The Problem with Nilfgaard

+
I don't like that suggestion, NG really doesn't need a nerf at the moment. Also I think you overvalue Lock as it is essential to find a good target, otherwise you won't get any value. And the Bleeding 2 makes this card a potential five for four which is underwhelming these days. The scenario procs might somewhat balance these shortcomings out. But again, this would be a big nerf for the faction as a whole which is definitely not necessary.
I think you know without anyone having to point it out that dames proc from lock so the notion that you're hard pressed to find a target is just not true. You either are able to lock a cards ability or if not you get a boost or a target you can destroy or take using several other gold cards or you can bleed. There's no scenario in which this card doesn't exceed its value. If the other cards like Vincent or even the Dame are addressed then you can make that argument. You have several capabilities which is more than most factions can say for a very cheap bronze card and then there's scenario.
 
I think you know without anyone having to point it out that dames proc from lock so the notion that you're hard pressed to find a target is just not true. You either are able to lock a cards ability or if not you get a boost or a target you can destroy or take using several other gold cards or you can bleed. There's no scenario in which this card doesn't exceed its value. If the other cards like Vincent or even the Dame are addressed then you can make that argument. You have several capabilities which is more than most factions can say for a very cheap bronze card and then there's scenario.
I can make this argument whenever I want, lol. You can absolutely forget your Dames against SK and NR, ST, SY and NG simply poison them, MO have Parasite, Manticore, Predatory Dive.... That card only really lives for me if you have like three copies on board. If one or very rarely two survive that CAN make Hunters six or seven points plus scenario proc. Don't see any imbalance or problem here considering NG already only has average winrates. If we really want to go on saying that Hunters are a problem then almost every other overused bronze in the entire game needs to be nerfed, too.
 
Come on, you must know that these "suggestions" are absolutely ridiculous if you play the game at least once in a while....
Fine, I increased the lock limit to up to target 6 provisions (for 4 provisions - good deal still xD), lol.

Also random gameplay that includes Nilfgaard for our amusement:
 

ya1

Forum regular
Sorry but 5p Hunters is not a great idea. It kills NG's strongest deck which is now the weakest of all factions' strongest decks. Why nerf the weakest guy?

Also random gameplay that includes Nilfgaard for our amusement:

Some constructive (I hope) criticism:

You run Trolololo in a non-warfare deck, Immortals in a non-shield deck, Vysigota without any support except that one defender (that you can't use for the melee locked Regis: Higher for which you also got no zeal and which also anti-synergizes with that Baron), some Landsknecht trash (when NR has some of the best 5p now), no Oneiro in a devoless deck, no AA in NR, and Royal Inspiration to top it off but zero boost pay-offs like Scythemen, Vissegerd (ok, Vissey is dead, I know...) but you still run boosty things like Knighthood or Armorer. Of course you're getting dominated even by meme decks like locks because they got synergy and a game plan. And you bitch on NG but you don't even run the Heaver?

And you passed R1 vs. NG when you were within 3 points of reach, leaving him to play you like a fiddle in a long round with his locks and seizes. But anyway he had an anti-engine deck. You were bound to lose anyway. You can comfort yourself that he'll be losing to any SK or ST.
 
Fine, I increased the lock limit to up to target 6 provisions (for 4 provisions - good deal still xD), lol.

Also random gameplay that includes Nilfgaard for our amusement:
Please tell me a single match-up in the current meta this deck doesn't struggle against....
 
I can make this argument whenever I want, lol. You can absolutely forget your Dames against SK and NR, ST, SY and NG simply poison them, MO have Parasite, Manticore, Predatory Dive.... That card only really lives for me if you have like three copies on board. If one or very rarely two survive that CAN make Hunters six or seven points plus scenario proc. Don't see any imbalance or problem here considering NG already only has average winrates. If we really want to go on saying that Hunters are a problem then almost every other overused bronze in the entire game needs to be nerfed, too.

- Hmmm... it might be just me but i dont come across a ton of players running Parasite, Manticore, Predatory Dive or all that together.
Parasite is arguably usefull but it's one time use, a lock lasts for the whole duration of a round unless it's answered with a purify, thats expensive...
...really expensive and if you're going against NG you better save it for their poisons, a TON of poisons i might add.

- I also also read in this thread about NG not having a lof of engines... hmmmphh, it depends really...
I've lost count on how many times i've came across the Letho (copy a card) + that card "boost your self every time your oponent boosts for the same amount" practicaly carrying you through a round against a lot of different decks.
One round of that and 2 rounds of Ball and you're off counting crowns.

