Anti-Finisher Cards are needed

[Lyserus]

Anti-Finisher Cards are needed

This is another thing I think about how to balance coinflip / card advantage.
All in all, the very reason that coinflip/card advantage is a thing is because the cards later played cannot be countered, to balance that, we need them to be "hitable", and making playing card first a bit more advantageous.

Few cards ability suggestion...I will not name them since I don't want "which card in which faction is OP" "unfair only this faction have counter" to affect the center of discussion (They should probably all in neutral to allow everyone access...but I'm not 100% this is for the best) :

1. 7str silver: When opponent passes, damage the highest opponent unit by half.
This can be used to counter Ciri Nova and other high str stack units. To counter this card, opponent's second last card will have to have 7+ damage ability, but saving such ability can cause other effects that are not related to card advantage, for example, saving damage will allow your opponent's engine cards generate more points.

2.Special gold card: When you passes, if this card is in the graveyard, choose 1 of 2: 1.give your highest unit immunity. 2.give the units on least-unit row immunity
This is used to prevent your high str unit(s) get hitted later in the round where you can no longer play cards, I don't think I need to explain it's usefulness. Obviously scortch can still be dangerous, but that card itself has enough limitations.

3.6str gold: Deploy: boost self by 1 for each card in your hand in round1; by 2 in round 2; by 4 in round 3. The ability boost max at 20 points.( so 26 points at max potential)
This is a high str unit that encourage you play it early, and it's very rewarding at the start of round 3. Tho not requiring deck build restriction like Nova, it does take a lot of risk putting this high unit early in rounds. High risk high reward.

Certainly the cards won't appear in every game, but like Roach:Merciless pre-release (destroy ambush and card advantage), it will make ppl less want to play the countered card, namely shupe, Nova, 17str monster giant. And without finishers taking majority, the coinflip's advantage is further restricted

 

[Jeydra]

Your premise is that the coin flip leads to card advantage leads to unanswerable finishers which is bad. However the coin flip has no relation to card advantage. I know some people argued that if they lose the coin flip they won't be able to answer Ciri: Nova, but I have yet to see a good argument for why.

Let's imagine Alice (Ciri: Nova) vs. Bob (Axemen). Bob loses the coin flip and goes first. He drypasses. Alice plays a card and wins the round. Now in round 2, Alice is the player with the blue coin, and she is down a card. She can:

1. Drypass.
2. Play.

If Alice chooses #1, she goes into round 3 on the red coin + on equal cards. That means she has the last play and Bob won't be able to answer the Ciri: Nova - but Bob still has no reason to complain, because he's probably going to win anyway.
If Alice chooses #2, then she is playing on the blue coin, and she has the additional handicap of starting down a card. At any point if she fails to maintain a tempo lead, Bob will go into round 3 up a card. If that happens, Bob will be the one with the last play. For Alice to escape into round 3 on equal cards, she must have an unanswered spy, or she must acquiesce to a medium-length round 3 by passing before that happens. From Bob's perspective, the latter scenario isn't too bad. The longer round 3 is, the weaker win conditions become. The former is obviously the worst case, which is part of the reason spies are good (and Axemen typically runs Skjall / Hym as a way to tutor for Uldaryk).

tl; dr: The coin flip is an issue, yes, but it's not related to finisher, and I don't see a problem with finishers themselves.

 

[Lyserus]

Your premise is that the coin flip leads to card advantage leads to unanswerable finishers which is bad. However the coin flip has no relation to card advantage. I know some people argued that if they lose the coin flip they won't be able to answer Ciri: Nova, but I have yet to see a good argument for why.

Let's imagine Alice (Ciri: Nova) vs. Bob (Axemen). Bob loses the coin flip and goes first. He drypasses. Alice plays a card and wins the round. Now in round 2, Alice is the player with the blue coin, and she is down a card. She can:

1. Drypass.
2. Play.

If Alice chooses #1, she goes into round 3 on the red coin + on equal cards. That means she has the last play and Bob won't be able to answer the Ciri: Nova - but Bob still has no reason to complain, because he's probably going to win anyway.
If Alice chooses #2, then she is playing on the blue coin, and she has the additional handicap of starting down a card. At any point if she fails to maintain a tempo lead, Bob will go into round 3 up a card. If that happens, Bob will be the one with the last play. For Alice to escape into round 3 on equal cards, she must have an unanswered spy, or she must acquiesce to a medium-length round 3 by passing before that happens. From Bob's perspective, the latter scenario isn't too bad. The longer round 3 is, the weaker win conditions become. The former is obviously the worst case, which is part of the reason spies are good (and Axemen typically runs Skjall / Hym as a way to tutor for Uldaryk).

tl; dr: The coin flip is an issue, yes, but it's not related to finisher, and I don't see a problem with finishers themselves.

