Broover/Fillavandrel Thematically flipped

[KoncertMajstor]

While I read somewhere that CDPR said they closed this discussion, I really think they should consider switching this for thematic consistency. Having thematic decks is important to bring cohesion between gameplay and aesthetics -- and a lot of people, including myself, love the Witcher universe, so this does a lot to help the game -- it's one of the things I love about this game over say Hearthstone which just prints a bunch of random units every expansion, and nothing feels like it really belongs to its respective class, and more and more, the cards don't even feel like they belong to the warcraft universe.

Let's look at theme/gameplay married correctly:
Svalblod feels great to play -- not from him being top meta right now -- but for the whole theme of brutally mistreating your cultists turning them into bear abominations. It's great.

Currently, we have Broover with elf archetype decks, and Filla with dwarf archetype decks...

Let's look at their leader abilities:
*Broover causes units to move around in tricky ways. Creating a fluid board state. (Not only do the elf cards use this mechanic efficiently, but it fits the theme of elves being quick and fighting a guerrilla style fight.
*Filla boosts all units in hand. This fortification helps your units dig deeper and stick to the board. (Again, dwarf cards use this, benefiting from these buffs both in hand and on board).

Since these are the cards we have now (and the cards fit their themes well -- mostly), this change would make perfect sense.

What are the negatives to doing this? People will get confused? Don't underestimate your player-base, we're not dumb, and it would be not cause a huge stir... here's why:
1. Players are brand new to the game. So they won't know the difference anyway, and can enjoy thematic cohesion from the start. What if they netdeck older decks? Well net-decking older decks already doesn't work, as you quickly realize provisions make a big deal and some cards are just totally different.
2. Existing players who read patch notes: They will not be surprised at all, and when the season updates, can move forward without a hitch. (Assuming CDPR just switches filla for broover in every deck... which should be easy since it's strictly cosmetic).
3. Existing players who DONT read patch notes: They'll play one game and get confused by the change, realize what happened, and move on with the new change in mind.

There is no case where this change causes such long lasting repercussions.

 

[SMiki55]

I definitely agree.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

100% agree. It makes no sense at all for me to create an almost all Dwarf deck that is led by an ELF when we have a leader that is a DWARF!!! BTW the game encourages me to make all dwarf decks because the dwarfs synergize with each other. Then on top of that the ELF leader synergizes with the dwarf cards by boosting them so they are effective.

This change should have already happened. I have no idea why they hesitated in doing it as its not that big of a change. If you aren't going to change the leaders then I expect you to redesign dwarves so that they make sense.

 

[BrokeCiri]

 

[StrykerxS77x]

View attachment 11002207

Yeah and I'm pretty annoyed at their lack of communication on this. They said they were going to do it and then just let us sit and wait while they decided not to do it and said nothing to us.

 

[SMiki55]

Another thing that Dana is better leader for dryads than Eithné

 

[KoncertMajstor]

View attachment 11002207

Ya, I saw this and was disappointed. My point was it's not something that's so set in stone... I hope they reconsider this.

 

[rrc]

Guys, please give up. This was never going to happen. Not because I firmly believe that CDPR doesn't care about ST, but because of their attitude towards changing the 3D leader models. Switching the ability between Fila and Brouver is not simple as their animation on activating abilities will need to be changed (imagine Fila had to show off his swordsman skill for every movement or imagine Brouver simply points his finger or a second to achieve a one time ability). With their current animations, swapping the ability will be very very odd and we, the community, will start bashing CDPR for being lazy or having an awkward animation for leader abilities.

Even when it comes to lore wise, CDPR never wants to change the leader 3D models (which should be simpler than changing their animations?). Harald the Cripple should never have a Shield (according to his own description?) and yet, even after repeatedly pointing it out the answer was always "no plans right now". When CDPR's beloved faction gets a treatment like this when it comes to 3D models, imagine what kind of treatment will other factions get when it comes to animations. Another example is the Arachas Queen's 3D model. It is the most blatant and horrible mistake in the Gwent. The 3D model is of Arachas Behemoth and whoever first designed it didn't even know the difference between the Behemoth and the Queen and yet, after so many posts discussing and requesting about the change of the 3D model, it hasn't happened yet and the answer wa always "no plans right now". CDPR is OK with having a permanent black mark on their lore friendliness and defying their own definition of the leaders rather than fixing it. I am guessing that it takes a lot of efforts (all their movements and their alternate skin need to be reanimated) and CDPR doesn't want to do it.

So, we will just have to give up on this lore friendliness when it comes to the poor ST faction. If CDPR really want to be lore friendly (Elf leader leading elfs and Dwarf leader leading dwarfs), they can change the card's ability rather than changing the leader ability, but it would still be some efforts. If they are willing, they can do something about the cards' abilities, but I don't think they are willing to spend any efforts on existing cards when they have huge pile of work that needs to be done for the new faction.

 

[Raziel_888]

If they work on balance and gameplay, the community will bash them because they didn't change the animations, 3D design or lore. If they change that, the community will complain because they work on that instead of balancing the gameplay or releasing new content...

I agree with some of your points, but for the animations if they swap the leaders, that is more than feasible. They did design and release 10 new leaders in 6 months or so, fully animated, some of them beautifully, and they are talking about a new faction which should also come with 5 new leaders... I'm sure making one animation for each of them wouldn't be a problem. However, although I also would like to see a swap between those 2, it is clearly not a problem for the game itself and considering the ranting of the community about this and that, I think it is appropriate for the devs to prioritize.
And I know it's off topic but having played magic, hearthstone, and a bunch of others, I think the job done for a free-to-play is amazing (not without flaws, some decisions are -let's say- akward, but still impressing) and the progression system is clearly the most gratifying I've seen so far in CCG (ok I've played from Beta but I have the whole collection, managed to craft all the CC new cards and still have enough scraps to craft all the new extension(s), by playing intermittently. So thanks

 

[Gyg]

Strange thing may it seem, but I prefer Brouver with my Dwarves. His charges will activate Mahakam Defenders and with Gabor in deck I don't need really the Mahakam Marauders. Not playing Filavandrel means I'm more flexible in commiting to different rounds and Brouver damaging ability means I can finish off enemies with mercenaries/Zotan Chivay. Also moving some row locked units of enemy to disactivate their powers is really handy.

 

[TheNetherlord]

I completely agree with your post.
Personally, I really enjoy creating lore-friendly decks that can also be competitive, thus preferring archetypes that allow me to combine coherent sets of cards and leaders. For this reason, I don't like playing with Filavandrel and Brouver.
As of now, dwarf decks almost always run an elven leader (see: Filavandrel), while the "movement" archetype, which mostly consists of elves, is represented by Brouver. There's no way to deny that, and I'm sure CDPR is aware of that.
What I can't understand is the reason why they dropped the idea of swapping the leader's abilities. Your points are valid, players would get used to it in no time. I should also point out that creating just a couple of new animations is not that expensive or time-consuming, especially if you consider we're talking about the same company that created The Witcher (not the same team, I give you that).
I presume it's about scores, contracts and leader trees tied to Filavandrel and Brouver. It could be kind of a mess to readjust them all without losing any data or upsetting hardcore players. Either way, they should at least explain why they chose to not do this reasonable ability swap.

...not that will stop us from claiming our freedom (of playing a lore-friendly deck). Fight the Scoia'Tael revolution 'till the bitter end, brothers and sisters!

 

[FG15-ISH7EG]

I presume it's about scores, contracts and leader trees tied to Filavandrel and Brouver. It could be kind of a mess to readjust them all without losing any data or upsetting hardcore players. Either way, they should at least explain why they chose to not do this reasonable ability swap.

I believe that this is exactly the problem. Due to Filandravel being a starter leader and Brouver having to be unlocked, they can't just swap those two abilities without everything becoming a mess. Furthermore, if both are swapped, what will happen to players having only Filandravel but not Brouver? Maybe some people choose to play Filandravel because of his design and not his ability. Just giving those Brouver would be weird.

Also, as pointed out above, the animations of those two don't fit for each others kind of ability.

While I really regret that it won't happen, I guess swapping two leaders would be just too big of a change for the game.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

Dwarf decks almost always never use the one dwarf leader in the game. That is so silly.

Edit: If you aren't going to swap them then please change mauraders to something that doesn't synergize with Filivandril.

 

[Rammyp]

Dwarf decks almost always never use the one dwarf leader in the game. That is so silly.

That's the power of Scoia'tael harmony, Bloede dh’oine.