- The hunters can disable orders, thrive units, any kind of engine and a ton of other cards breaking your oponent's strategy right from the start or bleed your enemy to help ya land a killing blow and ofc proc your scenario with minimum cost or risk since it's pretty rare for an enemy to attack a shielded unit.

- I realise that i'm exaggerating a bit as we don't always perfect draw but still i don't consider NG being weak against any type of enemy cause control and the reliability of removing-locking certain enemy cards on time can get you the win on most situations imo.
Anyways, i think we agree to disagree so i won't say anything more on the matter of the hunters...

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Imperial Manticore (7 provision, 5 points) is imo only useful if the other guy has only one unit on his side (and it's important enough to justify using a 7 point card to take it out) and you can insta-exploit the Manticore with Overwhelming Hunger. :] Other times it's rarely justifying it's price; Any ability or card that can make cheap 2 point tokens just completely nullifies it, how often is the most important card the one with the least points? The Parasite on the other hand is much more useful since it can never really brick you and with 6 dmg it can kill a lot of stuff. :] I only don't like it because of the morbid picture of a leech in someone's eye... :s
 
Last edited:
For me, the biggest problem with NG is that 35% of my games are against them. This number is after 55 games this season. Percentage is up 3% over last season.

NG is soon to be an auto forfeit as it is just tiresome playing against heavy poison and double ball every other match. When you have to carry 3 artifact removal cards for a match its getting just a bit ridiculous.
 
For me, the biggest problem with NG is that 35% of my games are against them. This number is after 55 games this season. Percentage is up 3% over last season.
This is probably because of how strong Northern Realms is. Nilfgaard naturally counters engine decks with all its locks and removal, so it would not surprise me if even more people are playing Nilfgaard this month.
 
For me, the biggest problem with NG is that 35% of my games are against them. This number is after 55 games this season. Percentage is up 3% over last season.

NG is soon to be an auto forfeit as it is just tiresome playing against heavy poison and double ball every other match. When you have to carry 3 artifact removal cards for a match its getting just a bit ridiculous.

- Imo if devotion decks had access to artifact removal the situation would be far better than now.
Else... make the scenario banish it self by the end of the round, or disable the interaction between the Asire and the scenario.
 
I hate to resurrect an almost dead anti-Nilfgaard rant, but I think this post really belongs here.

In my opinion, the real problem with Nilfgaard is not that it has toxic cards that instantly remove, disable, or steal anything without viable counters — other factions, especially SY and ST have the same. It’s that in NG these cards actually form strong decks — and are necessary for strong decks.

I just built an ST deck solely focused on completing the quest to play 15 deathblow cards as quickly as possible. I chose precision strike as leader because it grants a death blow card at the end. I then included every deathblow card I owned — although I eventually threw back two offering cards and two samums because I had too few unit cards. Because of Devil’s Puffball, and because I never really tried the mechanic, I took every poison card I own. (I do not own Maraal or Basilisk Venom, but I used everything else ST can access.) That left me about 50 provisions for 3 cards, so I took the most expensive cards I could access. That left 10 provisions after 25 cards— which was fortunate because I was still two units shy of a legal deck, so I added 2 “junk” units.

On paper the deck looks horrible — and it likely would be in practice against top competition. It uses 27 cards. It is 100% removal with no proactive plays. When I have to play first, I basically either waste a poison, waste damage, or discard a spell. It has no real answer to broad strategies. But in casual, it is very strong. And in a sadistic way, it is fun to play ( though I’m sure it is horrible for my opponents). I didn’t really care what was in my hand (every card plays basically the same — punch in removal) and I only really need Mulligans to get rid of Brokilon Sentinels in my hand. The play is pretty mindless — trigger deathblow when useful and possible, poison big or dangerous units not within removal range, and otherwise just punch whatever. Try to play a few unit cards to build a few points.

My point is really not the deck — it’s the fact that this deck works is a sorry reflection on the state of the game. Removal across all factions is too prevalent, too easy, too uncounterable, too cheap, and too rewarding. And it can ruin the playing experience.

Quest completed, with three round one forfeits in something like five plays, I have retired the deck with hope of never seeing it again. But it is a valuable lesson in how not to design a game.
 
I hate to resurrect an almost dead anti-Nilfgaard rant, but I think this post really belongs here.

