Welcome to Skylords Reborn

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • MrXLink

      Got questions about our currently closed beta? Have a look!   09/22/16

      For more information on the beta, why you can't play it yet, and what kind of bugs cause this, @Kiwi made a good thread. Have a look over here:   Also be sure to read the FAQ for more information about the project as a whole and some questions you will very likely have about us:  
    • InsaneHawk

      Donations are back !   01/17/17

      If you want more information, you can go check this topic : http://forum.bfreborn.com/index.php?/topic/2790-donations-are-back/


Alpha & Beta Tester
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Eirias

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Texas
  • Interests Battleforge, Chess, Trivia, Fire Emblem, Materials Science, Creative Writing

Recent Profile Visitors

9130 profile views
  1. Hearthstone Tournament 21-22 January 2017

    I can tentatively volunteer to stream. By the way, Bo3 mean you play 3 games, first to 2 wins, and Bo5 means you play 5 games, first to 3 wins. Bo2 means nothing.
  2. Economy improvement ideas. Save currency value.

    Regarding the rotating decks: The point of them is to make PvP playable for all people on an equal level. If someone just started after his old account got hacked or something, the rotating decks would allow him to play at a very high level without needing cards or upgrades. If it's not a faction he's comfortable with, or it doesn't have that one card he crutches on (mortar, cough cough), then that's his incentive to make a real deck. For the rotating deck to have that, it needs to be good cards (I'd imagine top PvP players would vote on the cards in each deck) and they need to be U3. I also agree that they should be the same for every player (to prevent multiaccounting). So either the rotating decks are useful and affect the metagame a lot, or they're not useful--in which case, why do it in the first place? I also don't see how the rotating decks will impact the economy at all--except possibly to reduce the price of the cards that sometimes appear in the rotating deck. At the very least, those cards will be at a reduced price WHILE the decks are on rotation.
  3. Economy improvement ideas. Save currency value.

    Ah, don't have a lot of time right now, but there are two or three threads related to the reward system. You should take a look at those. There are a couple other threads that discuss a lot of these ideas. If nobody else links them before I come back, I'll do it then.   I can give my opinions on some of these ideas later, but for now let me just touch on the idea of a rotating locked deck. While I agree that this could be a really good thing and might solve some of the issues people have with grinding upgrades, there are a few problems. First, I'm not sure how well the developers are prepared to code that. In beta right now, the tutorial deck is just like any other deck (a good deal of bugs right now are related to that issue).   But assuming that will be fixed, the other issue is the metagame. Getting a level 120 deck wasn't easy in the old BF. Maybe it will be now, but I'd imagine there will still be a lot of players who aren't quite "new," but who would still benefit from having a standard, level 120 deck with solid cards. That influences the metagame. Let's say the current rotating deck is a stonekin deck, with defenders, spirit hunters, stormsinger, stone tempest, razorshards, and aggressors. If I know that a larger-than-normal amount of people will be playing this deck, then I will either switch to a deck that has a good matchup against this deck, or I'll add counterpick cards (such as mauler, in this case).   Adding two decks helps, but I'm not sure it entirely solves this issue. And if every person gets a random choice of a rotating deck per week, then I can just multiaccount 10 accounts and I'll probably get the deck I want in one of them. Just giving you a couple ideas of the problems this faces, and it will ultimately come down to the cost vs benefits of this system.
  4. Is anyone recording your beta matches?

    AKA: me  
  5. How viable are these cards in pvp?

