What is CDPR's Stance on Discard Abuse by Letting the Timer Run Out?

[arubino99]

Either that or play a random card (for when you disconnect for a second and can't play a card) . There's just so many problems with the way it's done now, as many of you mentioned before.

There's just too much of an exploit in it, more so for Skellige decks.

Banishing wouldn't solve the problem either, to be honest. There are those cases where you've done all you possibly could to play around someone's scorch and now you got them in a tough situation where he could scorch his own unity... And let's say you just passed, the game is tied, but you have an unity under weather effect, then the other person could just wait to get their Scorch discarded and winning because of weather. When actually the other person should just pass or play a card. That's the way Gwent works and that's the beauty in it. You can Check your opponent against the wall and leave them in a tough situation where he has to pass, because playing more cards would just hurt him more.

Come on, guys, that's a clear exploit and somewhat ridiculous. I used to see it as a legit strategy when I was just a newbie, but through my own experiences and from what I get now about the more deep Gwent mechanics and strategies, I don't see how this kind of play would fit with what Gwent represents.

Clearly that isn't an exploit, as CDPR has acknowledged the need for a discard feature. I've actually been in the Scorch/Bekker's Mirror situation with weather on the board, and I roped simply to discard the Scorch simply to let weather tick another tick. I've also done it with Epidemic and Alzur's Thunder because I didn't want to nuke my own unit.

If I could select the card to banish from my hand, it would give no advantage at all to SK. They gain nothing from banish, and banish doesn't hit the GY. The only thing you can argue is that a card I didn't play but surrendered would cause the next on-turn trigger effects. Which is exactly how the game is right now. Banish/Card Surrender makes more sense rather than having to wait 60 seconds for an intentional rope.

The exploits that can be played out of this mechanic right now are just embarrassing.

You've yet to define a single exploit. You've given an anecdotal situation where a close game would be decided on whether a player should harm their own unit or surrender a card. That's not an exploit, that's strategic play. And really, it only involves weather or some on-turn effect that would decide the game. That's absolutely zero reason to not support an official means of surrendering a card.

As I stated previously - card surrender should be in the game at a base since passing is permanent. The card should be banished directly from the hand, so it has no board or GY interactions. And it shouldn't count as a discard. There's absolutely zero reason to make my opponent wait for a random discard.

 

[JotaTheDunadan]

You've yet to define a single exploit. You've given an anecdotal situation where a close game would be decided on whether a player should harm their own unit or surrender a card. That's not an exploit, that's strategic play. And really, it only involves weather or some on-turn effect that would decide the game. That's absolutely zero reason to not support an official means of surrendering a card.

As you can also understand why discarding leads to SK advantages right now, it can be used as an exploit to that faction, simply because you might have no cards to trigger a discard, oh, but just wait, the game will do that one for you. Really? So it's not that "playing a card would harm my units". There's more to it. I could play my unit or wait for it to get discarded, resurrected, bring Cerrys and strengthen P Captain (I've really been there, done that).

What you said is true though, that's why I dislike that we have no means to just not choosing a target for a card or to banish a card from our hand, since it would cause no interactions with the GY as you stated. But the way I think about the roping discard, is that if you have no means to just do it as a play option right now (like a button on UI or something) then it gets clear that it was not intended to be played like this and to cause the kinds of interactions it causes. So having to rope for that is kind of ridiculous (but as I said, a strategy that anyone would do, since it's a valid play).

Although I like new strategies coming out of unexpected places, it's clear to me that even devs didn't want it to be played like this.

I support any kind of mechanic as long as it's official, thought through and intended to work that way. It seems they'll change that, obviously because it wasn't meant to work like that, AKA "it's being exploited" (being used for not intended advantages), otherwise no one would ever mind changing that.

Hopefully we might even end up with a new play option to banish a chosen card. You made me think that's actually cool too. And since it would be an option, so roping could lead to a banish too. I agree with you.

 

[NerdExtrodinare]

Turn Timer Question/Suggestion

Is it intended that if you run the timer counts it as an actual discard for things like the Raiders "play when discarded"? Because that is how it's working now and it seems quite off that a that's meant to be how it works unless the designers want to just give us a button that says "discard" to discard a random card without passing.

 

[Draconifors]

NerdExtrodinare A massive thread already existed on the subject, so I merged your thread with it.

 

[Burza46]

I would like to see a clear answer on the matter. Is this a part of the game and an acceptable strategy? And if it isn't, how are the devs planning to address this issue?

In Gwent, roping is waiting until you almost timed out and then playing a card (and slow-rolling is playing all the cards after the opponent passed).

EDIT.
I am talking about not playing a card on your turn.

We will implement a fix for this