WTF: "Melee", "Ranged", "Reach"!!! Let's make rows great again!

[DrakeTurtle]

Let's talk about Row effects!
The Rows in Gwent have a long history. In closed beta, all units had an icon like "melee" or "ranged" and were forced to be played into the respective row. At that time weather was a key mechanic of Gwent. There used to be three rows at that time, and you were always trying to place units in a way, such that opponents weathers are not too powerful. Later the Players were able to play units in any row. From that point rows started to lose their purpose a little bit. After deleting the third row and basically weather from the game, rows didnt have a purpose at all anymore. So CDPR decided to make some keywords to bring back a purpose to rows. This is how the keywords "Melee", "Ranged" and "Reach" were born.

Here are some reasons why I think those keywords should be overworked or better removed:

1. They are completely random on some units. I can not remember which character has those kaywords and which doesnt have them. Every 10 game it happens one time to me that I play a unit into the false row, it doesnt activate its skill and im frustrated. Also before playing any unit, I reread the effect 3 times to make sure it doesnt have "Melee" or "Ranged" written in it.

2. They dont give the game more strategic depth. There is really no additional strategic thought that you can have, because of those keywords.

3. They dont make the game more fun, it just frustrates players, who place the card into the wrong row.


What do you think, do you agree with my complains?

How can we give rows a purpose again then? Is it even possible with only 2 rows, to make them meaningful? Or maybe should the concepts of rows be completely removed from the game?

Lets gather some good ideas! I'm sure CDPR will read this thread and follow our advise

 

[4RM3D]

What do you think, do you agree with my complains?

I already kinda suggested this.

Regardless, I do want to point out something about Closed Beta with weather and row-locked units. During that period, deckbuilding was more important because there you could select the various units, usually spread out between the rows, according to your tactics and weather cards. However, once the game begun, there were little tactics involved. The units were row-locked, so you didn't have any choice. Furthermore, having last say with the right weather card was usually the deciding factor. I know those were remnants of the original Gwent game. But that was never meant to be an online CCG and wasn't balanced as such.

Rows might not hold enough meaning now, but it's still better than the situation during beta.

 

[Draconifors]

3 is just a subjective opinion, one I disagree with. For example, it can be fun to use row-specific abilities to one's own advantage. Don't like that Tax Collector but don't want to/can't lock or kill him? Move him to the melee row. Even accidentally misplaying one's own row-specific units can provide some entertainment; I know when opponents do that, I can't be 100% sure whether it's on purpose or not. I certainly have purposely played units on the "wrong" row, just to mess with my opponents (and because the cards' abilities wouldn't have been useful in that situation anyway).

That kind of ties into 2, which I also disagree with. There's definitely more strategy to row-specific abilities that can be ignored, than to cards that literally cannot be played on rows other than a specified one. Basically, I agree with what 4RM3D said above.

1 might have some objective truth to it -- but it's not like all row-locks in beta made sense. Some cards were tied to a specific row for no apparent, logical reason.

 

[ElricVIII]

I'm a long-time TCG and war games player and this was one of the first thoughts I had. With the exception of row-specific abilities on units, one row is hardly differentiated from another beyond specific units in the faction you're facing (Alba Pikemen vs Reinforced Trebuchet, etc). I very rarely see units' reach being a factor. The biggest strategic impact on rows that I see is the use of weather effects to corral enemy units to a row that can be hit with AoE damage, and that's almost entirely on arena. But in this case the rows might as well be "1" and "2" instead of "ranged" and "melee." Right now my current strategy seems to be space units evenly between rows unless I think the enemy has a row-specific effect. That's kind of boring.

Having played some Thronebreaker before discovering this game, I was disappointed to find that armor was no longer a thing. I feel like that could have been used in some way to achieve this. I think the answer is giving a lot of units reach 1/2 and adding melee requirements to others. Additionally, add native effects to the rows to promote risk vs reward. This would also allow you to buff/nerf units by forcing them to be in melee.

