How we got here

+
Over the last few days I have read a lot of posts and threads about dissatisfaction with Gwent. To be honest, ever since coming back in February I have been growing less and less content with the game. I figure the solution is to leave again and maybe comeback after a few more expansions. Before I go, I wanted to share my thoughts on why I am dissatisfied and how we got here.

1. Too much focus on asthetics. In the old days each avatar had unique voice acting, which made them more interesting to work towards. Moreover, boarders were on display during matches, this made them more interesting if nothing else. Now, borders are almost never visible, taunts are leader specific and generic, and avatars are less important than ever. This wouldn't itself be an issue, if the game didn't base so much of the contract achievement on these aesthetic rewards. Instead, rewards should focus on things like unlocking lore, mini animated scenes which build on the world of the Witcher. It may be more costly and more work for CDPR, but genuine rewards inspire genuine interest.

2. I just can't get with 2 rows. It is so silly to me that when they finally make units abilities row specific they reduced the number of rows to reduce the number of options. Strategy is all about choices, you restrict the choices you limit the strategy. Moreover, the notions of reach, weather, spying, row limits, etc... are all impaired when the size and scope of the field are reduced.

3. Hand limit is awful. Talk about making the coinflip more relevant instead of less, this is just a bad idea. You took away the dry pass option for bad hands, gave added importance to the draw, and thanks to things like point slam and point swing put the first player at a huge disadvantage. Worse, the five point boost almost always makes the recipient at or above the 8 point big removal threshold. When to pass should be a choice, when you restrict choices you restrict strategy.

4. I have talked about this at length elsewhere so I will only touch on it here. The lack of faction identities and the removal of unique mechanics has compromised the very foundation of Gwent. Seeing the same finishers in every deck is not only not fun, it is boring. There is so much potential for faction identity, and more factions. Yet CDPR has continually ignored these opportunities and squandered the things that Witcher players loved about the mini game, one update at a time.

5. Finally, the ranked system is just too flawed. Downgrading rank is just not ok. It punishes players who don't have enough time to get to the top of the leader board, and ensures the pro rank will only be for the designated pros. It is a huge handicap and time suck to have to climb back up. Not to mention, the ranks are over run with net decks because CDPR does not provide sufficient mechanics to encourage deck diversity. In the 2 years I have been around this game (admittedly with over a year Gap in that span of time,) only arena and seasonal modes have been added. Arena is so luck based (how many golds you get, which leader you get, what cards you get,) that i struggle to find any true enjoyment out of it. Seasonal is awesome, but it gets boring after a while, especially when bugs like spy steal and op gimmicks like lippy during bear are over running the mode. Variety is the spice of life. New modes, new cards, just plain new is needed to keep the game fresh, and from what I have heard from the developers, new is going to be few and far between.

I hope they fix this game. I really wanted to like it. But honestly until they do, it just isn't worth the time investment.
 
One thing I'd like to see implemented for the ranked system is the possibility of losing ranks as was the case before along with maintaining your rank position at the end of a season following through to the next one. This can be the philosophy for all ranks besides pro ladder.

You would remain in the pro ladder no matter the losing streak over the course of a season yet only the top 20% (or whatever percentage is more suitable) would get to stay in the pro ladder at the beginning of the next season.

This would make ranked more interesting I believe.
 
I do not share opinion with @Wonderboy8700 on first 4 points, however I want to mention, that 5th point about rank downgrading is exactly one of reasons, why I abandoned Hearthstone completely half year ago and started playing Gwent, when it went out of beta. Such "ranks decay" is in my opinion terribly hurting game for beginners and casual players and rather encourages netdecking and higher time involvement of players (which is probably what developers want, but that is problem for players, who do not have enough time to spare for a game). Technically adding streak of 20 consecutive losses at end of season to rank of all players (with exception of very low ranks) is much worse, than it was at start of Homecoming, where ranks were just reset to lower base. I was keeping myself around rank 12-14 and fall down to rank 15, which I managed to go back, but with introduction of 4 ranks down, I am already for 2 season below rank 20 (currently 23) with little desire to climb up, to be again cut down 4 ranks back at end of season. There is no fun in getting 20 losses handicap each season and I do not like to play Sysifos.

