It costs 4p to counter the deck. And you can mulligan at no cost if it's not required.
Or, just DON'T PASS ROUND ONE, then, DON'T PASS ROUND 2. Hey presto, deck countered. I really can't understand why everyone is so butt-hurt about this.
It costs 4p to counter the deck. And you can mulligan at no cost if it's not required.
Or, just DON'T PASS ROUND ONE, then, DON'T PASS ROUND 2. Hey presto, deck countered. I really can't understand why everyone is so butt-hurt about this.
Please explain exactly what you mean.
Again not sure exactly what you are getting at here. I agree that pushing as hard as you can one round is a good idea but you aren't guaranteed to win it.
really well analysed psychology of trap players, including myself. in future i will play differently
Summoning Circle sees play outside of artifact decks. The card is awesome, as it allows you to set up amazing combos. Pulling a kaedweni knight out of your ass is pretty neat.
Limiting the number of special or artifacts in deck to 12 is more reasonable solution.
Limiting the number of special or artifacts in deck to 12 is more reasonable solution.
In my view artifacts are the problem. Summoning circle is great strategically but it's also pretty OP. At least one streamer I watched said he was shocked that they hadn't nerfed it yet. But anyway my opinion is that artifacts are flawed design. It's just bad gameplay to have a whole bunch of cards that you can't touch unless you happen to have special artifact removal cards on you. It's like a bad mini game with the game.
I don't like the idea of fixing the game by limiting the game. We have always been free to deck build using any cards that we want.
Dimeritium bomb costs 4p. If you're encountering a lot of specials decks, you should be running a least 1 of.
To be honest, summoning circle is so popular at the moment, every deck should be running it if they don't have any other artifact removal.
It doesn't matter if you win a card or two down, or even if you don't win but take the round as far as possible. The point is to bleed a special deck as much as possible in every round. They are terrible in short rounds. Win round one. Make them burn their leader in round 2, you'll have no issues in a 3 or 4 card round 3
A card that gives zero value against no artifact decks? No thanks. That is a great example of how artifact/artifact removal are horribly flawed. I do always try to have one artifact removal in all decks.
Anyway. Removing summoning circle does not guarantee victory against this deck.
I am aware of that tactic as I was around back when special decks first came out. I remember when Merchant explained how to counter special card no unit decks in his videos.
Do you know Swims deck very well? It can win a short round as much as a long round.
I like tainted ale for legit reasons. It's very powerful against thrive amongs others. Thunderbolt was something I always used with NR.
No, it's a great example of how to use the mulligan process. There are lots of 4p cards that provide little or no value except in certain circumstances, and you are free to spit them back into the deck when you're facing a deck that you don't believe require them.
Spores is another fine example. Little or no value against many opponents, worth it's weight in gold against point slam low IQ big monsters.
Which one?
His Henselt no unit deck?
His Harald no unit deck?
His Arachas Queen no unit deck?
His Brouver no unit deck?
Yea, I've heard of them
With the exception of Brouver/Xavier, they all suck in a short round three, even if they manage to draw actually a unit or 2.
No, it's a great example of how to use the mulligan process. There are lots of 4p cards that provide little or no value except in certain circumstances, and you are free to spit them back into the deck when you're facing a deck that you don't believe require them.
Spores is another fine example. Little or no value against many opponents, worth it's weight in gold against point slam low IQ big monsters.
Which one?
His Henselt no unit deck?
His Harald no unit deck?
His Arachas Queen no unit deck?
His Brouver no unit deck?
Yea, I've heard of them
With the exception of Brouver/Xavier, they all suck in a short round three, even if they manage to draw actually a unit or 2.
I wouldn't bother with a card that could hurt that badly in the last round against a non artifact deck. Mulligans will sometimes hurt.
Why would his Harald deck suck in a short round?
Because, if you played correctly, by round 3, it no longer has it's leader, summoning circle is all but bricked in a 3 or 4 card round.
