Less Artifact Removal Good or Bad?

[Slizzl]

I was happy when I first heard Scenarios were getting reworked thinking maybe they would get less binary this time around, with a more clever interaction. But in the end it turned out CDPR wanted to go in the opposite direction I hoped for, which is less artifact removal. They argued this would make Scenarios less binary which I don't get at all but maybe I'm missing something. To me it seems like Scenarios are more rampant than ever which in turn makes Heatwave autoinclude, I've even seen Angouleme back on the board. It's giving me the impression nothing was learned from the Sihil blunder.
So what's everyone's stance on this? Was I off-track and this was really the direction people wanted? If not, how would you rework them differently as to not make them such a binary interaction?

 

[OuterSpaceDoggo]

It was bad because every scenario was addressed in the same way. ( they were all given doomed )
Only NG and SK could play them twice in a single game ( SK required lippy and then a way to draw it ) so nothing changed for ST, NR, SY and MO. Then giving us less art. removals made them even dumber than before ( Wave or no way to remove them except for Shupe I guess? )
In the end the only real problem was double ball which wasn't that big of a deal anyways. I swear, people became so obsessed with SK and NG nerfs that nobody is looking at how the remaining factions gained so much power and actually birthed decks that are worse than SK warriors and ball power wise. But that's another problem I guess.
So, tldr: yes it was bad and all these little fixes changed nothing because a plethora of stuff needs a serious rework.

 

[judgecsk]

A good subject for discussion man.

I like the new changes I find em really good and fair aswell !

First of all we got rid off NG's double Ball.
I agree with people that D.Ball wasn't as prevalent these days but when you did come across that deck you could rarely win since you needed specific cards to counter it.
(only neutral)
I don't agree with the prov nerf they gave it though, doomed status should've been enough.

For SK I can't say I was annoyed by them playing their scenario twice as I haven't come across it as much as NG's D.Ball, not even close in terms of use imo.

As far as balancing goes, yes you're right it's still a binary situation but now it's undeniably fair.
Trading a Korathi for a scenario card is okay, removing a scenario with a BHeaver or bombs traded really bad and it was unfair.
Now devotion decks are stronger cause there's only so much removal a neutral deck can provide and Korathi can do both.
Before, the opponent would remove your scenario with a cheap@$$ card and he would still have Korathi available.

So in conclusion, I like and approve the changes made to artifact removal cause now Devotion decks are considerably stronger for it and if you want removal you still have it but there are certain criteria you need to meet to use it.

 

[Pacifixer]

I thought they would completly remove artifact removal and give artifacts some different "kill condition" instead (like armor/durability - making artifacts vulnerable to damage). So i'm a bit disappointed by the changes they've decided for, but it's still too early to say, if it was the right decision or not.

 

[Markus_Wirth]

To my mind the only bad thing of those artefact removal cards was that they had very limited value when they did not face a valuable artefact.

I would proceed as follows:
- Old ability (artefact removal) on melee, new ability on ranged

To my mind it´s nice to have those counter cards also for weather removal. And for those cards one could also have the weather removal on melee and another ability on ranged.

 

[Slizzl]

A good subject for discussion man.

I like the new changes I find em really good and fair aswell !

First of all we got rid off NG's double Ball.
I agree with people that D.Ball wasn't as prevalent these days but when you did come across that deck you could rarely win since you needed specific cards to counter it.
(only neutral)
I don't agree with the prov nerf they gave it though, doomed status should've been enough.

For SK I can't say I was annoyed by them playing their scenario twice as I haven't come across it as much as NG's D.Ball, not even close in terms of use imo.

As far as balancing goes, yes you're right it's still a binary situation but now it's undeniably fair.
Trading a Korathi for a scenario card is okay, removing a scenario with a BHeaver or bombs traded really bad and it was unfair.
Now devotion decks are stronger cause there's only so much removal a neutral deck can provide and Korathi can do both.
Before, the opponent would remove your scenario with a cheap@$$ card and he would still have Korathi available.

So in conclusion, I like and approve the changes made to artifact removal cause now Devotion decks are considerably stronger for it and if you want removal you still have it but there are certain criteria you need to meet to use it.

Thank you!
I actually think the provision nerf for Ball is completely justified, on it's own it's easily the strongest card in the entire game and now there's even less ways to deal with it. It's just stuck in the weakest faction right now.
I've won plenty of matches this season solely due to the fact my opponent didn't draw Korathi and the Ball got full value. When they do I tend to lose since NG really doesn't have much else to catch up with. That's what I find especially jarring right now. Okay, maybe Heavers were a way too inexpensive way to deal with Scenarios, but now there's just one single gold in the entire game to deal with them. It's just too little I think.
Entire matches live and die by Korathi now. I just don't know man. Having Artifact Removals range around 9-11 provisions seems like a good rule of thumb though.
I do agree in regards to Dball. I'm really glad it's gone, and Assire got away unscathed as well thankfully.

