Balance overhaul suggestions (Neutral)

+
Balance overhaul suggestions (Neutral)

This is my big balance overhaul. I'd just like to share some of my opinions and ideas with the community. Hopefully, someone will read this.

The new patch could be considered nothing more than a balance fix for the Midwinter Patch. The only thing that has seemingly changed so far is that Dwarves are gone and Impera Enforcers are back to their old state. Here are some more in-depth changes
I propose a change to Boons. make them trigger at the end of your turn, unlike Hazards.

If you want to hear the reasoning for any of the changes I made, feel free to ask me in the comments.
Neutral

Adrenaline Rush
In addition to toggling resilience, strengthen the unit by 2 if it's an ally.

Commander's Horn
Boost 6 adjacent units by 3. Add "Doomed" tag.
Tutors should have been nerfed, not Commander's Horn. The Doomed tag is added because of Eithné

Dragon's Dream
Trigger when you play a Mage or a Witcher as well.
Previously, only special cards could trigger Dragon's Dream

Torrential Rain
Deal 1 damage to a random unit, twice.
With this change, rain might see more play in an Axeman deck, since it gains 2 value even if only 1 unit is on the row, just like the other weathers. Credit to overcold_ice.

Ciri: Nova
12 strength. If you have exactly 2 copies of each bronze card in your starting deck, Strengthen all loyal Bronze and Silver units in your hand and deck by 1. Strengthen all loyal Gold units in your hand and deck by 2. This card is always in your starting hand.
Replaces the one card finisher with a boost to your overall deck power. The card also promotes swarm-ish gameplay.

Dudu
Copy the power of an ally.
Allows the card to be played with units that reach a high amount of strength. Vulnerable to Scorch.

Roach
Make her come out before deploy effects.
Prevents awkward situations with cards like Vilgefortz.

Aguara
Choose 2:
Deal 5 damage to an enemy
Boost an ally by 5.
Charm an enemy with 3 or less strength.
Boost two units in your hand by 3.
Removes weird elf punish and removes randomness

Ciri
9 Strength, no Armor. If Ciri returns to your hand, she cannot be mulliganed by any means.
Increases base power at the cost of weakening the card in later rounds, since you cannot trade it in for a better card from your deck. Pure card advantage.

Gaunter O'Dimm
8 Strength. Summon this unit from your deck or graveyard when you have the first play in the first or third round.
Helps decks that have problems when going first. If you go second, this card can still be summoned in the third round if you won the second round.

Lambert: Swordmaster
6 Strength. Deal 2 damage to a unit for each special card in your hand.


Lesser Demons/Iris'Companions
Weaken it to 6 Strength (from 11). Instead of discarding a card at random, banish a chosen card.
Makes the card much more consistent, at the cost of base strength and losing discard synergy.

Saskia: Dragonfire
Only banish Bronze and Silver cards. Boost self by 1 for each banished card.

King of Beggars
9 Strength. Choose an enemy unit and move up to 2 copies of it from your opponent's deck to their graveyard.
I will propose a Sweers and Nekker change in my Nilfgaard and Monsters overhaul, respectively. This is not an effect that should be restricted to one faction only.

I'd like to thank anyone who has read this post (even those who just looked at a couple of cards). Please tell me what you think. I welcome any suggestions.
 
Last edited:
DannyGuy;n10450322 said:
Saskia: Dragonfire Only banish Bronze and Silver cards. Boost self by 1 for each banished card.
Interesting. Might be OP but is interesting.
DannyGuy;n10450322 said:
King of Beggars 9 Strength. Choose an enemy unit and move up to 2 copies of it from your opponent's deck to their graveyard. I will propose a Sweers and Nekker change in my Nilfgaard and Monsters overhaul, respectively. This is not an effect that should be restricted to one faction only.
I dunno. I kind of like it when factions have unique things that are hard counters to other builds that only they can do. Gives the different factions different feels.
DannyGuy;n10450322 said:
Lesser Demons/Iris'Companions Weaken it to 9 Strength (from 11). Instead of discarding a card at random, banish a chosen card. Makes the card much more consistent, at the cost of base strength and losing discard synergy.
I do think that card need to be more consistent to get played more ... but it may be OP if you get to pick both the card you get and the card you lose. If your gonna do that I think you need to reduce value to like 1. The benefits in consistency would be huge with this mechanic. I would definitely include in my deck even at 1.
 
DannyGuy;n10450322 said:
Roach
Make him come out before deploy effects. Prevents awkward situations with cards like Vilgefortz.

Roach is a she. ;)
I always hated it when NG decks ran Roach just to burn her with Vilgefortz. Based on that alone (yes, I know it may sound like a stupid reason), I can't agree with this suggestion. I'd rather have her get summoned by Gold specials again, if she were to be changed.


