You're quite right, it's unreasonable and uncharitable of me to expect perfect usage from a non-native speaker of English and for that I apologize. I admit my passion for language got the better of me. As to the actual subject of the thread, having a Raging Strike in one's deck has almost always been a no-no to me, I must admit. I still balk at the very idea.
Please do not double-post, there is the edit button if you forgot something. I have trouble understanding what you are saying too. Also, english is not my first language either but I can write it decently(but my pronunciation is far from perfect). Same here, I would rather have a simple bludgeon instead of raging strike but it's only 1 copy in the entire deck and there is no alternative to rageblood at 2 blue that contain many strong step moves without having weak ones(and help cycle).
I really like Eixocl's Hammer. I think the Dodge, even taken as a Walk, is better than Raging Strike, and the other four attacks are fantastic (Pressing Bash is one of the best attacks in the game for taking victory squares/getting around Nimbus, especially now that we're back to a more orthodox set of maps).
I prefer just killing the guy instead of pressing bashing the VP. The damage output of this build is extremely high so that is not a problem unless they got parries(in which case,pressing bash wont help either. Rageblood also have 1 more move which have a non-negligible effect on elven mobility % of drawing you a card. While the damage is improved a bit with buiser, I still prever rageblood but I agree that the hammer is a very viable alternative.
Well, that was rather frighteningly effective, and I didn't even have all the right cards for it, and I used a human warrior too, since I only have two elf warriors since I only have two figures. They managed to hack down a dwarven warrior in one turn, then the dwarf priest the next, and the opponent's terrain control wizard didn't really do anything. I may have to see what I can do with this with lots of missing equipment.
You can use the same figure for more than 1 characters at the same time. This game would be pretty pay-to-win otherwise .They will have alternate color in battle for convenience. Unrelated: I just realised your avatar's pants are not pants but another slime. It's freaking hilarious XD.
Yeah, I know you can, it's just not elegant. Plus I didn't have enough bejeweld shortswords until one showed up today. For the avatar, I know, right? I found it on the wiki, or one of the resource pages, it had a page with all the figures on a single page, for each race/class, so there's a slime priest and warrior too, and I thought they were hilarious.
Huh? Sprint, Team! isn't on Crazy Sal's... I was talking about my build BEFORE my current one. It was basically the Bejeweled build here but with Sprint, Team! added on to close the distance. Granted this was on the much bigger maps.
I appreciate what you have done here exythe, and hats off to you for your success. Likewise, kudos for being open enough to pass that on to the newer players and share strategies etc. First of all, i think that it is great that people can be competitive early now in MP, due to the availability of bejeweled and double edged in the shops, where warriors seem to be a much easier to form early days as opposed to a wiz or priest who is going to be more dependent on rarer items. Your post has inspired many a player in MP, it has worked well, and perhaps too well. I will elaborate: It would be remiss of me not to mention here, what i have been whinging about in the lobby of late, which is we really need to start encouraging some variety in the builds. I obviously really like this game, and have been playing for some time now, and during that time i have used a countless number of builds in MP with varying success. And even during times of success, i will switch to perhaps a more risky or less efficient team to mix it up. And then there are other times where i play a downright crazy build, cause no-one wants to do a casual, so i cant test it. But i digress, I dont expect everyone to share this view, and appreciate that some people will just want to win, and this will mean using the same build over a whole rotation. I believe there is cause for concern in this methodology though. The game is called cardhunter, and the creators have gone to a great deal of trouble to provide us with many many items and many many cards, and although some are always going to be better than others, and some will only be good on some maps, and some are only to make up the collection, it seems a great waste and a tragedy, to have all these at our disposal, only to have everyone in multiplayer using the same 5-6 weapons all the time. The effect of this is two-fold, i am certain that other seasoned players have dropped off the game to various degrees for a similar reason (whether they would care to admit it or not). I clearly enjoy the game too much for that, and similarly do not condone it. I hope i have been eloquent here and a little more democratic than some of my fits of rage in the lobby at times, (i cant always defend those) but it is only because i feel passionately about it and wish to see the game continue to succeed, and thrive, and better itself. I believe it is truly the variety that is integral in keeping the game as interesting and most importantly as fun as it could possibly be. With a few small changes, to certain cards, (as i have mentioned in other posts) and even items such as bejeweled, the gameplay will be enhanced significantly. Just one crazy guys opinion though.
I agree that we should have some variety - it's kind of weird that with all those epics/legendaries I dont know is there anything that I would change in this build. It's better with commons/uncommons/rares .. as good that is for starting players, its also bad for elder ones - we have no "card to hunt" for .. I'm not sure how item rarity is calculated, but its really weird that Legendary counterparts of some less-rare items are less powerful .. why is that?
