Any of the original beta players still playing Gwent?

[Guest 4305932]

About archetypes i think many people are still too tied to the old beta vision of archetypes as tribal/tag collection and they are not getting used to the new "package" archetypes (which imho is one of the great things in HC even if his actual form is far from being perfect)). for example reveal, it was deemed RNG fiesta from people who literally put 25 unit and all cards with reveal tag in.

 

[MrMida]

Played since beta, wasn't a very big player but played my games from time to time. Stopped playing around the time they announced HC. I got Thronebreaker and I really wish CDP Red will do more of that. Started playing in earnest again earlier this year and really liked it. But after playing so much I started to not like the major changes of HC (overreliance on golden cards, removal of silver and bronze a lot of the time being nothing but filler you don't want to play, not being able to balance the game(NR drawing the short straw most of the time) so they have to make big changes (almost) every month). I haven't played enough of pre-HC to really understand what problems they tried to solve with it or if it the cure is worse than the disease. These days I mostly just play my daily quests, get my seasonal rewards and if I'm really bored I play some more.

 

[BornBoring]

Only a short time after HC and two days each after the two expansions. Amazing how a game I've played for several hundred hours during beta can bore me that much. Not just the gameplay itself puts me to sleep, but also my love for deckbuilding is completely vanished. Current provision system and two bronze copies have completely ruined it for me. Always loved the archetype focus Gwent used to have. Currently it's more about small synergy packages like in other card games. Can't say much positive about HC. I don't even like the look of it as I despise the 3d battlefields.

 

[EvgenTor777]

About archetypes i think many people are still too tied to the old beta vision of archetypes as tribal/tag collection and they are not getting used to the new "package" archetypes (which imho is one of the great things in HC even if his actual form is far from being perfect)). for example reveal, it was deemed RNG fiesta from people who literally put 25 unit and all cards with reveal tag in.

Yea, now it's like: Regis Bloodlust = one card package archetype, Assire + Roach = two cards package archetype, Crones = three cards package archetype, to be continued...)))

 

[Guest 4305932]

Assire + Roach = two cards package archetype

Assire + roach, cards notoriously know to be used in couple just in HC.

 

[EvgenTor777]

Sorry, didn't mean to offend you. I just don't like deckbuilding based only on squeezing in the deck separate strong cards and small combinations (like Assire + Roach). It's effective, but God it's boring.

 

[Gen_Liu]

Well.. the problem is that I tend to try "unplayable" archetypes again and again. I've always liked the deckbuilding part in Gwent the most. Running well-known strong decks for more wins feels boring and dull. Tried "Assimilation" lately. Against Syndicate it's a complete joke.
I just don't get why make so many useless archetypes and strategies. Playing now at Rank 9. Those are trash (in my opinion): "Spies", "Mill (and other ways of messing with opponent's deck or hand)", "Vampires", "Charges" (with Demavend), "Scoya with a lot of specials", "Scoya with a lot of poison", "Skellige warriors", "Monster beasts", "Full weather decks", "Monsters with less amount of units on the board (Keltullis, Trolls etc.)", "Assimilation", "NR Ghosts" (not just Draug with Henselt). Maybe there are more but I only tried these.
The game has a lot of cards now, I want to be able to use most of them with decent results not just a few. I don't remember that Beta had so many completely useless cards. I'm not complaining, just wondering.

-The problem is that, most of the decks you just mentioned has NO support whatsoever (Monster beast....seriously...). I'm a deck builder myself, never made a single net deck and never will but just don't waste your time with archetypes that has no support, especially because those will probably be playable in the future when CDPR decide to give them some actual back up.

-Assimilate is actually legit. I found that out very recently but there is ways of making this deck far better than you seem to think.

-Everything is a joke against SY, don't even bother about it right now, CDPR are gonna fix this mess without a doubt. That's why I said appart from SY when I was talking about balance.