DannyGuy;n10450322 said:
Lambert: Swordmaster
6 Strength. Deal 2 damage to a unit for each special card in your hand

Why? I think Lambert's current ability is great; he doesn't need changes.


DannyGuy;n10450322 said:
Gaunter O'Dimm
8 Strength. Summon this unit from your deck or graveyard when you have the first play in the first or third round. Helps decks that have problems when going first. If you go second, this card can still be summoned in the third round if you won the second round.

This sounds like a cool idea! :D
 
Muffliato;n10450552 said:
Roach is a she. ;)
I always hated it when NG decks ran Roach just to burn her with Vilgefortz. Based on that alone (yes, I know it may sound like a stupid reason), I can't agree with this suggestion. I'd rather have her get summoned by Gold specials again, if she were to be changed.
Dammit, I always forget that Roach is a girl.

Yeah. I don't like the Vilgefortz trick either, but what could be done is that roach gets put on hold and gets pulled after the card is played, but doesn't get pulled by their abilities. Let's say Roach goes to the bottom of your deck before the deploy, and comes out after.

Or make Roach immune to prevent her from getting targeted by Vilge.

 
Rawls;n10450462 said:
I do think that card need to be more consistent to get played more ... but it may be OP if you get to pick both the card you get and the card you lose. If your gonna do that I think you need to reduce value to like 1. The benefits in consistency would be huge with this mechanic. I would definitely include in my deck even at 1.
Mm, thanks for the feedback. You raise some good points, though I think it'd be fine at 4.

​​​​
 
DannyGuy;n10450322 said:
Commander's Horn Boost 6 adjacent units by 3. Add "Doomed" tag. Tutors should have been nerfed, not Commander's Horn. The Doomed tag is added because of Eithné

A couple of things regarding CH.

1) There's a small mechanical problem. CH is actually a targetable ability, now while it says "5 adjacent units" you really buff 1 unit and 4 units adjacent to it. For example if you have a Werewolf in the middle, you wouldn't be able to use CH for maximum potential even if you have 5 units lined up. All row multi-unit abilities work like that, so to affect 6 units it would require a whole new mechanic added to the game that would work exclusively for CH.

OR it could work to say 3 to the right and 2 to the left, although it's kinda confusing and weird.

2) I completely disagree with the doomed tag, seems like in the suggestion forum it's the easy go-to problem solver. Eithne's ability is to replay special cards, that's her whole thing, making special cards doomed so they can't be played with Eithne defeats the whole point of having this leader in the game.

Another thing about leaders, a quick history lesson if i may. Initially leaders did not have a body, they were just their ability HOWEVER it was quite difficult to have 3 different abilities of equal power, so it was sorted that the difference in ability strength to be compensated by points on the board. So if Eithne proves to be too powerful, the real solution would be to reduce her points, this is the whole reason he has a body in the first place, not to make special cards doomed.
 
Iuliandrei;n10452672 said:
1) There's a small mechanical problem. CH is actually a targetable ability, now while it says "5 adjacent units" you really buff 1 unit and 4 units adjacent to it. For example if you have a Werewolf in the middle, you wouldn't be able to use CH for maximum potential even if you have 5 units lined up. All row multi-unit abilities work like that, so to affect 6 units it would require a whole new mechanic added to the game that would work exclusively for CH.

OR it could work to say 3 to the right and 2 to the left, although it's kinda confusing and weird.

I don't see a problem with this. It doesn't even have to say this on the card, but boosting 2 units to the left and 3 units to the right isn't problematic in my opinion. Players will quickly get used to this.

Iuliandrei;n10452672 said:
2) I completely disagree with the doomed tag, seems like in the suggestion forum it's the easy go-to problem solver. Eithne's ability is to replay special cards, that's her whole thing, making special cards doomed so they can't be played with Eithne defeats the whole point of having this leader in the game.
Cards are alredy limited and balanced around others. Don't see a problem with that. Operator cannot be returned to hand for example, and many cards are doomed for the very same reason - it's too powerful when resurrected.
I didn't like this concept back when Blue Mountain Commando's used to replay a unit, but Elven Mercenaries also couldn't be returned to your hand for some reason, but spies still could, lol.

I must say though, you're the first person to disagree with this suggestion, and I know this because this very idea has been suggested many times since the change was announced.
 
DannyGuy;n10452982 said:
and many cards are doomed for the very same reason - it's too powerful when resurrected.

They are doomed or stubborn to prevent game breaking chains or infinite loops, these are exceptions and should be used as little as possible for the consistency of game rules. If CDPR would listen to everyone who wants everything popular to be doomed we wouldn't even have a graveyard right now.
 
Iuliandrei;n10453182 said:
They are doomed or stubborn to prevent game breaking chains or infinite loops, these are exceptions and should be used as little as possible for the consistency of game rules. If CDPR would listen to everyone who wants everything popular to be doomed we wouldn't even have a graveyard right now.