 

[M3e0w]

In my impression, as someone that mainly likes playing NG, this whole patch seems like a double nerf for NG, once with the provisions to Ball and once again with the artifact removal. Making scenarios doomed was a good change in my opinion though.

1. I don't understand why they felt they needed to increase masquerade ball's provisions, the NG decks were borderline bottomfeeders anyway... Sure you could argue ball is strong enough to warrant 15 provisions, while other factions have 13provision scenarios... but if the ball decks were weak already they should've simultaneously buffed some of the actually useful NG cards, then maybe NG wouldn't rely on ball so much...

2. Since they removed most artifact removal other factions seem to run scenarios way more, so almost everyone I come across has heatwave, way more so than last season, or maybe I'm just unlucky... so now it's almost guaranteed ball gets heatwaved. Paying 15 provisions for a heatwave target just feels bad.

 

[judgecsk]

To my mind the only bad thing of those artefact removal cards was that they had very limited value when they did not face a valuable artefact.

I would proceed as follows:
- Old ability (artefact removal) on melee, new ability on ranged

To my mind it´s nice to have those counter cards also for weather removal. And for those cards one could also have the weather removal on melee and another ability on ranged.

- So... let me see if I got this the way you wanted...
Instead of lessening artifact removal you would go as far to even boost the cards that did that by giving them secondary abilities aswell...sorry man but you had me laughing for a bit there.
If that was the case you might aswell completely remove scenarios from the game and be done with it.

- As for the weather changes, no one played the weather purifying cards so imo the change was not just good but necessary aswell, especially if you take in count the fact that Leader Abilities were changed.
The new leader abilities came in with weather control and having such cheap cards to counter costly leader abilities would be real unfair imo and would've most likely render these new Leader abilities useless and pretty much dead on arrival.

In my impression, as someone that mainly likes playing NG, this whole patch seems like a double nerf for NG, once with the provisions to Ball and once again with the artifact removal. Making scenarios doomed was a good change in my opinion though.

1. I don't understand why they felt they needed to increase masquerade ball's provisions, the NG decks were borderline bottomfeeders anyway... Sure you could argue ball is strong enough to warrant 15 provisions, while other factions have 13provision scenarios... but if the ball decks were weak already they should've simultaneously buffed some of the actually useful NG cards, then maybe NG wouldn't rely on ball so much...

2. Since they removed most artifact removal other factions seem to run scenarios way more, so almost everyone I come across has heatwave, way more so than last season, or maybe I'm just unlucky... so now it's almost guaranteed ball gets heatwaved. Paying 15 provisions for a heatwave target just feels bad.

- I agree with your first statement, they should've boosted NG's bronzes or support units before they nerfed the Ball's provisions.

- I main Monsters and now my scenario doesn't always get YeetWaved cause I bluff and bait my opponent as much as I can to make him use it before I drop my Haunt, ofc it doesn't always work but it's waaaaaay better than how it was before 7.3 dropped.
NG needs some boosting but not in terms of cheap removal imo, maybe a raw power rebalance on the faction's bronzes.

In my impression, as someone that mainly likes playing NG, this whole patch seems like a double nerf for NG, once with the provisions to Ball and once again with the artifact removal. Making scenarios doomed was a good change in my opinion though.

1. I don't understand why they felt they needed to increase masquerade ball's provisions, the NG decks were borderline bottomfeeders anyway... Sure you could argue ball is strong enough to warrant 15 provisions, while other factions have 13provision scenarios... but if the ball decks were weak already they should've simultaneously buffed some of the actually useful NG cards, then maybe NG wouldn't rely on ball so much...

2. Since they removed most artifact removal other factions seem to run scenarios way more, so almost everyone I come across has heatwave, way more so than last season, or maybe I'm just unlucky... so now it's almost guaranteed ball gets heatwaved. Paying 15 provisions for a heatwave target just feels bad.

If I was you I would save and play a defender before I drop the Ball.

Thank you!
I actually think the provision nerf for Ball is completely justified, on it's own it's easily the strongest card in the entire game and now there's even less ways to deal with it. It's just stuck in the weakest faction right now.
I've won plenty of matches this season solely due to the fact my opponent didn't draw Korathi and the Ball got full value. When they do I tend to lose since NG really doesn't have much else to catch up with. That's what I find especially jarring right now. Okay, maybe Heavers were a way too inexpensive way to deal with Scenarios, but now there's just one single gold in the entire game to deal with them. It's just too little I think.
Entire matches live and die by Korathi now. I just don't know man. Having Artifact Removals range around 9-11 provisions seems like a good rule of thumb though.
I do agree in regards to Dball. I'm really glad it's gone, and Assire got away unscathed as well thankfully.

