Vincent Van Moorlehem vs Veil

[DrunkHemplar]

but why should poeple calm down with veil? poison is still played a lot. He was also played in any NG deck before veil even was a thing.

I am not saying he needs a big nerf, but just a smal utility adjustment. my idea would be to remove the aristocrat, but that may be to harsh. (only target neg. status has been sugested a lot here)

I think if you play Ball, you should not be incentivized to also play Vincent, since you already have poison as your removal option.

If you play Ball and Vincent, as someone who does exactly this...that's a loooooot of provision used up in deck construction for 2 cards as is - which leaves less room in the deck for other powerful golds.

Removing the Aristocrat tag is okay, I mean it's probably the least impactful nerf ever, just a small tweak to Ball+Vincent. Actually, for my deck it would probably be a net buff since I can Roderick or Joachim out Vincent without triggering a the 3rd phase of Ball.

I don't think people should calm down with Veil, but they have to realize that Veil needs weaknesses and right now, Veiled units can be tall removed or reset. That's it. No locks, no poisons, no bleeds. Only raw damage or destroy effects are viable vs those cards, which are mostly engines so most non-tall removal won't work.

Therefore, imo, the very threat of Vincent is good because it means if you haphazardly play a high value veil card, you can be punished for it.

 

[Shagric]

It is absolutly true that vincent + ball costs a shitload of provision. So the correct play would be to bleed out in r2 while not giving vincent or ball good value. sadly denying vincent a target is almost impossible atm, so you have to accept that most likely you will go a card down while trying.
If thats the case it does not matter that he was used to destroy a bronze card, because that gave you card advantage. and you also cant really play any high value tempo cards in r2 to go for a 2:0, because you play into y:invocation.
If it was actually viable to brick vincent in the r2 bleed, then I would not have any problem with the card. but atm it is not an option, and with each new status introduced it will only get worse. He is strong in short rounds, against bleed and shines in long rounds. he does not realy have a weekness atm - thats why he is played in almost any NG deck.
He needs to have a weekness that can be exploited.

As a side note, I think you underestimate how unlikely it is to get 2 aristo tags for your ball in a short round 3, every card that looses the tag makes it much easier to bleed the ball in r2. otherwise you could brick it in a short r3 and because ball by itself is not a big tempo play in r2, it would be easier to get out of r2 after the ball is dropped without loosing a card.

Veiled engines can be destroyed like any other engine by direct dmg. And after growing big they are target to tallpunish and reset, just like you said. I dont think they need another drawback..

thank you for the discussion, it is interesting and I appreciate it.

 

[Guest 4404014]

There are 3 ways to establish whether a card is op:

1) Data. See if the card leads to unusual win-rates

2) Elite players. Take guys from the top of the ladder, tourney participants, streamers from top esport teams, etc, and ask them.

3) Personal subjective point of view. Often emotional.

Now, Vincent is only op according to one of the above. Guess which one?

 

[Shagric]

Data is often missleading.
Cause you do not compair in a neutral state.
Sk needs to be nerfed, everyone agrees on that. Ethereal is unhealthy, especially with caranthir interaction, but MO win rates are not over the top.
AA and visseguard are problematic for NR and deserve a slight nerv/change, yet no one would argue that NR by itself is overpowered.
Data is supporting my claim. Vincent is in every top level control deck. And NG is arguably the best faction behind sk. (And NR)

There are pros that do agree with this opinion (and at what level are you allowed to call yourself that? Is pro rank enough (that's me)? Top500 (could also be me)? Top200 (don't know, never pushed for it)?
Someone who just netdecks into a good placement has no clue about game design or what a healthy meta.

 

[Jamborinio]

There are some strange arguments in here about not using Vincent on low prov bronzes. It doesn't matter about the Prov value of the card you target (unless you're vastly overcommitting - see below), it's more about the current (or even potential) point value of the target. For example, you are absolutely not going to use Vincent on Wild Boar of the Sea, even thought it's a 12 Prov gold, and this is simply because the value you get of 4 isn't worth Vincent's use. However, a Fallen Knight at a value of 18 is absolutely value for Vincent; and on that note, using him on the 4 value base version might also still be value in a long round 3 since you are removing likely high potential point threat. It's not about prov to prov, it's about winning rounds, and using Vincent to remove a low prov bronze threat can absolutely be value if it's central to the win condition of your opponent.

Another example is the Tridam infantry which can get obscene value if left to grow and mature beside an engine. It might only be 4 a Prov bronze, but it can wreak havoc if left to develop.

Where i think people are getting confused is term 'overcommitting prov' and if you over-commit your golds to win a round vs an opponent who has only used bronzes, then yes this can make winning subsequent rounds more troublesome.