Now it needs to have drawn Gregoire (it's not going to win a short round with an axeman or marauder), and be able to set up its deathblow in just a few cards to have any real hop of achieving a win.
I'm not saying you'll beat it every time, but no deck can win EVERY match it plays, even against decks where it is favoured. Sometimes, you just don't draw what you need. You'll definitely have a positive win rate against it though.
Now it needs to have drawn Gregoire (it's not going to win a short round with an axeman or marauder), and be able to set up its deathblow in just a few cards to have any real hop of achieving a win.
I'm not saying you'll beat it every time, but no deck can win EVERY match it plays, even against decks where it is favoured. Sometimes, you just don't draw what you need. You'll definitely have a positive win rate against it though.
That seems like a big assumption. I don't know how you can say "just push round 1 and 2 and presto deck countered". It just won't play out like that much of the time. That deck doesn't need summoning circle to win the final round. All you need in the final round is Dagur two blades.
ok then maybe we are on the same page. You were kind of mocking people who hate playing against the deck and its pretty understandable why people hate to play it.
I am certainly mocking those whining on about having to face a legitimate deck, that's very flawed and on a good day, will be beaten by a large number of the decks out there. Yes, it not all that fun to sit there manually discarding your deck, but a win is a win
Iris Von Everec is actually a good value card to have in the deck if you can, since it can either destroy an artifact or remove a row effect. Or False Ciri for NG who can destroy artifact or move an enemy to another row.
At worst, they are 5 power for 7 and 8 provisions.
Not great cards, even at full value, but worth having in the deck if you can afford it. If you happen to play Francesca double row Ragnarok, or summoning circle, or frightened or something similar it gives good value. Or row dependent gold cards in the case of Ciri, or engine blocker.
None of those is a great counter to a special cards deck though.
Any card that can play multiple cards at once is a pretty good counter unless the units have the same power.
Part of the issue with special cards decks is that there are too many "scorch-like" cards if there is only 1 unit or less on the board. Another issue is that you can manually target immune units on hand, and boost them.
At worst, they are 5 power for 7 and 8 provisions.
Not great cards, even at full value, but worth having in the deck if you can afford it. If you happen to play Francesca double row Ragnarok, or summoning circle, or frightened or something similar it gives good value. Or row dependent gold cards in the case of Ciri, or engine blocker.
None of those is a great counter to a special cards deck though.
Any card that can play multiple cards at once is a pretty good counter unless the units have the same power.
Part of the issue with special cards decks is that there are too many "scorch-like" cards if there is only 1 unit or less on the board. Another issue is that you can manually target immune units on hand, and boost them.
I am certainly mocking those whining on about having to face a legitimate deck, that's very flawed and on a good day, will be beaten by a large number of the decks out there. Yes, it not all that fun to sit there manually discarding your deck, but a win is a win
Anti fun is part of the problem. It's not that the deck is OP. It's just too powerful given what it does.
Yeh predatory Dive and a lot of the other cards similar to it could do with changes I think.
I mean people are often playing them turn 1 to kill your unit but them having non on their side it doesn't harm them.
I think it should be "Kill the lowest value unit on each side, if you have no unit on you side discard a card"
OR
For the following cards
Predatory Dive
Glorious Hunt
Curse of Corruption
They spawn an artifact on the board that counts down so you play Predatory Dive is spawns "Apex Predators nest" The artifact says "If destroyed or the countdown reaches Zero Kill the lowest unit on each side".
You then have the countdown be like Crushing trap where it the countdown reaches Zero at the end of the owners next turn. Meaning they either have to play yet more filler or giving the opponent a chance to play round it by playing a lower valued unit.
What can they do? Make changes to reduce the viability of these type of decks. If they impact the rest of the game, so be it. Changes, as in card and mechanic redesigns. Not provision or power adjustments. Yeah, I know, actual work.
Ultimately, every "no unit" deck is based on the following...