Also, this is not bothering me only from my personal point of view, it is hurting game environment as a whole, which is what I experienced in Hearthstone, which I played for about 2.5 years. It is continually toughening rank system where casual players, who originally manage to get to certain rank, will over time (in course of years) fall to lower and lower ranks simply because of that rank toughening. In simple explanation, that 4 ranks reduction of ladder every season, is continually taking away points from system, which will manifest itself over longer course. It may not be visible month after month, but after year or longer, it will show visible effect.

Addendum:
Gwent developers, if you were inspired with that 4 ranks down mechanism by Hearthstone, please also notice, how much is Hearthstone trying to soften its negative effects. At example how they introduced ranks 50-26 for new beginners or how they implemented floor for players, who ever got above rank 15 to never fall lower than rank 20 no matter what. Those are exactly countermeasures to fight continually toughened ranked environment, which is caused by taking away rank points every season.
 
Last edited:
@OP May i ask you what rank are you?

Came back in early February to mid February, started at 25. Got to 0 in about 3 weeks (give or take a few days.) Then didn't play much ranked (really loved the seasonal and found the ranked mode boring, so I fell from pro to 9.)
 

partci

Forum veteran
The biggest crime the dev team had comited is the removal and/or dumbing down of old mechanics.

Let's take Mill for an example - it was a mechanic that was keeping overthining decks at check. What keeps SK at check now (besides removal)?

Also, remember when everybody was saying "the two rows matter more than the 3 now, we have so much more new row mechanics". Do I hear crickets today? Where are the row specific cards with the CC, how are they implemented, do they actually MATTER?

Playing these two rows now only makes me realize how much more the three rows at the last days of Beta meant.

It's preposterous.
 
@partci No mill please, it is one of the most oppressive mechanics in card games, which is defeating purpose of games. Games of this type are about spending resources (among other things) and mill is denying use of some resources completely (removes them before they are used). In other words, it makes resources to be unable to spend. It is like if you would play chess with random events and then one of random events would decide to remove opponents queen from board. It is very anti-gaming mechanic and I am very grateful, that there is not present mill (if I am aware, Viper Witchers are being under consideration).
 
5. Finally, the ranked system is just too flawed. Downgrading rank is just not ok. It punishes players who don't have enough time to get to the top of the leader board, and ensures the pro rank will only be for the designated pros. It is a huge handicap and time suck to have to climb back up. Not to mention, the ranks are over run with net decks because CDPR does not provide sufficient mechanics to encourage deck diversity.

I have to say that as a beginner myself, I strongly disagree with your point. Mainly because rank is locked so that seasonal downgrading is the only way to loose ranks, and I think that is even not sufficient to prevent some problems. For example I'm in a situation where I climbed too high for my level and the amount of cards I have, now facing very strong opponents with competitive decks (I'm still discovering the game, but I'm rank 8...). The result is that I loose very often, around 25% winrate if I do not play with the only viable faction I have unlocked.

In fact I tried to not climb too fast but 1 rank is given for a 4 win streak, which may happen even with a bad deck. Any player, even very casual ones, will reach the rank corresponding to their level in very few matches.

What alternative do you propose ? That you never loose ranks, so that everybody at the end reaches rank 0 ?That would mean very unbalanced matches between newcomers and skilled players. This is already happening, I do not want it to worsen...

Rank should not be the ultimate objective of every player. What is important is that the match is fair and that each player can have fun by finding opponents of their level.
 
I have to agree on points 2 and 4. Let me expand on them though because I do think they both could use some work.

