This game will never be balanced

[fantesmeee]

This game will never be balanced

This game will never be balanced. As long as they add new cards, this is impossible. Impossible... luck decides, not you, not your skills. The luck, always, the luck. And the more cards, the more luck you need.... I enjoyed the game. I learned it etc. but the more changes, the more irritating it has become. The more changes, the more cards they add, the more random it becomes. I do not like it. Any changes mean, I have to re-learn everything from stratch, and my time was WASTED.

I stop playing now because I have to re-learn everything from stratch every month. It's more irritating than fun.

The game is going into gamble, not your skill, which I do not like. Unlike the Witcher games, for instance, which focuses on experience.

But with so many new added cards, I do not think CDP is even able to keep the balance at all? It's simply impossible ever.

And yes, this is the beginning of CDP going into gambling. Not gaming.

And those are two different things for a lot of people, gamers.

SAD! Here, with thousands of cards, nothing really depends on you.

 

[alexmanelistu]

I enjoy this game even if is not as I wanted to be. but is great.

 

[Bleach25]

I don't know. Without new cards It would become monotonous and predictable

 

[altaybek]

I have to re-learn everything from stratch every month.

This is only reason I'm playing for. Different people, different tastes I guess.

I really don't enjoy playing when the new patch is imminent when every netdeck is OP and everyone is playing the same stuff (which is now). No trial and errors, no diversity, no different cards. Everyone just playing the same cards over and over again (with the same order) like a bot. I even started playing the annoying and boring Mill because I wanna bore the hell out of everyone and force them to forfeit.

Also more cards=more diversity which is the best thing that can happen in a CCG game.

On gambling part I partly agree because less RNG/more strategy is the ideal but a game without RNG would not be a "game" after all. If you want that I recommend Go or Chess. Otherwise you won't find a game that doesn't require luck.

 

[Stormbuster]

And yes, this is the beginning of CDP going into gambling. Not gaming.

Amen. Same opinion. CDRP took the same crash course as Blizzard. An evolved form of dice rolling.

I was looking to those championships. Whomever is having the better RNG wins. One of the game was particularly funny: it was this commentator/host being ecstatic about one particular player and stating several times "that kid is like 400 IQ'... and that player was nothing but lucky.

If in the beginning the strategy and tactics counted, it is not the case anymore.

 

[DMaster2]

This game will never be balanced. As long as they add new cards, this is impossible. Impossible... the loss decides, not you, not your skills. The loss, always, the loss. And the more cards, the more loss.... I enjoyed the game. I learned it etc. but the more changes, the more irritating it has become. The more changes, the more cards they add, the more random it becomes. I do not like it. Any changes mean, I have to re-learn everything from stratch, and my time was WASTED.

I stop playing now because I have to re-learn everything from stratch every month. It's more irritating than fun.

The game is going into gamble, not your skill, which I do not like. Unlike the Witcher games, for instance, which focuses on experience.

But with so many new added cards, I do not think CDP is even able to keep the balance at all? It's simply impossible ever.

And yes, this is the beginning of CDP going into gambling. Not gaming.

And those are two different things for a lot of people, gamers.

SAD! Here, with thousands of cards, nothing really depends on you.

If you want a game with all the same cards i suggest you single player card games like Duels of the planeswalker or solitaire or something (Etherlords II is a forgotten gem btw). Multiplayer CCGs live by adding more content, usually new cards. With no new stuff a multiplayer ccg just die out eventually.
As for the RNG, i agree. It's a path i don't like one bit. I left hearthstone exactly to escape rng bs and i'm not keen of seeing it infecting gwent as well.

 

[Legendarum]

I was looking to those championships. Whomever is having the better RNG wins. One of the game was particularly funny: it was this commentator/host being ecstatic about one particular player and stating several times "that kid is like 400 IQ'... and that player was nothing but lucky.

If in the beginning the strategy and tactics counted, it is not the case anymore.

I just can't see how that can be the case, that player climbed to the top of the tournament, and then beat it - surely that is more than 'nothing but luck'? Doesn't winning a tournament, sort of by definition, make you a pretty exceptional player? Sure, luck plays a part in it, it's a card game - you draw random cards from your deck, you can have terrible mulligans, etc, etc. - but that's the same for every player in the game, and this guy managed to win the tournament (and win it pretty well too, if I remember correctly).

Back on the main topic though - what does balanced even mean? It's impossible for every deck to be on-par with every other deck, or there'd be no such thing as a good or bad deck, you could just throw random cards together and do as well as anybody else. Does it mean that one or two decks don't dominate the meta? That sounds like it makes more sense, but then whatever game you're playing, it's inevitable that there are always going to be decks/specs/builds that sit above all the rest for periods of time.

Card games are a funny thing and it's really easy to tread over really old ground talking about stuff like this. But Gwent, in my opinion, is doing an incredible job at 'balance', whatever that means - I find you can compete (climb the ranks) with a variety of different decks from each faction (at LEAST two or more at any rate), and none of the most popular decks are so set in stone, you can't spin your own variety on it a little bit.

About the RNG, I say meh, all card games have it to my knowledge, I don't think it's inherently bad - I find hearthstone annoying for way more reasons than that, it just happens that the 'rng factor' does seem especially prevailent there.

edit: I believe I read something about RNG in card games, in that it is used to make the player feel better about their play. i.e. if RNG goes well, the player thinks 'wow, I'm a great player', whilst if it's going bad they can go 'damn, what bad luck', instead of 'I'm sucking'. I think I remember reading that somewhere anyway.

Lastly, about re-learning everything - well, uh, we are in beta - things will settle down eventually. Plus, even offline real-life card games have banlists etc that are updated semi-reguarly and can change decks entirely. It's just part and parcel of playing a competive game.

 

[gigabomb]

I was thinking about making a thread like this because adding 20 cards every few months and de-immunizing golds seems to be difficult for them to balance. Adding 109+ and changing/adding core game mechanics yet again means that, to continue to play the game, the players have to embrace the chaos. Only the Joker likes this much chaos.

At this point, I want an announcement saying that they aren't changing any core mechanics for a year.

Back on the main topic though - what does balanced even mean?

Balance means many competitive card choices. Right now, Nekkers are played in 98+% of unseen elder decks because there is no other option that comes even close to generating enough points to keep up with other decks. No one is playing Dagon because you can just use Eredin and a frost to generate more points and then your deck. Check the Gwentup statistics.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

This game will never be balanced. As long as they add new cards, this is impossible. Impossible... luck decides, not you, not your skills. The luck, always, the luck. And the more cards, the more luck you need.... I enjoyed the game. I learned it etc. but the more changes, the more irritating it has become. The more changes, the more cards they add, the more random it becomes. I do not like it. Any changes mean, I have to re-learn everything from stratch, and my time was WASTED.

I stop playing now because I have to re-learn everything from stratch every month. It's more irritating than fun.

The game is going into gamble, not your skill, which I do not like. Unlike the Witcher games, for instance, which focuses on experience.

But with so many new added cards, I do not think CDP is even able to keep the balance at all? It's simply impossible ever.

And yes, this is the beginning of CDP going into gambling. Not gaming.

And those are two different things for a lot of people, gamers.

SAD! Here, with thousands of cards, nothing really depends on you.

The game not being balanced and whether the game requires skill or not are two different things.

Just because the game will never be perfectly balanced and will always be changing that doesn't mean it doesn't' require knowledge and skill.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

If you want a game with all the same cards i suggest you single player card games like Duels of the planeswalker or solitaire or something (Etherlords II is a forgotten gem btw). Multiplayer CCGs live by adding more content, usually new cards. With no new stuff a multiplayer ccg just die out eventually.
As for the RNG, i agree. It's a path i don't like one bit. I left hearthstone exactly to escape rng bs and i'm not keen of seeing it infecting gwent as well.

I do not think the game has too much RNG. I think it arguably doesn't have enough RNG.

