Limit Scorch as well if you think this type of binary removal is an issue. For Scorch I was willing to make an exception as it impacts own units as well.
Not focusing on specific cards, the binary removal is clearly an issue. If we can agree on that, how to deal with specific cards can be done later.
Geralt is good as it is, he is a giant killer and should be. Being able to destroy ridiculously boosted card is needed. The cost of bringing him is not exactly low, and his point value not high, so it's a well balanced card. Both of them. But perhaps you use a monster deck and just want nobody to be able to kill high point units? Keep boosting them forever?
It seems you haven't read all the posts in this topic. It is ridiculous that all efforts to boost and protect a unit can be instantly negated by Geralt. Geralt is 10 provisions, so doing 8 damage with 3 strength would be cheap. If you are scared about big boosted units, then you should need a reset card and/or multiple damage and not this lazy binary stuff.
Limit Scorch as well if you think this type of binary removal is an issue. For Scorch I was willing to make an exception as it impacts own units as well.
Not focusing on specific cards, the binary removal is clearly an issue. If we can agree on that, how to deal with specific cards can be done later.
.
I don't think it's an issue and I don't see how it's "binary" either. These are just cards that have a good effect if the requirement is met. I don't see an issue with them at all.
Your definition of "bad binary" is flawed. I kinda agree with artifacts being a bad example of binary in Gwent, and even then they always have "Zeal" to provide at least a fraction of their value.
Speaking about Leo, it's not a binary card. It's a conditional card. It exists to prevent people from overcommiting to boosting a single unit. Same for other cards like Geralt, Igni, etc. So, a player either commits to boosting and gets punished, or he doesn't and doesn't get punished. it's always binary like this, and it's not a bad binarization. Strategies need to have means to be punished; otherwise the game becomes stale and unfun.
I don't think it's an issue and I don't see how it's "binary" either. These are just cards that have a good effect if the requirement is met. I don't see an issue with them at all.
Speaking about Leo, it's not a binary card. It's a conditional card. It exists to prevent people from overcommiting to boosting a single unit. Same for other cards like Geralt, Igni, etc. So, a player either commits to boosting and gets punished, or he doesn't and doesn't get punished. it's always binary like this, and it's not a bad binarization. Strategies need to have means to be punished; otherwise the game becomes stale and unfun.
Conditional and binary are not mutually exclusive. Leo's ability is binary: it's all or nothing removal. If a player commits heavily into boosting a unit, then (s)he can get punished by a reset and/or big damage. Simple one-shot unlimited damage (Geralt) and thereby complete removal of that boosted unit is just ridiculous. It seems some people want everything quick and easy.
Limit Scorch as well if you think this type of binary removal is an issue. For Scorch I was willing to make an exception as it impacts own units as well.
Not focusing on specific cards, the binary removal is clearly an issue. If we can agree on that, how to deal with specific cards can be done later.
It seems you haven't read all the posts in this topic. It is ridiculous that all efforts to boost and protect a unit can be instantly negated by Geralt. Geralt is 10 provisions, so doing 8 damage with 3 strength would be cheap. If you are scared about big boosted units, then you should need a reset card and/or multiple damage and not this lazy binary stuff.
I completely disagree. For this very reason, I try to avoid relying on boosting a single unit. It's a poor strategy and would make for a boring game.
Optimally I keep my important cards at 7 strength. Sure, perhaps if anything, this Geralt ability or giant killer ability should be for cards with more than 11. Not sure though, but it's definitely something that should remain in the game. It's about an overall tactic, not just boosting one unit. That's a way too simple tactical choice. Too many people would do that.
I think it also works out for powerunits. If you boost some important card too much too protect it, you know that someone might kill it off, so don't base your protection of that unit on just boosting to to "untouchable" strength before you can use the special power. That would be so silly. Maybe 8 is too low, because damage by 5 is very easy and even more. 7 is nowhere near safe for even 2 turns. But I'm not sure, 8 might be good. But then you also have to consider immune, it's also a possible tactic to protect high point cards. And few people are going to carry 2 giant killer cards in their deck, so you might pull off a distraction and toss a giant on the board, just to have the opponent use their giant killer, then throw the actual giant card that you want to boost after that.
