Close

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 69 of 69
  1. #61
    Board of Directors Demnchi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (GMT -4)
    Posts
    5,698
    Tournaments Joined
    8
    Tournaments Won
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Fristar View Post
    It just annoys me that to be that competitive you have to give up deck building. Its part of the games fun. You are forced to only play a certain way.
    As someone who plays quite a lot of card games and focuses purely on making fun and interesting decks, i can understand where you are coming from. Many times I feel like I have to compromise my deck a bit to address the meta. However, that's only because of me wanting to actually win every game with those decks. There are times when I don't care about winning, so I just ignore the meta to do something cool.

    Having said that, my suggestion would be to look at the options available to you and then look at where you could possibly fit that into your deck. For example, Sinkhole acts as a control tool in addition to being tech against locations. If you look at your deck and look at the cards you're using for control, you could likely find a way to fit in a copy or two of sinkhole. If you really are running into that many locations and losing because of them, then that should up your win rate without having to completely sacrifice your deck building. Often times I'll make a 40 card deck and then just add two copies of a meta counter. So long as its not an aggro deck, it seems to work out fairly well.

    That's just my advice until better options become available. Hopefully in the future we will have plenty of other ways to interact with locations, perhaps maybe even in Lost Lands pt2 and 3.
    Was the Leader of Acolytes of A1

    A1's Dimensional Eyes in the Sky
    A1 Alliance: Evolution in Theory
    PFG3 Leader

    Was Shadow Era Community Manager

    Sota, The Switch Axe Monster Hunter

    "When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
    "Humans fight to secure peace as they envision it. The trouble is, everyone's vision is different." - Ringabel

  2. #62
    Senior Member Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,000
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kross View Post
    Another thing to note is that I'm not using either of those heroes right now, nor am I using locations, and I'm at 330. I'm piloting a Gwen deck that punishes players that use tala, lance, and sosilo + Knight and/or Wisp strategies.
    I want to share this game I played last night against the well-known, high level player, TJ Streetsahead. I'm only sharing this here because I think its a STRONG testament to the fact that the cards in your deck do not matter nearly as much as the pilot. If you're outplayed, you're outplayed, and having all the tools you need to win isn't enough if you make bad decisions in-game!


  3. #63
    Senior Member starval's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States (GMT-4)
    Posts
    1,623
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kross View Post
    I want to share this game I played last night against the well-known, high level player, TJ Streetsahead. I'm only sharing this here because I think its a STRONG testament to the fact that the cards in your deck do not matter nearly as much as the pilot. If you're outplayed, you're outplayed, and having all the tools you need to win isn't enough if you make bad decisions in-game!

    Gwen is already a bad matchup against lance regardless of the deck makeup. As a rogue, lance has access to both stop thief and anarchic looting. Since gwen needs those weapons to be effective, you're already at a major disadvantage.
    IGN: TJ Starval
    TG: @Starval

    Elder, Mentoring Officer


    ShadowEra.Net Editor

  4. #64
    Senior Member Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    1,000
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by starval View Post
    Gwen is already a bad matchup against lance regardless of the deck makeup. As a rogue, lance has access to both stop thief and anarchic looting. Since gwen needs those weapons to be effective, you're already at a major disadvantage.
    Not with this deck. It currently runs 8 weapons and 2 Lily, and 6 cards that get around stealth if you count Retreat, and thats not including The Perfect Shot + Hunter's Gambit
    Last edited by Kross; 08-17-2017 at 05:14 PM.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Veles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    3,563
    Tournaments Joined
    29
    Tournaments Won
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Fristar View Post
    It just annoys me that to be that competitive you have to give up deck building. Its part of the games fun. You are forced to only play a certain way.
    That is true for all major card games. High level competitive play and fun deck building do not go together. You either enjoy winning sometimes with very odd deck, winning average with somewhat creative deck or going for max win rate with well tested most powerful deck.
    Last edited by Veles; 08-17-2017 at 09:01 PM.

