Discuss Reasoning for card changes [patch 0.9.20]

[SentryOmega]

Discuss Reasoning for card changes [patch 0.9.20]

Huge thanks to CDPR for the latest patch - well done. Special thanks to mr. Burza for patchnotes and re-evaluation of end-of-season reward distribution.

Now that the patchnotes actually include "developers feedback" / viewpoint reasoning behind particular changes, would you like to discuss?

Commanders Horn

You decided to nerf the entire card for ALL archetypes just because of 1 archetype of 1 faction (Eithne Scoiatael). Sure playing a leader for 25 guaranteed points was op, but only in this particular iteration, which was NOT the only one possible in the game. Commanders Horn as it is will barely see play now all the way across the game and is destroyed as a card just because of 1 use.

Projected better solution: make the CH doomed itself - it will stay the same for other archetypes (none other had the ability to replay it) and exclude the OP Eithne. Another possibility: make it buff 6x3 for 18 total points (harder to play, easier to counter, cannot be played by itself for 18 points (unlike Paulie Dal etc))

Summoning Circle

It feels like you concentrated on the wrong problem with this card. It was only used for spies particularly because its shit for anything else. Under even conditions, SS will NEVER WIN you a game, best case is a draw (if you play the exact same card on even points), or loss (SS spawns base copy, so if opponent plays a buffed dwarf or tuirseach soldier, you get less points).

Projected solution: SS strengthens the summoned unit by 1-2 points (or buffs).

Slave Driver

Fixed the wrong problem. Your change only added more pissy random, but did not change the possible versatility. Slave driver is not good because of versatility, but because it can Ointment --> into slave driver --> into elven scout --> into Sage --> into ointment --> into slave driver --> into elven scout --> into [any 12-point card].

Solution: Slave driver should not spawn something that can spawn something else (elven scouts and alike).

Tremors: this card will never be played again. It was only good because of double effect by Ithlinne. No other factions were using it (there are many 12-14 point bronzes which do NOT require the opponent to have 12-14 units on the board). Necessary here is the Ithlinne rework, not the tremors rework.

--------

End of season rewards: why did the border and title reward changes only come into effect the current (next) season, if the previous season was already 27 days (more than 2 times shorter than any other?)

 

[Cougar1993]

Ciri Nova - still in every fuckin*** game!!! Still lose so many games because this stupid noob card ...

 

[SentryOmega]

Ciri Nova

Actually got buffed because now it cannot be countered by Geralt: Igni with 100% probability.

 

[Cougar1993]

I saw new meta now, noob Nilfgaard Viper vipers player - super noob bronze card , he can kill almost everything. He run 25 cards and Ciri Nova of course - so best option here is delete this game and bye bye CDPR ...

 

[Cipher90]

It still feels like all games are about: "Who can play the last card". Which is of course Ciri:Nova

 

[Mancoon1980]

After first day. Reveal, cursed bears, and dwarves were what I faced with the occasional nr armour deck. Viper witcher needs changed so ointment can't pull it out again.

 

[Zjiin]

So Nova's play rate hasn't dropped at all after its "nerf" (read - Buff.)

Theres a surprise.

 

[partci]

Dudes... seriously?

Reading this comments one can presume that half the archetypes in the game should be removed, cause someone got B-hurt.

 

[Masti.675]

The best thing is what they have written as the reason of ciri:nova's "nerf":

Ciri: Nova has seen a lot of play since its inception into the game. She’s been a powerful finisher. One that could be easily countered with Geralt: Igni, which, based on stats, isn’t among cards being used the most. By bringing down the card’s power down to 22 points we’re making it slightly weaker when it comes to raw numbers, but still susceptible to Scorch.


Well. If Geralt:Igni ain't among the cards being played the most, (and on the opposite side we have Ciri, which actually is being played VERY VERY OFTEN) making Ciri Nova resistent to his abbility ain't the way you are repairing the things. She is now being played even more often while Geralt Igni is about to be forgotten tbh.

Don't see any kind of logic there.

 

[iamthedave]

The best thing is what they have written as the reason of ciri:nova's "nerf":

Ciri: Nova has seen a lot of play since its inception into the game. She’s been a powerful finisher. One that could be easily countered with Geralt: Igni, which, based on stats, isn’t among cards being used the most. By bringing down the card’s power down to 22 points we’re making it slightly weaker when it comes to raw numbers, but still susceptible to Scorch.