-It's funny how peoples can have a short memory. Of course useless cards were in BETA as well, probably even more than now. I remember having even golds serving no purpose whatsoever. The feeling was even stronger considering how messed up the balance was back at this time. Kinda felt like MTG for that matter (and not the more fun aspect of it), play meta or die.
It's not the case anymore or I should say wasn't the case before SY shows up.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

-It's funny how peoples can have a short memory. Of course useless cards were in BETA as well, probably even more than now. I remember having even golds serving no purpose whatsoever. The feeling was even stronger considering how messed up the balance was back at this time. Kinda felt like MTG for that matter (and not the more fun aspect of it), play meta or die.
It's not the case anymore or I should say wasn't the case before SY shows up.

When homecoming was released a lot of my initial feedback was in how bad the archetypes were and how there were so many useless and badly designed cards. Shit like Lambert Sword master which for some reason NEVER gets changed. Beta definitely didn't have this many terrible archetypes.

 

[BornBoring]

When homecoming was released a lot of my initial feedback was in how bad the archetypes were and how there were so many useless and badly designed cards. Shit like Lambert Sword master which for some reason NEVER gets changed. Beta definitely didn't have this many terrible archetypes.

Tbh I don't think beta gwent had less unfinished archetypes or useless cards than the current game. You just could build entire archetypes around 3-4 different bronzes and a few supportive silvers/golds.

 

[Rammyp]

Tbh I don't think beta gwent had less unfinished archetypes or useless cards than the current game. You just could build entire archetypes around 3-4 different bronzes and a few supportive silvers/golds.

Yes, and also since you could have 3 of the same bronzes in a deck, 4 bronzes from a certain archetype were practically half of your deck (12/25 cards).

 

[4RM3D]

With all the talk about archetypes, I also want to point out that, during beta, most decks where pretty obvious and had little room for variations on an established archetype. This resulted in most decks being exactly the same, which made the game more boring. After Homecoming, we got a greater variety of decks, thanks to the 2 bronze limit and the provision system. That didn't stop netdecks because nothing will, but even in that segment I see more experimentation.

Let's take a look at a few examples from ST. Facing Francesca, is it a double RNR/Muzzle, Waters or maybe the new double Dwarf Justice? All three "archetypes" play differently. Picking Eithné, she can be midrange or focused on Scorch/Igni/Regis, with or without a dwarven package. And Dana can be anything with Waters. The point is, instead of swapping a whole deck around, you swap part of the deck, like the dwarven package.

 

[Guest 4305932]

With all the talk about archetypes, I also want to point out that, during beta, most decks where pretty obvious and had little room for variations on an established archetype. This resulted in most decks being exactly the same, which made the game more boring. After Homecoming, we got a greater variety of decks, thanks to the 2 bronze limit and the provision system. That didn't stop netdecks because nothing will, but even in that segment I see more experimentation.

Let's take a look at a few examples from ST. Facing Francesca, is it a double RNR/Muzzle, Waters or maybe the new double Dwarf Justice? All three "archetypes" play differently. Picking Eithné, she can be midrange or focused on Scorch/Igni/Regis, with or without a dwarven package. And Dana can be anything with Waters. The point is, instead of swapping a whole deck around, you swap part of the deck, like the dwarven package.

I agree with everything you said and i want to add that when we talk about archetype we should separate the existence of the archetype from the power of the archetype.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

With all the talk about archetypes, I also want to point out that, during beta, most decks where pretty obvious and had little room for variations on an established archetype. This resulted in most decks being exactly the same, which made the game more boring. After Homecoming, we got a greater variety of decks, thanks to the 2 bronze limit and the provision system. That didn't stop netdecks because nothing will, but even in that segment I see more experimentation.

Let's take a look at a few examples from ST. Facing Francesca, is it a double RNR/Muzzle, Waters or maybe the new double Dwarf Justice? All three "archetypes" play differently. Picking Eithné, she can be midrange or focused on Scorch/Igni/Regis, with or without a dwarven package. And Dana can be anything with Waters. The point is, instead of swapping a whole deck around, you swap part of the deck, like the dwarven package.