In my opinion, the real problem with Nilfgaard is not that it has toxic cards that instantly remove, disable, or steal anything without viable counters — other factions, especially SY and ST have the same. It’s that in NG these cards actually form strong decks — and are necessary for strong decks.

I just built an ST deck solely focused on completing the quest to play 15 deathblow cards as quickly as possible. I chose precision strike as leader because it grants a death blow card at the end. I then included every deathblow card I owned — although I eventually threw back two offering cards and two samums because I had too few unit cards. Because of Devil’s Puffball, and because I never really tried the mechanic, I took every poison card I own. (I do not own Maraal or Basilisk Venom, but I used everything else ST can access.) That left me about 50 provisions for 3 cards, so I took the most expensive cards I could access. That left 10 provisions after 25 cards— which was fortunate because I was still two units shy of a legal deck, so I added 2 “junk” units.

On paper the deck looks horrible — and it likely would be in practice against top competition. It uses 27 cards. It is 100% removal with no proactive plays. When I have to play first, I basically either waste a poison, waste damage, or discard a spell. It has no real answer to broad strategies. But in casual, it is very strong. And in a sadistic way, it is fun to play ( though I’m sure it is horrible for my opponents). I didn’t really care what was in my hand (every card plays basically the same — punch in removal) and I only really need Mulligans to get rid of Brokilon Sentinels in my hand. The play is pretty mindless — trigger deathblow when useful and possible, poison big or dangerous units not within removal range, and otherwise just punch whatever. Try to play a few unit cards to build a few points.

My point is really not the deck — it’s the fact that this deck works is a sorry reflection on the state of the game. Removal across all factions is too prevalent, too easy, too uncounterable, too cheap, and too rewarding. And it can ruin the playing experience.

Quest completed, with three round one forfeits in something like five plays, I have retired the deck with hope of never seeing it again. But it is a valuable lesson in how not to design a game.
And yet there still are people who defend the Masquerade Ball and even make claims about NG removal ostensibly keeping engine strategies in check (heard this one during the Passiflora nightmare, good job keeping engines in check, heh)

See, I've been saying this for a long time most of the important cards you play often end up as meaningless targets for 5p removals, poison and now this new SK stuff, which is hardly fun.
Conditional non-lethal damage would be much healthier as the prevalent damage mechanic, but the thing is, people seem to hate pointslam contests and wouldn't want to see it getting even more intense, which would be inevitable with insant removal nerfed. IMO there should be more cards like Milaen and less like Rebuke in the meta, but, again, I fear it's an unpopular opinion.
 
This Original Post is the perfect example of why anecdotal evidence is worthless.

You can have all the hardships in the world with NG but if the statistics show that their win rate is in the gutter, all your experiences are a drop of red pain in an ocean of blue paint. They are meaningless and count for nothing.

Not to mention, that if you recently got to Pro and faced mostly NG it still means that you won more than you lost.
 
Last edited:
I agree that NG needs some rethinking. The archetype that I see most disproportionately represented is the assimilate/spying. It seems odd that such a consistently powerful game can be played with an archetype that entirely hangs on the opponent playing units. It ends up being so good because the opposition MUST play units to win, and the opposition most often picked units that synergize with each other. So, NG assimilate/spy gets to copy the synergy from another deck, and add on top of that the value of its own synergy (assimilate). Plus, the number of assimilate cards available to NG is bonkers. It's totally bananas to me that even newcomers can make full use (or nearly so) of the strategy of copy-copy-copy with little fear of counter. The armor that often accompanies assimilate units well exceeds the countering capacity of many damage-based removal cards. One of the best viable counters is a lock-based NG deck, which is an archetype with its own problems as far as balancing goes... I think these are a couple reasons why we're seeing NG getting so much play.
 
I agree that NG needs some rethinking. The archetype that I see most disproportionately represented is the assimilate/spying. It seems odd that such a consistently powerful game can be played with an archetype that entirely hangs on the opponent playing units. It ends up being so good because the opposition MUST play units to win, and the opposition most often picked units that synergize with each other. So, NG assimilate/spy gets to copy the synergy from another deck, and add on top of that the value of its own synergy (assimilate). Plus, the number of assimilate cards available to NG is bonkers. It's totally bananas to me that even newcomers can make full use (or nearly so) of the strategy of copy-copy-copy with little fear of counter. The armor that often accompanies assimilate units well exceeds the countering capacity of many damage-based removal cards. One of the best viable counters is a lock-based NG deck, which is an archetype with its own problems as far as balancing goes... I think these are a couple reasons why we're seeing NG getting so much play.
Are you suggesting Assimilate should get nerfed?
 