  1. While two rows are much easier to balance, CDPR has forgotten to look deeper into row-punishing and row-locked cards . Nivellen, for example, was barely just changed to only move three units. This card was absolutely devastating when paired up with Regis, Lacerate or Dragon's Dream. Another problem that I have with the new row system is the fact that some cards only work on a specific row or have a reach of one. This is very dumb because it feels like some cards are just handicapped because of this system instead of getting benefits from it. My understanding of the cutting a row was so that CDPR could balance cards better, but at the moment, it mostly feels like the rows are limiting design space. This is why I absolutely love Formation and cards with two different abilities depending on what row they are on. More units should have that.
  2. Faction identity used to be extremely important in the old Gwent. Remember when NR cards could be turned into gold cards and Monsters had resiliency on their last unit? Sure, it was incredibly unbalanced, but now a lot of factions feel so similar. I mean, Assimilate, Harmony and Thrive all basically serve the same purpose. They work differently but it's almost the same thing. Hopefully they're able to introduce more cards that actually make sense in their respective factions.
 
I have to say that as a beginner myself, I strongly disagree with your point. Mainly because rank is locked so that seasonal downgrading is the only way to loose ranks, and I think that is even not sufficient to prevent some problems. For example I'm in a situation where I climbed too high for my level and the amount of cards I have, now facing very strong opponents with competitive decks (I'm still discovering the game, but I'm rank 8...). The result is that I loose very often, around 25% winrate if I do not play with the only viable faction I have unlocked.

In fact I tried to not climb too fast but 1 rank is given for a 4 win streak, which may happen even with a bad deck. Any player, even very casual ones, will reach the rank corresponding to their level in very few matches.

What alternative do you propose ? That you never loose ranks, so that everybody at the end reaches rank 0 ?That would mean very unbalanced matches between newcomers and skilled players. This is already happening, I do not want it to worsen...

Rank should not be the ultimate objective of every player. What is important is that the match is fair and that each player can have fun by finding opponents of their level.

Three things.

1. For pro to be anything more than who rewarding people for spending the most time playing, no one should ever be demoted from pro. If you get there, you belong there. As for normal ranks, this is not the beta. In the beta you got rewards based on reaching a rank, here you only get them at the end. The goal should be to work your way up to being pro level then competing as a pro for the right to win money and fame. It's like telling an NBA players they have to go back to college to earn back their spot.

2. If you aren't developed enough (nothing to do with skill, only resources,) then play casual and seasonal, or even auto lose to grind exp, and get developed enough. Then when you have the cards and faction flexibility, you can go ahead and earn your way to the top ranks. Making you regrind the ranks you already climbed doesn't force you to prove your skill, just to waste your time. Is this a true sport, or is this just a time suck.

3. Ranked is not casual or arena, or seasonal. They need more modes for sure, but ranked is not just about fun. Ranked is about testing yourself and earning the right to compete for real prizes. I got into pro with 4 or 5 days left on the season and started on the leaderboard. That tells me not many people are playing pro. I got up to around 700 at the peak of my play, and decided it wasn't even worth my time grinding my way to 500. Why, because the matches were literally replays of the same strategy over and over again. Everyone uses the same decks and same play style, the only variables were the draw and coinflip. I blame CDPR for this. With more factions by default their would be more variety. With less powerful neutrals and more defined faction identities, you would see literally double or triple the variety of net deck. I know this, because I played high ranked beta and there was more diversity. At least until midwinter, when everyone and their mother played either tutor NG or double scorch ST. The game lost interest for me then as it does now. You want fun, how about free deck mode. You pick 25 cards, compile any starting hand if your choice and play against the opponent. No faction restrictions, no provision restrictions, just best against best in organized chaos. Also how about a team mode. I could go on, but if your playing ranked expecting that people are all about having fun you have missed the part about net deck craze.

Finally as an aside, one thing has really always bothered me about Gwent. I left it out if my original post as it was not related to the changes made to ruin the game. While I agree a random draw is essential, I disagree that random mulligans are a good system. Players should always have the choice of at least 4 cards throughout the game. 2 in the starting 10 as well as 1 per round. This way, the game is less about the draw, and more about skill. Do you choose counter cards and seek to survive the enemy plan, or do you ignore their plan and focus on your own potential. By choosing just 4 cards you guarantee that the worst case scenario of the draw never happens. More choice equals more strategy, and less random equals more skill.
 
