Recent troll defende team: solo celestasia

It still too early for me to know if I feel Celestia is as bad as the Agile/Trueshot combo.

I’ve been able to beat her with a Paladin/Sheggra team, and my burn debuff team. Alas, she clears frozen on her own, so she get’s the extra turns.

  • Devour
  • Dragon Slayer
  • Burn
  • Poison
  • Death Mark

Take your pick.

Depends on definition of “bad”. The TS teams were fast cointoss battles, either way it was over soon. Cel is completely luck dependent and resembles the venoxia-webspinner teams of the past when they did like 1 damage but took infinite turns.

When alone Cel can very easily catch a spin and grow out of hand – without ever attempting to hurt you except for random skull drops. If your team is attack buff based or can freeze it, no problem but if it’s some usual thing it will yoyo for ages.

Whay I wrote earlier is no joke, it climbed over 300, I struggled it down to 150-ish then it grew back. No matter how I tried to eliminate all yellow and blue it kept finding just enough – and 4-matches in between.

Probably a big part of problem is the mana bonus and surges.

An hour? Whoa… what was your team?

Infernal King is a very good counter to her : the split damage will break every barrier before he turns every green gems to skull, turning her into mere scales :slight_smile:

Some early experimental team with 18 attack in front and only dmg dealer scythe ~18.

The main discussion thread is Celestia's Barrier - The new trueshot/agile? With more dmg output I could beat a 3 cel+sheggra team with the last having over 500 life to punch down, took quite some time too. Good for single challenge, but will be alt-f4-ed onward.

As experiment I put on a Cel team on def too, got overall only 2 losses over a day (one lvl1000) instead of usual 20-30 mixed win/loss for the same time, so most people keep skipping or quitting.

That is why I have finally joined with putting up a horrible defend team. It is amazing how many more people don’t skip or force quit when they see an abysmally weak lineup. I feel like there are A LOT of people force quitting these days. If I put up a good team, I’ll be lucky to get 10 win/lose a week. If I put up a horrible team, it is nearly 50 over a week. It is nearly 100% lose, but with the weird new reward system that rewards losing, it works just fine.

I know right?
We complained a lot about loosing being better than winning defenses, and I know we are lucky that the devs are oftenly listening to us, but I don’t get why they chose to ignore us on this and went further on with the bad defense rewarding…

I sent a PM to Sirrian. Hopefully the change will be possible within 1.0.9. I’d hate to have to go through all of 1.0.9 with a lose incentive when there are so many powerful defends to try now.

The change being that an AI defense win would count as a tick towards the reward system with the reward just being sent to mail like it already does.

1 Like

It’s not so easy to fix, every solution either opens an exploit or nudge people to rage quit.

What about people rage quiting counting as wins?
I read somewhere that they think this issue is solved, yet, somehow, when I have a strong defense I get something like 8 loss / 2 victory in defense a week, while with a weak defense, I get something like 20 loss on Monday alone…

In prev post I meant people rage-quiting the game. :slight_smile:

If alt-f4 would count as def win it would lead to simple exploit, as games are free to start quits would generate stuff for others in no time. And figuring limit on that is not trivial either.

That is important too, but that would probably be harder to fix. It may also cause some complaints to people, like myself and others, who tend to have bad connections. Despite using the exploit myself on occasion, I would love if it was removed. Since matches don’t cost gold anymore, it is not like a person is really losing anything for losing connection. Fixing it will lead to a trophy loss, win streak loss, and the defendant actually getting the reward.

Alt+F4 and other connection exploitations really need to be fixed now that doing so has basically no negative repercussions on a bad connection player.

You can’t find a guild mate, so that would only benefit other guilds. To be able to abuse this, you have to maintain 2 accounts on same levels and fight one another repeteadly. As long as finding opponents is quite random, I don’t see any viable exploit.

I don’t think so : rage quiting in Arena results in a loss. They deliberately didn’t add this to the PvP system.

I’m in this case too. I see no complaints if it only affects the victorious player : the quitter (looser) doesn’t even see a change, he simply wasted his time on this battle. The winner gets a defense win. Every one is happy, good defenses are rewarded, no one is punished.

You don’t need to aim, I bet currently many many people just blindly launch games and quit either immediately or soon if it does not go their way. Without any effort on team-building or winning. Why not, when it costs nothing. That would create much income if counted as def win.

To contain the exploit some cost/penalty should be imposed on the attacker. But with the current teams I see, it would cause a fair amount of justified rage. IMO the battles being free is what keeps the thing working right now.

Well… In my opinion, it takes a lot of joyless efforts to do this “start game, quit, rince and repeat” for pretty low rewards… You are better of playing your games normally.

Besides, although quiting games don’t give any rewards, retreating does, and it is faster than force quiting the game as there is less loading screens involved…
Hell, even without that, you can attack anyone with a Spider Swarm and set skull matches for the AI to kill you.

The point is : the issue you are trying to prevent is not an issue. And if it was, it would already be affecting the game right now.

Currently scouting and even skip cost more to do, if the other team was revealed and fully visible I’d expect less engage and quit immediately. (but making strong def teams even less desireable… )

The other usual case of quitting is when you fight a cointoss battle and does not going in your favor. If you lost a troop early or just can’t engage your steamroller it’s more time economic to quit right on and start another battle that you will win.

Devs probably have statistics on hand, wish some of it would be shared.

The time diff between retreat and quit is minimal, especially lately when every server action takes long time with the login almost the shortest of them.

Not sure what you mean by “would be effecting”, measurements clearly show counted attack battles go from like 30 to 2 having changed a medium team to a strong one.

That. I’ll agree that this is extremly weird and feels stupid xD

Well, engaging and quiting immediatly IS an exploit of the current system. Making the defender win here does seem reasonnable as the attacker just forfeited the fight.

It’s all the more reasonnable when they loose the “cointoss battle”, they lost it and surrendered.

This is both viable in term of gameplay than it is in term of RP. Someone sieging someone else, exhausting too much time and energy ends up turning tail although they could have won, because that victory would have cost too much. It makes perfect sense to me.

Ha, when I see a def lineup of a hero with a Crude Club (which was before 1.0.9), I know I’ll fight him :slight_smile:

I don’t think they are “ignoring” I think they are just staging silent because they already have stuff in the works. The amount of times this has been brought up, they know, oh, they know.

2 Likes