Vespuche;n10809821 said:
I don't know at what rank you play, but Wardancer is a serious problem in the high ranks, where losing the coinflip means having a significantly higher chance to lose the match, and that card does not let you pass to gain card advantage. When used in conjunction with Brouver being able to pull a card advantage spy and then Barclay into Cleaver for 26 points so early (only Reveal can do that and Reveal requires some setup/a good hand to do so) it becomes a serious problem.
Also, I believe there's a thread for that
Yes, uncounterable carryover, which prevents drypassing. This is esspecially problematic in combination with a lost coinflip.
In my opinion, it's a good card, strong, but it is not a problem. The problem are the tons of guys that scream "NEEERF" to all because they have lost a match.
I don't see it being a problem either, I easily play around it by spying rount 2 or bleeding in round 2. Dry passing every round 2 is stupid anyways imo.
ser2440;n10809961 said:
True man, but I ask your opinion: it will remain a problem when there will be a solution for coinflip?
In my opinion, the problem is coinflip, not wardancer/carryover. Solving coinflip, you will solve everything
jotunheim92;n10810321 said:
Possibly. But it's still impossible to counter carryover. So if you go a card down to win the round and the opponent plays Wardancer afterwards, it's still a tight spot to be in, making the card quite powerful.
I don't know. If we do end up with the coinflip solved (which is almost like a dream by now to me, it seems so difficult to solve), I guess we'll see
Hellsmoke77;n10810201 said:
The problem doesn't arise in Round 2. It arises in Round 1.
At higher levels of play when people "lose" the coinflip (i.e. have to play first) then there is a high chance they will just pass and let the opponent take Round 1, meaning they go into Round 2 with a 1 card advantage. They do this because going first is a massive detriment and has been an issue throughout the lifetime of GWENT. I won't document why here, there's plenty of information all over the forums and Reddit on that particular nugget.
Anyway, if someone is playing Wardancer and they "win" the coinflip (i.e. they go second) and they get a free Wardancer on the board from the mulligan, then it stops your opponents dry pass on Round 1, meaning he can't get an easy card advantage without playing the round out. Wardancer is not an innately strong card in and of itself but the utility it provides when it comes to securing card advantage can be game changing.
I hope this post clears up some of the confusion.
EDIT :- For the record, it also has utility in Round 2 where both players open with Spies. Again, the Wardancer secures the round for free (13+3 against 13) unless the opponent keeps playing.
Last edited:
Hellsmoke77;n10810201 said:
You need a really powerful play with your first card, at least 17 points, to avoid going 2 cards down if you go first and the opponent has a Wardancer. Brouver into Barclay into Cleaver is 26 points. If they play Yaevinn or Brouver into Yaevinn as their first card, and you haven't gotten at least 17 - 20 points with your played card (since they'll have 7 from Brouver and Wardancer and you'll have 13 + your played card), they can overwhelm you with a single card (barclay for 22 points). While if you keep playing, you go 2 cards down. So you cannot drypass round one, and you HAVE to play at least 17 points with your first card, which with many decks, is not possible. Not to mention you might not draw that but your opponent has constant access to his CA spy with the leader. Even if he doesn't draw Barclay, you cannot be sure of that.
Last edited:
ser2440;n10811981 said:
Which is why this is the worst shit in the game right now. And also why every tom dick and harry is playing it.
It's going to be changed anyways, the devs said it twice now. Discussing it other than for the sake of conversation is pointless. The only thing that wonders me is that if Wardancer is so powerfull why aren't the top ranked players all playing ST? Why doesn't ST have the highest win rate all the time?
People exaggerate, it is a good card but it's not auto win. Before someone says ST has a pretty decent win rate..yes it does but that is largely due to the Brouver combo abusing the coinflip. Wardancer has been as is for ages.
People exaggerate, it is a good card but it's not auto win. Before someone says ST has a pretty decent win rate..yes it does but that is largely due to the Brouver combo abusing the coinflip. Wardancer has been as is for ages.
Yes, definitely problematic in my opinion. Here's a more detailed discussion on the issue.
Reflecting to several other posts above, regarding it's relation to coinflip and silver spies, I think in fact these are the three biggest game mechanic problems in Gwent at the moment (in decreasing severity):
1. Coinflip
2. Card advantage spies
3. "Carryovers" with no or minimal counters denying dry-pass (mostly Wardancer, but I also include Olgierd & Morkvarg; the quatation mark signifies that a round 1 Wardancer is technically not a carryover, but it still poses the same problem)
All of them come down to the same effect, namely giving easy card advantage to a player, with CA being pretty much the most important thing in Gwent. Still they're also completely different problems in the sense that fixing one of them doesn't fix the other. They're also all subject to luck and/or faction dependence.