I really agree with you on your opinion in another post about the balancing between engines and removal. However, I don't agree with you on your view about Pro.
1. For pro to be anything more than who rewarding people for spending the most time playing, no one should ever be demoted from pro. If you get there, you belong there. As for normal ranks, this is not the beta. In the beta you got rewards based on reaching a rank, here you only get them at the end. The goal should be to work your way up to being pro level then competing as a pro for the right to win money and fame. It's like telling an NBA players they have to go back to college to earn back their spot.
I think Pro means professional, and it is designed for those who have plenty of time or those who take competing in a videogame as his profession. It might not be appropriate for anyone who reach pro to stay in there. As you mention NBA, do you know that only very few most talented players manage to stay in the league for quite long time? The average career length for a NBA player is surprisingly short. Most player struggles for their next contract. And some player simply just disappear from the league without you even noticing. Not every one is LBJ or KD. And that is real "cruel" Pro. Now in gwent, you can always get 25 reward points from reaching Pro, which is nothing from old players' perspective, but it truly means a great reward for us new players. Maybe that is the point that makes you feel reclimbing the ladder totally a waste of time, since you got nothing you want compared to the amount of time you invest.
 
GWENTFiesta1.jpg

Post automatically merged:

A competitive card game ...
 
@Charles5pencer-I find HS to be much more fun and variating then Gwent, graphically supreme and more stabile, much more combos possible, equally or even better musicwise, and the onlty things gamewise that seem to differ are the provision costs, the rows and the powerpoints instead of lifepoints. Started playing HS about 2 weeks ago, I don't have the power anymore to play Gwent unless I desire to die on boredom and frustration. HS has a lot of more possibilities on the board. Gwent should return to its beta version the more, perhaps add back the 3d row, which could protect units against damage by distance. I'm not going to put time in Gwent anymore as I did before, spent over 6000 hours playing this game including the Beta, I'm glad I never spent a cent on Gwent in real money.
 

rrc

Forum veteran
@Charles5pencer-I find HS to be much more fun and variating then Gwent, graphically supreme and more stabile, much more combos possible, equally or even better musicwise, and the onlty things gamewise that seem to differ are the provision costs, the rows and the powerpoints instead of lifepoints. Started playing HS about 2 weeks ago, I don't have the power anymore to play Gwent unless I desire to die on boredom and frustration. HS has a lot of more possibilities on the board. Gwent should return to its beta version the more, perhaps add back the 3d row, which could protect units against damage by distance. I'm not going to put time in Gwent anymore as I did before, spent over 6000 hours playing this game including the Beta, I'm glad I never spent a cent on Gwent in real money.

Two weeks is like honeymoon period, where everything seems interesting and beautiful and happily-ever-after :coolstory:

You should compare (your experience/view on) Gwent with HS after you have played 6000 hours in HS (after spending 0 cent in that game) :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:. Personally I haven't played any other card games (and I don't intend to), so I can't compare with them.

But 6000 hours of your life is much much more worth than a few hundred dollars for the game. So, thank you for that! I am nearing 1000 hours and I haven't spent any real money in Gwent (till now - I didn't like the CC cardback; or it didn't appeal to me - and the leader skin was not for ST - otherwise, 100% sure I would have spent my first real money on Gwent - Even then I wanted to, but didn't have excess money too :(). But I will not feel bad. I am contributing to the game/community with my time which is also equally valuable.
 

Guest 4339135

Guest
Over the last few days I have read a lot of posts and threads about dissatisfaction with Gwent. To be honest, ever since coming back in February I have been growing less and less content with the game. I figure the solution is to leave again and maybe comeback after a few more expansions. Before I go, I wanted to share my thoughts on why I am dissatisfied and how we got here.

1. Too much focus on asthetics. In the old days each avatar had unique voice acting, which made them more interesting to work towards. Moreover, boarders were on display during matches, this made them more interesting if nothing else. Now, borders are almost never visible, taunts are leader specific and generic, and avatars are less important than ever. This wouldn't itself be an issue, if the game didn't base so much of the contract achievement on these aesthetic rewards. Instead, rewards should focus on things like unlocking lore, mini animated scenes which build on the world of the Witcher. It may be more costly and more work for CDPR, but genuine rewards inspire genuine interest.

