offline 0_The_Oracle Imperator Open Casket
Sunday 27/01/2013, 07:55

Ok not going to start off my thread with a great solid argument, just putting it out there that:

when i am using nightmare/ piranas/ gheist/ roots and i still usually end up with 50-50s against skeelz, then something is seriously wrong with the clan.

what do you think?

offline 0_The_Oracle Imperator Open Casket
Tuesday 29/01/2013, 05:35

Skeelz will NEVER climb to the top unlike clans such as montana + roots (when gertjan allowed) or uppers (dorian). the reason is they have way too many counters to them. Take exampple of montana, there is not a single good counter to them that makes the matchup go at least 20% in your favor. people say SoA, but montanas are not that hard to win 3 rounds, and what if you dont draw 2 gheist? well you get my point.

lorna going pill for pill with pan? well pan was never meant to be a round winner, but rather a semi-nuke...... so thats not an impressive trait (edwin beats her pill for pill).

a clan that is simply not good enough to get to the upper elo (not capable) is simply underpowered, I demand something with good damage with sometihng more than 7 power, (not logan, please).

oh and at belle, for a 2* you simple do not want to pill and definitely not fury.... she is shaky as well. well sferiks not used, i dont see why belle should be.

offline The Ideal Master  
Tuesday 29/01/2013, 09:03

Not much left to say skeelz have lacked a solid nuke card since caelus ban. Really though there have been some missed opportunities with cards like eloxia and minerva (why didn't they make it +2/+2 >.

offline Joinone Imperator XiongDang
Friday 01/02/2013, 18:33

No mention of Aylen,,, me disappointed smiley

Seriously, think about it as a one more star more reliable version of Greem, since Greem borderline breaks the game, what is not to like about Aylen as a totally viable bomb
then you can put in all the walls and DRs and stuff so you can win another round
Again, heavy power manipulation is a problem, but hey, you can try to avoid them. you can also afford to throw a 7/10 to a DR card and it probably still makes a 7 gap. I think that's how you should use her. A little different than Greem, not a first round win/lose situation.

offline 0_The_Oracle Imperator Open Casket
Saturday 02/02/2013, 03:29

Well, aylen was actually mentioned in a previous thread. aylen IS more stable than greem and can be used in any round. problem is:

1. 1 more star and NO improvement on round winning.
2. fewer life gap assuming greem used on round 1.
3. more prone to DR

yes those are the reasons why aylen is not as much used. when you hold aylen in your hand, your opponent IS going to expect her some time, and therefore perhaps play a bit more conservatively. although you might use this to your advantage, chances are you might not get aylen in. and skeelz is well known for its crappy damage.

greem on the other hand is basically a coin flip, and thats great for a 4*

offline KitsuneKatsumi Imperator XiongDang
Saturday 02/02/2013, 04:19

We already discussed Aylen quite a lot in a previous thread. I think Aylen is a playable bomb. However, in mono I prefer Michael. Aylen is the most flexible bomb in Skeelz but that flexibility comes at the cost of raw power and efficiency. Also, Greem *is* better against DR, arguably Skeelz's biggest weakness. You might use Aylen or Minerva in Skeelz 1/2 decks.

Aylen is playable but she is by no means overpowered. So I think she doesn't help put Skeelz into top tier; therefore 5* Skeelz characters similar to her in power do not help put Skeelz into Tier 1 or Tier 2.

offline Joinone Imperator XiongDang
Saturday 02/02/2013, 05:37

I agree that Michael is better than Aylen
Maybe just Aylen suits me better for my opportunist's style of play

offline misterjones Titan Limit Break
Saturday 02/02/2013, 07:58

Can't believe we're a page and a half into a Skeelz thread and nobody has mentioned Snowflake yet. Basically does 90% of what Greem does, for 1 less star. Like Greem, she had great synergy with Skeelz DR (Redra/Dwan/Minerva). Furthermore, landing heal in r1 can dictate play in later rounds-- an opponent is unlikely to pill heavy in r2 since the damage will get mitigated by the heal, so you can sometimes sneak in a low-pill win. Anyway, she's one of my favorite cards and a staple for me in both mono and halfdecks.

@Kitsune: one of the great things about Skeelz is that you can play them in many different ways, depending on your deck. Want your opponent to worry about which nuke will hit them? Stack your deck with Greem/Aylen/Snowflake. Want to try and take three rounds every time? Make sure you have Dr Falk, Sandro, and Chiara. Minerva is a perfect fit in the second strategy.

offline 0_The_Oracle Imperator Open Casket
Saturday 02/02/2013, 08:05

Personally I would use aylen over michael. as said before, michael is PREDICTABLE, and you really dont want to use him without his ability. while 10/7 is nice, it still does not fix skeelz's terrible effin damage.

offline ghelas Titan E X C A L I B U R
Sunday 03/02/2013, 03:15

^ What Jones said. Skeelz have two very viable strategies: What I like to call "ball-and-wall" (launching a high-gap card with a ton of pills and falling back on attack/power manip/high-powered cards for damage denial) and 3-round wins with their wall cards, which are abundant. Neither strategy is easy to achieve a > 50% win rate against... That means a player who is good at reading his opponents will do just fine with Skeelz.

Part of the problem is that Skeelz is just starting to really blossom as a clan. Michael and Falkenstein are important recent additions, and of course Minerva is as well. We all know by now that part of being "good" with a clan is just understanding in what ways your opponents will typically react to your moves. If more people get experienced with Skeelz, and learn how people tend to react to these valuable new cards, Skeelz will suddenly start to seem a lot better. They still have room to grow, but they're definitely no Frozn. smiley

offline - Gino - Senior  
Sunday 03/02/2013, 08:05

Personally I like michael because his predictability becomes a huge trick play. I don't know how many times I caught players off guard because players set up for the michael play and 1-2 pill a card. Skeelz are obviously great in soa weeks and any week when greem is playable and allstars are hit by the weekly list. If allstars are going to be good I don't even bother with them.

Skeelz have almost every card to counter the weekly elo meta however the fact that a player has to make nifty plays consistently makes them just ok

Answer to this subject

Clint City, day.