Why I detest removal in this game.

[SHALLAHJUSTICE]

I agree gwent has got very zappy. Too zappy maybe.

It's not he most sophisticated play for sure, but the need to remove threats on the board remains paramount, especially for ranked games.

Not getting rid of a troublesome unit early can cost you the game, so it's all just a simple matter of practicality really.

For shackles to be a viable alternative they need some sort of improvement like banishing the locked unit when it goes to the GY or something

Not worth getting your knickers in a twist over.

 

[Cipher90]

Still have no idea how you can somehow complain about both. Removal is what keeps point spam in check.

The decks which are spamming points are not relying on specific engine cards and not affected by removal. The amount of point-spam-decks played is partially caused by the removal making complex decks unplayable.


The game could have more viable decks if removing cards would be harder (Especially SocioTael Decks which are depending on specific cards and are unable to revive them -.- eg. Moving or Drunken Dwarfs), right?

 

[Legendarum]

Also, isnt part of the skill of playing Gwent, judging when to play your engine cards with the least probability of them being removed? Obviously some decks run a lot of removal, but often, against decks running less, you can bluff out the opponent removing something you dont mind losing.

 

[Cipher90]

How much bluffing can be done in a game? You usually have 11+2+1 Cards to play. Most engine cards need other cards to function (That's the whole point of them) and you can be happy if you draw the right cards.
That doesn't leave much space for sacrifices Oo

 

[MaximumSquid]

You need counters to cards. . . removal and locks take care of most of it

If we got rid of locks there's a number of cards that would become must plays during a game and would ultimately make the game worse

 

[StrykerxS77x]

The decks which are spamming points are not relying on specific engine cards and not affected by removal. The amount of point-spam-decks played is partially caused by the removal making complex decks unplayable.

I don't think that the real issue here is being identified correctly. Point spam decks ARE affected by removal specifically removal like Scorch, Igni, Villen etc etc.

I agree that engine decks are not very good due to having so much removal and this has been a big issue for awhile now. Ever since the gold immunity change there are gold cards that are almost never used because people simply remove them so that their over time effects mean nothing. The devs have to figure out how to address this issue.

 

[Mathspy]

Here's an image to think of:
Gwent where everyone is only playing engines! Whoever puts their engine first on-board and the engine combos the most, and the deck generally has a higher potential of total points automatically wins! I remember reading in the other thread about removals someone saying "Gwent is now playing your cards in a specific order and that's all"
Well that's not true, it'll be once we move to this engine only meta though!

Seriously removals are literally the definition of interactivity, and if locks become more popular you'll just be like "Why I detest locks." They aren't even different, except that locks will not be able to counter point spam, only engines lol.

 

[Shadow-Stalker]

I don't think that the real issue here is being identified correctly. Point spam decks ARE affected by removal specifically removal like Scorch, Igni, Villen etc etc.

And the never ending catch 22 starts again. Point spam being resolved by reverse point spam (Which is simply spamming points by deleting your opponents point spam)

So yes, this is not removal. This is just point spam under another guise. Which is perfectly acceptable under certain limited circumstances-- the less you have, the more you treasure it. But unfotunately the whole thing is a shit storm in the game as a side effect of a whole host of stupid changes and hasn't been maintained one bit.

You used to be able to igni two or more of your opponents mangonels, because they were row locked and igni had a much lower threshold.
Doing so however may cost you the game because you had then obviously used your reverse point spam card. So it was about that minute decision on what to do and what is the best action depending on the hand you drew.
CARDS HAD WEIGHT


These days you just delete it. And when he plays another, you deleted that too. And you do so because removal has been buffed continuously to the point cards like mangonel needed to be buffed themselves to be worth while (Now dealing two damage on play and voorhis revealing 4 cards instead of three) This in turn causes people to play more and more removal, which again in CDPR's minds mean cards like mangonel must be underpowered and will need to be buffed even more.

And the more removal people play the less engine cards people play which means in turn the more point spam people play, but unfortunately the only counter to point spam is either A. More point spam. Or B. Reverse point spam (Which as stated is technically still point spam)

Thus point spam will never die because of the way gwents evolution was handled.

We now have two ways to play. You add points or you take them away. And both of those have been diluted so much that there is no interesting variance.

Remember old champion of champions? Strengthen self by 2 each turn if on a row on his lonesome. Can't have that unique effect anymore, He'd be deleted either when played or when he is 20 points.


LESS. IS. MORE.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

And the never ending catch 22 starts again. Point spam being resolved by reverse point spam (Which is simply spamming points by deleting your opponents point spam)

So yes, this is not removal. This is just point spam under another guise. Which is perfectly acceptable under certain limited circumstances-- the less you have, the more you treasure it. But unfotunately the whole thing is a shit storm in the game as a side effect of a whole host of stupid changes and hasn't been maintained one bit.

You used to be able to igni two or more of your opponents mangonels, because they were row locked and igni had a much lower threshold.
Doing so however may cost you the game because you had then obviously used your reverse point spam card. So it was about that minute decision on what to do and what is the best action depending on the hand you drew.
CARDS HAD WEIGHT


These days you just delete it. And when he plays another, you deleted that too. And you do so because removal has been buffed continuously to the point cards like mangonel needed to be buffed themselves to be worth while (Now dealing two damage on play and voorhis revealing 4 cards instead of three) This in turn causes people to play more and more removal, which again in CDPR's minds mean cards like mangonel must be underpowered and will need to be buffed even more.

And the more removal people play the less engine cards people play which means in turn the more point spam people play, but unfortunately the only counter to point spam is either A. More point spam. Or B. Reverse point spam (Which as stated is technically still point spam)

Thus point spam will never die because of the way gwents evolution was handled.

We now have two ways to play. You add points or you take them away. And both of those have been diluted so much that there is no interesting variance.

Remember old champion of champions? Strengthen self by 2 each turn if on a row on his lonesome. Can't have that unique effect anymore, He'd be deleted either when played or when he is 20 points.


LESS. IS. MORE.

Honestly I don't agree with the complaining over "point spam" anyway. The entire game is simply pointing points on your side of the board or removing points from your opponents side of the board. So spamming points is literally what you are supposed to be doing. Trying to make the game interesting and engaging is something to discuss but I don't get complaining about point spam when that is literally the point of the game.

Scorch is literally not point spam as it puts no points on your side of the board.

"You add points or you take them away". Well yeah that's always been the game.

No one played champions of champions anyway. But I agree that over time cards are going to have to be reworked somehow. They don't work in the game anymore and they rarely have in the past as well.

Also, multiple scorches has always been in the game. It might be a little worse now but it's always been a thing so I don't really get complaining about it now instead of back then.

 

[Mancoon1980]

Im with you. Just built a pretty cool deck that involves varies strategies and non point spam cards only to be greeted with six freaking viper witchers, slave drivers to pull my engine cards more efficiently than me plus with adding an extra point, then quickly stealing those engine cards with a medic. After all 6 witchers were played I bring out my main engine card only to get it banished making my restore useless. Very frustrating to have to play point spam..makes me so angry I could smash my controller. I haven't done that since the sega genesis playing broken games.

 

[TrompeLaMort]

'Oh god my opponent actually has a chance because he is running that one bronze card.' Is not at all on the same lines as; 'Oh no my opponent renders my deck completely useless because he is playing that one bronze card that every deck now has a variation of so therefor my deck went from being useful in 50% of matchups to useless in all of them.

I mean, if your deck relies on an engine to win, then by running enough removal I'll counter your deck. That is a fact. It is the same in any card game. And it should be like this: if I can build my deck knowing your deck, I should win every single time.

The problem of removal is point-spamming decks, because then thunder is just a 9 point play (at most!!), against 12+ of the opponent. The problem of point-spamming decks are engines, because although you can run a couple of thunders in a elves or bears deck, you certainly can't run much more than that, otherwise you won't have enough points. And the problem of engines is control. People complain that alchemy NG takes care of their engines: that is the entire point of the deck.

When I'm playing Harald against Alchemy, I mulligan away all my engines. The deck is weaker like this, but still wins ~40% of the time. And that is fine for a bad matchup. But if your deck absolutely depends on the engine to win a game, then your deck is just bad, I'm sorry.

 

[gards]

An interesting read. If the OP had his way there would be no removal? I can't see that happening. Removal is a must but I certainly get the OP's point about how frustrating it is when you play an engine card that gets removed immediately haha
Somehow, maybe in a few months it will settle down again. Would be interesting to know how many of the mid-winter cards are being played across ALL factions. That crow card that does -4 on all rows...never seen it played haha
The problem is that online games are full of unpleasant people and the number of them is very high indeed. Think about the other online games you play. You have probably encountered so many people playing online it beggars belief. I remember feeling sheer joy when I would come across a normal, decent person playing Dayz. They felt the same way. But that was maybe 5 out of 100 players or so on Dayz. THIS! More than any other point or opinion made me realise that online play is just upsetting and crates anger or occasionally, joy.

Chin up OP, it's just a game, not your life's work. I reiterate. ANY online game is full of people that revel in your misery haha

GG

 

[Maerd]

I think the biggest offender of the excessive removal that doesn't allow any combos is the removal resurrection cards. Imagine that there are no ointments, or vipers are power 6. Then alchemy will have 3 strong removals and that's it. It's still very powerful ~16 point bronzes but now it can be played around them. With 6 or 7 (with operator) exceptional removals there's no chance to play around it. Therefore, most engine decks will be stillborn.

In general, Gwent is suffering from resurrections, "tutors" and "creators" running amok. Playing just a bronze card without any additional card feels like a waste of value nowadays. The whole deck optimization relies on making sure you should exploit your deck to the last card. If resurrection cards and "tutors" were only one-use gold and silver cards then, I think, it would have improved the game. Create mechanics is just randomness that, imho, just doesn't even belong to a serious game.

 

[Shadow-Stalker]

Scorch is literally not point spam as it puts no points on your side of the board.

The scenario: You're nearing the end of a round, you are 30 points behind, you so desperately need exactly that amount to win. You can A. Play 30 points on the board. Which adds up to thirty points being played and gives you the win; Or B. You can play scorch to remove 30 points from the board, which adds up to a total of 30 points and gives you the win.

Because at the end of the day 30 points is thirty points.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

The scenario: You're nearing the end of a round, you are 30 points behind, you so desperately need exactly that amount to win. You can A. Play 30 points on the board. Which adds up to thirty points being played and gives you the win; Or B. You can play scorch to remove 30 points from the board, which adds up to a total of 30 points and gives you the win.

Because at the end of the day 30 points is thirty points.

Calling it point spam isn't correct though. No one ever says "spam removal". The entire point of the phrase is a critique on doing nothing but throwing large numbers of points onto the board without board interaction. Removal is specifically interacting with your opponent. It's the opposite of point spam.

 

[tealquest]

Without removal the game would be brainless. Everyone would be just slamming their combos exponentially growing in power. While removal being present in the game, makes smart people kinda play around them, never go all in spread your boosts, etc. Without removal why do you need opponent then at all? Just make charts: who was able to put maximum power on board in two turns wins...

 

[TheShift]

No hard feelings to anyone,from what I'm about to say

But month after month after month these same threads pop up of what someone "dislikes" about the game

I'm going to state the obvious,and say Gwent has been only one type of play style... only one way to enjoy the game everytime a patch drops and the meta changes

A-DAPT

verb

1. make (something) suitable for a new use or purpose; modify.

   synonyms:

   modify, alter, change, adjust, readjust, convert, redesign, restyle, refashion, remodel, reshape, revamp, rework, rejig, redo, reconstruct, reorganize; More

   • become adjusted to new conditions.

     synonyms:

     adjust to, acclimatize oneself to, acclimate to, accommodate oneself to, attune to, conform to, habituate oneself to, become habituated to, get used to, orient oneself in, reconcile oneself to, come to terms with, get one's bearings in, find one's feet in, acculturate to, assimilate to, blend in to, fit in to ​

Its just that simple. In 2 days I made card adjustments and play style to accommodate the overzealous removal theme this season so far.
It's very easily done with most decks..no there is no way to deal with what seems to be the best couple decks out there ..unless you copy those decks.and play them yourself
But adapting older decks to the new meta is not that hard

 

[Shadow-Stalker]

Without removal the game would be brainless. Everyone would be just slamming their combos exponentially growing in power. While removal being present in the game, makes smart people kinda play around them, never go all in spread your boosts, etc. Without removal why do you need opponent then at all? Just make charts: who was able to put maximum power on board in two turns wins...

And the issue is that too much removal is equally brainless. But again, I guarantee you read the headline and started typing a response. We have other solutions.

Killing everything your opponent plays is really skill-full isn't it? ...Isn't it?

 

[TheNotoriousThree]

I finally got the proof that it is exactly the same people that complain Gwent is not-interactive (point-spamming) and complain about removal, which is the main form of interaction in any game.

"Oh no, my opponent has a way to fight back against my 40-point red-coin Voorhis, this game is so unbalanced!"

You don't understand the problem at all do you. I don't have a problem with control decks but the current point slap ST decks aren't control based at all. The problem is that all the support that removal currently has. Back in the days control decks were not powerful enough on their own since locks and removal cards were very low tempo, so the whole point of a control deck was shutting down engine cards. Nobody had a problem with control decks back then, or did you see people complain about, say, Radovid? Nowedays Viper Witcher can get an easy 15 points on his own and can also remove engine cards while doing so. And that a total of six times throughout the match. So they get all their value on deploy without me being able to interrupt their gameplan and they remove my engines. How fun right?

This is simply ridiculous and I don't understand how people don't see the problem here and still defend point slapping. It's literally a back and forth in adding 15 points to your side or removing 15 points from the opponent each turn with no risk of losing your engines or your opponent countering you. This is basically what Gwent used to be back in Witcher 3. But people still say stuff like "Duh this is what Gwent is, spamming points".

Way to go one million IQ Brouver-into-Barclay-into-Cleaver-red-coin players.

 

[Legendarum]

I mean, if your deck relies on an engine to win, then by running enough removal I'll counter your deck. That is a fact. It is the same in any card game. And it should be like this: if I can build my deck knowing your deck, I should win every single time.

The problem of removal is point-spamming decks, because then thunder is just a 9 point play (at most!!), against 12+ of the opponent. The problem of point-spamming decks are engines, because although you can run a couple of thunders in a elves or bears deck, you certainly can't run much more than that, otherwise you won't have enough points. And the problem of engines is control. People complain that alchemy NG takes care of their engines: that is the entire point of the deck.

When I'm playing Harald against Alchemy, I mulligan away all my engines. The deck is weaker like this, but still wins ~40% of the time. And that is fine for a bad matchup. But if your deck absolutely depends on the engine to win a game, then your deck is just bad, I'm sorry.

I think this pretty much hits the nail on the head - not all decks are susceptible to removal, at all. Just engine decks particularly are.

In Magic the Gathering it's well known that generally aggro beats control, control beats combo, and combo beats aggro - in general. In Gwent I don't see it as any different, point spam beats removal, removal beats engines, and engines beats point spam - in general.

I don't see that as a problem whatsoever. It's just impossible to have one deck that does equally as well versus any other deck.

I can see it's annoying having your engine cards removed straight away - but again, even though most decks run a bit of removal, there are many, many decks that don't run enough to counter a good engine deck - and those that do, will struggle against other sorts of decks.

Eh, I just don't see an issue.