Some people say that one is only a problem with another (e.g. Wardancer is only problematic because of coinflip). Others say we actually need one to balance the other (e.g. we need silver spies to fight coinflip). I think ironically both and neither opinion is true. If the problems stack on one player's side they completely kill the game. If they turn up on different sides they may actually bring it to something close to being balanced.
In the end I think the best way would be to get rid of all of them instead of trying to pit them against each other. Though getting rid of one or two of them is still better than nothing.
Reflecting to several other posts above, regarding it's relation to coinflip and silver spies, I think in fact these are the three biggest game mechanic problems in Gwent at the moment (in decreasing severity):
1. Coinflip
2. Card advantage spies
3. "Carryovers" with no or minimal counters denying dry-pass (mostly Wardancer, but I also include Olgierd & Morkvarg; the quatation mark signifies that a round 1 Wardancer is technically not a carryover, but it still poses the same problem)
All of them come down to the same effect, namely giving easy card advantage to a player, with CA being pretty much the most important thing in Gwent. Still they're also completely different problems in the sense that fixing one of them doesn't fix the other. They're also all subject to luck and/or faction dependence.
Some people say that one is only a problem with another (e.g. Wardancer is only problematic because of coinflip). Others say we actually need one to balance the other (e.g. we need silver spies to fight coinflip). I think ironically both and neither opinion is true. If the problems stack on one player's side they completely kill the game. If they turn up on different sides they may actually bring it to something close to being balanced.
In the end I think the best way would be to get rid of all of them instead of trying to pit them against each other. Though getting rid of one or two of them is still better than nothing.
Hellsmoke77;n10812211 said:
Check the latest meta report. Brouver is the most popular leader at the highest tier (staggering 27% popularity. Henselt has 9.3%, Crach has about 14% and the rest all have less than that) And also has the highest winrate (54.4%. Even Henselt has 53.4%) which means that ST does have the highest winrate and the top ranked players ARE playing ST.
I agree it's not an auto win and I also agree that it is problematic completely (not even mainly) due to the barclay into Cleaver combo. In general, coinflip abuse is a serious issue and that's not just with Brouver's deck, but with Henselt as well.
ser2440;n10813571 said:
Yes a 27% popularity which is the reason for it having a 53.4% winrate. This does not mean that the top ten players are using the deck and in most cases they are not. They are playing alchemy or greatswords which both beat this deck.
Actually I wouldn't base too much conclusions on last meta report, probably not even the next one. It's still early season, lot of players didn't even start climbing. On 3300 MMR (highest tier border in the report) you can still climb with meme. Hell, I was in top4000 with a non-meta deck just yesterday, and I'm not a very good or active player.ser2440;n10813571 said:
So I think earlier meta reports are more indicative.
Well sorry but numbers tell otherwise. The rock-paper-scissor goes like this: Brouver beats Crach, Crach beats Henselt, Henselt beats Brouver. And everybody beats alchemy except Crach. (Just check earlier meta reports)Hellsmoke77;n10813781 said:
Also I don't see your reasoning on the connection between popularity and win rate. More players playing it doesn't increase its win rate. If anything I'd expect better popularity to decrease its win rate potential as it indicates that a lot of players including ones with lower skill and less experience with the deck are running it. I think it's rather the other way around: better win rate baits more players to play the deck, so popularity increases.
Vespuche;n10809821 said:
Yes it is a problem as it heavily influences card advantage.
Brouver was always one of the most popular decks this patch, and had one of the highest win rates. Popularity should have nothing to do with win rates. But that's not the point. We're discussing Wardancer, not Brouver.
There're two problems with Wardancer. The first is that if it's mulliganed in round one + on the blue coin you can't drypass. This has severe consequences on CA. Beating any deck on the blue coin with a mulliganed Wardancer - or god forbid multiple mulliganed Wardancers - is very difficult.
The other problem with Wardancer is that you don't know if the opponent has it. If they have it then they have carryover, making losing round 1 more attractive; however if they don't, winning round 1 is preferable. Some decks might not care (especially those that were going to bleed round 2 anyway) but others will find this very problematic
I think if Wardancer did something like "when this unit is mulliganed, at the end of your next turn, play it on a random row" then there'd be no problem.
There're two problems with Wardancer. The first is that if it's mulliganed in round one + on the blue coin you can't drypass. This has severe consequences on CA. Beating any deck on the blue coin with a mulliganed Wardancer - or god forbid multiple mulliganed Wardancers - is very difficult.
The other problem with Wardancer is that you don't know if the opponent has it. If they have it then they have carryover, making losing round 1 more attractive; however if they don't, winning round 1 is preferable. Some decks might not care (especially those that were going to bleed round 2 anyway) but others will find this very problematic
I think if Wardancer did something like "when this unit is mulliganed, at the end of your next turn, play it on a random row" then there'd be no problem.