Given the fact that I haven't played any higher than rank 7 competitively I don't know what's goin on in the top ranks but if I was playing NG I wouldn't drop the Ball without a defender down.

 

[4RM3D]

Every mechanic needs different ways it can be used and, more importantly, different ways it can be countered and every counter needs different type of targets it can be used on. Artifacts violate this principle because artifacts can only be removed by artifact removal and artifact removal only works on artifacts (with the exception of one card). If every deck consistently included multiple artifacts, then the aforementioned issue wouldn't be as problematic, but now that most artifacts have been made weaker, artifacts are slowly disappearing from Gwent and removal has become make or break versus something like Scenarios.

What was needed, after Homecoming, was an artifact redesign. Back then, various suggestions have been made to reduce the binary nature of artifacts. Instead, the devs just kept nerfing most artifacts. One of the most interesting suggestions was to turn artifacts into equipment, which needed a unit to operate/wield it. Make sense, a spear needs to be wielded by someone. How this would have been implemented varies per suggestion. I suggested that an artifact needs an adjacent wielder, in order to be usable. Another way is that some cards have slots in which artifacts can be placed.

 

[judgecsk]

I suggested that an artifact needs an adjacent wielder, in order to be usable

...this idea of yours I think is really cool as a concept, I once tried to pair Sihil (that frost sword) with Nithral, turns out you lose a lot of value if you don't drop em in right away...maybe in a semi unitless deck it can be done.
I think I'll go try that now... thanks for the idea.

Cheers !

 

[Six-Sided-Prism]

I'm very confused that Scenarios were almost not touched at all with this patch. When they first said they were going to eliminate Artifact removal, I assumed that they would buff a few of the weaker Bronze Artifacts and then completely redesign Scenarios so that they didn't consistently produce 20+ points every game. It definitely feels like Scenarios are too good now that they can only be countered by "Korathi Heatwave", especially once you realize that even when this happens, you're still left with a free engine. Universally amazing cards like Masquerade Ball and even Haunt or Passiflora, which have very little deckbuilding restrictions and can be dropped into practically any deck, are probably the main reason that CDPR isn't making the rest of the cards in their respective factions better because then those factions would potentially be raised to Tier 0.

This is probably also the reason why they won't add many more Druids, Elves, or Siege Engines to future expansions or significantly buff the ones that are already in the game. The fact that you have to use a lot mediocre or downright bad cards in order to play Skellige's, Scoia'tael's, or Northern Realms' Scenarios is the only thing keeping those decks from running ramapant.

 

[Sensimilius]

I mostly agree with the latest changes.

 

[DRK3]

This 'artefact rework' was so half-assed... just give doomed to scenarios (which should have been done months ago), and remove most of artefact removal, just like did with weather removal...

The difference is removing the weather removal makes sense, as weather isnt usually game-changing and there are indirect ways to counter it. But with artefacts that's not the case.

These changes just focus on the battle 'scenarios vs heatwave' and completely ignore the rarely played artefacts, which although weak in most cases, can be decisive, like a Petris Philter on a Vattier or a Thunderbolt on an Aglais.

 

[quintivarium]

My big issue with the change is that it massively increased the value — even the necessity — of heatwave. Now every deck that relies on slow developing cards faces instant removal of key cards with no counters other than defender. This pushes a game that already strongly favors instant effect cards even further in that direction.

 

[Elliezrah]

They should have gone either way:
-remove artifact destruction cards but further increase in scenario provision cost
-Dont remove artifact removal and give them more flexibility but decrease scenario provision cost

If your deck doesnt have your faction scenario also and your opponent uses scenario, chance is that you will most likely lose always, at lease for that round.

 

[ShinAkira00]

I won't sugarcoat things, Scenarios should be removed from the game. It's a single card determining whether you win the game and I refuse to use it. I haven't used scenarios since MOO when I realized what it would unleash and it has as expected made the game even more unstable. Right now you MUST have a scenario or you MUST have heatwave unless you are playing SK or NR. Those are the win conditions at the moment and it kills any creativity whatsoever. I've stopped playing the game now because those are your only options to win and it's dull as hell.

Giving scenarios doomed was a step in the right direction but scenarios need to be removed altogether, there's no way to balance this game while removing any counters to cards that decide the game.