1. Non-interactive.
2. Ability to constantly remove opponent positive points.
3. Ability to quickly supply positive points.
To provide an example, Francesca. You could build a Fran deck with a lot of "offensive" spells, buff potions, possibly offensive artifacts, spell tutors, a few boost spells, Saes and something like Renew. 90% of a round is spent removing opponent positive value with non-interactive concepts (offensive spells/artifacts). Incidentally, any opponent "control" is negated, as it has nothing to hit. For the other 5% of the round you could be tossing buff potions at a board to store positive value for later. When the end of a round comes around you dump a big Immune dragon on the board (again, control can't target it). At that point it's a matter of funneling those buffs into it (potions, spells).
Another example? Sihil decks of the past. Essentially, these builds played artifacts, Sihil, ways to return Sihil to the board, (via resurrection to counter AR or play it over multiple rounds), ways to reliably find Sihil and something "big" to take rounds. In games against these decks nearly everything the opponent put down was going to get steamrolled by Sihil. You could spend 80-90% of a round intentionally discarding your cards. In fact, it was often correct to do so to block Sihil from "growing". Those card plays simply did not matter. The important part was when the round was hitting the end point. The Sihil deck then dumps a big play on the board. Witchers come to mind. The opponent then dumps their big card on the board. Since, you know, they kept it because they were smart. Who wins? Who has a bigger unit at this point. That is who wins.
Taking a trip down memory lane.... Spell'tael was a thing in beta. It ran on the same concept. Remove opponent positive points, funnel buffs to hand-buff cards in the process then use those hand-buff cards (#3) to win rounds. Granted, it wasn't nearly to this extreme. You know why? Because, back then, we didn't have artifacts. The only "non-interactive" option available was spells/specials. Insert HC. The developers, in their infinite wisdom, decided we needed more "non-interactive" options (or maybe they just pulled the idea out of a hat... or their asshole... who knows). Now we suddenly have a way to pair and combine two different non-interactive concepts, one of which can store value for later (positive or negative). We also didn't have Immune. Why? Because in CB we had Promote and it was a disaster, so they removed it (and clearly they "learned" from their mistakes... heh heh).
Getting to the point....
1. Remove artifacts from the game completely.
2. Remove Immune from the game completely (replace it with Armor because it's more better).
I'd bet most non-interactive, "no-unit", "special" decks would go poof. The reason being it would become far more difficult to do #1 and #3 all the way at the top of this post in the way these decks do it. Yeah, it would still be doable with a "spell" deck. Such as with Francesca. There wouldn't be 14 ways to do it, however. It would be more in-line with Spell'tael, which even at it's peak was a T2 concept at best, and less like the Sihil builds before the card was nerfed into unplayable land (by the way, good fix team... you fixed it because nobody plays it anymore... sounds fixed to me).
Lastly, people really need to stop pretending there is thinking involved in countering these type of decks. Their approach is extremely simple. The counter-play is incredibly simple. The problem comes when you insert stuff like coin flip and draws. Likewise, it's not about whether these no-unit decks are overpowered, weak, terrible, strong, awesome, etc. They're annoying to play against. Play one three times in a row and, even if you win all three games in convincing fashion, you still feel like playing a different game for a while.
I personally like artifacts for legitimate reasons. I don't use them often, not with Nilfgaard. I used Thunderbolt alot with Northern Realms. I think it was 3 updates ago, they did fix some artifacts (mostly damage ones).
As I see it, potions and such belong in the game, and artifact is a good way to implement that. And I never had any issues with artifacts when opponents play those for in a legitimate way. Besides artifacts isn't the biggest problem with special cards decks, variants of scorch is. Now there is what, 7 for monsters, 5 for the others? Why did they add that cheaper scorch card in the first place with Crimson Curse? And that bronze situational scorch for monsters (predatory dive) does not exactly help against special cards decks.
I agree, special card decks are annoying and boring to play against. But people play them because it is a viable tactic. That's the problem, it shouldn't be, it should be a weak tactic. If is was, very few people would play it. As I see it, there are a few ways to make the tactic weak. Remove/change some of those scorch like cards, and remove the option to target immune cards on hand manually. This would go a long way in making the tactic less viable.