    To say I think it's "really good" is not quite accurate . I think it has a lot of versatility, which I like. Overall it has bad stats, but it serves as a decent AA, semi-useful cc, good XL counter (with roots), and it's good at applying pressure against non-aggressive factions because they often don't have good t3 AA. Against aggressive factions though, it has almost no offensive use because your opponent will counterattack harder with that 120 power. @Draknoron Most of those cards aren't used because Shadow Frost has a TON of really, really strong cards, and those just are redundant. I agree with most of what @SunWu II. Lost vigil is kinda lame, IMO. If your opponent does not have a good t3 AA, this card is almost uncounterable. In my fire nature deck, I keep either swamp drake or magma hurler because I lost to one too many low-ranked players with a strange air card, such as lost vigil. If your opponent does have a good counter (even storm singer counts), then the lost vigil is not great.  Lost dancers, lost warden, and lost shade are possibly viable (depending on the matchup) but they are kinda weak. @Avire once used some lost shades against me in a match, and despite him starting with a huge lead, it opened the door for a potential comeback. I don't recall if that replay is up on my channel yet, but if it's not there now, it will be eventually. Shadow insects are great. They're really strong, but micro-ing them is really a pain, and t3 is so crazy that braindead options like a grigori or silverwind lancers are much more effective. Still though, I think players like @RadicalX, who have great micro even on busy maps, really like this card. I like the Gunner. LagOps does too, and he gave some nice reasons. If I'm not mistaken, it also has some defense-penetrating abilities, which really help against frost splashes. Magma hurler has bad stats, but it's a decent L counter (with roots) and it covers a lot of AA. I remember there was one week where I played like 5 really good pure frost players, and Magma hurler really helps win the t3 vs t2, if the frost player goes that route. I kept it in for a long time since. It can be dodged, but not easily and not if you have more than one. Magma hurlers are for defense (L counters and knockback), so if you have the player microing around to avoid the shots, he's not hitting your well, so mission accomplished. Also, if you have someone microing a single unit around your magma hurler, he's going to die to the giant slayers I sent to 3 different bases. Unstable demon is alright. It has good stats, but it needs to be micro'd well. Also its an M counter, which has pros and cons. It's main problem is there are a lot of superior shadow units. Do you mean aggressors cost too much bfp, or they cost too much power? Neither, IMO. They are well balanced, although perhaps on the weak side (because L unit knockback is pretty crazy if you think about it). They fit into a certain style of deck, and a lot of players find that style to be boring. Mutating Frenzy is one of the most underrated cards in my opinion. It actually has pretty good stats, and the ability can be useful (you don't expect them to live past the base nuke, so it's fine). I think it really only works in a shadow nature deck though, and it struggles as an XL counter because unlike ranged XL counters, or cards like fathom lord/giantslayer that have a cc, it's relatively easy for the XL to run away. I could possibly see the card working in a pure shadow deck as well.  
  6. Logo Winner: Poll

    @PooRJoghurT's monument logo is amazing. I wish the text was a bit easier to read, but that seems like an easy fix. Clear winner in my mind, although @Lukaznid and @CyRiX both have great entries.
  7. If I may direct you to my deckbuilding guide (still in progress) I believe I dedicated a long section to answering that question. You might also find all sorts of other PvP info, if you're interested.     TL;DR First, with a shadow frost deck, there is really no need to splash. IMO, 2 frost orbs and one anything is already a really strong combo. Brannoc, silverwind lancers, shield building, tremors, and timeless one are 5 of the best t3 cards in the game (especially considering strength-to-bfp ratio), and you haven't even touched on another orb. Grigori and ashbne pyro are also great cards, so with 1 shadow and 2 frost, you have 7 fantastic cards to choose from--which is way more than you need in t3. Double shadow t3 doesn't have a TON of good cards, but both frenetic assault and cultist master are quite strong, and if you don't have a lot of slots for t3, cultist master + evocutator's woe is a super strong t3 combo.   In general, I believe the disadvantages of splashing 3 different orbs outweigh the advantages--although there are some exceptions, and I can list some examples from @Aragorn's deck to show you why I think it's viable in his situation. The main advantage of splashing is that it gives you diversity. Since 3 t3 cards is the magic number for most decks (depending on playstyle, but I think it's a good rule of thumb for beginners), even sticking just to one faction, usually you'll have more t3 cards that you want, that don't fit in your deck. Additionally, in t3 things start to get a little bit broken, so crazy combos aren't as powerful in that stage of the game (unless they're REALLY crazy, but again, not really possible with just 3 cards). The correct cards to use depend on your deck, but you are right: usually, cards that require 2 faction-specific orbs are generally stronger and more expensive than those that only require one. (The most extreme example is probably fire dancer vs fire stalker). Cards like giant slayer, fathom lord, timeless one, cultist master, and tremor are all among the best t3 cards in the game. There are, of course, really good cards that only require one orb--I'm just making a generalization. Since you usually don't have a ton of space for t3, I think it makes sense to choose stronger cards from a more limited pool, than weaker ones from a larger pool. Additionally, if you play an aggressive deck (or more accurately, one without a frost splash), you gain an additional advantage my making your first and third orbs the same faction. I used to play fire nature shadow, which has some really, really strong combos. For one, an XL unit (soulhunter) or ashbones are GREAT with the spell support from nature. Additionally, sandstorm is an instant base nuke. Swamp drake (esp with roots) adequately covers the XL weakness, and swamp drakes are also very annoying for most factions to deal with. But you see, we've spent 4 cards in t3 already, and we really need to add drones or shadow insect to cover our L counter and give us a swift. So 5 cards, all super aggressive. Basically no other faction can survive an attack from those combos at high power levels. The problem is that other factions don't need to, because this deck doesn't have great defense. So if I played against pure frost and dropped an orb, they can just come back and drop one of my orbs. Alternatively, the other faction might attack first. Since my deck is geared to attack instead of defend, it's better for me to launch a counter attack and try to kill my opponent before I die. So we enter base trades. With an aggressive faction, base trades are a huge part of why I suggest keeping your first and third orbs the same. Many games I would take out one of my opponent's orbs and send them to t2. But if they took out my fire orb, I can spawn almost nothing. Maybe like a ghostspears or something. So my opponent is t2 vs my t1/3, and I lose. Switching my shadow orb out for another fire orb really increased my win rate, because then I no longer had to be afraid about base trades. We both go to t2, and then I have more aggressive units so I can take my opponent to t1 before he takes me to t1. So, rule of thumb: for each orb you have that is the same as your initial orb, base trades favor you more.   That said, it's NOT unviable to take 3 different orbs. Especially when you can't afford cards like giant slayer. In my opinion, the best deck to do this is possibly stonekin, because stonekin is very good at defensive play, so base trades are often easily avoidable. Aragorn's deck is nature-frost-shadow. He also plays a pretty minimal t1/t2, so he has 7 or 8 cards in t3. This allows the diversity of options to be more useful, because he has more slots. Additionally, nature t2 spells are very strong in t3--only, nature t3 cards are NOT usually very strong. So usually it's a bad idea to start shadow (many strong t3 cards) but splash a t3 nature, because most of the worth you get comes from t2, and why not play t2 nature if that's what you want? In contrast, starting nature and splashing shadow has much more synergy. (Still though, in the games I beat him, my strategy often revolved around going t3 just as early as him and then trading for his nature orb).   Hope this helps!
  8. Feels bad moments