I'm not going to agree or disagree in this post. I just want to say that I prefer actual archetypes like Deathwish over a leader using a specific gold card. Homecoming seems to be very focused on decks being made around powerful gold finishers such as RNR/muzzle/Regis like you mentioned. Those really aren't archetypes.

 

[sfruzz]

The game went into a different direction then we Beta players would have whished for. It went more into a mainstream audience direction and less into that hardcore strategic-nerd and mindgame direction.

I strongly thinks that they have decided to go for two rows not to improve gameplay but to introduce gwent on mobile device as more rows means small cards & as it's a touch device so..

As a closed beta player I think the game went into the wrong direction, trying to expand the playerbase to a more casual and mobile friendly audience. But that segment of the market is already taken by well established competitors, plus the the game being on GoG only, not yet avaialable on mobile, made things difficult.

As for the game mechanics I enjoyed the beta version more. Not saying Homecoming is terrible or that I hate all the changes. I still play the game.

 

[Gen_Liu]

With all the talk about archetypes, I also want to point out that, during beta, most decks where pretty obvious and had little room for variations on an established archetype. This resulted in most decks being exactly the same, which made the game more boring. After Homecoming, we got a greater variety of decks, thanks to the 2 bronze limit and the provision system. That didn't stop netdecks because nothing will, but even in that segment I see more experimentation.

Yup, exactly.

 

[Fimbulthrym]

That didn't stop netdecks because nothing will, but even in that segment I see more experimentation.

The question is, do these deck play differently (against)

Let's take a look at a few examples from ST. Facing Francesca, is it a double RNR/Muzzle, Waters or maybe the new double Dwarf Justice? All three "archetypes" play differently. Picking Eithné, she can be midrange or focused on Scorch/Igni/Regis, with or without a dwarven package. And Dana can be anything with Waters. The point is, instead of swapping a whole deck around, you swap part of the deck, like the dwarven package.

I think you misjudge a combo as an archetype. If you just swap one or two cards, you dont generate a new archetyp, just adding a bit variety to the same, at best.
The new Coin-Mechanik is an archetype, deathwish or movement were archetypes. "Picking Eithne with Scorch" is none

 

[Guest 4305932]

The new Coin-Mechanik is an archetype,

Not exactly otherwise SY would have just 1 archetype while it has many archetypes each with a specific internal mechanic (swarm, bounty etc) and a shared mechanic (coins)

Sorry, didn't mean to offend you. I just don't like deckbuilding based only on squeezing in the deck separate strong cards and small combinations (like Assire + Roach). It's effective, but God it's boring.

No offense taken. I edited my post because it seemed too harsh. They are 2 different philosophies, for me deckbuilding around a single tag (like old spies) is boring, Hopefully they will add enough cards to support both. But it's not correct to use Assire + Roach as examples and is not what i consider a "package". An example of what I considerer to be a package is my old reveal deck https://gwentup.com/decks/5434 . As you can see here there are 2 "package" a thinning one and a reveal one.

 

[4RM3D]

Homecoming seems to be very focused on decks being made around powerful gold finishers such as RNR/muzzle/Regis like you mentioned. Those really aren't archetypes.

I think you misjudge a combo as an archetype. If you just swap one or two cards, you dont generate a new archetyp, just adding a bit variety to the same, at best.

That's the whole point I wanted to make. There are no real archetypes anymore. Instead, we have a combination of "packages", for the lack of a better term. And because of this, decks have a lot more variety.

 

[Raunbjorn]

That's the whole point I wanted to make. There are no real archetypes anymore. Instead, we have a combination of "packages", for the lack of a better term. And because of this, decks have a lot more variety.

And a lot less identity and flavor as well.

 

[Archan6el]

That's the whole point I wanted to make. There are no real archetypes anymore. Instead, we have a combination of "packages", for the lack of a better term. And because of this, decks have a lot more variety.

Playing a true archetype with significant deck consistency is fun. Having multiple packages in your deck that don't work so well because draw RNG doesn't let you pull the combo is not. That's a major reason why highly synergistic decks like SK, SY and MO AQ are dominating (other than being OP).