Balance changes and short explanations.

+

Guest 4368268

Guest
I just want the removal meta to go. It's the number one thing I'm just so completely done with.
Even 'proactive' strategies (such as the one NR uses) just culminate to board wiping your opponent.
Now you've got scenarios further enabling that idea. NG was designed for control. Syndicate was designed for control. ST was designed for control.
Now Northern Realms essentially is too. If the engines don't board wipe you then Falibor and Philippa surely will finish the job.

It seems only Skellige isn't going to try to destroy your every card from the offset.
Don't get me wrong don't even mind my combos being destroyed and losing big time, if I at least get a chance to play (a portion of) them first.
You see a certain faction/deck and you just know that what you'll try to do won't work regardless and that feeling sucks.
I don't mind being scorched/geralt/igni out of existence at the end of a fun game. I don't even mind if my opponent sacrificed serious points/provisions/tempo to be able to control my strategy from the start.

I do mind getting locked/poisoned/Vilgefortz/Yennefer Invo and so on and so on throughout the entirety of it. There's just so many efficient control cards with little to no drawback. So why not run them? Please make them more weak and more expensive. Let control be a (risky) choice rather than a convenient auto-include package.
 
I just want the removal meta to go. It's the number one thing I'm just so completely done with.
Even 'proactive' strategies (such as the one NR uses) just culminate to board wiping your opponent.
Now you've got scenarios further enabling that idea. NG was designed for control. Syndicate was designed for control. ST was designed for control.
Now Northern Realms essentially is too. If the engines don't board wipe you then Falibor and Philippa surely will finish the job.

It seems only Skellige isn't going to try to destroy your every card from the offset.
Don't get me wrong don't even mind my combos being destroyed and losing big time, if I at least get a chance to play (a portion of) them first.
You see a certain faction/deck and you just know that what you'll try to do won't work regardless and that feeling sucks.
I don't mind being scorched/geralt/igni out of existence at the end of a fun game. I don't even mind if my opponent sacrificed serious points/provisions/tempo to be able to control my strategy from the start.

I do mind getting locked/poisoned/Vilgefortz/Yennefer Invo and so on and so on throughout the entirety of it. There's just so many efficient control cards with little to no drawback. So why not run them? Please make them more weak and more expensive. Let control be a (risky) choice rather than a convenient auto-include package.

The devs were informed that the game had too much control months ago and they gave us some lip service and some small changes here and there and then they simply released even more control oriented cards. They just do whatever they want. Nothing we say matters.
 
I just want the removal meta to go. It's the number one thing I'm just so completely done with...
Funny thing is how they go in circles with this, but regardless - the devs always return to it and than wonder why everybody are frustrated.

HUGE part of the problem we have now is the CHEAP 4p Poison cards we had before, plus the addition of 2 new NEUTRAL ones and a variety of even more poisoning cards in certain factions. It's like they never thought about.

Anyway, this Poison mechanic needs to go in its current state (I like the adding damage mechanic - 1 Poison does -1str per turn, 2 Poisons does -2str per turn, etc.). It's just not healthy as a direct removal and will become even worse with the introduction of new support cards. Hey, do you remember that there is a card in SY that boosts itself by 1 wherever it has the Poison status on it? Yeah, true story - this card does exists. Try to include it in your next deck, see how this goes.
 
Anyway, this Poison mechanic needs to go in its current state (I like the adding damage mechanic - 1 Poison does -1str per turn, 2 Poisons does -2str per turn, etc.).
Agree that poison is out of control in NG and borderline for SY and ST. The only problem I see with the suggested method is that it potentially stacks with bleeding. Perhaps an alternative for poison could be that it temporarily reduces a unit to half its base strength, and shuts down any abilities if the unit's total strength is in the red. That way poison can still be control, but not full removal.
 
I would much appreciate Poison to be something calculative. Cards could deal Poison in numbers, just like damage. If a unit of 3 strength gets 3 Poison, it dies. If it is 4 strength and gets 3 Poison, it stays alive at 4 strength, but can now be killed with 1 or more damage or 1 or more Poison. Several interesting combo's and mechanics will be possible this way.

Purify makes sense to remove physical statuses and should be reworked by adding numbers as well. For example, 3 Purify could remove 3 Bleeding, 3 Poison or 3 Vitality (choose one status if more than one applies).

Defenders should be reworked. "Defender" clearly isn't a physical status, so Purify should not work on Defender. Defender should be an ability and Lock should work against Defenders. Defending a whole row is OP and makes no sense; how can one unit defend a whole row? On Deploy, a Defender should pick one adjacent unit to defend. That would fix the issue with powerful Order cards. These cards have Order for a reason and it seems CDPR forgot this when they created Defenders.
 