Geralt can ONLY damage an enemy with more than 8, ergo, he is ONLY a giant killer. 10 provisions is perfectly fine for his ability. It's not something you want to carry. Not everyone do. It's poor value unless someone actually boost a high unit. Doing 8 damage would be a really poor choice, it would make the card useless, and if you say 8 damage on "anyone" that would be even worse.
Resetting is also binary, just a different way to deal with it. I think both are important to the game. Relying on boost and having this as an "untouchable" tactic or just being able to take small hits at that, would make the game poor.
Ps. I don't use Geralt or any giant killer myself in my current decks
Conditional and binary are not mutually exclusive. Leo's ability is binary: it's all or nothing removal. If a player commits heavily into boosting a unit, then (s)he can get punished by a reset and/or big damage. Simple one-shot unlimited damage (Geralt) and thereby complete removal of that boosted unit is just ridiculous. It seems some people want everything quick and easy.
The removal is binary: the unit stays or is completely destroyed. 1 or 0.
Conditional and binary are not mutually exclusive. Leo's ability is binary: it's all or nothing removal. If a player commits heavily into boosting a unit, then (s)he can get punished by a reset and/or big damage. Simple one-shot unlimited damage (Geralt) and thereby complete removal of that boosted unit is just ridiculous. It seems some people want everything quick and easy.
When using removal cards the unit you are targeting "staying or being completely destroyed" are always the only two options you have. Your "binary" criticism makes no sense.
I think the game has too much removal but I don't get your criticism of professional or scorch at all. There isn't anything wrong wih this game having conditional destroy the card effects.
I get your points and yes, resetting is also binary, but it only counters the boost and is not a 2 in 1 boost-and-card-destroyer. Reset is a tech card.
When using removal cards the unit you are targeting "staying or being completely destroyed" are always the only two options you have. Your "binary" criticism makes no sense.
I think the game has too much removal but I don't get your criticism of professional or scorch at all. There isn't anything wrong wih this game having conditional destroy the card effects.
Well, that's where I think differently. As I don't like the binary way of dealing with artifacts, I also don't like the binary effect of unlimited damage cards such as Geralt. It feels like gambling.
I get your points and yes, resetting is also binary, but it only counters the boost and is not a 2 in 1 boost-and-card-destroyer. Reset is a tech card.
Well, that's where I think differently. As I don't like the binary way of dealing with artifacts, I also don't like the binary effect of unlimited damage cards such as Geralt. It feels like gambling.
Why should there be a binary dead-or-nothing-happens-risk? The risk that a big damage dealer like an 8 damage Geralt gets full value because the unit is boosted is enough risk for me.
Why should there be a binary dead-or-nothing-happens-risk? The risk that a big damage dealer like an 8 damage Geralt gets full value because the unit is boosted is enough risk for me.
They are nothing alike. Artifacts are engines that have no counter other than artifact removal. That is the entire issue.
Professional is just a normal removal card that has criteria to meet in order to remove any power unit. There is nothing at all wrong with that. Same as there is nothing wrong with scorch. The game would only be more boring by getting rid of these types of cards.
They are nothing alike. Artifacts are engines that have no counter other than artifact removal. That is the entire issue.
Professional is just a normal removal card that has criteria to meet in order to remove any power unit. There is nothing at all wrong with that. Same as there is nothing wrong with scorch. The game would only be more boring by getting rid of these types of cards.
That's not the entire issue. It doesn't matter if a card has to meet criteria. A card can meet criteria to do more damage, but it does not have to destroy. It is this crappy binary destroy effect that gives the game a gambling ping-pong feel.