In terms of my overall opinion, I think VVM makes Veil rather defunct when playing against NG. Veil was supposed to be a counter (or antidote) to poison and yet what's happened is poison is effectively as strong as it always was and this is because playing Veil against NG just sets you up to be VVM'd. Has anyone seen that Order card that gives Veil being used (Marlene De Trastamara)? VVM is probably the reason why no one has...

 

[Guest 4404014]

Data is often missleading.

True.

Cause you do not compair in a neutral state.

Dunno what that means.

Ethereal is unhealthy, especially with caranthir interaction, but MO win rates are not over the top. AA and visseguard are problematic for NR and deserve a slight nerv/change, yet no one would argue that NR by itself is overpowered.
Data is supporting my claim. Vincent is in every top level control deck. And NG is arguably the best faction behind sk. (And NR)

I'm not saying Vincent isn't strong. I'm just saying it's not nearly as overpowered as they make it in rant-a-threads.

BTW you just cited 4 other op cards and suggested that NG might in fact be a mid-tier 3rd place faction. So which is it? Broken card that needs fixing or just another strong card among many such strong cards, and in a faction that isn't even on top? You don't see the contradiction?

There are pros that do agree with this opinion (and at what level are you allowed to call yourself that? Is pro rank enough (that's me)? Top500 (could also be me)?

Which opinion do those pros - you included - agree with? Making Vincent only apply to negative effects? It would basically make him a Fang that can't play first poison (with +1 to body and destroy locks and bleeds for 7 more provisions lol). Do you seriously support this?

 

[Shagric]

It seems you misunderstood my post,
I said that the cards I mentioned also deserve a small nerv, just as Vincent does. They and Vincent are overtuned, and on THAT some professional players agree (not on the balance suggestions -my idea is to remove aristocrat tag, so he is less likely to be played in a ball/poison list, so poison can actually be countered by veil as it is supposed to be).

You are using the old "if others have cards that are to strong, it is okay for "placeholder card" to be to strong as well!!

No it is not. This line of thought destroys deck diversity and creates stale an boring metas. And further more it's a straw man argument, because this topic is not about other cards. It's about Vincent being to versatile a removal card.

 

[quintivarium]

In terms of my overall opinion, I think VVM makes Veil rather defunct when playing against NG. Veil was supposed to be a counter (or antidote) to poison and yet what's happened is poison is effectively as strong as it always was and this is because playing Veil against NG just sets you up to be VVM'd. Has anyone seen that Order card that gives Veil being used (Marlene De Trastamara)? VVM is probably the reason why no one has...

I might agree with you if there were 5 or 6 Vincent-like cards. One card potentially destroying one unit should not thwart an otherwise useful mechanic. Any deck Vincent alone can shut down is poorly designed indeed.

Veil is a useful (and probably necessary) mechanism to balance poison unless you would rather have half of the poison inflicting cards changed. Unfortunately, it destroys archetypes based upon bleeding, lock, and doom as well. Vincent is a valuable tool to keep these archetypes viable.

 

[Guest 4404014]

It seems you misunderstood my post,
I said that the cards I mentioned also deserve a small nerv, just as Vincent does. They and Vincent are overtuned, and on THAT some professional players agree (not on the balance suggestions -my idea is to remove aristocrat tag, so he is less likely to be played in a ball/poison list, so poison can actually be countered by veil as it is supposed to be).

You are using the old "if others have cards that are to strong, it is okay for "placeholder card" to be to strong as well!!

No it is not. This line of thought destroys deck diversity and creates stale an boring metas. And further more it's a straw man argument, because this topic is not about other cards. It's about Vincent being to versatile a removal card.

I understand. I do agree with your reasoning. Just because other cards are op doesn't mean this one or that one should be. But if that one is nerfed and the other one isn't, it creates even more imbalance. So it's not only, I cite, "if others have cards that are to strong, it is okay for "placeholder card" to be to strong as well!!" It's more like "if others have cards that are to strong, the "placeholder card" MUST BE strong as well or the whole faction is screwed." It's what happened to ST. It not doesn't have much in terms of op cards like everyone else.

But I also agree that NG is somewhat strong-ish now if you forget about the SK anomaly for a while. Maybe a little tiny bit too strong-ish. But I don't think it's because of Vincent and in NG control in general. MM did not add much in that regard (except no Heaver in devotion match ups. But that's balanced by Oneiro which makes Heaver misses much rarer in non-devo match ups). What MM did add was a crazy amount of points that NG should not necessarily be allowed to spam so casually as a control faction.