Totally agree with your opinions. Those that have effects of playing another card are the ones that should be tweaked and tinkered about, not the cards that they play.
Speaking of that, I think Henselt needs a change. I mean, he is worth 20+ points easily, and can thin the deck should that even matter anymore.
 
Iuliandrei;n10453182 said:
They are doomed or stubborn to prevent game breaking chains or infinite loops, these are exceptions and should be used as little as possible for the consistency of game rules. If CDPR would listen to everyone who wants everything popular to be doomed we wouldn't even have a graveyard right now.
overcold_ice;n10454022 said:
Totally agree with your opinions. Those that have effects of playing another card are the ones that should be tweaked and tinkered about, not the cards that they play. Speaking of that, I think Henselt needs a change. I mean, he is worth 20+ points easily, and can thin the deck should that even matter anymore.
I must say that I agree, but I don't see any other way of balancing Commander's Horn that doesn't completely kill the card. Maybe make it exclusive to only one faction? It does seem like a sort of Northern Realms-ish card based on the theme. What are your guys' suggestions?
 
No i love my Aguara! stop touching her ... and this ciri nova idea sounds not good to me, we saw what happens with strengthen stuffs in the month of dwarves, also lambert sounds more like a card only for Alch NG and spellatel
 
Commander's Horn:
Boost a unit by 6, and boost units adjacent to it by 4.

Perfect at 14 points.

Btw, Torrential Rain is too strong that way. Make it do 1 damage to random unit twice.
And Iris' Companions is too weak. The part that let it choose any card is the thing that needs to be tweaked imo, banishing a card for its cost is alright.
 
Last edited:
overcold_ice;n10454282 said:
Commander's Horn:
Boost a unit by 6, and boost units adjacent to it by 4.

Perfect at 14 points.

Btw, Torrential Rain is too strong that way. Make it do 1 damage to random unit twice.
And Iris' Companions is too weak. The part that let it choose any card is the thing that needs to be tweaked imo, banishing a card for its cost is alright.

Your suggestion completely kills the flavor of the card and makes it a bland boost with a low requirement for a low reward.

Excellent idea with Torrential Rain - I can't believe I haven't thought of that myself, much better.

Target drawing anything from your deck is really powerful. Think about it for a second. Treat is as you would Operator. You will play this card no matter how weak the body is...

Rawls;n10450462 said:
I do think that card need to be more consistent to get played more ... but it may be OP if you get to pick both the card you get and the card you lose. If your gonna do that I think you need to reduce value to like 1. The benefits in consistency would be huge with this mechanic. I would definitely include in my deck even at 1.
 
oOxhaosOo;n10454132 said:
No i love my Aguara! stop touching her ... and this ciri nova idea sounds not good to me, we saw what happens with strengthen stuffs in the month of dwarves, also lambert sounds more like a card only for Alch NG and spellatel

Well, Aguara randomly punishing elves isn't good. I left her relatively unchanged - if not slightly better except for the elf change. What are your thoughts on Aguara?

Not sure what you mean with the Strengthening in Dwarves. Dennis Cranmer was never the problem in Dwarves. Dwarven Skirmisher and Paulie Dahlberg were the main culprits of the dwarven rise to power. Care to elaborate?

My suggestion for Lambert is intended to be used in spell oriented decks, is that a problem? Many neutral cards only fit in very few decks (Triss: Butterflies, Trial of the Grasses, Wolfsbane and Phoenix, for example).

Sorry if I seem hostile. I just want some constructive feedback.
 
Honestly, of these cards, the only ones I feel need change are Adrenaline Rush, Ciri, Gaunter, and King of Beggars.

Adrenaline Rush: I agree that it is a meme card, right now. And eventually CDPR will want to look at it. But honestly, the way carry-over is broken right now, I think that until they find a solution, the last thing they want is to have this card being a meta card. (See my other thread on dry-passing.)

Ciri: I don't think anyone denies that Ciri is completely useless right now. But again, until CA/coin-flip is fixed in this game, the last thing CDPR wants is having Ciri being played again. (Just imagine a strong and not easily killed Ciri. You start, and play a unit. I play Ciri and get ahead. Where is the concede button again?)

Gaunter: they really should move away from him drawing a card, since that would allow them to make him playable, without ever being afraid he gets too good. (If they want to keep him being a RNG "meme" card, which I don't mind.) I had an idea the other day: "Each player chooses a card in hand. Whose card has higher strength, the owner plays it and draws a card. Whose card has lower or equal strength, discard the card and draw another." So you have the trade-off between risking a strong card and trying to win. Still meme, but interesting meme. (The worst thing about current design is that the right strategy is to check gwentdb and always choose the same bracket.)