Well. If Geralt:Igni ain't among the cards being played the most, (and on the opposite side we have Ciri, which actually is being played VERY VERY OFTEN) making Ciri Nova resistent to his abbility ain't the way you are repairing the things. She is now being played even more often while Geralt Igni is about to be forgotten tbh.

Don't see any kind of logic there.

Then you aren't trying.

The obvious logic is to try and bring Ciri Nova down a little so she's not overpoweringly above most other finishers in the game, since an unanswered round 3 ciri nova - or last play ciri nova - is almost always a win because there are very few one-card plays that can equal it, let alone beat it, and very few card combos that go above 25 in one play.

Their explanation implies that they believed Gigni would keep Ciri Nova in check, but it didn't, so they decided to make her a bit weaker. Hasn't worked out, of course, but the logic is clear.

 

[DannyGuy]

Commander's Horn
Agreed, should be 6x3 +doomed tag.

Summoning Circle
Agreed, it should boost the unit by 1 or 2. Let's say it'd boost the unit by 1 if it's silver and by 2 if it's bronze.

Slave Driver
I'd honestly rework the card. It's reasonably unhealthy for the game in my opinion. It's quite bullshit in mirror matches, and we don't need any of that. Something like "Play the lowest bronze soldier from your deck" would make sense in my opinion, since it'd synergize with the Slave Infantry.

Tremors
I think that something like "deal 1 damage to all enemies. Deal 2 damage instead to enemies that have 4 or less strength." Punishes swarm and synergizes with cards that deal damage, but not quite enough to kill anything.

 

[x1Cygnus]

Commanders Horn: should have left it as it was and made it doomed - problem given for the change is then solved without affecting every other faction that uses it... like NR who really needed this change, right?

Summoning Circle: pretty much the only reason this card was used of late is for the Silver Spy thing. Summoning Circle was kinda used in Spellatael decks, but it was never really an auto-include as it's just not that good a card, but was there for the spell tag so... I kind of agree - they saw the problem with spies but have "fixed" the wrong card. Anyway, Summoning Circle is not a good card as it stands, and will probably see progressively less play now that it'll be binned from most decks as it can't be used for the Silver Spy thing anymore, so letting SC buff whatever it copies seems sensible to keep it kind of relevant I guess.

Slave Driver: I already proposed a change to this card in another thread - and what's been implemented in latest patch won't change or balance much I feel. The change I suggested was that the SD card should get a choice of a card from opposing players faction rather than deck; this can keep oppo's deck composition and strategy hidden from the NG player for a time until oppo starts to play through their hand etc. SD should also not be able to pull other create cards and benefit from that ability; like Elven Scout should be blacklisted from SD 'pick list'.

Dwarves have taken a major hit across most of their deck (expected and needed) and will go some way to stop their spam/high bronze numbers, but this change only means something else will come along to take their place in the points spam decks like SK Bears (which I've seen a lot more of recently) and maybe NG Viper Witchers - or just anything with that one particular card that got buffed to 22 strength.

The rest of the patch is fairly underwhelming I feel; it's patching by numbers/spreadsheet - "card X isn't popular or played much - let's increase it by 1". There's a whole list of these changes - hasn't anybody considered that maybe the reason these cards aren't played much isn't just because of their strength as a unit? ie: Avallac'h: Sage - increasing this cards power from 2 to 3 won't make me want to play this card any more now than I did when it was a 2 strength unit, which was 'not at all'. That's not because I thought he needed more power, but because I think the card is generally bad, is unreliable and a bit of a meme... which is fine if you're building a meme/fun deck, but for anything remotely competitive it's useless.

 

[SlevinHakase]

I personnaly dislike a lot these changes aswell as the given reasonings for them since i enjoy GWENT for the interactions in the game, and not for mindlessly playing all your cards and hoping your deck is able to play more points than your opponent, but looking at the changes it looks as if that is the intendet way to play the game, since most changes are to point values as such making it seem like the interactions between cards should not be incresed to make counteplay more viable but rather it seem that interactions are even actively beeing made impossible like the change to ciri nova wich is now impossible to interac with using igni aslong as ciri is played on an emptey row as such making ciri nova even more difficult to counter and removing interactability from the game.

 

[Masti.675]

Then you aren't trying.

The obvious logic is to try and bring Ciri Nova down a little so she's not overpoweringly above most other finishers in the game, since an unanswered round 3 ciri nova - or last play ciri nova - is almost always a win because there are very few one-card plays that can equal it, let alone beat it, and very few card combos that go above 25 in one play.