 

[fantesmeee]

The game not being balanced and whether the game requires skill or not are two different things.

Just because the game will never be perfectly balanced and will always be changing that doesn't mean it doesn't' require knowledge and skill.

The thing is it is becoming more and more dependent on luck than skill. There is even no balance between these two things. I like when luck is less important than skill. Not the other way round. That's the issue. The more luck you need, the more your skill and knowledge is devaluated. And the more cards they add, the more unpredictable decks are going to appear. It's a gamble. Nothing else. I like the element of luck, but to much lesser extent.

 

[Legendarum]

And the more cards they add, the more unpredictable decks are going to appear.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Magic the Gathering has around seventeen thousand cards, and skill is definitely still a major contributing factor in gameplay.

 

[fantesmeee]

I don't think this is necessarily true. Magic the Gathering has around seventeen thousand cards, and skill is definitely still a major contributing factor in gameplay.

Really? The skill is required, the skill dependent on luck - at least in Gwent. I never played Magic the Gathering.

 

[HTMekkatorque]

Whereas I think arguably this game needs more complicated mechanisms periodically added and i'm quick to become bored of my current card pool. I think if you think the game is all about the RNG then potentially there is a lot you don't understand about the game, even heavy RNG elements like dijkstra can be controlled somewhat with a proper deck build and card thinning and even then there is an element of knowing which cards are in your deck and your chances of pulling the right ones, simillar to the likes of poker. I think you'll be a happier player if you just play casuals and netdeck, I know I'll recieve a lot of flack for saying that, but people who don't have the time to learn mechanics, probably don't have the time to craft decks that are cohesive, and I think just with every new card that comes out, having mastered (or close to) the top rated 10 decks in the game, that and varying them. For instance in a hand boosting deck I included the core 18 or so essential cards and have played around with spell packages, carry over packages, different combos from other decks. That and foremost this is a game of memory, I'll admit I know what every single meta card does and I can promptly guess it will be played or not in the next 2-3 turns in advance and that is the fun of gwent. Although I think where people often attribute luck or RNG or a lack of equality is also somewhat to do with your card collection which does play a large role, these players who have achieved top 8 globally never would have made it with my card lists for instance likewise a new player will never make it to rank 18 without collecting atleast some essential silvers and 3 of certain bronzes.

Though also you gotta consider that time plays the biggest role, and if you don't have the time to learn the mechanisms then maybe you'll just get matched against other players who've had little time to play as well which is often the case. But to you it'll always seem like there is roughly a 50% chance to win based on luck because you'll either play against terrible people with amazing decks or against amazing people with limitted card pools. This might make you feel cheated, it may feel a bit like you're playing AI at times when you encounter someone auto piloting a very good deck but sadly you have to break past that barrier and then you'll always play against good people with good decks and the order in which you play things will be necessary and there are ways you can increase the magnitude of variation, by playing more highly skill capped decks or swapping your deck out more often.

 

[Legendarum]

Really? The skill is required, the skill dependent on luck - at least in Gwent. I never played Magic the Gathering.

Obviously there has to be a balance somewhere. Too much luck is a bad thing, but too little and a game can feel stale. However, I was just disputing the 'more cards released means more luck in the game' - I think having more cards leads to a much healthier game in the long run. More card diversity does mean there will be lots more different decks, but that is the nature of any growing card game.

I think at the end of the day, regardless of the card game, the skill of deckbuilding and how you play your cards/respond to the opponent's cards, more or less outweighs the amount of luck in any given game. If that weren't the case, then professional players surely wouldn't consistantly beat worse players.

 

[fantesmeee]

Obviously there has to be a balance somewhere. Too much luck is a bad thing, but too little and a game can feel stale. However, I was just disputing the 'more cards released means more luck in the game' - I think having more cards leads to a much healthier game in the long run. More card diversity does mean there will be lots more different decks, but that is the nature of any growing card game.

