Imlerith: Sabbath

[Khreygond]

This is just simply not true. You're not required to have everything, having few tall units is enough for Imlerith to fail. But if you have no removals or locks in your deck then you just play pure point vomit deck, which should not be encouraged. Fewer strong point vomit decks we have, the better it is for the game.

Very few strong units can survive an I:S tutored by Royal Decree. The massive advantage offered to the attacker in a duel also makes it hard for them to survive even without Royal Decree, as they need to be stronger than 9 even in that situation.

I love how you are making assumptions as to the decks that I play not based at all on what I say. Go back and read my posts and you will find that I run at least 3 locks/removal in my current deck. 4 if you count the revive which can be used again. The fact I have to keep at least 2 in hand (if I even draw them), not because the opponent has this card, but because the opponent MIGHT have it with Renew, is what is overdoing it for me.

 

[Maerd]

Very few strong units can survive an I:S tutored by Royal Decree.

Not true. Every faction has several units in the current meta that will survive I:S.

The fact I have to keep at least 2 in hand (if I even draw them), not because the opponent has this card, but because the opponent MIGHT have it with Renew, is what is overdoing it for me.

If your opponent has the Renew then it's overcommitment, which means the deck will just loose so much that that person will stop using it because it won't be fun to loose 80% of games. Therefore, in a few days you won't see such decks at all.

 

[Khreygond]

Not true. Every faction has several units in the current meta that will survive I:S.


If your opponent has the Renew then it's overcommitment, which means the deck will just loose so much that that person will stop using it because it won't be fun to loose 80% of games. Therefore, in a few days you won't see such decks at all.

Machines don't. Alchemy (even if it can remove said card easily) doesn't. Reveal doesn't. Not even meta decks with strong units necessarily have a strong enough unit on the board all the time. Timed right he can still appear and survive the first duel, even against the decks you are talking about.

Overcommitment or not, I've seen 4 of these (Imlerith Sabbath + Renew. Because Imlerith Sabbath alone I've seen at least 7 times, and 2 in the arena, which I don't count) just today. And it's been almost 2 weeks since this card and the new meta was introduced. Which means in 4 days, half the season will be over.

I don't know if it is fun for the people playing them or not, but seeing at least 4 Imlerith overcommitment decks in one day in the middle of the meta doesn't look like this is going to be dropped anytime soon.

 

[Maerd]

Machines don't.

Siege towers.

Alchemy (even if it can remove said card easily) doesn't.

Are you OK? After a couple of beers MOST units in that deck are unbeatable by I:S, not that he's going to survive that long.

Overcommitment or not, I've seen 4 of these (Imlerith Sabbath + Renew. Because Imlerith Sabbath alone I've seen at least 7 times, and 2 in the arena, which I don't count) just today.

In casual? Who cares. In ranking it exists only in low ranks and in proladder it's almost non-existent at all.

I don't know if it is fun for the people playing them or not

I played a little bit of non-overcommitment Imlerith (I played many decks in ranked this season to check what works the best) and it's a lot of fun and a lot of strategy to put it on the board at the right time, requires a lot of planning and tracking of opponent's deck. It's a skill card, we need more cards like that (not by effect but by design). It's extremely satisfying when you bait all removals first, place protection from scorch and go on to destroy an opponent. But in proladder people are way too smart to take baits, which is why it's not working there well.

 

[Jeydra]

That I have to keep my removal in hand for the mere possibility of my opponent playing with this card, that he is independent of archetypes and synergies and all he needs is Mandrake to go out of control. I quite simply, don't enjoy games against this card at all, and all of that for the reasons posted in this thread.

You're lucky all you need to do is keep removal in hand. Earlier today I played one game where my Eredin opponent played Wild Hunt Drakkar. I played Dagon (12-5). He played Hound (10-10). I passed. He played Sabbath and Adrenaline Rush, going three cards down. Next round he played Mandrake. I'm not running Scorch and didn't have access to Parasite. gg wp lose game.

A few games later, I met another Eredin player on ladder. Again he led with Drakkar. We traded some cards with me always being mindful of the potential Sabbath. With about 6 cards left, he passes. Do I drypass round 2? I usually would since I was running something with a lot of engines and so prefer long rounds; however if I do that he can potentially Sabbath into Adrenaline Rush and win. Do I pass?

And for anyone saying this doesn't exist in the higher ranks - the first game described above was in top 500.

 

[Maerd]

Do I drypass round 2? I usually would since I was running something with a lot of engines and so prefer long rounds; however if I do that he can potentially Sabbath into Adrenaline Rush and win. Do I pass?

And for anyone saying this doesn't exist in the higher ranks - the first game described above was in top 500.

And the problem here is? That the game all of a sudden requires thinking and making different strategy for a different deck?

 

[Jeydra]

And the problem here is? That the game all of a sudden requires thinking and making different strategy for a different deck?

How do you know it's a different deck? For that matter how do you know the next monsters deck you queue into on ladder is / isn't running I:Sabbath + Adrenaline Rush?

 

[Maerd]

How do you know it's a different deck? For that matter how do you know the next monsters deck you queue into on ladder is / isn't running I:Sabbath + Adrenaline Rush?

If you don't know, that's great. It means that it isn't a netdeck. Or do you think everybody have to report you, which deck they play and what cards they have in hand?

 

[Hellsmoke77]

How do you know it's a different deck? For that matter how do you know the next monsters deck you queue into on ladder is / isn't running I:Sabbath + Adrenaline Rush?

You don't know and you shouldn't know. If it is a Sabbath and you can't remove it you lose. If you run into axemen and don't have any weather clear you lose again. If you run into consume and can't stop the first one or two nekkers you lose again.

If you are in the top 500 I shouldn't have to explain this to you. No deck is nor should it be ready to beat every deck. Tech for the meta or lose, that's how it's always been and more so at higher ranks. You adapt to what people are playing or you go no further.

 

[Jeydra]

If you don't know, that's great. It means that it isn't a netdeck. Or do you think everybody have to report you, which deck they play and what cards they have in hand?

I think you didn't understand what I wrote. Let's start from the basics. Do you believe it's a reasonable strategy to drypass round 1 on blue coin?

You don't know and you shouldn't know. If it is a Sabbath and you can't remove it you lose. If you run into axemen and don't have any weather clear you lose again. If you run into consume and can't stop the first one or two nekkers you lose again.

If you are in the top 500 I shouldn't have to explain this to you. No deck is nor should it be ready to beat every deck. Tech for the meta or lose, that's how it's always been and more so at higher ranks. You adapt to what people are playing or you go no further.

Tell me, what is this magic removal you run against Sabbath? Before you say Mandrake, I just described a situation where Mandrake does NOT help, and I can think of situations where any removal you can run does not help.

And have you ever been in the top 500? If you have, you should know very well that you can beat e.g. consume Nekkers without breaking the Nekker chain by executing your plan better. If you haven't, then what makes you think you understand the game better than I do, enough to give me "I shouldn't have to explain this to you" advice?

 

[Maerd]

Do you believe it's a reasonable strategy to drypass round 1 on blue coin?

It depends on your deck strong points, the opponent's deck, and opponent's deck advantages. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's a stupid idea. For example, dry-passing against Axemen equals to loosing because such deck generates insane tempos in the long rounds (unless your deck can outperform that), but dry-passing against alchemy is actually decent, because you may be able to brick an ointment or two in opponent's hand or face less removals in total. What you're saying is that you want to execute your strategy regardless of what other person is playing.

 

[Khreygond]

Siege towers.

There are many machines to run. A lot of the decks don't run them. and even if all of them did, the timing problem remains. It's not necessary that a siege tower will be on the board 100% of the time.

Are you OK? After a couple of beers MOST units in that deck are unbeatable by I:S, not that he's going to survive that long.

Yes. AFTER a couple of beers. That's 3 turns at least, 3 turns which is more than enough time to tutor him via Royal Decree (he'll be at 7 strength and 4 armor), mandrake him and/or boost him/renew him. Either way, he'll survive the first duel.

In casual? Who cares. In ranking it exists only in low ranks and in proladder it's almost non-existent at all.

I care because I like to enjoy the games I am playing. I am not arguing that he is competitive, I KNOW he isn't. He is not OP either. It's how oppressive he is and how he makes for extremely unsatisfying and not enjoyable at all games. ALL of my Sabbath matches either ended with me forfeiting when I couldn't counter it, or my opponent forfeiting when I did. That's hardly enjoyable, that's not even a full game. That is all I've been saying, why is it so hard for you to understand that? More on that, why do you have to take out your misunderstanding with nothing but disguised insults?

 

[Jeydra]

It depends on your deck strong points, the opponent's deck, and opponent's deck advantages. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's a stupid idea. For example, dry-passing against Axemen equals to loosing because such deck generates insane tempos in the long rounds (unless your deck can outperform that), but dry-passing against alchemy is actually decent, because you may be able to brick an ointment or two in opponent's hand or face less removals in total. What you're saying is that you want to execute your strategy regardless of what other person is playing.

You haven't understood what I'm saying.

Pick your favourite non-armor, non-Greatsword, non-consume deck (I exclude these because they are Dagon's worst matchups which gives you more leeway). You're going up against Dagon and you're on the blue coin. Do you drypass round 1?

 

[Maerd]

Pick your favourite non-armor, non-Greatsword, non-consume deck (I exclude these because they are Dagon's worst matchups which gives you more leeway). You're going up against Dagon and you're on the blue coin. Do you drypass round 1?

OK, I pick alchemy and the answer is no, unless my hand is crap and I desperately need other cards. However, it doesn't matter. There are certain situations when you dry-pass and when you don't, what's the point of expecting every deck to perform exactly the same?

There are many machines to run. A lot of the decks don't run them.

It's your problem, really. You can run one Sergeant in your deck, easily accessible via Reinforcement. It's a "crew", a weather clear, and will kill Imlerith if needed. There are multiple ways to deal with it.

Yes. AFTER a couple of beers. That's 3 turns at least, 3 turns which is more than enough time to tutor him via Royal Decree (he'll be at 7 strength and 4 armor), mandrake him and/or boost him/renew him. Either way, he'll survive the first duel.

If he doesn't survive the first duel then it's 5 point gold. Do you think it's a good value for a gold slot?

I care because I like to enjoy the games I am playing. I am not arguing that he is competitive, I KNOW he isn't. He is not OP either.

You see I also like to enjoy games I play. I also enjoy cards like this and I like to design decks with interesting cards. More cards with interesting design exist, the better, IMHO. So, why exactly should your enjoyment be somehow preferable to mine?

 

[iamthedave]

You're lucky all you need to do is keep removal in hand. Earlier today I played one game where my Eredin opponent played Wild Hunt Drakkar. I played Dagon (12-5). He played Hound (10-10). I passed. He played Sabbath and Adrenaline Rush, going three cards down. Next round he played Mandrake. I'm not running Scorch and didn't have access to Parasite. gg wp lose game.

A few games later, I met another Eredin player on ladder. Again he led with Drakkar. We traded some cards with me always being mindful of the potential Sabbath. With about 6 cards left, he passes. Do I drypass round 2? I usually would since I was running something with a lot of engines and so prefer long rounds; however if I do that he can potentially Sabbath into Adrenaline Rush and win. Do I pass?

And for anyone saying this doesn't exist in the higher ranks - the first game described above was in top 500.

Is that 'I have the second worst win rate of all leaders in the game above 3300, yes, even lower than Filavandrel, Adda and Eist, and only a positive matchup against Unseen Elder and Foltest' Eredin?

His going winrate against Dagon is 37%.

Are you sure you aren't mentally beating yourself when against Monster decks? Imlerith is clearly not a card people are struggling to deal with. Or is there something missing in your deck that's making it vulnerable to Sabbath somehow? In all seriousness, are you sure you're not tilting yourself and building Imlerith up to be something he's not?

 

[Khreygond]

It's your problem, really. You can run one Sergeant in your deck, easily accessible via Reinforcement. It's a "crew", a weather clear, and will kill Imlerith if needed. There are multiple ways to deal with it.

And again, that's not my problem. My problem with this card is how it makes games binary. I am not saying he is OP or anything. Not to mention that no, he won't if there's Royal Decree.

If he doesn't survive the first duel then it's 5 point gold. Do you think it's a good value for a gold slot?

No. But if he doesn't survive opponents forfeit. If he does, I usually have to.

You see I also like to enjoy games I play. I also enjoy cards like this and I like to design decks with interesting cards. More cards with interesting design exist, the better, IMHO. So, why exactly should your enjoyment be somehow preferable to mine?

The binary forfeit of either me or my opponent is not even a full game, let alone something anyone would enjoy. And don't tell me you enjoy games where either your opponent or you have to forfeit when there are still 7 - 8 cards to play.

 

[iamthedave]

And again, that's not my problem. My problem with this card is how it makes games binary. I am not saying he is OP or anything. Not to mention that no, he won't if there's Royal Decree.



No. But if he doesn't survive opponents forfeit. If he does, I usually have to.



The binary forfeit of either me or my opponent is not even a full game, let alone something anyone would enjoy. And don't tell me you enjoy games where either your opponent or you have to forfeit when there are still 7 - 8 cards to play.

Maybe I'm some sort of fringe case outlier, but I don't forfeit when my Imlerith dies. But then I don't build a one-card deck that has no hope if he does, either.

Is the all-in Imlerith deck really the way he's used most commonly? I don't think so. And either I'm the best Gwent player in the world (I'm not) or everyone else can't build decks (they can), but I can think of only a handful of occasions when I actually have lost to an Imlerith play. Compared to the number of forfeits I've racked up to Ciri: Nova, he's not even a blip on the radar.

And sure, I might have played those games out, but I was doing so hoping that their last card wasn't Ciri: Nova when I knew it was.

 

[Maerd]

The binary forfeit of either me or my opponent is not even a full game, let alone something anyone would enjoy.

Binary forfeit exists only if people don't make the deck viable. My version of Imlerith deck is capable of winning without using him. I don't run renew. I don't run locks/unlocks, if its dead then that's it. But if I force my opponent out of removals early then its good time to play it, usually it's either late round 2 or round 3. In this sense it is working similar to Ciri: Nova finisher when opponent run out of scorches. Games are very far from binary and require a lot of set up (the main engine is frost damage, drowners and ice trolls). If some player made a deck that has only one winning condition if stars align then why not, you cannot prohibit bad players to play the game, right?

 

[Khreygond]

Maybe I'm some sort of fringe case outlier, but I don't forfeit when my Imlerith dies. But then I don't build a one-card deck that has no hope if he does, either.

Is the all-in Imlerith deck really the way he's used most commonly? I don't think so. And either I'm the best Gwent player in the world (I'm not) or everyone else can't build decks (they can), but I can think of only a handful of occasions when I actually have lost to an Imlerith play. Compared to the number of forfeits I've racked up to Ciri: Nova, he's not even a blip on the radar.

And sure, I might have played those games out, but I was doing so hoping that their last card wasn't Ciri: Nova when I knew it was.

Binary forfeit exists only if people don't make the deck viable. My version of Imlerith deck is capable of winning without using him. I don't run renew. I don't run locks/unlocks, if its dead then that's it. But if I force my opponent out of removals early then its good time to play it, usually it's either late round 2 or round 3. In this sense it is working similar to Ciri: Nova finisher when opponent run out of scorches. Games are very far from binary and require a lot of set up (the main engine is frost damage, drowners and ice trolls). If some player made a deck that has only one winning condition if stars align then why not, you cannot prohibit bad players to play the game, right?

And again, just because you two don't do it doesn't mean no one does. I've run across at least 4 ( I think 5, after having calculated a bit) such binary decks yesterday. To answer your question dave, the Sabbath overcommitment decks outnumbered the viable sabbath decks yesterday. I wouldn't do it either, I don't have a Sabbath overcommitment deck. I've tried a sabbath deck in the very early days and I just couldn't draw it or the tutor. Of course it's not really viable but it hinges on the off-chance that you can drop him enough times for the opponent not to counter. And that decides games within 3 cards usually. THAT is what I find completely unsatisfying and not enjoyable. And that's all I've been saying since the start.

 

[iamthedave]

And again, just because you two don't do it doesn't mean no one does. I've run across at least 4 ( I think 5, after having calculated a bit) such binary decks yesterday. To answer your question dave, the Sabbath overcommitment decks outnumbered the viable sabbath decks yesterday. I wouldn't do it either, I don't have a Sabbath overcommitment deck. I've tried a sabbath deck in the very early days and I just couldn't draw it or the tutor. Of course it's not really viable but it hinges on the off-chance that you can drop him enough times for the opponent not to counter. And that decides games within 3 cards usually. THAT is what I find completely unsatisfying and not enjoyable. And that's all I've been saying since the start.

OK, that's fine, I accept their existence and lack of fun-ness.

Do you think the card needs to be changed because of that, or do you think that those decks are likely going to be a short term fad that'll naturally fade into relative obscurity after a month or so? My instinct leans towards the latter, because these decks are too easily shut down, and by a card that was common even before Imlerith spiked its popularity.