 

[Azuma-II]

I thought removing artifact removal (Just like removing weather removal) was a horrible idea and I still think I was right.

1. Removing artifact removal in a Heatwave meta is like plowing snow in a blizzard. It accomplishes nothing.

2. Removing hard counters tries to make a card game something that it isn't. Card games are games of probability and therefore the skill of the player is (or rather "should be") tested in their ability to calculate and know the odds of getting the right card at the right time. This just tries to balance things without actually balancing things.

3. It is yet another dumbing down of deck building. You don't need to know the meta and consider the value of putting in a hard counter. No, now the matches become even more predetermined from the start by the 2 main factors. (1: The matchup. 2: Who goes first.)

 

[ReaperTek]

Gotta say I don't like the way they handled the Artifact removal rework, without Removal apart from Heatwave which does actually feel a bit wasted with already one Engine on Board Scenarios are still way to strong and it became even more binary.

I would have preferred if they removed Artifact removal completely and toned down Scenarios with it, currently Feign Death seems to be the healthiest Scenario and is a good example of how Scenarios probably should be especially after recent rework it makes only sense to use it in one Archetype and it's even not that strong by itself and mainly just supports cards like Isengrim, Yaevinn etc.
and most likely it wouldn't even be really worth it using a Heatwave on it if Elfs wouldn't be running mainly low power unit's.

If they really want to keep the Scenarios as strong as they currently are with only Heatwave as a save removal option, they should probably take a inspiration from a suggestion I made a few months ago when I complained about the removal of Silver Cards (well in that case they worked around that with adding a provision Limit to some Card's like Renew and Hanmarvyns Blue Dream, but I still think with the increased amount of weak and cheap Gold Cards with each expansion it doesn't really feel like Gold Cards are something strong and special anymore and it would be better if those low tier Golds where silver) I made suggestion to add an even higher valued Card like for example platinum of which you can only put one of that color in to you're Deck for example Scenarios, Evolving Cards and other extremely powerful Cards added in the upcoming expansions ( in that case they could even add more Scenarios and Evolving Cards in future expansions because you're only able to put one of them in your Deck) in that case using one of those Powerful Card's would at least come with the downside of not being able to put the other most powerful Card/s in you're Deck and in that case they could even make Heatwave and maybe some other "Dual Skill" Cards only able to target Gold Artifacts and lower because it might still be useful against some
Artifacts like Petri's Philter or Frightener.

 

[ya1]

I fail to understand this completely. The problem was the value ceiling of scenarios, wasn't it? Getting full value out of scenarios secured a too big of an advantage. This in turn resulted in binary interactions with artifact removal. But too much artifact removal was never a problem.

So, can anyone explain it to me like to a child, why did they remove artifact removal if it's the artifacts that are a problem, not the removal? Isn't it completely counter-intuitive?

But what I struggle most with is this. If their reasoning was to limit binary interactions by sheer brute force - just eliminating one side of the equation - why did they leave Heatwave? The binary interactions just got pushed to a new level of ridiculousness with only one card allowing for them and becoming a must in every deck.

Truly mysterious ways devs think in...

 

[judgecsk]

I fail to understand this completely. The problem was the value ceiling of scenarios, wasn't it? Getting full value out of scenarios secured a too big of an advantage. This in turn resulted in binary interactions with artifact removal. But too much artifact removal was never a problem.

So, can anyone explain it to me like to a child, why did they remove artifact removal if it's the artifacts that are a problem, not the removal? Isn't it completely counter-intuitive?

But what I struggle most with is this. If their reasoning was to limit binary interactions by sheer brute force - just eliminating one side of the equation - why did they leave Heatwave? The binary interactions just got pushed to a new level of ridiculousness with only one card allowing for them and becoming a must in every deck.

Truly mysterious ways devs think in...

I don't think that they removed artifact removal variety to make decks and how they play less binary.

Since it's introduction *Devotion* as a concept has been really weak and patch 7.3 made things a little bit more fair.

Imo they removed artifact removal to boost the whole *Devotion* concept.
Before that patch, (again imo) the best decks were neutrals (obvsl besides SK and NR) cause people could play neutral and have both scenario and Korathi.
This can still happen ofc but now scenarios are a bit safer to play since people might need to save that Korathi for another target depending on the strategy they have in mind.

People were and still are complaining about "too much" removal plaguing the game and they are right...this makes things a little bit more balanced I believe.

Now...in saying all that, I wouldn't mind if scenarios where removed from the game but... (a huge BUT) if they do that, some factions must be rebalanced from scratch cause a lot of cards have been balanced around how scenarios play out.