1. Radeyah - stratagem destroys itself at the end of your turn. No more OP combos (outside of pincer maneuver which deserves a big nerf but there is another topic about that), she is strong enough.
2. Aen seidhe sabre - spawn and summon scoiatael neophyte at the end of your rows. ST is the only faction that is using their stratagem in all of their decks. 4 points with 2 extra units and them being elfs is enough. Triggering harmony and being able to pick where you want to place them is too much.
3. Poison - needs a points ceiling and more interactivity. Right now it makes cheap bronzes have "infinite" value, and tall decks unplayable.
- two applications can kill an up to 8 points unit
- three applications can kill an up to 15 points unit
- four applications can kill an up to 24 points unit
4. Falibor - 12p. I don't remember if he got introduced when NR had less damage and 3 points units were less common so he was harder to trigger? Right now he is OP.
5. Vernossiel - 4 points. Unconditional 11 for 12 with 3 units and them being elfs is OP.
6. Maraal - 10p. Very strong ability and half of it is on deploy. I would like to see him in decks that can protect him instead of any poison decks.
7. Yennefer's invocation - 10p. It's a better version of heatwave, no need for it to also be cheaper. Especially after the intoduction of war council.
8. Bribery - should be picking from ALL THE CARDS - meaning if your opponent is running 2 copies of a bronze unit you should be twice as likely to get it as a result, and also be able to get two copies of the same card as your choices, greatly reducing the chances of getting golds as your choices.
9. Sweers - 9p. He got buffed when there were less 3 points units. He is still great at 9p.
10. Matta Huuri - 10p, 5 points. Let's say on average she draws you an 11 points card, and 5 points card for your opponent. Doesn't that make her an 6+11-5=12 points card? And if you are playing engines making a round longer also gets you some value.
11. Endrega larva - 6p. This is possibly the best bronze card in the game. Easily giving you huge value even in short rounds.
12. Yghern - 11p. It's just a little bit too strong. Doesn't matter if you are playing thrive or dominance or neither.
13. Madame Luiza - 11p. She can get you 9 points on savolla, 8 points on tinboy, 6 points on moreelse. OP.

I'm leaving leader abilities and buffs for another topic.
Agree with some, disagree with others.

For example, Yghern and Vernossiel are fine honestly. They're strong cards but they're not a problem for the game, at least I don't think so. Imo, nerfs should be only made as a last resort, when a card is really off the charts. CDPR shouldn't nerf a card as soon as they win games occasionally, we still need strong cards in the game.

I'm much more agree with Radeyah or Matta Huuri, for example.
The first for obvious reasons (I mean, see the difference with the two others and how she impacts the game), the second because of poor design.

I mean, there is always one card that make me think "What the hell?!" with every expansion and Matta Huuri is the winner for this time. I don't even want to know if the card is OP or not, it's just straight up poor design, no card should make one player drawing his higher provision card while the other draws his lower...What a random effect, like seriously CDPR, I love you but sometimes you have some weird ideas.
 
Ridiculous, some of the stuff I read on this Forum. People complaining that Northern Realms removes their units. Er, you're supposed to be fighting a war - soldiers get killed!
Yes, but it's supposed to be medieval war with aspects of fantasty magic. NR, being a notoriously hard faction to balance correctly, unfortunately tends to fluctuate between lambs before the slaughter and precision drone strikes with MOAB in terms of damage-type control. Either is not good for a strategic card game, since it renders the faction either not fun to play or not fun to play against. NG is similar in that it consistently tends to balance on the not fun to play against side of things.

Oh yeah, I forgot, some players enjoy the SPAWN decks - overwhelming the opposition with spawning units instead of engaging in an actual battle against the opposition.

Little wonder this game is completely and utterly shagged!
Nothing wrong with spawn decks, just that there is very little wide removal in the game. Currently, NR ping decks are probably the only faction that can handle swarm. CDPR really seems to balk at mutually assured board-wipes, yet release (then nerf) one-sided, situational board-wipes (e.g. Regis, Falibor). Weather is rather impotent since you only get 4 turns out of it and, if you only have one, most of the time the opponent just changes rows, particularly if it's frost or rain. Without viable tech to deal with it, it tends to stifle the creative space, since there is nothing for the other factions to viably build with.