There is nothing that valids "Bob is probably going to win". He needs to go first in round 3 on equal so Alice have the last say (And she doesn't even have to play Ciri last, in a long round 3 against axemen an 30 point scorch is possible as well) , which is exactly what causes coin flip an issue. Coin flip decides who have the last card play unless there is really big gap or situation allows the lose coin flip side to pass and opponent have to play 2 cards to push (and opponent doesn't even have to)

If in your opinion coin flip is not a issue due to finisher, please state what causes coin flip an issue in your opinion.

 

[TrompeLaMort]

You know what card is great in mitigating the power of CA? Sabbath. With Sabbath, you can be 0, 1, or 10 cards behind the opponent, and yet if he doesn't have an answer, you will win.

And yet you see a huge thread here asking to nerf him.

 

[Lyserus]

You know what card is great in mitigating the power of CA? Sabbath. With Sabbath, you can be 0, 1, or 10 cards behind the opponent, and yet if he doesn't have an answer, you will win.

And yet you see a huge thread here asking to nerf him.

Which means you always need a control card....or vomit points better

Against a sabbath with my mulligan deck, either use my only damage card (Ivorveth original) at the right time or just swap swap swap get higher points every time

 

[FG15-ISH7EG]

I agree with the OT. Cards that prevent the last play from playing a huge point swing would be great. In a way we already have Villen for that, but more or other cards are needed too, in my opinion.

I like the first suggestion. The second one seems not that usefull. Even if it works in multiple rounds, you sacrificed a gold slot for it without any direct value. Just remember that even Quen had a +2 for every affected unit. Suggestion 3 is more or less a Cleaver, but yes why not.

I would also like to add another suggestion. A neutral card similar to Morenn: silver 7, at the end of the next opponent turn damage all played units by half their power (rounding up) or alternitively silver 3, lock the next played unit before its deploy. If you know for sure that the next card is a huge finisher both would be extremly powerfull and else at least decent. The latter one might be with 6 strength also a possible rework for Roche(not Roach):Merciless.

 

[Jeydra]

There is nothing that valids "Bob is probably going to win". He needs to go first in round 3 on equal so Alice have the last say (And she doesn't even have to play Ciri last, in a long round 3 against axemen an 30 point scorch is possible as well) , which is exactly what causes coin flip an issue. Coin flip decides who have the last card play unless there is really big gap or situation allows the lose coin flip side to pass and opponent have to play 2 cards to push (and opponent doesn't even have to)

If in your opinion coin flip is not a issue due to finisher, please state what causes coin flip an issue in your opinion.

Bob is going to win round 3 because Axemen is the ultimate long-round deck. 30 points from Scorch is not enough. To beat Axemen in a long round even Eithne into double Compression with Schirru backup isn't enough (one of my friends tested this on me and he still lost by a substantial margin). Even if you answer all the Axemen, you're still facing a gold weather deck in a long round.

Coin flip is an issue because the person going first is playing, at best, to win down one card while the person going second can aim to win on equal. There's a large difference between these two results. The person going second also gets to set up engines while the person going first cannot easily do that (setting up engines is low tempo and hence makes the first player easily passed).

 

[Void_Singer]

You know what card is great in mitigating the power of CA? Sabbath. With Sabbath, you can be 0, 1, or 10 cards behind the opponent, and yet if he doesn't have an answer, you will win.

And yet you see a huge thread here asking to nerf him.

"and yet".... I love how you clearly define why it's such a ridiculous card, then then act surprised that it draws so much hate.

 

[Hellsmoke77]

"and yet".... I love how you clearly define why it's such a ridiculous card, then then act surprised that it draws so much hate.

The card is fine and the reports show the use of this card is declining. If it were ridiculous I guarantee you this would not be the case.

 

[Lyserus]

Bob is going to win round 3 because Axemen is the ultimate long-round deck. 30 points from Scorch is not enough. To beat Axemen in a long round even Eithne into double Compression with Schirru backup isn't enough (one of my friends tested this on me and he still lost by a substantial margin). Even if you answer all the Axemen, you're still facing a gold weather deck in a long round.

Coin flip is an issue because the person going first is playing, at best, to win down one card while the person going second can aim to win on equal. There's a large difference between these two results. The person going second also gets to set up engines while the person going first cannot easily do that (setting up engines is low tempo and hence makes the first player easily passed).