From my PoV the problem with Nilfgaard is that NG has different viable strategies which are very hard to predict - which deck you'll encounter. You can build a decent deck with artifact removal and purify to counter the "standard" NG tactic with mass poison/lock, but this deck will be almost useless against "Assimilate" strategy. So in fact you can make a deck which will beat NG tactics, but this deck in 90% cases will be useless against other factions. So you have a choice - to make a deck which will be competetive vs other factions or vs NG.
 

ya1

Forum regular
the "standard" NG tactic with mass poison/lock

This tactic has been dead for a long time. Single Ball decks pack wholesome 3 poisons and 2 locks. The last nail to the coffin of all-out status decks was scenarios got doomed but in fact, it hasn't been a thing since two weeks after Master Mirror. That's when people stopped playing devotion only, and Oneiromancy into Heatwave effectively killed the already heavily gimped by veil Double Ball.

So in fact you can make a deck which will beat NG tactics

Or you can just make a deck, period. In pro, it will win vs. NG like 57% of the time on the average... ;) But first you'll have to play like 2 days straight to even encounter the dying breed lol
 
Hi All, I am probably repeating what has been said many times, but I just do not understand how playing Gwent is supposed to be fun right now. Out of my last 30 games I played about 25 against NG. That fact means something, doesnt it. The decks look all the same. I reached rank about 4 or so with my Skelige and NR decks. Now 90% of my games look like this - destroy unit with status (good bye defender), poison about 5 cards, lock other 2 or so. It is that simple. Now if you tell me that NG is not overpowered then explain to me why I bascially only meet NG decks? I have not played against skelilge or syndicate for ages.
 
Hi All, I am probably repeating what has been said many times, but I just do not understand how playing Gwent is supposed to be fun right now. Out of my last 30 games I played about 25 against NG. That fact means something, doesnt it. The decks look all the same. I reached rank about 4 or so with my Skelige and NR decks. Now 90% of my games look like this - destroy unit with status (good bye defender), poison about 5 cards, lock other 2 or so. It is that simple. Now if you tell me that NG is not overpowered then explain to me why I bascially only meet NG decks? I have not played against skelilge or syndicate for ages.

Because if that person reached higher ranks just playing NG it means that, on average, is a better player than NR or SK players that just use the same overpowered decks that can work basically on auto pilot. Try to play around the control and make them waste poison on low power targets.
 
Hi All, I am probably repeating what has been said many times, but I just do not understand how playing Gwent is supposed to be fun right now. Out of my last 30 games I played about 25 against NG. That fact means something, doesnt it. The decks look all the same. I reached rank about 4 or so with my Skelige and NR decks. Now 90% of my games look like this - destroy unit with status (good bye defender), poison about 5 cards, lock other 2 or so. It is that simple. Now if you tell me that NG is not overpowered then explain to me why I bascially only meet NG decks? I have not played against skelilge or syndicate for ages.
To properly answer these questions it is important to understand that your point of view (as it goes for everyone else around usually) is fundamentally biased. You mention having difficulties on the ladder against masses of NG players with your SK and NR decks - I trust you feel the controversy here. In short, SK and NR decks are generalyl considered the most streamlined FoTM variants one can play. Please note, I do not support this approach to decks, I truly believe there is a "natural selection" where the best decks will always emerge no matter what - still, playing NG's Ball variant is a solid, easy-to-learn option to progress, somewhere in the same ballpark as your own preferred decks. And believe me, by winning with your NR (Shieldwall or Revenants, let me guess) decks you bring grief to just as many opponenets while you progress on ranked.
At the end of the day, this is all well and fine. People steer naturally towards the easier route if progression is the goal - denying this would be pointless.

All in all, NG is everything but overpowered at this point. They still have their solid place on ladder with the single Ball / soldiers package, and in some cases can have solid results with some other archetypes. The number of opponents you meet is based on your own mathcmaking and generally does not represent the overall state of the ladder. For your information, I generally play in Pro with a wide array of decks each month, and NG is definitely below NR for me when it comes to decks I face. Revenants and SK Lippy / Maerdrome builds are at the top for me. SY Congregate and MO OH is also among the top5 faced decks I encounter.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom