Lets compare some Northen Realms and Skellige Cards and try to find any logic in they provinsion costs and design

+
NR is meant to be an engine faction, while SK is rather midrange nobrain slam. It's OK.
The problem is - devs can't math and thus balance it (it's not OK).

The best engine in the game currently is messanger of the sea in Skellige - any other can't compare in terms of price/value/uncounterability (it grows to 6p quickly and can be played cheaply few times from graveyard by skellige). So it is SK who have best engines in the game, best control, and best dmg+bodies pointslam - no NR. NR engines doesn't exist in current game state at all - and not only because wizards are just stronger - even before alumnies introduction they wasn't played often
Post automatically merged:

NR and SK both got good cards, this comparison makes no sense.

If comparision for example coockoduck to gremist don't make sense, than what comparision have? Regardless of that I see that rather all players agree that Skellige have upperhand over NR and they dont deny it, they argue that NR have upperhand over some other factions though (what is irrelevant in NR vs Skellige metchups mentioned in that post; But I encourage someone to make complex and detaileed comparisment of cards in NR to cards in other factions that NR should be theoretically much stronger, and we could see it). So if something doesn't have sense is Your post , no My comparision.
Post automatically merged:

I just wanted to say that NR engines (and order) are generally not favoured against Skellige Damage/Control Decks. Especially in this meta, where you gonna face very agressive decks (because of crazy engines) and nothing you put on the board would stick. Hyper Control > Engines

I agree that NR have a lot of bad cards that need a little LOVE (you listed some). More than Skellige, probably. But enough good cards to be playable. Scoia'Tael has far more crappy cards, if you wanna go this way.

That post is not about SC or other factions, it is about NR vs Skellige. In SC the first thing that should be reworked is traps though - playing against spam of it is only flustrating because You can't do anything except to put card on the table and wait what will happens and something like that shouldnt exist at all. But it is off topic - yet I encourage You or others to make (if You find a little time off for it of course, because it is time consuming activity) as detailed as possiblle comparisment of cards in NR to cards in other factions that NR should be theoretically much stronger (like SC that You mentioned, for example wather of the valley vs PFI, skaggs or mentioned wov vs seltkirk, or Ida vs coockoduck etc.), so we clearly could see it about what cards You are speaking and discuss it
 
Last edited:
The best engine in the game currently is messanger of the sea in Skellige
As I said, CDPR can't math. Same thing happens if you compare for example NG and MO, where NG actually has more pointslam than MO.
Wait a couple of patches till they realize that those dudes have to be capped. Same for Alumni btw.
 
As I said, CDPR can't math. Same thing happens if you compare for example NG and MO, where NG actually has more pointslam than MO.
Wait a couple of patches till they realize that those dudes have to be capped. Same for Alumni btw.

That is tottaly off topic but IMHO something like "faction identity" shouldnt be supperted at all. All factions should have three Basic types of VIABLE (key-word) archetypes - pointslam, control, and engines, or maschups of two or three of them. You want to play effectively MO control? Thats fine, you can do it. You want NG pointslam? Ok, no problem. II is always funny for me when I hear that: MO shouldn't have control, NG is for that! Or: NR should play engines, no pointslam! for that is that faction created for! Etc. BS
 
Last edited:
To be very honest, I do not think that these comparisions do make sense because of reasons already explained by others above.
Of course there are cards like Lyrian Landsknecht who definitely need a buff.

What I consider to be problematic is the current meta deck of Leticia + both student + Tissaia in round 1 and then Alumni nightmare in later rounds. I also play this deck in Pro Rank and do very well. What I consider to be problematic is that many decks are teching against and I have the impression that the whole meta is less variant.

Fortunately, in TWIG Burza already confirmed that Leticia will be nerfed.
I would hope for the following.
"Patience.
Order (Ranged): At the end of this turn, Patience value of all other allied units is increased by [1] instead."
 
All factions should have three Basic types of VIABLE (key-word) archetypes - pointslam, control, and engines, or maschups of two or three of them.
Agree. But that's a lot of work. It requires wider card pool and many balance adjustments.
 
Of course there are cards like Lyrian Landsknecht who definitely need a buff.
And here is where I dont agree - I dont think that is a good solution to buff everything all the time to keep up with powercreep - it is vicious cycle, and never will be good balance in the game when we will want to fix problems with the same metod that we created them (powercreep) at the first place. So in that example it is nor a landskneht that needs a buff - its a SK bear witcher than needs a nerf
Post automatically merged:

meta deck of Leticia + both student + Tissaia in round 1 and then Alumni nightmare in later rounds. I also play this deck in Pro Rank and do very well.

Against SK Reckless Fury also?
Post automatically merged:

Fortunately, in TWIG Burza already confirmed that Leticia will be nerfed.
I would hope for the following.
"Patience.
Order (Ranged): At the end of this turn, Patience value of all other allied units is increased by [1] instead."