The rarity of an item has to do with the rarity of the cards themselves on that item. A rare paper quality card, is theoretically slightly better than an uncommon paper quality card, which is slightly better than a common paper quality card and so forth. For legendary, it would seem that there needs to be a >80% distribution of rare cards on the item, im not sure the valuse for the others off the top of my head, but it would be progressive, i guess epics would need maybe 50%+ or something and rares 30%+ with an uncommon maybe.
Not necessarily. It has been said several time by the devs rarity =/= how good a card/item is. The rarer a card is, the more complex the rules on it are, it basically boils down to this (at least, in Blue Manchu's intentions). In fact, Bejeweled is a testament to that: the cards on it are relatively straightforward, hence they are more common then other, more complex cards. Which leads to the item itself being more common then other items holding rarer cards. But still, the cards are very effective, resulting in a weapon which is both very effective and still easily-available. Again, rarity =/= power. This much has always been one of the more solid principle within CH's overall design. Not sure if this is slowly changing though, as I remember @Flaxative saying in another thread the devs are actively working on making rarer items more interesting/useful/sexy in some very practical way. As a side note: you often get cards which could be said to be over/under-valued, leading to strange itemization issues. But that's a whole different topic.
We have two goals relevant to this discussion: 1 - make sure that rarity of cards doesn't translate directly into quality of cards 2 - make sure there aren't too many dud legendary items In short, a higher percentage of high-rarity items should be competitive/interesting, compared to lower-rarity items, but we don't want low-rarity cards to be bad (and thus a good number of low-rarity items, like Bejeweled, Double Edged, etc., end up competitive). And, of course, this is a guideline for future content. We don't intend to change every card currently in the game until our goals are met. This is actually really simple. 1/3 of cards on an item are rare = rare (or 1-2/6 on a weapon) 2/3 of cards on an item are rare = epic (or 3-4/6 on a weapon) 3/3 of cards on an item are rare = legendary (or 5-6/6 on a weapon)
Well, if this is becoming too dominant or has become too dominant, the first obvious question to ask is what can be built to beat this build. So what are the strengths? Mobility, and the ability to hit hard over and over. Weaknesses? The most obvious are elves are fragile, and can only hit when up close. So, where does that lead us? The mobility and step attacks make the range issue for the attacks less salient. Trying to load up on blocks means you lose attacks of your own, and if they're being played right, the elves should be ganging up on one target usually. Well, that points to one possibility, if your using warriors who can survive the first round of elf attacks, could chops work to take out multiple elves at once? Would that require your own elf warriors? Nimbus seems obvious, but I beat nimbus one hand myself because the mobility let me get to the priest before they could nimbus again. It was harder though. So how about reducing mobility? The I've attacks I've seen with encumber are not terribly common or very strong. The big area effect things like rockfall and mud pit are monster only. Are there other ones besides entangling roots in missing? Are there any step attacks with spears besides shifty staff that could step away and still hit the elves?
Path Of Knives punishes mobility, especially if you also have a way to force moves like Winds Of War or maybe Violent Spin. Keeping a wizard alive around a bunch of fast elf warriors is a challenge, though. Also, if the bejazzled elves are interested in Vicious Thrust and other step attacks mostly to do damage rather than as ways to get around it won't hurt them much. Also also, if they have Elven Maneuvers active (or draw it after you hit them with the attachment), it can get them even more cards. Some purges might help with that, although that comes at the expense of offense.
Its a good call, no doubt there. A suggestion what could be done (in future) that is in line with all your guidelines - if you have a Bejeweled Shortsword as common, you could make just slightly better Legendary counterpart .. for example 2x7, 2x 11, 2x 13dmg .. That's only 4dmg total more, wont break the meta.. and doesn't make regular common weapon bad in no way.. and yet makes owners of that Legendary item feel more satisfied (than having bunch of Legendary weapons that aren'c competitively playable) like The Bludgeonator and OB .. only I think they should cost the same for all that to make sense Similar thing is made with Kerrick's Steel boots VS Quellic's Boots .. it a minor difference and owner of Quellic gets that little bit of edge..
The math person in me requests you simplify all your fractions or none of them (in this case probably not simplifying would be easier to picture/remember for many).
The problem is, you can't just put higher quality cards on a item like that. 2x7,2x11 and 2x13 would be a level 21 item. Higher rarity mean more interesting, more complex, but not more directly more powerful. Here we have an item that WANT to be simple and straightforward by being near min-maxed to damage. The only way to improve average damage would be to add traits such a blind rage to allow more points into the other attacks.
Had to double-check terms to make sure I wasn't being horribly obtuse, but I'm pretty sure all 3 of those are simplified fractions.