 

[Philido]

Data is often missleading.
Cause you do not compair in a neutral state.
Sk needs to be nerfed, everyone agrees on that. Ethereal is unhealthy, especially with caranthir interaction, but MO win rates are not over the top.
AA and visseguard are problematic for NR and deserve a slight nerv/change, yet no one would argue that NR by itself is overpowered.
Data is supporting my claim. Vincent is in every top level control deck. And NG is arguably the best faction behind sk. (And NR)

There are pros that do agree with this opinion (and at what level are you allowed to call yourself that? Is pro rank enough (that's me)? Top500 (could also be me)? Top200 (don't know, never pushed for it)?
Someone who just netdecks into a good placement has no clue about game design or what a healthy meta.

You say data is misleading and some sentences after you mention that your claim is supported by it? Additionally, how is MO's winrate not "over the top" compared to Nilfgaard's? Where do you have that from? Pro rank can be reached by nearly everyone, I'd only consider the players regularly streaming and partaking in tournaments "pro".

 

[Shagric]

You say data is misleading and some sentences after you mention that your claim is supported by it? Additionally, how is MO's winrate not "over the top" compared to Nilfgaard's? Where do you have that from? Pro rank can be reached by nearly everyone, I'd only consider the players regularly streaming and partaking in tournaments "pro".

That post was poorly worded by me, it has been missunderstood by you and others. First off, I said monsters winrate, as well as ng and NR are fine (47-49%), only Sk is over the top (56%) at top ranks. But this does not mean that every card in those faction is balanced (hence the "data is missleading"). Ethereal for monsters, AA, visseguard + uprising and NG ball/Vincent synergies outperform almost all other deck/card combinations in their specific factions. So they deserve a nerf, even though their winrate is overall moderate (below 50% thanks to skellige). That nerf is supported by data (metareports,...) , Meaning almost all the featured top faction decks have those mentioned cards in them.
And since this topic is about Vincent, it is a valid argument to be made here.

Hope that cleared thing up for you.

 

[Philido]

That post was poorly worded by me, it has been missunderstood by you and others. First off, I said monsters winrate, as well as ng and NR are fine (47-49%), only Sk is over the top (56%) at top ranks. But this does not mean that every card in those faction is balanced (hence the "data is missleading"). Ethereal for monsters, AA, visseguard + uprising and NG ball/Vincent synergies outperform almost all other deck/card combinations in their specific factions. So they deserve a nerf, even though their winrate is overall moderate (below 50% thanks to skellige). That nerf is supported by data (metareports,...) , Meaning almost all the featured top faction decks have those mentioned cards in them.
And since this topic is about Vincent, it is a valid argument to be made here.

Hope that cleared thing up for you.

Okay, well that's something we definitely agree on. I have problems with situations where a card is said to be problematic, then gets nerfed and the faction as a whole becomes even worse than before because it didn't have such a high winrate after all, despite that one card being "busted". This then needs to be equalized through buffs somewhere else, but of course only if the faction wasn't clearly overpowered before the negative change.

 

[judgecsk]

It IS weak. VERY. By the same logic, if I use my Oak to remove or damage anything less than legendary, I just created a "massive provision deficit" in my deck. It makes no sense. The value of a card is NOT judged based on the exchange of provisions between opponents. It's judged based on points earned vs provision cost, and it is a commonly accepted FACT that one is getting value as long as the points earned are HIGHER than provision cost, REGARDLESS of provision cost of your target. So destroying that 7-point villager "as a last resort" is NOT a terrible waste of Vince, because you still got 12 out of 11 invested.

Agreed.

- I also agree with people talking bout baiting him out.
For example when i'm playing MO-WH (mostly devotion) and get matched up with NG I use those 4p veiled units to bait Vincent out, imo it works almost 50% of the time if you set it up during what you feel to be the very last turns of a round.

- While i don't think Vincent is OP or something I think it's a little bit unfair for veiled units to have such a weak point since NG can utilize poisons, locks, bleeds, shields, doomed, def status quite easily without neutral help and run on devotion decks. What I'm saying is that NG in comparison to other factions is way better equipped in handling enemies and controlling the flow of battle.
Maybe... maybe let them veiled units be by making him remove units with negative statuses only ?

- Anyways... I don't think this is a real huge issue in the grand scheme of things since imo NG is already powerful enough with or without Vincent outright killing veiled units.
Cheers !

 

[Philido]

Agreed.

- I also agree with people talking bout baiting him out.
For example when i'm playing MO-WH (mostly devotion) and get matched up with NG I use those 4p veiled units to bait Vincent out, imo it works almost 50% of the time if you set it up during what you feel to be the very last turns of a round.

