x

You have decided to merge your account with the GOG.com.

You can now start participating in the community discussions.

x

You chose to opt out from the merge process.
Please note that you will not be able to access your account until you opt in.

We strongly encourage you to merge your RED account with the GOG.com one.
If you want to do it later please try logging in again.

  • Register

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

In 4k plus ranked play is a 27 card deck *2, 2* many cards?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • In 4k plus ranked play is a 27 card deck *2, 2* many cards?

    Does anyone have a link or information on the true downsides of playing more then 25 cards in competitive game play. I can definitely see it is risky from personal experience but when (if ever) is it deemed ok to play with 26,27 or 28 cards? I've added two cards to my deck to specifically counter this carry over meta I keep running into consistantly from dwarves, and monster decks. But now that skellige decks are hopping on this "resilience" band wagon I truely feel I need a counter measure but the only way to do this is to add two cards, substituting cards is not an option. I hope the game expands, in time, to allow a little more freedom in deck diversity and size without the inherent risks always outweighing the reward value of doing so. Any thoughts, comments or links on this topic is appreciated.

  • #2
    I never consider the 25 fetish a real thing. I know ppl like to secure their draw or they are netdecking, somehow doesn't make sense to me. Go on to what ever size you like, magic number to me is 32 or 35.

    Comment


    • #3
      I was consistently running 25 until the rise of the Monster Meta, at which point I added two weather removal and two lacerates, but only removed two bronze cards. So I am currently at 27. That of course is less relevant for me, as I play NG and can thin 27 cards before most people can thin 20.

      I think adding a pair of cards if you are consistently ending the match with 7 cards left to begin with can be dangerous, if you don't have a direct way to your win condition (IE Henselt, Marching Orders to Grave Hag, ADC into a DBP, etc). Personally, I am not confident going above 27, because I have to get to Vilgie/Petey/Tibor to win consistently. I need to finish with 1-2 cards in my deck in order to win.

      Comment


      • #4
        I mean, '37' is a NR deck type, but I wouldn't know about non-NR decks.

        Comment


        • #5
          The deck I like the most to play with is my 32 cards Foltest, and I got to 4.2K with it, so it sounds pretty competitive

          The thing with running 25 cards is that it decreases the randomness of your games. With enough thining in it, you'll run through all your deck almost every game. When you increase the number of cards in your deck you add a bit of randomness to the table, which I enjoy, and it can still stay competitive.
          Last edited by Theodrik; 13-08-17, 06:57.

          Comment


          • #6
            The Nilfgaard deck I play is 27, but then again, it got lots of thinning. Point is, there is cases when more than 25 is fine. But really, playing it, how do you feel about it? Does it work out better than before? Then the answer is simply, yes.

            Comment


            • #7
              It really depends on the cards you use and how much deck thinning is possible in your deck.
              There's no general rule that says it has to be 25.

              Comment


              • #8
                I play NG with 28 cards and ST with 26 cards for the same reason - monsters. And I find that with 25 cards on ST with my builds, sometimes I run into either rallying no bronze units for power swings or no special cards in the 3rd round, so I wanted to maximise that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  It depends on faction that you are playing, I play queensguard with a deck of 28 cards, and on the last round there is no cards left after the draw. The same applies to any other crowd based builds like monsters or northern realams with their infantry chains.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I play a 27-card deck because I run so much thinning (Elven Mercs, First Lights, BMCs, ADC, Aelirenn and Saskia). Usually finish games with 3-5 cards left in the deck, so 25 cards would definitely be too risky.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      There's generally not much point in running more than 25 cards because all it does is limit your options. One of the main reasons thinning exists in the game is because 25 cards is actually still too many and people want to get around that. There are decks that run more than 25 cards, but there is usually a very specific reason why they do that. Those two extra cards in your deck for a reason and you should be pretty confident you'll be able to play them on a regular basis. Otherwise you're just weakening your deck.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I play a 27 card Henselt, and two different 30 card monster decks, also run a 39 card Foltest deck. They seem to work for me after much experimentation and learning from defeat. In a 25 card deck, sometimes the mulligan draws can be a kick in the pants.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          If your deck needs more than 25 cards then that's the size your deck should be. If it doesn't though, then you should stick with 25 cards. There's no reason to add tech cards or "what-if?" cards to a well-tuned 25 card deck.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X