Then switch axemen to any other deck your assumption won't work, since it's only base on "bob can win because he is using axemen in long round".

Like you said, and we are actually talking about one thing differently, the issue caused by coin flip is that the player play first can be targeted/countered easier while the other have less chance to be targeted, I mentioned finisher because they are the signature big uncounterable point swing caused by coin flip, but suggestion 3 (non-engine cards that reward you if you play it early in round) actually solves the problem you mentioned in a way (big point that is targeted by control cards in the early round to protect engine cards)

 

[Jeydra]

That's why your deck must be able to compete in long rounds, or it's probably not worth playing. https://www.gwentdb.com/decks/44358-...unt-lan-axemen - see the theory there. Axemen is (almost) the ultimate long round deck, but it's by no means the only one that can drypass round 1 with confidence.

You are seeing the consequence of playing a deck that cannot drypass round 1, which means you're forced to play on the blue coin, which means you risk losing on equal cards, which gives you the impression that you're losing to finishers because of the coin flip. The problem isn't the coin flip, it's your choice of deck.

 

[Lyserus]

That's why your deck must be able to compete in long rounds, or it's probably not worth playing. https://www.gwentdb.com/decks/44358-...unt-lan-axemen - see the theory there. Axemen is (almost) the ultimate long round deck, but it's by no means the only one that can drypass round 1 with confidence.

You are seeing the consequence of playing a deck that cannot drypass round 1, which means you're forced to play on the blue coin, which means you risk losing on equal cards, which gives you the impression that you're losing to finishers because of the coin flip. The problem isn't the coin flip, it's your choice of deck.

Well holla I guess problem is solved. All those players whines about coinflip without knowing their real problem-- they should have played axemen deck.

I'm not saying your point is completely invalid, but if axemen is really that almighty in long round, no opponent is gonna dry pass on round 2, which is another BIG assumption in your argument. And knowing axemen which requires setup, forcing axemen to go one more card down in round 2 is not all that difficult, a smart pass can force axemen to go one more card down. And with a medium-length round 3 and 2 card disadvantage, I doubt axemen is all that good anymore (And if it still super great in round 2, probably a nerf is needed)

You have some valid points, but the statics are there, losing coin flip influence a great deal even in high rank.
The point of this thread is to solve the problem caused by coin flip: Can't counter opponent and get countered. rather than discussing why certain ONE deck is okay even losing coin flip.

 

[Jeydra]

Hence nobody drypasses round 2 against Axemen. You're right about that. But here's the thing: if you play round 2 after the opponent drypasses round 1, he actually starts up a card. He has two cards to catch up to whatever you're doing. That's even better odds than winning the coin flip in round 1. As for forcing Axemen down one card in round 3 - I played Axemen to the top 100, and it's pretty rare. It's doable, but rare. You need to put out a lot of tempo in the early turns of round 2, and opponent cannot stick any Axemen. If you pass too soon in round 2, Axemen can and will win round 3 down a card.

And again - I'm not saying that the coin flip isn't the problem. I'm saying that there is no relation between the coin flip and finishers / who gets the last play. If you're looking for coin flip fixes, we have a big thread just for that; if you're after fixes to finishers, then you've yet to come up with a good reason for why that's a problem.

 

[Pruny]

Axemen got rekt by my swordmasters

 

[TrompeLaMort]

"and yet".... I love how you clearly define why it's such a ridiculous card, then then act surprised that it draws so much hate.

I'm not arguing it is or it is not ridiculous. (Although I think it is not.)

What I'm saying is that you can either complain about cards that can win the game with card disadvantage, or you can complain that card advantage by itself defines the outcome of most games. (Which is what makes CA spies, coin-flip, etc. so worrisome lately.) Complaining about both is self-contradictory.

 

[Steped]

Yeah, a think gwent needs more counter combo cards.

 

[Void_Singer]

What I'm saying is that you can either complain about cards that can win the game with card disadvantage, or you can complain that card advantage by itself defines the outcome of most games. (Which is what makes CA spies, coin-flip, etc. so worrisome lately.) Complaining about both is self-contradictory.

neither are absolutes. however in general CA is the leading indicator, particularly between comparable decks, and most certainly when talking about the ability to answer late game plays.

in the more specific, and not as common case (because it's unhealthy mechanically), single cards can determine games.

both things can be true in their own scope and context, and do not invalidate the other.

 

[DannyGuy]

However the coin flip has no relation to card advantage