Wish to contribute to the project by donating? Heads up to our Patreon -> https://www.patreon.com/skylordsreborn

Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • InsaneHawk

      We now have a Patreon !   10/16/17

      Donations are back, but they're now all on Patreon ! Feel free to check it out : https://goo.gl/TwmHYW
RadicalX

Battleforge PvP deck overview - by Hirooo & RadicalX 

Recommended Posts

Ok read the full overview and would give it the perfect 5/7 score ^^.  Read little flaws where i wouldnt agree to 100%, but super detailed and high quality. I like the rating for new player, i think that will help alot player that want to start pvp :hype:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24. 9. 2016 at 2:20 AM, RadicalX said:

New player experience:
Pure Shadow is a really good deck to start with. Shadow T1 is pretty ideal to start with and the basics of your T2 aren't that hard to learn (Shadow Mage has a great efficiency in lower elos even without insane micro skills). Harvester is also really powerful in low elo games, because alot of people have no clue how to defend against him, while it's pretty easy for you to execute this type of "strategy". You will end up winning alot of games in the lower ranks just because of that, which makes playing this deck even more enjoyable. No cc and the missing building protects are the big downside, which is the only reason why pure Shadow doesn't get 10 points in this rating.

What I think is that Pure Shadow is a more difficult deck to build, as it (in my opinions) requires at least U2 on most cards to be usefull. Shadow Mage on U0 isn't weak, but much more vulnerable and so is Harvester and Lost Grigory (without his ability). Not really sure if it's the ideal deck to start with

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, anonyme0273 said:

What I think is that Pure Shadow is a more difficult deck to build, as it (in my opinions) requires at least U2 on most cards to be usefull. Shadow Mage on U0 isn't weak, but much more vulnerable and so is Harvester and Lost Grigory (without his ability). Not really sure if it's the ideal deck to start with

I think the importance of charges shouldn't play too much of a role for the NPE. It is a factor that can be completly eliminated by getting a lvl 120 deck before starting out in ranked matches. And if not, charges really don't matter until you are somehere in the gold ranks. And if you played that many matches already you might have gotten a lvl 120 deck aswell at some point. The other factors for the NPE (how successful can i be immediatley?/ is what i learned valuable for other decks?) are unchangeable so i thnk it's right that they are of higher importance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great Guide, well done. But I wouldn't agree that Pure Frost is that hard for fire/frost... I always liked that matchup actually and I won it often even against very strong High Ranked Frost Players. But I played a bit different Fire/Frost deck.. with rageclaws and at that time (before stormsinger buff) with gravity surge. Supported Rageclaws are nice vs Pure Frost and in other matchups they can help to build up pressure with multiple attacks because they are relatively cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rageclaws dont do well against shadow splashes since DA is way too efficient. Nature can use ghostspears. Fire wins with scyth. A spam is only really useful against pure Frost or stonekin and well microed Frostmages beat rageclaws(you need to kite until rageclaws are clumped up again). They can be useful to snowball a temporary energy advantage but you might as well use mountaineer for the slot since the card is way more useful in other matchups and probably even better against pure Frost.

 


 

Edited by Hirooo
GS to ghostspears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you consider going frost t1 in fire-frost? frost t1 is having a really hard time on some maps and can often be bullied. to me, such (map dependened) highly disadvantagous matchups are something i wouldn't want at all, fire t1 can deal with any other t1 given that you are skilled enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LagOps said:

Why would you consider going frost t1 in fire-frost? frost t1 is having a really hard time on some maps and can often be bullied. to me, such (map dependened) highly disadvantagous matchups are something i wouldn't want at all, fire t1 can deal with any other t1 given that you are skilled enough.

The main reason is homesoil. It transitions really damn well into the T2 (even T3) stage and empowers your defense and offense by alot. But due to the high slot requirements (Ice Barrier is also needed to use it properly) there is no way to include it into the fire T1 version without making it instable in some scenarios. 