Artifact removal card played - artifact destroyed
Professional meeting criteria - unit destroyed (unlimited)
Interestingly, the current general complaint about too much removal has the same underlying cause. Most cards are 4-5 power and these get immediately removed by several popular cards that do 4-5 damage. This is the same crappy binary effect. Removal and damage are just not properly balanced with all the high damage/low power units and "destroys".
That's not the entire issue. It doesn't matter if a card has to meet criteria. A card can meet criteria to do more damage, but it does not have to destroy. It is this crappy binary destroy effect that gives the game a gambling ping-pong feel.
Artifact removal card played - artifact destroyed
Professional meeting criteria - unit destroyed (unlimited)
Interestingly, the current general complaint about too much removal has the same underlying cause. Most cards are 4-5 power and these get immediately removed by several popular cards that do 4-5 damage. This is the same crappy binary effect. Removal and damage are just not properly balanced with all the high damage/low power units and "destroys".
Still don't know how a destory effect is "binary". It's a normal removal card. I don't see what there is to complain about there. You want all removal cards to just be fixed stats? How does that make the game better? Cards like Vilgefortz are interesting cards. What really matters is if a card is balanced. There isn't anything wrong with destory effects. Especially in a game that has ways to buff cards extremely high.
If you want to argue that he game has too much removal I can completely understand that criticism and I have made the same criticism of the game myself. Destroy effects are not the problem though.
Still don't know how a destory effect is "binary". It's a normal removal card. I don't see what there is to complain about there. You want all removal cards to just be fixed stats? How does that make the game better? Cards like Vilgefortz are interesting cards. What really matters is if a card is balanced. There isn't anything wrong with destory effects. Especially in a game that has ways to buff cards extremely high.
If you want to argue that he game has too much removal I can completely understand that criticism and I have made the same criticism of the game myself. Destroy effects are not the problem though.
Destroy effects are binary: a unit is not targeted and lives (1) or it is targeted and is destroyed (0). There is no in-between, damaged units do not exist in this situation. Units that do immediate removal due to high damage have the same binary effect. I believe that cards that do damage should not do unlimited damage, with some very rare exceptions like Scorch. With unlimited damage, the card is difficult to balance with provisions as the variation of these cards is just too high. High variation cards and high RNG make no sense in this game, as Gwent is advertised to be strategic. These type of card effects (similar to artifact removal) are much more a gambling game (destroy or not) than strategy.
Not correct. There is also the option that the criteria is not met so the card is bricked or does low damage like professional. There is nothing more binary about these cards than any other removal card in the game. Hence why I do not understand your problem with these cards other than you don't like how much removal is in the game.
Units that do immediate removal due to high damage have the same binary effect. I believe that cards that do damage should not do unlimited damage, with some very rare exceptions like Scorch. With unlimited damage, the card is difficult to balance with provisions as the variation of these cards is just too high. High variation cards and high RNG make no sense in this game, as Gwent is advertised to be strategic. These type of card effects (similar to artifact removal) are much more a gambling game (destroy or not) than strategy.
Removal cards that only do 3 damage also commonly remove other cards. There is no getting around that unless you do something like add armor or shields into the game which CDPR is apparently doing soon.
Getting rid of destroy effects would only make the game less interesting. Scorch, professional, Vilegefortz are all fun cards. Making them boring normal removal cards does not make the game more interesting.
Maybe check the posts above before writing something? If a unit gets boosted to 30, someone has made a significant investment (multiple cards) to do this. It is therefore deserved that removal may take a bit more effort than lazy one-shot Geralt. Like a reset and then damage for example.
It's not only about Professional and it doesn't matter if the effect is conditional or not. It's about the binariness of the effect. A destroy effect is binary, just like artifact removal. Getting rid of destroy effects will not make the game less interesting imo. It will make it more interesting, because people will have to strategize more and tech their decks to deal with boosts.
Everything with a flat ability is binary; buff by 2, damage by 4, destroy X, lock Y. That's why I like cards such as Summoning Portal and Zoltan, which have a dynamic range. Because those cards scale with the state of the board.