King of Beggars: The idea (of current King) is interesting, but again it is a design that will never work with the current coin-flip system. (See my thread.) The problem is that if you get the blue coin, tying with the opponent still leaves you screwed. Maybe just change it to not only tie, but pass by 1 point, besides raising one or two max points, would be enough to make him a good card.
 
Last edited:
DannyGuy;n10454542 said:
Well, Aguara randomly punishing elves isn't good. I left her relatively unchanged - if not slightly better except for the elf change. What are your thoughts on Aguara?

Not sure what you mean with the Strengthening in Dwarves. Dennis Cranmer was never the problem in Dwarves. Dwarven Skirmisher and Paulie Dahlberg were the main culprits of the dwarven rise to power. Care to elaborate?

My suggestion for Lambert is intended to be used in spell oriented decks, is that a problem? Many neutral cards only fit in very few decks (Triss: Butterflies, Trial of the Grasses, Wolfsbane and Phoenix, for example).
w
Sorry if I seem hostile. I just want some constructive feedback.

Its not random Aguara is a lore based creature and so its against elvs... and it should stay because of it.

Lambert total changing to a Alchi/spell deck only is a little unfair against the people using him now, this would be better for a new lambert card.

i understand that you want some cards for your play style but because of that ignoring lore based stuff and changing all ready in game implemented cards to your style seems not good in my oppinion.
 
Last edited:
TrompeLaMort;n10454732 said:
Honestly, of these cards, the only ones I feel need change are Adrenaline Rush, Ciri, Gaunter, and King of Beggars.

Adrenaline Rush: I agree that it is a meme card, right now. And eventually CDPR will want to look at it. But honestly, the way carry-over is broken right now, I think that until they find a solution, the last thing they want is to have this card being a meta card. (See my other thread on dry-passing.)

Ciri: I don't think anyone denies that Ciri is completely useless right now. But again, until CA/coin-flip is fixed in this game, the last thing CDPR wants is having Ciri being played again. (Just imagine a strong and not easily killed Ciri. You start, and play a unit. I play Ciri and get ahead. Where is the concede button again?)

Gaunter: they really should move away from him drawing a card, since that would allow them to make him playable, without ever being afraid he gets too good. (If they want to keep him being a RNG "meme" card, which I don't mind.) I had an idea the other day: "Each player chooses a card in hand. Whose card has higher strength, the owner plays it and draws a card. Whose card has lower or equal strength, discard the card and draw another." So you have the trade-off between risking a strong card and trying to win. Still meme, but interesting meme. (The worst thing about current design is that the right strategy is to check gwentdb and always choose the same bracket.)

King of Beggars: The idea (of current King) is interesting, but again it is a design that will never work with the current coin-flip system. (See my thread.) The problem is that if you get the blue coin, tying with the opponent still leaves you screwed. Maybe just change it to not only tie, but pass by 1 point, besides raising one or two max points, would be enough to make him a good card.

Not sure if you read my suggestions. It'd be nice to hear some feedback on them, I especially think that my Gaunter o'Dimm suggestion is pretty good. Nevertheless, I agree with what you are saying.
 
oOxhaosOo;n10454742 said:
Its not random Aguara is a lore based creature and so its against elvs... and it should stay because of it.

Lambert total changing to a Alchi/spell deck only is a little unfair against the people using him now, this would be better for a new lambert card.

i understand that you want some cards for your play style but because of that ignoring lore based stuff and changing all ready in game implemented cards to your style seems not good in my oppinion.

I know, Aguaras turn elves into more aguaras or something like that. What I meant by random is that it punishes only one faction, which is very specific, and it's very bad design (I am an amateur game designer myself, so I am well aquainted with the subject of game design).

You like the current Lamber that much, eh? I've always thought of him as an extremely situational card that I wouldn't include in any of my decks. I'd like to see in which deck you run him. Perhaps a Shupe Deck?
 
DannyGuy;n10454802 said:
Not sure if you read my suggestions. It'd be nice to hear some feedback on them, I especially think that my Gaunter o'Dimm suggestion is pretty good. Nevertheless, I agree with what you are saying.

I actually commented on your Gaunter suggestion in another thread. I mean, I understand the purpose. I just think it is a feels bad card. Half of your games, it is basically a waste of a gold slot (and a brick to your mulligan). It might help the win-rate of decks, but it certainly won't make anyone happy playing it. I just feel we need a real solution to the coin-flip, not try to patch it with cards, that if they work, become auto-include.

DannyGuy;n10454832 said:
You like the current Lamber that much, eh? I've always thought of him as an extremely situational card that I wouldn't include in any of my decks. I'd like to see in which deck you run him. Perhaps a Shupe Deck?

Lambert is a very situational card, but that is completely fine. Not all cards are meant for all situations. It is a counter to swarm strategies, and if ever they become prevalent, we will see him more. And I already remember him being played in a Gwent pro tournament, so he is completely viable.
 
Top Bottom