I mean, what cards are the most frequently used in these kind of decks, what tactics do they use? If we all look at that, note it down, discuss them, and hope that CDPR red will change them, then perhaps the problem would be solved.
Removing artifacts or putting limits on special cards and/or artifacts would be a bit big of a change to try as a 1st solution to solving this issue.
As I see it, potions and such belong in the game, and artifact is a good way to implement that. And I never had any issues with artifacts when opponents play those for in a legitimate way. Besides artifacts isn't the biggest problem with special cards decks, variants of scorch is. Now there is what, 7 for monsters, 5 for the others? Why did they add that cheaper scorch card in the first place with Crimson Curse? And that bronze situational scorch for monsters (predatory dive) does not exactly help against special cards decks.
I agree, special card decks are annoying and boring to play against. But people play them because it is a viable tactic. That's the problem, it shouldn't be, it should be a weak tactic. If is was, very few people would play it. As I see it, there are a few ways to make the tactic weak. Remove/change some of those scorch like cards, and remove the option to target immune cards on hand manually. This would go a long way in making the tactic less viable.
I mean, what cards are the most frequently used in these kind of decks, what tactics do they use? If we all look at that, note it down, discuss them, and hope that CDPR red will change them, then perhaps the problem would be solved.
Removing artifacts or putting limits on special cards and/or artifacts would be a bit big of a change to try as a 1st solution to solving this issue.
I want to discuss some of this with you and maybe we can come to an agreement.
Lets just start with what I think is the most important point here. Unitless style decks are out of control because of artifacts. Without artifacts these types of decks would be very niche and basically a meme. They wouldn't be powerful enough for anyone to really use competitively. I know you have a problem with scorch style cards and I'm not going to argue that all of these cards are fine for the game. Some of them might need to be changed so we really aren't in disagreement there. The problem is that if you leave artifacts the way they are unitless decks are always going to have a home. Its just too easy to stack the board with artifacts that the opponent can't do anything about (assuming they don't have the one type of counter card) and then use these saved up points at the end.
From what I can see there is no real solution other than changing artifacts a lot or removing them completely.
TBH, I don't mind special cards/unitless decks if I almost never see them. Logically, the tactic should not be strong and not viable, it should almost be an automatic-lose kind of deck. If it was, very few people would play it at all, and if that would be the case, problem would be solved at least for me, since I don't mind the deck itself, I just mind seeing it/playing it.
If there was a rare and weak special card deck I would have to play once in awhile, I would not really mind so much, especially if I knew that it is so weak that I must win against it.
I don't have a problem with Scorch cards, only in the context of special cards decks, because those scorch cards are in my experience core to their tactic. Regarding predatory dive, I think the purpose behind it is to actually destroy one unit on each side, not just scorch a unit on the other side. Now it is used as a no-unit deck scorch card, and it is used as a round starting scorch card in more legitimate decks, and i don't think that was the intention behind the card. I think the purpose was for it to be a card used with the deathwish ability. Both cards die, but deathwish is triggered.
I think they could safely remove the new "mini-scorch" card they added in Crimson Curse. And I think the 9 provision epidemic card can be a gold card instead of a bronze. Predatory dive could be adjusted to work as the design behind it intended.
You think unitless decks are out of control due to artifacts, I think it is out of control due to scorch like cards. Perhaps it is one or the other, or perhaps it's both or either. Anyways, as I said somewhere else to you, if they need to adjust some artifacts to avoid filling the board with those, they can add a use timer on some of them. This would make it more tactical and strategical when you would place them etc too and avoid filling the board with them with no purpose.
You can't just expect to have a board full of artifacts and enemy units. Why would the enemy units then not destroy them? Ergo, the timer.
Also, personally I like that a few units can have immune, I almost never use it myself, and those units are not overpowered, especially now that they fixed Saesenthessis. But I think it's bad that they can manually be targeted while on hand, and this is also problematic in relation to the special cards deck. What's your thought on immune in this regard?