Their explanation implies that they believed Gigni would keep Ciri Nova in check, but it didn't, so they decided to make her a bit weaker. Hasn't worked out, of course, but the logic is clear.

Rotfl. It is irrational to make her just a 3 points weaker and making her uncounterable in the same way. It wouldn't be so bad if only she wouldn't be the finisher, but while the way of playing her is kinda simple, then I do not understand what do those 3 points change was about to actually change in the way to make her less attractive. For me and for lots of players it is not a nerf but a great buff, cos' it is now impossible to counter-play her in R3.

People knew her and everyone who used a brain knew how to play around her, but right know if you do not have anything that may gave you like 22+ points in ONE turn then you are hopeless, and most of the archetypes can't even dream about such without making a great effort to create such envaironment to make it possible. Geralt Igni as a non-faction card was the great alternative to not only counter-play Ciri Nova, but also was somehow usefull in the game after-all. Right now only Schirru may counter-play her in same way without being totally useless in the case of other archetypes at table, but Schirru is an SC exclusive.

The change of Ciri: Nova was irrational and stupid, and makes game even more about raw points than some kind of tactic.

 

[Snake_Foxhounder]

People called for the Enforcer nerf, me among them, but why drive it into the ground?

In the pre mid-winter patch, Enforcers worked as follows: emissary-emisarry-emissary-enforcer=you get 4 shots in total. As it is now, you only get one shot, regardless of how many emissaries are chained before the enforcers are put down.

I love the idea of them having to be on the board to actually trigger but they always chained off of emissaries that spawned them. I don't know, might be a bit much.

 

[DannyGuy]

People called for the Enforcer nerf, me among them, but why drive it into the ground?

In the pre mid-winter patch, Enforcers worked as follows: emissary-emisarry-emissary-enforcer=you get 4 shots in total. As it is now, you only get one shot, regardless of how many emissaries are chained before the enforcers are put down.

I love the idea of them having to be on the board to actually trigger but they always chained off of emissaries that spawned them. I don't know, might be a bit much.

What? That's stupid. Even with the Enforcers being back to they were pre-midwinter patch, they should be boosted to 7 strength (at least), since the game has powercrept so much since they were first introduced. I don't play NG much so it's hard to say, but i am definitely feeling the difference in power in the few games I've played against them.

 

[partci]

... In the pre mid-winter patch, Enforcers worked as follows: emissary-emisarry-emissary-enforcer=you get 4 shots in total. As it is now, you only get one shot, regardless of how many emissaries are chained before the enforcers are put down...

Really? Now this is stupid! No, pardon me, this is STUPID.

I was just about to suggest that Enforcers should actually get the Arachas Behemoth Treatment: deal 2 DMG up to 5 or 6 times with an 8 STR body.

Why something that is so easy to fix CDPR are making so hard?

My mind is boggled...

 

[OG.laloquaint]

I feel like both Tremors and Commander's Horn were wrongly nerfed because ST abused of them. I know I said that Tremors was the problematic card, but now I realize that it is actually Ithlinne who should actually be changed. I know they wanted to change her but decided not to because it could cause problems. As for Comamander's Horn, couldn't they just like have it banish itself or something?

 

[x1Cygnus]

[SNIP] Ithlinne who should actually be changed. [/SNIP]

It's the lack of any decent bronze spells and the removal of Quen that has led to the Ithlinne / Tremors situation.

Ithlinne's ability has remained unchanged for nearly a year - yep, her ability has been the same since about this time 2017, and looking back through the forum I don't see any threads calling for her to be changed/nerfed way back when; it's only since the mid-winter patch that the "problem" has become apparent. Prior to this her main utility was in spell decks for applying Quen to multiple cards within your deck. Until Quen comes back (not holding my breath) or they develop other decent bronze spells for use on your own cards (which also probably won't happen as "balancing" bronze spells can be a problem as you can have multiple copies of the utility which can become OP as we have seen with Tremors) the problem with Ithlinne will remain.

 

[Theo_FP]

Really? Now this is stupid! No, pardon me, this is STUPID.

I was just about to suggest that Enforcers should actually get the Arachas Behemoth Treatment: deal 2 DMG up to 5 or 6 times with an 8 STR body.

Why something that is so easy to fix CDPR are making so hard?

My mind is boggled...

You have to play your Enforcers before the Emissaries, which is a perfectly fine change. It allows people to actually counter the Enforcers (in the same way you'd counter Mangonels and An Craite Longships); Why should the Enforcers get special treatment over every other card that uses the same mechanic?