    When you go into a public restroom and realize there is no toilet paper.
  9. Coop the fine diffrence

    This entire post was super confusing to me until I realized you meant "co-op," not "coop" But I agree. BF has so many mechanics that I've never seen in other games, and among them are great team synergies.
  10. Eirias Replay are Back!

    I just uploaded my 100th replay! There's a special surprise....    
  11. Should I Make New Youtube Channel

    Thanks for the input guys! I've also updated the OP with the video.
  12. Should I Make New Youtube Channel

    So I'm sure most of you have forgotten, but I've dropped some hints before about upcoming non-Battleforge videos. In particular, I have some smash montages and a funny animation that I've been working on for over 7 months. I also intend to make challenges for you guys.   My question: Should I make a separate youtube channel for those videos? Eirias_BFR has so far been a Battleforge channel. Are you guys interested in watching my non-BattleForge videos, or should I put them on another channel so the videos don't show up in your feed? I just don't want people to be expecting a BattleForge video and be disappointed because it's something else.   I've got a video coming up soon (probably tomorrow) that has a teaser of some stuff to come, but I also wanted to make a forum post. When the video comes up, I'll link it below:    
  13. @nightrein I live in Texas, and Dex is in Canada (I believe).  Figure out who you're closest to, but either way, the lag isn't terrible (unless we have a 2v2 with everyone from different countries. Then it can be a little rough). You can see our livecasts to get an idea of how bad it is. Also note that I only expect the lag to decrease as the network is optimized and we move to a better server to support a larger playerbase.
  14. Just uploaded a different kind of video!

    Let me know if you guys are interested in stuff like this, or if you'd rather I stick to the normal stuff.



    1. sylvix95


      This is an answer.

    2. Eddio


      Well the normal stuff is better but I guess this is also funny once in a while.  :P 

    3. Akaranda


      As someone who watches all the vids on the channel, more PvE please! :)

  15. Challenges

    Alright then: totaling the people who have given rep and posted, there are 10 of you! I already know what the first puzzle will be, but give me a few days to move and then I'll formally lay out the problem!