The same Pasternak for years - first , they create problem, and than, they fix problem that they on they own created. That all could be in a big part avoided by running tests of cards before introduction in the game.
Post automatically merged:

Agree. But that's a lot of work. It requires wider card pool and many balance adjustments.

Balancing of cards is only matter of time and good will, no costs. So if there will be a will in devs team to do it, they will do it with no problem. But as I see it: there is no will at all.
And I don't agree that a broader card pool is needed to do it - there are already so many unused at all cards created long time ago, that they can be used to that purpouses with ease and more - it will be only matter of they power, provinsion, ability and affiliation ( if needed) update
 
Last edited:
And here is where I dont agree - I dont think that is a good solution to buff everything all the time to keep up with powercreep - it is vicious cycle, and never will be good balance in the game when we will want to fix problems with the same metod that we created them (powercreep) at the first place. So in that example it is nor a landskneht that needs a buff - its a SK bear witcher than needs a nerf
Post automatically merged:

Bear witcher is a 8 for 5 if Adrenaline 4 is met. Lyrian Landsknecht is a 8 for 5 if played on Range and able to play it´s order. I think both cards are fine as they are. Maybe the uninspired order can be increased to 2
Bear witcher sees maybe more play because of the healing opportunity and the witcher tag.

Against SK Reckless Fury also?
Post automatically merged:



The same Pasternak for years - first , they create problem, and than, they fix problem that they on they own created. That all could be in a big part avoided by running tests of cards before introduction in the game.
Post automatically merged:

Against reckless fury it depends. Early morning I won against reckless fury in Pro Rank. They need their cards (Heatwave, Junod of Belhaven and so on) on hand or tutored to stop the huge patience carryover. My opponent did not manage.

Well, the problem is that there are cards with relatively low provision and huge value potential. This combo is just one outstanding example.
I would not blame the developers that they did not see this interaction in play testing. Actually, even in competitive Gwent the combo only appeared few weeks ago and would even argue that the potential of these cards was detected by players due to the nerf of mediating mages.

Another one is SK Messenger of the Sea which from my perspective should be only refering to the opposite row as old Greatswords did.
 
Last edited:
Bear witcher is a 8 for 5 if Adrenaline 4 is met. Lyrian Landsknecht is a 8 for 5 if played on Range and able to play it´s order. I think both cards are fine as they are.

Bear witcher works with no order and adrenaline is easy condition to meet, yet about landskneht the order with boost is almost impossible in reality to meet condition - and that is why he is not played, no other. If we will increase his dmg to unconditional 3 dmg and 5 power with adrenaline - He will be played also. But it is the way that we want to approach to create another one 3 dmg 5 power card instead if nerfing bear witcher?
Post automatically merged:

Against reckless fury it depends. Early morning I won against reckless fury in Pro Rank. They need their cards (Heatwave, Junod of Belhaven and so on) on hand or tutored to stop the huge patience carryover. My opponent did not manage.

So - in other words- it is possible to win only with luck or very good card draw while opponent have poor card draw, as I wrote at the beggining of that thread
 
Last edited:
Bear witcher works with no order and adrenaline is easy condition to meet, yet about landskneht the order with boost is almost impossible in reality to meet condition - and that is why he is not played, no other. If we will increase his dmg to unconditional 3 dmg and 5 power with adrenaline - He will be played also. But it is the way that we want to approach to create another one 3 dmg 5 power card instead if nerfing bear witcher?
Post automatically merged:



So - in other words- it is possible to win only with luck or very good card draw while opponent have poor card draw, as I wrote at the beggining of that thread

My big point is that I do not consider bear witcher to be problematic. What´s your problem with this card?

That it deals conditional 3 damage?
  • Battering Ram also deals 3 conditional damage, is an engine card and has a valuable siege engine tag but one less body

  • Bomb Heaver: also has 3 conditional damage but one less body

  • Griffin Witcher: is a one damage engine card + one time 3 random damage but one less body
That it has at max 5 body plus healing potential of 3?

From my perspective Adrenaline 4 can be a tough condition. Dependent on your deck list you have many card you want to play late:

=> I can tell from own playing experience that I often run into the situation where I played a Bear witcher as a 5 for 5.

What I expect from the Devs is that they take a look which cards are played often and result in a high win rate and consider nerfing them and, currently, bear witcher belongs not to these cards.
 
Last edited:
That it deals conditional 3 damage?
  • Battering Ram also deals 3 conditional damage, is an engine card and has a valuable siege engine tag but one less body

  • Bomb Heaver: also has 3 conditional damage but one less body

  • Griffin Witcher: is a one damage engine card + one time 3 random damage but one less body
That it has at max 5 body plus healing potential of 3?

Griffin Witcher + battering ram both are order cards and it is unlikely for them to survive against control decks to be more than 4p for 5 prov. Bear witcher is almost always 8 for 5 including 3p removal and can work immidiately - both ram and landskneht needs to survive on battlefield for one turn. Uncomparable power in favour of bear witcher.
 