- While i don't think Vincent is OP or something I think it's a little bit unfair for veiled units to have such a weak point since NG can utilize poisons, locks, bleeds, shields, doomed, def status quite easily without neutral help and run on devotion decks. What I'm saying is that NG in comparison to other factions is way better equipped in handling enemies and controlling the flow of battle.
Maybe... maybe let them veiled units be by making him remove units with negative statuses only ?

- Anyways... I don't think this is a real huge issue in the grand scheme of things since imo NG is already powerful enough with or without Vincent outright killing veiled units.
Cheers !

It should also be mentioned, however, that there will be less and less good poison targets as new veiled units will be introduced in the next expansions. This could justify Vincent being able to target them in exchange of poison becoming gradually weaker. Maybe that was the thought process of the devs all along.

 

[judgecsk]

It should also be mentioned, however, that there will be less and less good poison targets as new veiled units will be introduced in the next expansions. This could justify Vincent being able to target them in exchange of poison becoming gradually weaker. Maybe that was the thought process of the devs all along.

Agreed though i'll refrain from speculating on that since i'm a relatively new player (playing since Android release) and have no long term experience on how devs move about on balancing factions since beta. What i've seen so far is that they "move in mysterious ways".

- At the moment it seems bearable
and my only real issue is with SK-SW.

 

[Slizzl]

Old Speartip just became Vincent food nomnomnom

 

[Payus]

Old Speartip just became Vincent food nomnomnom

And yet they nerfed Tyrgvvy
I'll take that with the new raid tutor!

 

[Iuliandrei]

Old Speartip just became Vincent food nomnomnom

Because of Vincent the new Ciri Nova rework is for naught, it reminds me of the original Roche Merciless where his mere existence made ambush cards unplayable.
Considering the deck restrictions Ciri Nova requires, playing her against NG is an auto-loss.

 

[Jollyrogerxberg]

I have to agree with ya1. He is no doubtletly strong, he isn't op. And well Ng is the controll faction and will have allways have the answeres by desing. Viel is an answer to poison, but not to Ng in general. Vincent while beeing an option before is now just nessecary in this faction. If you rely on all those juicy cards you will either lose to Vince or Ng will lose to you because you have more threads and he have only one Vince. I see Vincent right now as totally balanced around his provisoin. If you use him only after deloying the geagativ status yourself he is a worse Maraal or a good finisher to ensure your Removal. This is 11 Provision worth. If you use him as an oportunity card, well done or opponent was just reckless. If he can allways find a highvalue card, like Harald, new speartip, new Ciri, huge Hama, its either that your deck has a serious lose condition with "status abuse" or the devs build other faction to weak and you have to rely on one single huge Hamadryad.
So my conclusion is still Vince is strong not op. Ng is very strong, not op (let's see after the patch). Hama is bad and scoia is weak as well as symbiosis flawed. I can't think right now of another deck that can't play around vincent and not have a lot of points all around the board. If you play nonmeta, well it's a ccg. There will allways be better and worse options and you can freely chose your losecon.

 

[Payus]

I have to agree with ya1. He is no doubtletly strong, he isn't op. And well Ng is the controll faction and will have allways have the answeres by desing. Viel is an answer to poison, but not to Ng in general. Vincent while beeing an option before is now just nessecary in this faction. If you rely on all those juicy cards you will either lose to Vince or Ng will lose to you because you have more threads and he have only one Vince. I see Vincent right now as totally balanced around his provisoin. If you use him only after deloying the geagativ status yourself he is a worse Maraal or a good finisher to ensure your Removal. This is 11 Provision worth. If you use him as an oportunity card, well done or opponent was just reckless. If he can allways find a highvalue card, like Harald, new speartip, new Ciri, huge Hama, its either that your deck has a serious lose condition with "status abuse" or the devs build other faction to weak and you have to rely on one single huge Hamadryad.
So my conclusion is still Vince is strong not op. Ng is very strong, not op (let's see after the patch). Hama is bad and scoia is weak as well as symbiosis flawed. I can't think right now of another deck that can't play around vincent and not have a lot of points all around the board. If you play nonmeta, well it's a ccg. There will allways be better and worse options and you can freely chose your losecon.

How are Tyrggvy and Vincent the same Prov cost but one destroys any unit INSTANTANEOUSLY as long as they have any status EVEN VEIL or shield, but the other card that used to do that in 2 turns (Tyrggvy) now does even less and VVM has gotten the best new targets in the new Ciri: Nova, defenders and evolving cards, so Guaranteed value if you're not a complete moron.