Please make it possible to reroll quests. Being forced to play certain faction is no fun. And please go back to having two month seasons. The grind is real with these short seasons and there's no satisfaction in ranking up when the rewards are so modest. Two month seasons ftw!
Hydrahead;n10264152 said:
Since daily rewards are already generous, the game doesn't force us to do these quests. It would indeed be nice if we could reroll them once a day though.
DoubleDealer;n10264232 said:
It's more a matter of how people actually play. For example, when I started playing I completely dusted the entire Nilfgaard faction because I just don't like their playstyle. Now I have a decent collection of cards I'm collecting Nilfgaard again but in no way do I have enough cards to form a functional deck.
This means one of the quests in my list "Play X Matches As Nilfgaard" is effectively dead and will never be completed.
Rerolling daily quests is done in quite literally every CCG that exists, and it's done to give people flexibility in how they play. There's no reason at all to NOT include this feature.
Yeah... Cards... Balance...
But the problems were not about the balance*
The problems were about the fact, that devs screwed up the old players with challenges
What challenge to get top rank, if you got dwarfs?
What challenge to finish event for rewards, when it's simple like "play this card first, then play this as second and you win"?
The idea of any competitive game is about damn challenges, and devs did something realy "casual" with this patch
But the problems were not about the balance*
The problems were about the fact, that devs screwed up the old players with challenges
What challenge to get top rank, if you got dwarfs?
What challenge to finish event for rewards, when it's simple like "play this card first, then play this as second and you win"?
The idea of any competitive game is about damn challenges, and devs did something realy "casual" with this patch
Kingoko;n10262572 said:
I don't care which cards and how much they demote, as long as it is transparent and we get those double scraps for milling, not full refund ithat would be greedy thing to ask, just 20 scraps as we would have gotten for a Rare and of course more importantly 50 meteorite powder instead of 20.
Secrecy is bad, no matter that we didn't lose anything (tiny fraction of players who had more Flaminicas than Quens actually did).
Please add Clan Veteran back to Eist, he's a very underwhelming leader however Clan Veteran was the best card choice but you guys removed it. please make my favorite weak leader good :'(
So far I haven't hated this update quite as much as some other people, but its nice to see that the problems I and many other people do have might be addressed. Faction identities in particular are what need to be defined, and a core set is not made by simply adding the same things to each faction - self wounding needs to come back to Skellige, for example. Not every faction need a res, and every other card should not be a tutor - its just boring when one card plays another, means that first card had no place in the game in the first place.
In general I would suggest to CDPR to go for the same design philosophy I've suggested before - if something is strong, don't nerf it (unless absolutely necessary), try and add counters to the game instead. If something is weak, don't change it, try to add some synergies with other cards. To me, that is where they are failing right now - I feel they are a bit too willing to change things, when the game needs a bit of stability before it comes to a full release.
In general I would suggest to CDPR to go for the same design philosophy I've suggested before - if something is strong, don't nerf it (unless absolutely necessary), try and add counters to the game instead. If something is weak, don't change it, try to add some synergies with other cards. To me, that is where they are failing right now - I feel they are a bit too willing to change things, when the game needs a bit of stability before it comes to a full release.
SkippyHole;n10266342 said:
I understand where you're coming from but what you describe leads directly to what is known as "power creep".
If you have a broadly strong card / combo (i.e. Dorfs, which are broadly good against pretty much everything depending on the variant you play), adding a counter to it, which has to be stronger by definition, inevitably leads to the counter taking prominence. If no nerfs are incoming then the next cards designed again need to be stronger than the first counter introduced. By this point the original combo has been outstripped by 2 new cards / combos making it useless. The other mistake usually made is that of the super-nerf which nukes the card / combo / strategy so that it is simply unplayable. If the problem in question was specific, for example Deck X was unbeatable by Deck A but could be easily handled by Decks, B, C and D then adding counters would be viable. But not for Dorfs as they are right now.
Different genre but Blizzard got balancing correct with Starcraft 2. Every change was small and meaningful. They changed the odd number by 1 or 2, here and there, and it actually did wonders. I'm wondering if the same could not be said of GWENT.
I think you are almost right about the decision to change things, except it's not the willingness but the magnitude that is the problem. Introducing 120 new cards, changing many existing core cards, removing established mechanics altogether (rows) and altering existing mechanics was just too much for a single patch.
Thankfully they addressed this in the open letter above so I'm expecting the next 2 patches to go a long way toward righting the many wrongs of the Midwinter patch.
Oh, and also give us back our damn proper and full card names, if you please!
Thanks!
Last edited:
Power creep is not necessarily a bad thing. Of course the counter has to have its own weaknesses - a good example in my opinion is a card like Sweers, which can be added as a good counter for certain matchups (it can shut down Nekkers, and actually does wonders against the current Dorf deck if played on time). A specific counter that can be otherwise useless, or countered itself. For quite a few problems in the game, these can be added quite easily. Dorfs is an exception, I will grant, but that is because they are a complete travesty of an archetype right now. CDPR clearly had no idea what to do with them after resiliency was shown to be stupidly strong, gave them as many tools they could and inevitably something stuck. They have no defined role in the game - they have resilient units, movement, swarm, buffs, a hint of self wounding and graveyard play all in one archetype. The next patch really needs to focus on a definite role for dwarves in general, they are just a mess right now.CallMeHoot;n10266462 said:
As for the rest I agree with you. Its just too many changes too quickly. In some patches I'd love to try things that have changed with newer mechanics - playing old Champion of Champions with current Warcry could be an interesting experiment, for example. But its not allowed.
When I first played Gwent. It was in the Witcher 3. I had played few, if any card games prior just because I thought they would be boring and unenjoyable for me. Not my cup of tea. Well, I thought Gwent (in Witcher 3) was the best thing since sliced bread. I was hooked. I found myself yearning to just get to the moments when I could play it. It was such a odd feeling. I was loving this card game. I thought to myself countless times, that would be awesome if they actually made Gwent a full fledged game!! Not too long after, it happened. I was ecstatic!! I'll always have this special love for Gwent. There are still many people waiting to get hooked as well. Keep up the hard work. A lot of people want this game to be GREAT!! Thanks CDPR
I still have not understood if they stated they'll revert the UI and visual to "big, non-cropped cards" or not.
Bugs will surely be fixed, it's a matter of time, I have no doubt about it.
But the thing that bugs (pun!) me is: "Are we going to suffer this card size and state forever?".
Anyone can clarify it for me?
Bugs will surely be fixed, it's a matter of time, I have no doubt about it.
But the thing that bugs (pun!) me is: "Are we going to suffer this card size and state forever?".
Anyone can clarify it for me?
It has been said before but I still want to mention this once more: More avatars for casual players are needed. Some people like myself have to go to school or work and don't have much time to rank up. So we can only really grind during holidays and because of that we lose out on many many avatars. And avatars (not borders or titles) are pretty important in my opinion, giving out alot of avatars just adds alot of diversity which can only be good.
So either keep rotating avatars or just let us unlock multiple/all avatars for reaching a certain rank etc.
So either keep rotating avatars or just let us unlock multiple/all avatars for reaching a certain rank etc.