As an example, imagine that the above reach/melee requirements are in place. Now we add in a new value called "reserves." This value adds to your point total without strengthening any specific units. Let's say that every unit in the melee row adds 1 to your reserves. So, the ranged row is safer because more units have a limited reach, but the melee row contributes more to your point total.

The biggest downside to something like this is you'd also have to re-balance swarm/tall decks as well as tweaking the values of special cards. So while it's nice to think about, this would require huge re-balancing of the entire game for a minimal benefit.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

When homecoming was announced I honestly thought basically all cards would have an effect for both rows. Disappointed.

 

[KoncertMajstor]

I think every card should have some sort of Melee/Ranged effect... kind of like how Xavier or Assire has a melee and ranged variation of their effects.
Formation is a great idea, but I don't get why so few cards have it.
Not every card needs crazy effects, but let's utilize rows to add more player choice to the game.
Even point slam vanilla cards could have simple effects.

What about Old Speartip. Always start old speartip as Asleep. But change his effect to "When opponent plays 3 cards on opposite row, turn to Old Speartip: awakened". This would also make the card much more thematic, and tie in with how the character behaves in the universe... this is in my opinion important (cough, deithwen arbalist???)
Yes, it would require a rework of the cards, but CDPR has done this before. This way we can turn boring cards, into cards that have interesting effects, something that lets you interact with your opponent without directly just doing "boost unit or damage unit". Whether or not you think that is a good idea, it's just an example of how cards can be used to interact with rows more meaningfully.

 

[Vedamir]

I already wrote my opinion too here (point #2):
https://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?threads/gwent-that-i-desire.11007874/post-11584642
The main point is: rows was made to introduce different types of troops. In past OBT and HC rows almost lost their purpose. They have become something to just avoid row effects and nothing else. Cards have become too jumpy without any sense - just to make them more variable. Sense of rows has been lost. Better to return to roots of Gwent and make rows and cards more sensible. I think there must be 33% of melee cards, 33% of ranged and 33% of flexible cards, that can jump to both rows as it was in CBT.

 

[FG15-ISH7EG]

The old Row Locked system was doomed from the start as it was arbitrary instead of meaningful.
It would have only made sense if each row had a purpose, for example control cards were played on the front row, engines on the middle row and units that support your own units on the last row, such that it would allow players to tech against certain types of play by teching against certain rows.
The problem with that is that Gwent relies on the witcher universe and therefore we get a lot of characters with predefined characteristics, such that it isn't possible to easily to give a card a certain role without it feeling forced. Good examples for that was the Alba Pikeman locked on the Ranged Row, or now the Arabalest with the weird banishment ability. Having a meaningful row system would have required to force roles on characters that don't fit or leave characters out and invent completly new onces, which would be disliked by the community aswell.

While I was the one, who suggested the Reach system in the forums, I'm not that convinced anymore of it myself, because it is far too underused and not fleshed out enough. But also, because it would make more sense with 3 rows in my opinion.


What I would like for a change now, and what I read already suggested in the forum is to change the board into more of a chessboard. The rows have already limits of 9 cards, so it could make sense to fix every possible position and allow specific placement of the cards, such that you can leave the middle of the board free and only place units at the right side.
Such a change would be compatible with nearly everything we already have and would nonetheless allow the much larger exploration of the rows, by adding things like flanking enemies and targeting enemies in a line or other placement specific effects.

 

[Moors-]

For the cards with only 1 Deploy ability row restriction makes no sense, adds no strategy or decision making, it equals to row locked card from beta. So row restriction for 1 Deploy ability cards should be removed. As for engines it's fine, additional way to counter-play or interact with opponents is always welcomed.

 

[DrakeTurtle]

I think the answer is giving a lot of units reach 1/2 and adding melee requirements to others. Additionally, add native effects to the rows to promote risk vs reward. This would also allow you to buff/nerf units by forcing them to be in melee.

As an example, imagine that the above reach/melee requirements are in place. Now we add in a new value called "reserves." This value adds to your point total without strengthening any specific units. Let's say that every unit in the melee row adds 1 to your reserves. So, the ranged row is safer because more units have a limited reach, but the melee row contributes more to your point total.