I think at the end of the day, regardless of the card game, the skill of deckbuilding and how you play your cards/respond to the opponent's cards, more or less outweighs the amount of luck in any given game. If that weren't the case, then professional players surely wouldn't consistantly beat worse players.

The more cards, the more changes, the less balance - like in many other games. The more cards, the more unpredictable a game can become. The more unpredictable it is, the more luck you need. That's my experience. I don't know what is your experience with games like Magic the Gathering?

 

[DMaster2]

I do not think the game has too much RNG. I think it arguably doesn't have enough RNG.

And i think it has too much already. If you want to play rng ccgs there are plenty out there. I'd like to see gwent be different than the rest, that's why i picked it in the first place...

 

[HTMekkatorque]

Well if you'd ever played magic the gathering you'd know that hearthstone wasn't the first game to release cards in batches and have a standard mode, I'm sure magic wasn't the first at that either but it did so so successfully. I think the frustrating thing about CDPR is how little they want to divulge about the future of the state of the game, and whether or not they even know what they see themselves doing. Theres so many unanswered questions and I believe even a question thread for questions like these, that and people have asked these questions before but have gotten pretty vague responses back. For now all you can do is wait and see, perhaps they'll have a standard mode in the future or seal off factions (what I'm hoping for) and just make new ones therefore keeping each factions card pool limitted to about 200 cards each that way you can still predict some of the gameplay without it being out of your hands. That and yes I totally get what you mean by a certain level of predictability leads to skill, if the parameters are too random and the cards they are playing are completely unknown then it does become a complete random game of chance. That and unbalance as bad as it sounds actually limits the viable pool of cards and keeps options a little lower which is actually not necessarily bad, it just is depending on the context of why you are playing this game in the first place.

 

[Stormbuster]

I just can't see how that can be the case, that player climbed to the top of the tournament, and then beat it - surely that is more than 'nothing but luck'? Doesn't winning a tournament, sort of by definition, make you a pretty exceptional player? Sure, luck plays a part in it, it's a card game - you draw random cards from your deck, you can have terrible mulligans, etc, etc. - but that's the same for every player in the game, and this guy managed to win the tournament (and win it pretty well too, if I remember correctly).

Not really. I've seen World Poker Tours Championship won by people not having an ounce of skill. Just pure luck. A sequence like make a bluff at pre-flop with 2 and 5 offsuit (which is ok, esp. when you are chipleader) being asked all in by a pair of aces and go all in with 85% of your chips at the final table and eventually win it with a straight means nothing but pure luck. This was an indian player who won in 2007 (?) almost all hands purely by chance.

One of my RL friends whom happens to be part of our Fridays poker group is particularly lucky. In 8 years I have seen him losing his money like twice. Doesn't matter what he plays, almost every time he is having the top gun. Hard to bluff him as well....being almost always chip leader he pays just out of curiosity.

I didn't watch all those particular player's matches throughout the tournament. Just few games in semifinal. Only luck was the deciding factor. I agree with you that he has playing skills as well. Like the other players does. But in case in more or less equal skills there is only the RNG deciding the game. Actually there is not too much room in Gwent for bluffing, sqeezing, luring...At least I did not see any of such tactics in the games I've watched.

Inmh, as long as RNG is deciding Gwent is not a skill based game anymore. It would become again if the developers turn back and let the RNG be only the modulating factor so that skill to become (again) the deciding factor. In other words I think it is ok that a fully equilibrated game from the skills point of view is decided by 2-3 points difference, courtesy of RNG...but is not ok to be decided by a very lucky combo changing the score from +20 to -20.

 

[Archpriest]

One of my RL friends whom happens to be part of our Fridays poker group is particularly lucky. In 8 years I have seen him losing his money like twice. Doesn't matter what he plays, almost every time he is having the top gun. Hard to bluff him as well....being almost always chip leader he pays just out of curiosity.

This alone shows that your friend is just better than you. You can't be lucky for 8 years. I could go further but I'll stop here. And bringing the aggro tournament rules into discussion is disingenuous. Why not cash games? Probably because it undermines your position?