2. I just can't get with 2 rows. It is so silly to me that when they finally make units abilities row specific they reduced the number of rows to reduce the number of options. Strategy is all about choices, you restrict the choices you limit the strategy. Moreover, the notions of reach, weather, spying, row limits, etc... are all impaired when the size and scope of the field are reduced.

3. Hand limit is awful. Talk about making the coinflip more relevant instead of less, this is just a bad idea. You took away the dry pass option for bad hands, gave added importance to the draw, and thanks to things like point slam and point swing put the first player at a huge disadvantage. Worse, the five point boost almost always makes the recipient at or above the 8 point big removal threshold. When to pass should be a choice, when you restrict choices you restrict strategy.

4. I have talked about this at length elsewhere so I will only touch on it here. The lack of faction identities and the removal of unique mechanics has compromised the very foundation of Gwent. Seeing the same finishers in every deck is not only not fun, it is boring. There is so much potential for faction identity, and more factions. Yet CDPR has continually ignored these opportunities and squandered the things that Witcher players loved about the mini game, one update at a time.

5. Finally, the ranked system is just too flawed. Downgrading rank is just not ok. It punishes players who don't have enough time to get to the top of the leader board, and ensures the pro rank will only be for the designated pros. It is a huge handicap and time suck to have to climb back up. Not to mention, the ranks are over run with net decks because CDPR does not provide sufficient mechanics to encourage deck diversity. In the 2 years I have been around this game (admittedly with over a year Gap in that span of time,) only arena and seasonal modes have been added. Arena is so luck based (how many golds you get, which leader you get, what cards you get,) that i struggle to find any true enjoyment out of it. Seasonal is awesome, but it gets boring after a while, especially when bugs like spy steal and op gimmicks like lippy during bear are over running the mode. Variety is the spice of life. New modes, new cards, just plain new is needed to keep the game fresh, and from what I have heard from the developers, new is going to be few and far between.

I hope they fix this game. I really wanted to like it. But honestly until they do, it just isn't worth the time investment.


There is much truth in your statement. For me it gets every day harder to follow the way that CDPR is going, the CC expansion has confirmed all of my concerns. Especially the lack of faction identity is a big problem and many players want to have more of it in the game. But it seems that the opinions and the satisfaction of their players is not very important for CDPR...
 
Can you explain me how you spent 6000 hours in a 2 years old game ? It's over 250 full days... Even without working you still have to sleep I guess

I don't sleep that much and am quite fanatic in games. Actually been looking for a cardgame since yugiohBAM disappeared from PC format. And there was Gwent. Can play for 10-12 hours a day if I have the mood for it.
 
Can you explain me how you spent 6000 hours in a 2 years old game ? It's over 250 full days... Even without working you still have to sleep I guess
It's normal if someone spends time for things he or she enjoys.
For a competitive game , one needs to train and play a lot , and what he does with his or hers life is their own bushiness.
Back in the days , people were playing Starcraft , Age of Empires 1/2 and Quake non-stop willing to improve and find competition , now people just donate their money to online beggars on Twitch watching them for hours wondering why they are bad at a game and judging someone on the Internet about his or her's real life.
<3
 
I find HS to be much more fun and variating then Gwent

Not really, you will understand after a fwe weeks in HS.
The game is not horrible, art is beautifull, but the core of HS is the WoW nostalgia, not mechanics, and never the progresion sistem (horrible in any way even if you are f2p or buy things).
Even in the wild format the number of decks is restricted thanks to the disproportionate strength of some cards.

Art to art...they are bot great, but completely diferent, Gwent is more mature.

About gameplay, HS has few meta decks all the time and the balance updates take months sometimes.
Although currently Gwent does not leave much room for creativity with the system of provisions which is very oppressive.

The biggest problem of Gwent currently are the technical developers. They are not taking their work seriously and are only using mechanics from other games, Gwent is less and less Gwent as time passes.
 
Top Bottom