[HC] Shared Melee row v2 and Overwhelming rows

+
[HC] Shared Melee row v2 and Overwhelming rows

ThunderboltPotion has stated of an excellent idea of Shared Melee Row in Reddit (Gwent 2.0 – Rowbreader). If Gwent is really going to Mobile, I understood/accept reason behind CDPR announcement to try removing a row. But I very much want to keep the Melee/Ranged/Siege row mechanics thus Shared Row (2+2+1 row) is an excellent compromise.

I present here a more simplified implementation (and more elegant) to his original idea:
1. New ability “Fight”:
- Place your unit next to opponent (in the same row), choose that opponent, then deal damage to enemy (and verse visa) at the same time.

e.g. Opponent Wardancer (3 str) was in the shared melee row. Now you deploy your Nekker (4 str) next to it. After the Fight is resolved, you have a damaged 1 str Nekker standing and the enemy Wardancer went to the graveyard.

Mechanically, there aren't much changed as it just 'nets' the point difference; and it has the benefit of reducing the number of cards displayed on small 'mobile' screens. Also, new ability can be given to those Fights. e.g. First strike, trample etc.

1b. Units without Fight ability cannot 'fight back'
Most machine, mages etc that has Ranged/Siege row as preferred rows don't have the Fight ability, thus cannot fight back.

For the previous example if Wardancer was made to not having the Fight ability, the Nekker can kill it without being damaged. This gives deck building space & incentive to design decks that try to 'overwhelm' the hind rows.

2. Overwhelming a row make the opponent row above Shared:
- Allows unit deployment on Opponent Ranged/Siege row at your turn start (checked every turn), after you managed to 'overwhelm' its lower row (Melee/Ranged respectively)

A proposed criteria of Overwhelm can be -- having 15 points more than your opponent on that particular row.
I chose 15 point, as I assume average Melee unit is 11 str, thus you usually managed to overwhelm a row if you have 1 non-damaged unit and about 1 damaged unit while opponent has no units there.

(The criteria of overwhelm should be thoroughly tested, should be something else in the end, to make it 'significantly difficult, but doable'. Balance it to happen for about 15% of the games)

This adds a new tactical layer to the gameplay.
e.g. your Ranged units can be placed in opponent Ranged row (Preferred row bonus for Range row still applies) avoiding the frost at your home range row. Fight the iris you placed there, enable Igni etc. Fight opponent units that are incapable to fight back to gain extra points.

Ranged/Siege units are supposed to be more engine like which gains value if it sticks to the board for multiple turns AND I hope for less direct & mindless bronze removal (like Alzur Thunder spam) in HomeComing. Adding an 'always available, but difficult’ way to remove engine (by Fighting on Ranged) reduces the need for player to pick up mindless bronze removal during deck building.

2a. Supplies line (optional)
Opponent units in your Ranged/Sieged row can be made 'out of supplied' if your Melee/Ranged row is no longer overwhelmed. One of the opponent that were 'out of supplies' will get damaged 1 point per round, for example.

Putting it all together:
1. Opponent put a (25 str) Tibor on an empty shared melee row, at his turn
2. On my turn, if I really want to prevent him overwhelm the melee row I absolutely need to make 11+ points on that row. The only unit my hand that can do that is a 11 str Saskia. I don't want to use it this turn yet, instead I put 2X6 points half elf on my ranged row, fully knowing that my opponent is allowed to put units on my ranged row next turn.
3. On opponent turn, he put Germain (10 str + 4X1 str cow) next to my half elf on my Ranged row. They Fight, it ends up with a 4 str Germain, 4X 1 str cow and a 6 str elf. Opponent has a mere 2 points more than me, my Siege row where most my vulnerable units are, remain very safe.
4. On my turn, I put my Saskia to fight the Tibor on the shared melee row. Tibor end up with 14 str, Saskia die after swapping units.
5. On opponent turn start, since he did not overwhlem the melee row with only 14 str, he no longer can put unit into my Ranged row. Though he can commander horn my ranged row (that affects only his units), my elf remains a 6 str elf.
6. On my turn, since I on longer has unit in hand that has melee preferred row benefit, I use a single row hazard on the shared melee row, in hope that his hand mainly has units that benefits by melee row placement. Or frost on my own Ranged row to kill cow etc, if I decided not putting units there in future turns.
 
Last edited:
Definetly sounds worth trying it out.
The biggest problem I see with it, is that quite a lot of effects aren't created around chared rows. Who is allowed to add boons/hazards to that row and whom does it affect?
How are units working, which are changing the rows (Odrin, movement archetype, ...)?
Is a player who has lost control of a row still allowed to interact with his units on that row? Will those units automatically become locked? If that isn't the case I can see a huge problem with it.
In which way is it clear which units on the melee row belong to whom? A spying tag isn't possible else that will destroy the spying archetype.
Effects that target the opposite row won't work on the melee row anymore.


Also, I'm afraid this system will make engines even more unrelevant and empower pointspam even more. I could just imagine the following combination:
1. play Tibor on melee row
2. if not one the melee row already play Cynthia there
3. play Germain on the enemy ranged row
4. Commanders horn on Germain

If the enemy runs an engine deck without scorch(in hand), there isn't anything he can do against that.

Also the NR armor archetype could overroll the enemy in the same way and Dwarven Marauders would need a rework for sure. (Barclay->Marauder on melee GG)
 
I am in supporter of the three lines. I propose a new criterion to establish the winner of a round. Instead of simply comparing the total score on the battlefield, compare the scores for each line and determine that the winner is the one who has won on more lines.
 
@FG15, all good comment.

My OP still needs some gaps to explain it clearly. I have given some thoughts on how to make #1 and #2 clearer. I will update the OP soon after I finish this reply.
There sure will be lots of balance changes for Homecoming, thus out of scope of this discussion.

Yes, for row based effects when Shared Row is introduced, row based effect (commander horn, weather, Odin etc) will need to have a clear indication of affecting:
allied units (for good effects)
opponent units (for damage effects)
all units (for neutral effects like hazards/boons) .
 
olmonte;n10884741 said:
I am in supporter of the three lines. I propose a new criterion to establish the winner of a round. Instead of simply comparing the total score on the battlefield, compare the scores for each line and determine that the winner is the one who has won on more lines.

Now this is a marvelous idea, although off topic of OPs suggestion. This could make for more row centric plays without adding back row lock units.
 
olmonte;n10884741 said:
I am in supporter of the three lines. I propose a new criterion to establish the winner of a round. Instead of simply comparing the total score on the battlefield, compare the scores for each line and determine that the winner is the one who has won on more lines.

Sorry bit I am not in favor that winner will going to decided by "who has won on more lines". Reason, It's going to be so much calculation as you have to calculate every row specially against engine decks or against par turn ability cards & little mistake can cost you card disadvantage which is very bad in gwent.
 
Top Bottom