    Exceed The Challenge
    Proud member of ETC guild
    For more info about guild check our presentation thread
    here

    Check out my decks and articles at ShadowEra.net

    “Let the future tell the truth, and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments.
    The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine.”
    -
    Nikola Tesla

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    361
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by a player View Post
    Have you tried creating an alternate account? With two accounts, you can play fewer games on the competitive scene and more on the alt, without jeopardizing your standing.
    I could if the board wants to give me all the cards I have purchased on my first account to match my second account so I don't have to go buy them all again.

  7. #67
    Senior Member Nijjis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    271
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fristar View Post
    Another example of cheap combos with location play.

    KA Cutenew3dy vs Fristar.

    Turn 3 has a 4/5 ally on board. And you say locations aren't a problem? if they actually cost something to put down then this BS wouldn't exist.
    Fact is there is a problem but everyone wont say it cause they like using the cheap system of locations to get a massive advantage.
    And yes in almost every single game I have played over 300 my opponent is using a cheap location combo cause that what this game has come to.
    It used to be more fun when people had to build decks to be good, and balanced to win. Not anymore, just use a location deck and cheap combo it away.
    I think its laughable that you guys don't see a problem with the location system.
    How many top ranked people here are not ever using locations in there decks over 300 rating? I wouldn't be surprised if the number is zero
    I initially had an uneasy feeling about locations, but I feel they have been successfully implemented with little to no negative impact on the game.

    When I finished rank 1 with my kiruth location deck, I don't believe I came across very many location decks, or at least none that were problematic. Also the kiruth location wasn't always a win condition and in a handful of games I sacrificed all of them. I really don't feel that locations have had an overwhelming impact on the meta, which I was initially very afraid of.

    I think the fact that some decks get no benefit from locations Is a good thing not a bad thing. Although it leaves these decks with less options to counter locations it is better than the alternative: if most / every deck could benefit from locations every deck might potentially run locations. This would seriously impact the meta in a bad way. Basically it would turn into a locations arm race... All decks may need to run locations + bad Santa to help fill up hand / dig for a location to replace the opponents

  8. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    361
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Nijjis View Post
    I initially had an uneasy feeling about locations, but I feel they have been successfully implemented with little to no negative impact on the game.

    When I finished rank 1 with my kiruth location deck, I don't believe I came across very many location decks, or at least none that were problematic. Also the kiruth location wasn't always a win condition and in a handful of games I sacrificed all of them. I really don't feel that locations have had an overwhelming impact on the meta, which I was initially very afraid of.

    I think the fact that some decks get no benefit from locations Is a good thing not a bad thing. Although it leaves these decks with less options to counter locations it is better than the alternative: if most / every deck could benefit from locations every deck might potentially run locations. This would seriously impact the meta in a bad way. Basically it would turn into a locations arm race... All decks may need to run locations + bad Santa to help fill up hand / dig for a location to replace the opponents
    The current minimal usable locations favor certain decks only.
    Where is a good location for someone who likes ravagers?
    Priests? etc.
    They came out with a half done idea, cause they are incapable of getting cards out fast enough to prevent people from moving on to other games.
    Locations should be removed and reworked to a more general sense of use and not such specific uses by specific deck builds only.
    Locations could have been a much more improvement to the game then they were.

  9. #69
    Senior Member Nijjis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    271
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I tend to agree with all of what you said except possibly that they should be removed. It should be much easier to get a read on locations and the adjustments they might need by having them in the game. If you take them out and it goes back to a play test server then the progress towards developing them would certainly decrease. That being said I would agree that they were released prematurely.

    They seem far from a finished product... Many tweaks to the existing locations and or the release of new cards that interact with them is definitely needed, because like you mentioned: only a handful of them are viable.

    The balancing issues I imagine will be quite a headache! If they are changed like you suggested and are made to be generally more applicable... This should increase their usage rates and lead to a bigger impact on the meta (which I think I'm against). I prefer a world in which locations have a small handful of applications in a rather limited amount of decks, reducing their impact on the meta. The moment locations become standard for the majority of decks, I believe, will be when things get out of hand. If this happens every deck will need to run locations / and or counters. And then designing new cards will be negatively impacted by the restraints placed upon them by locations

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •