Coinflip continues to ruin this game, and CDPR seems to have no solution.

[Mehariel]

Coinflip continues to ruin this game, and CDPR seems to have no solution.

(This is all just my opinion, youre welcome to tell me im wrong, just include why)

Almost every game these days, if you go first you pass, that's the accepted strategy, or at least it seems to be the case in my games.

Because card advantage is the real decider of who wins and loses in this game. I'm not saying i know what the solution is, i don't it's not like Hearthstone where you can just add a mana coin to fix it.

But something needs to be found because it is one of the main things dragging this game down (along with poor communication from devs, slow changes, and seeming lack of interest in community feedback despite us apparently "testing" the game)

What does the rest of community think though? Maybe i'm over reacting or just making things seem out of proportion, feel free to tell me so.

PS to mods: i know there is a megathread for this somewhere but it'd be nice if this could be kept separate, the thread i remember was so huge and cluttered it was getting really hard to have proper discussions on it.

 

[SoSaHer]

The whole coinflip issue is also about proactive and reactive cards. Reactive cards in Gwent (seem) to outvalue proactive cards by far and thus exagregate the issue.

I dont`t know if they don`t seem to have an answer though, I think it is much more likely that they are aware of the issue and contemplating strategies to handle it.

 

[Hellsmoke77]

The whole coinflip issue is also about proactive and reactive cards. Reactive cards in Gwent (seem) to outvalue proactive cards by far and thus exagregate the issue.

I dont`t know if they don`t seem to have an answer though, I think it is much more likely that they are aware of the issue and contemplating strategies to handle it.

That's actually a pretty good point. CDPR did say they are testing a fix for coinflip so it is being worked on, we just gotta let them work. It takes time.

 

[Goro123]

One possible solution for the coin flip could be - the one that start first get an extra blank card that will give certain amount of points 5-10 extra strength, this should solve the problem with going first and be afraid that you will get out tempo'ed.

The card will be playable after you play a normal card(preventing CA ,if the opponent dry passes). When the first round is over if the bonus blank card is not play it will vanish (preventing again CA).

Sorry if this idea is been discussed before.

The auto include spy in every deck will still remain though - going first then opponent plays spy and passes scenario.

 

[BornBoring]

What does the rest of community think though? Maybe i'm over reacting or just making things seem out of proportion, feel free to tell me so.

During the AMA Burza said they want to introduce a leader initiative system to solve the coinflip problem. Only if both players are using the same leader (or leaders with same initiative stats, I don't know the details) the coinflip determines, who has to go first. This means they would have to balance whole archetypes around that. I doubt this will work though.

The whole coinflip issue is also about proactive and reactive cards. Reactive cards in Gwent (seem) to outvalue proactive cards by far and thus exagregate the issue.

True, it's also one of the reason why we see a lot of drypassing in round 2. That's why I don't like the way they tried to balance cards like mangonel. They are worth less if your playing on an empty board. In my opinion something like this is a huge design mistake. Playing engine decks if you have to go first is awful. You play your engine card and your opponent will play a x-point body + removal. Then you're are already x-points behind and in trouble. Also one of the reasons (there are more important ones though), why we don't see any engine decks (beside greatswords). Playing dull cards like beastmaster is the safer play.

 

[ZenaRose]

Coinflip fix in 2022 confirmed

 

[iamthedave]

CDPR in 'fixing fundamental problem with the design of the game is hard' shocker, fans fail to understand why it takes a while!

 

[Kramin42]

I actually quite like CDPR's proposed leader initiative system. The two worst coinflip abuse offenders work so well because they are based on their high tempo leader card, which is always in hand at the start of the game and gives them a lot of consistency. So making high tempo leaders have to go first against low tempo leaders will eliminate that high consistency coinflip abuse. We'll still have lower consistency methods of coinflip abuse, but I think it will be a huge improvement; Consistency is everything in gwent. I also like the direction of removing a big source of RNG from the game.

The main problems with the leader initiative system, as I see it, are:
1. Mirror matches are still random
2. leaders could become difficult to balance if you add this whole new dimension to their power level.

Ideally I'd love them to try and even out the difference in power of red and blue coin in addition to their leader initiative system, but we'll have to wait and see. My own suggestion would be making the player who goes first in round 1 always get to go second in round 2, as I think it's more fair if both players get a turn going second before round 3. A lot of the reason blue coiners dry pass round 1 is because winning round 1 forces them to go first two rounds in a row, often putting them at a card disadvantage going into round 3 (in which case going second in round 3 is little consolation when they don't even get last say).

 

[RazTheGnome]

I agree that CDPR's proposed solution has promise, but I also worry about balancing leaders. KingBlackToof expressed another concern: would this lead to an even more stale meta, in which each leader "works" with only one deck? I'm not experienced enough with the game to know, but it worries me. On the other hand, I do like the idea of tailoring coinflip to the leaders, rather than a one-size-fits all solution.

Would any sort of bidding or auction system work? Each side bids a number of first-round points for the right to go second?

 

[DowlandCobaltSS_PC]

It's obvious they don't know how to balance the game and don't care. Amateur match making algorithm. Coin flip busted. RNG. Create mechanic lame. No one likes it.

 

[South8]

The idea with the initiaitve does not seem sensible to me, because balancing is a lot more difficult and eventually people will find out ways to make uninitative leaders OP by always going second, which will only break the game more and create even worse abuses. Coin-flip should be balanced by eliminating coin-flip abuse (going second and playing only a spy to go 2 card up), because most decks are still viable even with a card down when played right, while being 2 cards down is pretty much a death sentence.

Also, coin-flip problem is inherent to the current state of the game - there are too few cards to create many different decks (yes, there is loads of cards, but when you split them in 5 factions and again into archetypes, there are really card poor archetypes - e.g. movement and ambush ST). Consequently, removal - reactive - cards are more viable due to consistency as you can almost always know what to expect from the other player based on their archetype. Having many engine and proactive cards available would in my opinion shift the balance and going first could no longer be strictly a bad thing. But for this to work, every faction would have to have loads of archetypes and sub-archetypes so that strategy would come back (currently too many matches are almost like chess, as you can predict exactly which cards the opponent has - therefore removal is quite a simple and straightforward way to disrupt your opponent). I like to play with mixed and slightly confused/confusing archetypes to bait removal and guarantee myself the correct win condition. More of this would IMO greatly raise the strategic side of the game.

 

[Cipher90]

Some engine decks have to dry-pass. For example:
There are not enough engine cards (or ways to revive them) to play more than one round with ST movement. Drypassing is the only way to force the game into one playable round.

Even if CDPR is fixing the coin flip system I'll still have to drypass round 1 and hope for a short round 2

 

[Burza46]

(This is all just my opinion, youre welcome to tell me im wrong, just include why)

Almost every game these days, if you go first you pass, that's the accepted strategy, or at least it seems to be the case in my games.

Because card advantage is the real decider of who wins and loses in this game. I'm not saying i know what the solution is, i don't it's not like Hearthstone where you can just add a mana coin to fix it.

But something needs to be found because it is one of the main things dragging this game down (along with poor communication from devs, slow changes, and seeming lack of interest in community feedback despite us apparently "testing" the game)

What does the rest of community think though? Maybe i'm over reacting or just making things seem out of proportion, feel free to tell me so.

PS to mods: i know there is a megathread for this somewhere but it'd be nice if this could be kept separate, the thread i remember was so huge and cluttered it was getting really hard to have proper discussions on it.

We're working on a solution

 

[DrScaphandre]

You might wanna read the roadmap for Homecoming, for major reworks to the coinflip are coming, as well as dealing with the RNG.

 

[clarrus]

It would be great if they let you know who is going first when you are drafting as well.

 

[guison]

I dont see how it ruins the game. If someone started the game and passes first, then u play a card and win first round, then 2nd round u pass and he has to play a card to win the round then has same cards as you then he goes first in round 3 again.. Whats the benefit of that?

 

[Dalinski]

Adding a simple 3 points to the first person might be a good stop gap measure. But I like the sound of the proposed Initiative system as it sounds like a new mechanic that cards can leverage adding more variety and deck-building opportunities to the game. Everything can be balanced with some tweaking

 

[Pruny]

I hate spyabuse more than coinflip.