Actually this was exactly what I also have in mind as a possible solution. Maybe a bit simpler with just boosing every unit when played to the melee row by 1 though. And you need a lot reach 1 effects, like you also stated before. A trade off between more value and higher risk between rows would be really interesting, would add strategic depth and would give rows a purpose again. (With 3 rows and this mechanic, it would be even more interesting probably though)

I already kinda suggested this.
Regardless, I do want to point out something about Closed Beta with weather and row-locked units. (...) However, once the game begun, there were little tactics involved. The units were row-locked, so you didn't have any choice. Furthermore, having last say with the right weather card was usually the deciding factor.

I absolutely agree, I didnt want ot say row locked units were better. Just this skill-row-lock-mechanic is no better than the old row lock.

 

[Vedamir]

For the cards with only 1 Deploy ability row restriction makes no sense, adds no strategy or decision making, it equals to row locked card from beta. So row restriction for 1 Deploy ability cards should be removed. As for engines it's fine, additional way to counter-play or interact with opponents is always welcomed.

It makes sense. If there is opponent's card, which triggers, when some unit appears on the opposite row (some trap for example). So this trap can deny the deploy or it can damage unit after it. Or it may be NR catapult, which is shooting every turn on ranged row. If u can jump with ur deploy to other row, u can avoid damage, what is bad for opponent and for the game sense, when deploy is made by melee-fighter for example. How can he execute his deploy from range? No logic here and no beauty because of it. Logic and realism must be respected to make game good-looking and well-perceived.

 

[ElricVIII]

For the cards with only 1 Deploy ability row restriction makes no sense, adds no strategy or decision making, it equals to row locked card from beta. So row restriction for 1 Deploy ability cards should be removed. As for engines it's fine, additional way to counter-play or interact with opponents is always welcomed.

That's not exactly true. Right now, the difference between a "range 2: 3 damage" ability and a "Melee: 3 damage" ability is that the former could be placed on the ranged row to hit an enemy on the melee row, but be safe from "range 1" abilities. The latter is forced to be up close, regardless of its target location.

This situation needs to happen more, not less. That's what gives strategic depth.

 

[DrakeTurtle]

Don't like that Tax Collector but don't want to/can't lock or kill him? Move him to the melee row.

You're right. For engines it does make sense, so moving row effects are "locks" for them!

 

[Guest 4305932]

Let's talk about Row effects!
The Rows in Gwent have a long history. In closed beta, all units had an icon like "melee" or "ranged" and were forced to be played into the respective row. At that time weather was a key mechanic of Gwent. There used to be three rows at that time, and you were always trying to place units in a way, such that opponents weathers are not too powerful. Later the Players were able to play units in any row. From that point rows started to lose their purpose a little bit. After deleting the third row and basically weather from the game, rows didnt have a purpose at all anymore. So CDPR decided to make some keywords to bring back a purpose to rows. This is how the keywords "Melee", "Ranged" and "Reach" were born.

Here are some reasons why I think those keywords should be overworked or better removed:

1. They are completely random on some units. I can not remember which character has those kaywords and which doesnt have them. Every 10 game it happens one time to me that I play a unit into the false row, it doesnt activate its skill and im frustrated. Also before playing any unit, I reread the effect 3 times to make sure it doesnt have "Melee" or "Ranged" written in it.

2. They dont give the game more strategic depth. There is really no additional strategic thought that you can have, because of those keywords.

3. They dont make the game more fun, it just frustrates players, who place the card into the wrong row.


What do you think, do you agree with my complains?

How can we give rows a purpose again then? Is it even possible with only 2 rows, to make them meaningful? Or maybe should the concepts of rows be completely removed from the game?

Lets gather some good ideas! I'm sure CDPR will read this thread and follow our advise

For 1 and 3 you will get used to it. We all made this mistake. Btw when you select a card with a specific row ability the correct row will be highlighted.



For 2 i don't think that is true. They have some strategic value because of movement, double abilities and row limit.