How we got here

+
We'll see, WoW was a horrible game such as Age of Empires, I really suck in those kind of gamesm, the concept though is very nice, it even got me some *inspiration* for songtitles and lyrics. Graphically Gwent is more realistically drawn, but it's board is way behind ans somehow premiums still don't move in a flow on my pc, which isn't that old, just 5 years now. Gamewise HS and Gwent don't differ much at all. Still I miss YuGiOh for that but I will not spend money on games except on poker which online has even a worse rng then the ppl here complain about on the forums.

I got more time then I got money, to quote Frog from the movie Colours. The only thing i need to keep rolling is the Household, cooking and make music and lyrics. It's in fact healthier to game a lot then to make music longtime, the latter enhances rsi quicker.
 
I consider myself a novice in Gwent (played old version, played homecoming only for 2-3 hours and trying again now).

My biggest issue with the game atm is the balance, even if not OP, some things are incredibly unfun to play against (basically... Mosnters faction), and the game was 'dumbed' to season (a a BS mode, in my oppinion) or the stress of ranked. Wanna play a jank deck in unranked? good luck finding a match...

I'm really , really, trying to adapt and like, but Deathlaff and his monsters friends are not making this easy...
 
I believe that cards like Geralt and Leo Bonhart are not healthy for the game. I don't recall every being cards like these in Beta. It ALWAYS finds value and pays for it's provision cost. Can be absolutely devastating last play with limitless removal potential.
 
I believe that cards like Geralt and Leo Bonhart are not healthy for the game. I don't recall every being cards like these in Beta. It ALWAYS finds value and pays for it's provision cost. Can be absolutely devastating last play with limitless removal potential.
~90% of the used top tier decks in the beta used Geralt:Igni and Scorch was much much much more popular than now.
More Cards did have reset etc.
The 8+ Value removal Cards in GWENT now are fine , stupidity and greed should be punished - and these cards make just that.
 
@TheWIldHunt93 I really do not understand this kind of worrying. Did you ever face cards like Regis or Schirru? Single target removal is always just single target removal, no matter what. Mass removal is multiplicatively more powerful by definition. Even mere bronze Lacerate can change score more than Leo or Geralt (depending on exact situation on board).
 
  • RED Point
Reactions: rrc
Never played that game, but to me, visually it looks like it's done for children 7 years old and under.

I've played Hearthstone for quite some time (more than 3 years), and the " cartoon/child look" is not the worst part.

The meta is always INCREDIBLY stale and balance is non existent, to the point that altought bad in it, gwent can even seems ok compared. Blizzard/Activision idea of balance is to make 2-3 classes(same as factions in gwent) stupidly broken while cicling other as pure trash, and so goes on

Besides that, the game is DAMN FREAKING EXPENSIVE, with 3 expansions per year. I was a f2p, and this required an ungodly amount of grind, to the point I just gave up and started to look for another card game to play.
 
~90% of the used top tier decks in the beta used Geralt:Igni and Scorch was much much much more popular than now.
More Cards did have reset etc.
The 8+ Value removal Cards in GWENT now are fine , stupidity and greed should be punished - and these cards make just that.

90% is a bit of an exaggeration. Igni was never difficult to play around in beta because we had 3 rows. It only got hit with so many complaints because people either lacked the ability or chose not to do so. Also, "beta" is not exactly one, singular entity. It want through many revisions and featured a number of rather large over-hauls.

In regards to 8+ value removal cards.... They're only fine because you can quickly dump ridiculous value on a board instantly, without any modicum of setup. I'd have to side with Wildhunt, the 8+ value "instant kill" removal cards are pretty stupid. Not because they're overpowered but because, like many mechanics, they're too simple and binary. The cards able to instantly dump 8+ points on the board are equally stupid.

In terms of how we got here... Well, if you start progressively turning a competitive, skill based, strategic card game into a vanity treadmill consisting of checkers with card art people stop finding it appealing and/or get burned out. I'd count myself among those "people". It's becoming really hard to convince myself this game doesn't just... well, suck. Sadly, that feeling has been progressively increasing since around the gold immunity update. CC didn't do much to improve the situation, in that regard. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are a lot of other people looking for checkers with Witcher themed card art. So my personal feelings on the matter are largely irrelevant.
 