The design team's seems to have focus exclusively on tall removal and single unit temoval. They've not really enriched archetypes with new units that suuport abilities. Rather, they've created a pseudo-system that mimics the old 4-card bronze mechanic with bronzes (and some golds) doing what existing bronzes do. Recently they've said that big number swings are more exciting to watch, and likely this also influences design space. Not to say all of this is bad. Done right, it could make the game more fun and exciting, rather than frustrating. Unfortunately, the later has been the case. In turn, this influences player perception and has pushes the game down onto that shag patch.
 
Last edited:
Ridiculous, some of the stuff I read on this Forum. People complaining that Northern Realms removes their units. Er, you're supposed to be fighting a war - soldiers get killed!

Oh yeah, I forgot, some players enjoy the SPAWN decks - overwhelming the opposition with spawning units instead of engaging in an actual battle against the opposition.

Little wonder this game is completely and utterly shagged!

This isn't a battle game, it's a card game and you win by having more points on your side than your opponent.
 
  • RED Point
Reactions: rrc
Nonsense.

The Gwent of the Witcher 3 was based entirely around winning a battle. Yes, the highest score wins, but the point is you're in combat.

However, as one of my other threads points out, Gwent has become a game about SWARM to get the highest score where actually engaging the other player in combat has actually become irrelevant.

I'd say Syndicate barely requires combat units - plenty of Feresworn Zealots to spawn, as well as boost cards and units.

Skellige has a few attack units, but can get away with boost units and spawning cards - specially crow related decks.

Monsters are nearly always shag decks, er, spawn decks.

ST spawn elves left, right and centre, with a few combat units - and lots of traps.

NG is about the only one that doesn't have a lot in the way of spawning from what I've seen. Although it has other issues.

Norther Realms can spawn a few units.

Personally, I just find playing a game where the opponent doesn't engage with the opponent in any way whatsoever pointless. I've player some matches where the opponent has focused entirely on their own side. Honestly, why bother?

Ultimately, if CDPR want players to play lots of the same card - especially Bronze - don't restrict cards to 2 and then implement a pathetic mechanic that allows players to spawn or copy the same card type so as to bypass the 2 card limit now imposed for Bronze.

At any rate, if players think it's fun, and a multiplayer experience, seeing who can play the most cards to spawn the highest score, and that's supposed to be fun, I think they're seriously deluded.

I, for one, don't play the game so as not to bother engaging the opposition. The whole point is factions fighting one another, trying to reduce the opponent score through combat.

Where's the strategy or skill in laying down cards that spawn more units and the cards that boost those low units? It's crap.

Well, I happen to think Swarm is as valid a strategy as any other currently in the game. You might hate it, but there's nothing wrong with it, it has many weakneses and that's why I consider it valid. Most spawned units range between 1 and 3 power, making them very weak to lacerate, tremors, tempest, etc. Wheather is not specifically made to counter swarm, but in can help in some cases(specially gold weathers like Dragon's dream) or units like Regis, Lambert in case it is the same bronze copied many times, there's also some tech cards that can get you good value and stop swarming like arachas venom, or similar.

When you play vs swarms decks you need to
a) identify it is indeed a swarming deck,
b) Bleed! do not lose round 1, you must bleed their combo pieces along the 3 (ideally) rounds, then save some kind of big control-big swing cards for the last round. They need to play in a specific very telegraphed order or they loose lots of points, your aim must be making their life hard, not letting them overrun you or on the contrary, make them waste loads of power when you control the round (normally in R2 but you can do it in a very long round 1)

By the way, strenght in numbers and overwhelming the oponents are very basic war strategies.
What if your army was say 1000 strong and the enemy brought 3000 units(most weaker than your own) at some point your army would be overrun, unless they made some good strategic decissions, say creating a moat/barricade and shooting with ranged weapons like trebs or arrows, attacking from different points dividing their attention, using Area of effect weapons since they're more vulnerable to them as many units would get hit each time due to their inevitable grouping, etc...

That coming from a player that doesn't play any swarm decks since beta. I do play a lot vs them, and honestly it doesn't bother me a third as much as the usual suspects.

Edit: Forgot to add that weather effects although underwhelming in it of themselves, can be used to force row stacking wich punishes the oponent in some more ways, the stacked row can now be lacerated or similar for about 10 to 18 points or maybe a Regis can wipe it, or you can also screw with rowlocked units that are now bricked for the oponent.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand... these decks still attack you and you attack them.... moreover tehre's more interactions than "dealing Damage".

A typical ST swarm deck runs one or more of these: hawks that deal 2 dmg or move your units. Poison givers. Purifiers, vitality givers. Sometimes dwarfs that damage, Iorveth or Zoltan to kill another unit, Oak to deal dmg/boost itself, etc...

Sk Alchemy Scenario runs mandrake(can be used to kill a 3 or less) Sometimes Gigascorpion Decoction or deirium for targeted 6 consecutive pings or 6 random pings on a row. Harald houndsnout sometimes to deal 2 random dmg for each popped skull. Gremist to purify their-your units, crushing blow or gutting slash for cheap deal 7 damage to armored units or deal 4-6 dmg conditional to bloodthirst 2. Morkvaarg HOT to ping you highes boosted unit until its damaged. Etc

There is definetly tons more to do for each player than you might have considered.
 
If you've played Thronebreaker, Nilfgaard are presented as this mighty military force that has a massive army able to contend with multiple rivals at the same time.

However, in Gwent they are played mainly in a way that employs spying and other tactics to win battles. You'd have thunk, if any faction was to be spawn, it'd be NG.

No, I still haven't gotten around to buying TB. That said, a lot of what is in TB likely represents the vision for Gwent during beta. As we've seen, CDPR has pretty much run out of lore from the IP they own, so are having to add to CDPR's world of the Witcher. Hence we have Offiri merchants and units in Gwent. Concievably, they could say that the TW3 ending where NG wins is canon, thus cementing NG's super power status. And with that, a greater emphasis on diplomacy and espionage to further the Empire's interests.

Of course, since we're overthinking things, that does raise some questions about NR, given that they were a collection of warring kingdoms before NG's rise to power, and then a bunch of refugees and geurillas afterward. Maybe NR units should duel each other in mirror matches and set traps when facing NG? Actually, if you think about the last few updates prior to the great pre-HC drought, CDPR were playing around with that concept of NR being a fractured collective, than a unified whole. I remember at one point the nationality tags actually determined what units could be affected by other friendlies (e.g. old Blue Stripes Scout boosting whenever ). I think we lost cool things like that, which can potentially control powercreep, simply because they were just too complicated.

If you return to the original Gwent of the Witcher 3, how much of that depended upon spawning? From my own recollection, it was much more combat oriented- like fighting a war.

Yes, weather has been made ineffective. It wasn't well designed originally, but it's even worse now.

It's been quite a while since I played TW3. From what I do recall, spawning wasn't a thing. It was more tutoring that powered swarm decks, since there was no draw between rounds. I don't think there was a cap on unit copies either. As I remember it, early in the game when your deck is weak, MO is the faction that destroys you with swarms. So you spend a good portion of the game building a MO deck, only to find out that NG is actually the power deck. Not that it really means much, since NG in TW3 is a more advanced faction. Interestingly, I don't recall any bronze spies existing in TW3 Gwent. I'm sure they were gold cards.
 
1. Radeyah - stratagem destroys itself at the end of your turn. No more OP combos (outside of pincer maneuver which deserves a big nerf but there is another topic about that), she is strong enough.
2. Aen seidhe sabre - spawn and summon scoiatael neophyte at the end of your rows. ST is the only faction that is using their stratagem in all of their decks. 4 points with 2 extra units and them being elfs is enough. Triggering harmony and being able to pick where you want to place them is too much.
3. Poison - needs a points ceiling and more interactivity. Right now it makes cheap bronzes have "infinite" value, and tall decks unplayable.
- two applications can kill an up to 8 points unit
- three applications can kill an up to 15 points unit
- four applications can kill an up to 24 points unit
4. Falibor - 12p. I don't remember if he got introduced when NR had less damage and 3 points units were less common so he was harder to trigger? Right now he is OP.
5. Vernossiel - 4 points. Unconditional 11 for 12 with 3 units and them being elfs is OP.
6. Maraal - 10p. Very strong ability and half of it is on deploy. I would like to see him in decks that can protect him instead of any poison decks.
7. Yennefer's invocation - 10p. It's a better version of heatwave, no need for it to also be cheaper. Especially after the intoduction of war council.
8. Bribery - should be picking from ALL THE CARDS - meaning if your opponent is running 2 copies of a bronze unit you should be twice as likely to get it as a result, and also be able to get two copies of the same card as your choices, greatly reducing the chances of getting golds as your choices.
9. Sweers - 9p. He got buffed when there were less 3 points units. He is still great at 9p.
10. Matta Huuri - 10p, 5 points. Let's say on average she draws you an 11 points card, and 5 points card for your opponent. Doesn't that make her an 6+11-5=12 points card? And if you are playing engines making a round longer also gets you some value.
11. Endrega larva - 6p. This is possibly the best bronze card in the game. Easily giving you huge value even in short rounds.
12. Yghern - 11p. It's just a little bit too strong. Doesn't matter if you are playing thrive or dominance or neither.
13. Madame Luiza - 11p. She can get you 9 points on savolla, 8 points on tinboy, 6 points on moreelse. OP.

I'm leaving leader abilities and buffs for another topic.
1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Hmm, don't think so. Running poison is already risky, there is lot's of decks with about ~4 hp, you need two turns usually to do it, tall decks usually got/should have more than one tall unit, you can purify... I play right know mostly blood scent and Passiflora wild card. Blood scent have few tall units, same passiflora wild cards - and poison hurt, but I don't see it like threat that makes it unplayable. Just had few games as blood scent against enemy with a lot poison. And lock. And kill locked. Still sometimes won, when in theory is should be my doom, my full counter. And I myself struggle with getting high value of my own poison i got in passiflora wild card.
If you guys are sure it's to strong, maybe give it some more provision? I'm not sure and definietly see need to punish sometimes tall decks (even when i play blood scent).
4. Not sure.
5. I never used him. It i a lot in elves archetypes, bot other than this... Naah, I don't think it's to strong, especially when you already nerf sabre.
6. Maybe? Look comment 3.
7. Arguable better but totally agree with 10p.
8. Nice one, I'm not playing Nilfgaard, wouldn't it hurt them too much?
9. Not sure, he is conditional, can give much more, can much less.
10. Lets say for now 9p 5 hp or 10p 6hp and see?
11. Hmmm, I guess, but I see problems.
12. Maybe. But you know you need to just destroy armor to kill him?
13. No. Definietly no. She NEED this second card. Without it, she is useless. And you are giving here already 2 provision points...
 
A better idea I have read for poison is that poison doesn't instantly kill at all.

Like BLEEDING poison should do damage to a unit every turn (until the unit is dead or gets healed). Further applications will INCREASE the damage done each turn:

1 poison dose = 1 damage a turn.

2 poison doses = 2 damage a turn.

3 poison doses = 3 damage a turn.

Poison, in real life, rarely kills instantly.

Certain units could have a WEAKNESS to poison and be killed instantly by one or two doses if players really demand that.

Also, certain units should be IMMUNE to poison, so that poison has no effect.

Killing units instantly with poison is bloody stupid, in my opinion.
Uh.
So many poison types can kill you instantly.
Let's say, your idea works.
Totally NOT agree with weakness and immune to poison. Even if that would be good if we talk about lore (Witcher immunity etc)
 
... If you return to the original Gwent of the Witcher 3, how much of that depended upon spawning? From my own recollection, it was much more combat oriented- like fighting a war.
...
Absolutely no! This thing that you claim is actually something that the devs said when they deleted the Beta and introduced Homecoming - that they want the game to feel more like a battlefield. Something the game never was.

@Evangium No, Thronebreaker has nothing to do with what the Beta Gwent was - it is more like Beta Homecoming, simple as that.

I will say it once again (will not stop repeat this) - the game is at its best when there are points on the board. When there are several archetypes that destroy everything their opponent plays (and those usually are the ones that everybody are playing with, I wonder why), this is when the game becomes obnoxious. And this is exactly what I am experiencing with it the last couple of days on ladder (Rank 5) when the meta settled - NG Poison, NG Poison, NG Poison, NR Machines, NR Machines, NR Machines, some ST Harmony (which is broken on another level) and ST Elves, but still with a lot of Poison and other removal, SY has TONS of options for removal, but is rarely seen cause... well, it's the bastard child of the game, SK (I guess) was toned down on removal, but they still have some crazy cards there too, unfortunately they rely on their units getting big, which with so much poison, locks and machines they just can't hang with, as their swarm is way weaker/synergistic than what ST Elves are doing. If you see a MS deck you just laugh and pick the easy win.

Immunity was removed from the game for reasons, but I guess here no one never learns from the past. This is why we are spinning in circles with the removal metas.

I FN miss NG from Beta - was such diverse and unique faction. Now it devolved simply in a removal fiesta, that makes me sick to my stomach. The devs just don't know what else to do with it.
 
The idea would work and makes perfect sense. As does having units that are immune to poison. Various units should definitely have their own unique strengths, weaknesses, immunities, vulnerabilities, etc.

Doesn't nature teach that wood is vulnerable to fire?

In game, shouldn't Wild Hunt be immune to cold (perhaps they are). Shouldn't certain monsters be immune to poison? Should it be possible to poison a DEMON or JINN? :rolleyes:
l'm extremely greatfull for your red points in other topic, but can't agree with you about immunity. That would destroy game balance. The best you would get by making faction immune to one thing and other - not - would be hard rock paper scissors.
 
Top Bottom