Frost T1 on the other hand allows you to cut Gladiatrix, because she's necessary in the Fire T1 version to:

-> counter L Units 

-> counter buffed XL units aka. Harvester (there is no disenchant in this deck & freeze can be dodged by nether warp, so Gladi is essential to get rid of the Harvester)

Other decks like pure Fire or Fire Nature require her to deal with air units too, but this isn't necessary in Fire Frost due to Stormsinger & Shield Drake.

In the Frost T1 version Lightblade offers reliable cc against Harvester & does well against L Units too. Even though it's useless against air units Fire Frost doesn't benefit from that advantage Gladiatrix would offer in this situation. Therefore it's possible to exclude her and get access to homesoil. This also one reason why we chose the 2nd Fire orb in T3, so you can play Giant Slayer + homesoil (1550dmg charges are pretty good) and Fire Frost has no special cards who synergize well with timeless one anyway. 

The Frost T1 version is pretty much a trade of (empowered T2  vs reliable T1) which makes it worth beeing mentioned. That said I would still prefer playing the Fire T1 deck, due to its higher consistency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the suggested fire-frost deck with frost t1 really handle the havester (it has no lyrish, so i am guessing you use drakes instead?) signifficantly better than the fire t1 version with gladi (+disenchant ability)?

without a way to get rid of live weaving, the live weaving passive will deal quite a bit of damage to your units and possibly the well while making the kited harvester really tanky. on the other hand, with the fire version, you can disenchant and then dps the harvester down while you stall with cc (glacier shell if well gets low to force target switch, then cobold to keep the other well alive long enough). if your base gets too low, you can freeze and force the enemy to netherwarp out, which at least can be used to buy more time. against l units i don't see much of an issue with the fire version either, you have high dps l counters with gladi (and if you really need the burst, firesworn) combined with disenchant ability and protects+cc to stall. at most you should lose one well, but then the enemy is likely to lose at least as much in the counter offense.

offensively, sure having home soil is very nice, however fire/frost allready suffers from needing tons of power for a proper offense and you might not have the power to be able to use home soil in enough scenarious to make it work picking. you propably are more concerned with keeping the units alive in an offense by using ravage/shields/cc than dealing enough damage. in t3, sure enough home soil+slayers is really nice to have. for t3 the frost start is really better.

 

while i am not quite convinced of the frost t1 build, i can see the idea behind it and i guess it is at least semi-viable. would have to test it a bit to see if it is really worth playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LagOps Well the fire T1 is obviously the "better" choice since it has no downsides in T1 compared to the sometimes map gamble frost T1. 

I agree with Radical in the Harvester part. While disentchant on a buffed harvester is great, a very versatile distration is much better. The harvester is easy to kite for stormsingers and drakes so the harvester has to go for the well and lightblade stops him from the best he can.

But overall I don't think that this matchup is so horrible for fire/frost that having a lightblade in T2 is a huge upside compared to gladiatrix. Against a strong shadow/frost I'd rather have an aggressive fire T1 than anything else.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would change some cards in the stonekin Decks/Nature Deck and Lost Souls.

I would miss cards Like spikeroot/brutus 

Well played Crystal fiend are very strong and stone tempest is better than aggressor imo

Why is there no lost reaver in the Shadow/Frost Deck..?? 

And in the frost fire Deck i wouldn't take gladiatrix and storm Singer. Better Take gladi and gravity surge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since stormsinger has been buffed she is a must have in any frostsplash and gravity surge became pretty much obsolete. Stonetempest is nice but aggressor makes life much easier because with stormsinger you already have an allround M counter and L units are the only (tiny) threat left in your T2. Crystal fiend is nice, too, but it depends on the playstyle and if you have the slots in your deck. Spikeroot or deep one is personal preference i guess, brute isn't really needed if you have parasite swarm against stuff like mountaineers or razorshards, i think. When reaver got nerfed mountaineer experienced a renaissance, (almost) everyone who played reaver before switched to mounty. Radical and Hirooo seemingly hopped onto that train.

Edited by SunWu II.

Share this post


Link to post
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

×