90% is a bit of an exaggeration. Igni was never difficult to play around in beta because we had 3 rows. It only got hit with so many complaints because people either lacked the ability or chose not to do so. Also, "beta" is not exactly one, singular entity. It want through many revisions and featured a number of rather large over-hauls.

In regards to 8+ value removal cards.... They're only fine because you can quickly dump ridiculous value on a board instantly, without any modicum of setup. I'd have to side with Wildhunt, the 8+ value "instant kill" removal cards are pretty stupid. Not because they're overpowered but because, like many mechanics, they're too simple and binary. The cards able to instantly dump 8+ points on the board are equally stupid.

In terms of how we got here... Well, if you start progressively turning a competitive, skill based, strategic card game into a vanity treadmill consisting of checkers with card art people stop finding it appealing and/or get burned out. I'd count myself among those "people". It's becoming really hard to convince myself this game doesn't just... well, suck. Sadly, that feeling has been progressively increasing since around the gold immunity update. CC didn't do much to improve the situation, in that regard. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are a lot of other people looking for checkers with Witcher themed card art. So my personal feelings on the matter are largely irrelevant.
I didn't mention that playing around Igni was difficult and that stuff about complains has nothing to do with anything.
Overall the mechanics in this game are rotten and still there are tons of cards that overwhelm one of the players , with the other doing nothing but to put it on the board - that's why 8+ Value kill cards are a must.
If these cards are changed , CDPR needs to change most of the stuff we have ingame , from card values and removal mechanics etc (which won't happen).
We play a game where you put a card with big hp value number or a card with average hp value and average damage.
 
In terms of how we got here... Well, if you start progressively turning a competitive, skill based, strategic card game into a vanity treadmill consisting of checkers with card art people stop finding it appealing and/or get burned out. I'd count myself among those "people". It's becoming really hard to convince myself this game doesn't just... well, suck. Sadly, that feeling has been progressively increasing since around the gold immunity update. CC didn't do much to improve the situation, in that regard. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are a lot of other people looking for checkers with Witcher themed card art. So my personal feelings on the matter are largely irrelevant.
Sadly, this pretty much sums up my view of the current state of the game too.

An interesting strategic card game, which I very much enjoyed, was thrown away and replaced with A.N. Other generic card game. It's not a terrible game, and quite a few people still seem to like it, but to quote Francesca, to me it's just "meh".

Player skill plays a less significant role nowadays. Long-game strategy has been largely replaced by short-term tactics. The whole thing just feels much more shallow. It is a game designed for a more casual audience. The recent confirmation of the mobile version explains a lot.

In Beta, with most balanced decks, you could at least compete in most games, even if you didn't draw the exact cards you wanted. In HC, too many things are binary in nature. Without the right cards in your deck and the right draws, on far too many occasions you might as well just skip to the next match.

The uber grind of Pro ladder doesn't appeal to me, so ranked feels pretty pointless now, it's just casual with better matchmaking. Casual might as well not exist. Arena is too random and unbalanced to find enjoyable competition there. Seasonal at least offers some interesting variation, but the novelty wears off after a bit. Worst of all, like you said, the whole aim of playing now seems to be tied to a massive grind in the pursuit of vanity items. Most of which are pointless. Card backs are nice, but you hardly see your own. Leader skins are uninspiring (and again you see your opponent's better than yours). All the boards are much of a muchness - and mostly consist of a patch of mud surrounded by fluff hidden in the darkness. Trinkets are even more pointless now that borders and avatars don't appear in game. What's the point now of grinding for that hard earned avatar that had just the right amusing taunts you wanted?

From a poor start, HC has at least improved. For a while I was still optimistic that with time CDPR could rediscover that lost something that the earlier game possessed (despite its flaws). I figured that it would take at least another 6 months and hoped that the lessons they learned during Beta development would help guide them. Today I am much less optimistic. The direction of travel does not look promising and potential changes that they have now ruled out don't leave much scope for a turnaround. The fact that they keep making the same card design mistakes doesn't bode well either.

If I didn't care, I'd have left long ago. Sadly though, it is looking like this game just isn't aimed at players like me anymore, and I'm just going to have to accept that. Hey, at least all that time and money I spent during the Beta means that I can have all the nice pictures to look at, albeit non-premium from now on. If only I still wanted to use them to play cards.
 
Never played that game, but to me, visually it looks like it's done for children 7 years old and under.

It's actually drawn very well, far from a *cartoonish* catagory as stated earlier on these forums.

Got to add, it in fact is similar drawn to the age of empire style game_WoW. It's not necesarily easier to draw then realistic works.
 
Sadly, that feeling has been progressively increasing since around the gold immunity update. CC didn't do much to improve the situation, in that regard. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are a lot of other people looking for checkers with Witcher themed card art. So my personal feelings on the matter are largely irrelevant.

The Midwinter update is regarded as the one that ruined Gwent but the Gold Immunity one is where I started having serious doubts. When they removed the immunity but refused to balance the Golds around it and made a lot useless, is when I started having doubts about the dev team.
 
The Midwinter update is regarded as the one that ruined Gwent but the Gold Immunity one is where I started having serious doubts. When they removed the immunity but refused to balance the Golds around it and made a lot useless, is when I started having doubts about the dev team.

Silvers definitely became as valuable or more valuable (in some cases) than golds. But if I'm being honest, there has never been a positive update or expansion. Every single change always messed with balance or strategy or compromised some aspect of the original.

Look at the change from strengthen to boost. In theory this should change the dynamics surrounding reset, yet they never made a viable reset strategy. At the end of the day, Gwent should have focused on cards having multiple functions (causing and curing row effects as an easy example. Or heal or reset. Or boost or damage.) Multi effects prevent bricking, add depth and support multi-archetype decks. Gwent has never and will never have a good team developing it.
 
I believe that cards like Geralt and Leo Bonhart are not healthy for the game. I don't recall every being cards like these in Beta. It ALWAYS finds value and pays for it's provision cost. Can be absolutely devastating last play with limitless removal potential.

In my experience they don't always find value.

Beta had a worse card in igni before it was nerfed and changed many times.
 
Homecoming saved gwent. It was so uninteresting and dull in beta I dropped the game after half an hour.
 
Homecoming saved gwent. It was so uninteresting and dull in beta I dropped the game after half an hour.

Homecoming was months after midwinter. @Mystikast is correct that midwinter was the beginning of the end. However, the downturn started before that. Never satisfied with the identity or direction of Gwent, change after change was made. Units went from row specific to wherever they want. Golds went from immune to vulnerable. Weather went from multi units on a row to single unit. I could go on, but one of the weirdest and most troubling things about Gwent has always been its lack of creative vision.
 
Homecoming was months after midwinter. @Mystikast is correct that midwinter was the beginning of the end. However, the downturn started before that. Never satisfied with the identity or direction of Gwent, change after change was made. Units went from row specific to wherever they want. Golds went from immune to vulnerable. Weather went from multi units on a row to single unit. I could go on, but one of the weirdest and most troubling things about Gwent has always been its lack of creative vision.

Oh, I'm not on track with updates unfortunately.
That last sentence is true, but all the changes you mentioned aren't really bad. Especially gold immunity, in my opinion, wouldn't even play the game if that was still around.
I believe people have more problems with change from something familiar to something not so much, and being unable to go back to a familiar zone causes outrage in human beings.
I still think this game is way better then what it was in beta (though I don't remember exactly when in beta did I try it).
 
Every single point you made is why Gwent is amazing now. Before in Beta, it was a broken mess with stupid "synergies" which was basically playing an endless amount of cards from the deck and amassing cards in your hand for the last round.

I like the 2 rows - engines are balanced.

The trade-off between handlimit and mulligan is solid.

There is indeed factional identities and lastly ranked is done wonderfully viable for both casual and competitive players.

This is a post made from a throwback sense, not reality. Gwent is better than it ever was, period.
 
Every single point you made is why Gwent is amazing now. Before in Beta, it was a broken mess with stupid "synergies" which was basically playing an endless amount of cards from the deck and amassing cards in your hand for the last round.

I like the 2 rows - engines are balanced.

The trade-off between handlimit and mulligan is solid.

There is indeed factional identities and lastly ranked is done wonderfully viable for both casual and competitive players.

This is a post made from a throwback sense, not reality. Gwent is better than it ever was, period.

Your opinion is just as valid as mine. The question now becomes player base. Given the Gwent uninstalled club, poor throne breaker sales, and general dissatisfaction among Witcher 3 vets, the size of the player base is a concern. If it does not grow then Gwent will continue to be a financial disappointment for CDPR and will eventually likely end the game/sport. Only time will tell.
 
Top Bottom