 22, 2016 by SpiritOfTheAbyss

[LagOps]

the card itself is totally fine, it just often gets abused as the swaped units do not hold power... so players just swap everything without thinking (often 70pwer+ units get swaped at some point in the game) and get the power back with void manipulation and ep spamm. i feel that it would be justified to reduce the charges to 2. this gives 8 when fully upgraded, just as skyfiredrake. this way nature players who abuse this card will eventually run out of charges while everything is the same for non-lamers.