• C0ntr1v3d

    @Moderators can we get rid of the parochial US political drivel please?

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    @Slamansen said in Resurrection Bug:

    @C0ntr1v3d said in Resurrection Bug:

    For the other end of the spectrum:

    Just fought a war battle. Enemy Necromancer resurrected enemy Thetys, which then got 5 turns in a row. Thetys was killed early on, and resurrected a few turns later. I suspect she got all the turns she would have had (if she had been alive) in one go. @Carlos

    Ha-ha. This has been pointed out to SP for years...

    What is worse, ignorance or arrogance... who knows? Who cares?

    A question of degree, perhaps.

    Yes, I recall your Alex Bone example a few months back, @Slamansen . But since then, due to Fatid and Necromancer revive/resurrect mechanics I believed this had been addressed. Certainly other aspects have been tinkered with. Point in case: the OP had the opposite problem.

    PS This has not been a problem for years. The formula used to be, quite simply, when a monster was resurrected the turn order was recalculated as if the battle just started, taking into account only the monsters on the table (including the resurrected one), then skipping the first. A mechanic I frequently used tactically in wars.

    posted in Bugs read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    For the other end of the spectrum:

    Just fought a war battle. Enemy Necromancer resurrected enemy Thetys, which then got 5 turns in a row. Thetys was killed early on, and resurrected a few turns later. I suspect she got all the turns she would have had (if she had been alive) in one go. @Carlos

    posted in Bugs read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    @Portgas-D.-Ace

    I accept in the Rules you selected that defence would either need to run Sammy and let the attacker take the risk that denial does not stick on him (failing which he will clear both buffs and debuffs by default and the defence team will certainly deny at least a coin by killing Elvira), or run Elvira.

    But if the rules include Artifact, Mechanical, Good Legions, Exclusive, Superheroes, Earth, Evil Legions, or Light, Elvira would not be necessary.

    I get that you don't like that Elvira will be needed to defend against an Elvira attack in rules that don't allow an alternative. And that is both understandable and valid.

    My point is that it goes a long way towards shifting away from pure speed denial supremacy.

    Assume the defender in your example does place Elvira (3 team speed), along with, say, Ingenica 1 speed 2 team speed, and Cavernfish 1 speed 2 strength.

    Your Elvira attacker is in trouble, because speed becomes its weakness. The attack Kihaku cannot deny. The defence Ingenica clears Evasion from the remaining attackers, and disables traits. Then the defence Cavernfish denies and smacks the attack team.

    That defence can be overcome, but by dropping lead attacker speed and increasing the others' speed. Kihaku does not become ineffective. A high speed Kihaku becomes ineffective. And just like that, the current meta is disrupted and players start thinking about alternatives beyond pure speed.

    So I do accept what you say about forcing players to get and run Elvira for several rules. But I believe it is a better overall shift.

    I would have a different view if it was like when Sammy was introduced and all competitive teams had to buy and rank him or get slaughtered in Sammy rules. But Elvira is accessible and effective at level 100. So I am in favour.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    @Portgas-D.-Ace

    Thank you for well written and reasoned views as always. A pleasure to read.

    Bear with me as I project the meta forward.

    Current meta: Xiron full speed, supported by 5 or 6 team speed on any of Faraday, Talos, Necromancer, Barbael, Gravedigger, Samael, Gortak, Ingenica, what have you.

    In many cases, let's be frank, the average skilled attacker runs similar runes, activates Mjolnir and just looks to outspeed.

    Now, let's place Elvira on that defence team, wearing team speed. So, still a 5 or 6 team speed Xiron - but starting with Evasion (note, Elvira here has made Xiron more effective, not obsolete).

    So, the attacker's previous resort to more speed and Mjolnir is no longer effective. Result: players are forced to design strategies around accepting going second, and working out how to neutralize the effects of an enemy denier going first.

    Already I like this. It makes people think anew.

    No doubt there are any number of ways to tackle the problem. I like Gortak/Sweeperion - Samael/Ingenica/Valgar/Demise/any of the many monsters that can clear positive effects from the enemy team - and a denier, with 7 or 8 team speed and 1 or 2 strength runes on the Clearer and the Denier (I like Hydratila for this).

    So, defence Ruby goes first. Then attack Gortak/Sweep clears negative effects on its team, the attack Clearer goes next removing Evasion, then the attack denier does its thing.

    Elvira overcome.

    In response, the defence player may abandon full speed, and constrict turn order so as not to leave such a big gap between the opening denier and the rest of the team.

    That may then allow the attacker to get, say, both Ingenica and Xiron in front.

    Elvira overcome.

    But of course there are many degrees in that range, and fine tuning that balance will be where the art is.

    Now, Elvira on attack: again, she makes her denier more, not less, powerful. Not at all obsolete. But current meta looks to outspeed on attack. With Elvira, the attack team can run slower and with more strength, knowing the denier can go second or even slower.

    Not too slow though, or defence Barbael/Ingenica/Llum/Samael/Warthak/Nadiel etc can strip the Evasion and add some nasty effects besides.

    And not too fast either, or a bunched defence (eg Gortak-Ingenica-Riftmaker) will rip the attack apart.

    IMO Demise, Samael and Xiron were all too OP. And yet we adapted. Elvira does not jump the shark like Sammy and Xiron did. And because, like Gortak, she is easily obtainable over time by all, everyone gets to experiment. This is just another layer.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    @Suraj-B-Naik no. I would rather crawl across broken glass than endure two races almost back to back. I wish they were one every 3 or 4 months. I am hoping Battlegrounds pushes some races off the calendar.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    @Suraj-B-Naik said in Race:

    @C0ntr1v3d yes. But when you can get rank 3 and rank 1 monster at 14 laps easy and this race only concentrate on global ranking... No fun in race like before...

    This race for huge gems spender... Spend gems twice in month . Shows they hungry for money. Task are getting more hard each race..

    You could only get the rank 3 prize in the old races by... not racing. By placing fake teams to find a weak group from which to steal the prize.

    Seems to me, the old races created a situation where it became normal to cheat. Where everyone persuaded themselves that it was ok because 'everyone' was doing it, and where 'everyone' just expected a Rank 3 Race Monster for doing 14 laps. I blame that attitude for the frequency of these stupid race events, and I blame that attitude for the increased race costs, too.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    @Suraj-B-Naik why do you like the old race format more than the current? The old version was only better for yoyo teams exploiting the event mechanic flaws, as far as I can see.

    posted in General Discussion read more
  • C0ntr1v3d

    @Portgas-D.-Ace

    I am not as pessimistic. It is true that Elvira will have a significant impact on the speed denial game. But I am not convinced that is a bad thing. The full speed meta was getting a little ho hum and anything that expands the range of options is good IMO. Elvira's one turn opening evasion does not make all those denial monsters useless. It makes their effective deployment different, that's all. It requires rethinking the meta.

    I expect the attack dynamic may change, since it will no longer be necessary to outspeed the defence denial. And a fast Elvira team will lose the benefit of the Evasion quickly. Let alone if the other team also has Elvira (in which case it is better to let the other team lose its Evasion first). So attackers may be more inclined to maximize the Evasion by running slower attack teams. That in turn makes them vulnerable to a defence Samael inevitably opening with Pain Scourge or Ingenica with My Favorite Trait, or Valgar with Light of Punishment, or Hydratila with Unblessed Area etc etc. The following defence denial monster in that case can go second rather than first in the turn order, and be as devastating as ever.

    Alternatively, run your denial teams slower and tankier so they pounce after the Evasion expires. Mix in Gortak to clear any unwanted effects (he will run whichever version of Yager you give him).

    So, Elvira teams have decisions to make about their overall speed and turn order, none of which will be free of counter.

    The Evasion at start of battle does not make denial monsters obsolete by any means. It makes their deployment require more thought than 3 speed 6 team speed, that's all. IMO.

    posted in General Discussion read more

Looks like your connection to Social Point Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.