Griffin Witcher + battering ram both are order cards and it is unlikely for them to survive against control decks to be more than 4p for 5 prov. Bear witcher is almost always 8 for 5 including 3p removal and can work immidiately - both ram and landskneht needs to survive on battlefield for one turn. Uncomparable power in favour of bear witcher.
Griffin Witcher has a much higher point cap with engine traits. Bear Witcher is immediate value. The two are not comparable. Landsknect is comparable, though it is an older card (and hence more powercrept). Bear Witcher does have an adrenaline condition, which if not met, gives it poor value. and this condition is sufficiently stringent that it is rarely usable in round 1 (when you most want to use bronze cards). And Landsknect is not a bad card; I think it sees less use because it does not fit the general NR deck as well as other cards.
 
And to edit: Battering Ram has with crew a more easy condition than adrenaline 4.

Lol how often do You see that "easy condition card" played with crew than? Or played at all except created by scenario? :D
Post automatically merged:

Griffin Witcher has a much higher point cap with engine traits. Bear Witcher is immediate value. The two are not comparable. Landsknect is comparable, though it is an older card (and hence more powercrept). Bear Witcher does have an adrenaline condition, which if not met, gives it poor value. and this condition is sufficiently stringent that it is rarely usable in round 1 (when you most want to use bronze cards). And Landsknect is not a bad card; I think it sees less use because it does not fit the general NR deck as well as other cards.

Im game where control is cheap and played almost in every deck immidiate high value is worth much more than value over time - and therefore cards designed to be used immidiately with high value (like mentioned 8p for 5prov bear witcher) are just better than others.
 
Last edited:
It's difficult to compare cards Prov. for Prov and Point for Point. Cards work in combos and synergies.

- Bear Witcher has a lot of synergies : immediate damages, self wound (with healing or shield if he's tutored by a Geralt), witcher tag.
- Lyrian Landsknecht is quite bad : risky, less potential points, slow synergies (boost, soldier/crew,...).

They don't come from the same expansion, though. Bear Witcher equivalent is Griffin Witcher. They both reflect their respective faction identity.
Skellige : immediate damages, Northern Realms : slow engines. That's the main thing with NR : they are slow, and weak against control Skellige.

How do you compare Blue Stripes Commando and Crow Messenger ? Those are cards you can build a deck around and as a Crow player, I could write an essay about Pros and Cons of each. Those cards are different enough to be fun, even though the strategy seems to be the same, they depend on the deck you'll build.

Honestly, I would hate if every faction had "perfect mirror cards", ending being quite the same...

In the end, I think your problem is you want Skellige not to be Skellige... :)
 
In the end, I think your problem is you want Skellige not to be Skellige... :)

No, bro. I want the game, when playing every faction You can have fair chances against every other faction, without upperhand in one over another just by cards design and poor balance in favour of one over other one. And if that condition is impossible to fullfill, than lets let players to combine cards from for example 2 factions or lets resign from faction system at all and let players to build decks from all cards aviable - sky is a limit tnan and no inequality, equal chances for all players regardless of the faction that they like or dislike. And if You (not You personally, but I mean every reader of that post) played only gwent and it is unimaginable for You how all cards can be avaiable to all players or how to combine cards from 2 factions I will suprise You: that solutions already exist in other succesfull card games: 2 factions combination in LoR, and all cards aviable to all players without factions in Clash Royale. So it's doable, and exists in much more popular and successfull card games than gwent. So I don't know with one of that solutions is the best one (good balancing, factions combine or no factions at all) but I know that something have to be done in that matter
 
Last edited:
Just played Nr 4x in a row, lost every match. I'm a ST player and a returning player that will now be an ex player again having not played this game for 6 months. Literaly every faction is better than ST, it's boring now, don't even bother with rnked unless you use the ST netdeck, there's about two that might win you some games.

tata
 
[...] gwent is amazingly flustrating game for me and cost a lot of stress, if it works the same for You [...]
don't worry I learned to stop when the joy is replaced by frustration.
I actually liked your misspelling as gwent is actually FLUSTRATING - highly fluctuation from joy to frustration
 
don't worry I learned to stop when the joy is replaced by frustration.
I actually liked your misspelling as gwent is actually FLUSTRATING - highly fluctuation from joy to frustration

Lol I am really sorry and feel stupid right now - of course I meant "frustration" , it was unintentional mistake. But I fully agree with You - when I loose few games in a row I feel really bad, no joy at all, last time even my gf asked if I am mad on her for sth, or if it is everything ok in company because I am so upset so I replied - honestly - that everything is ok in business and about Her, I just loose in gwent few games, and it is the reason for my mood - lol. I stopped playing than, I decided that it is right time for that :) it can be really FRUSTRATING :)
 

Agree but we dont have access to as detailed stats to compare cards and they winrates as it is needed to do it. For example we don't have Access to stats like: winrate in NR all leaders against SK Flurry in last whole season. We have only very general winrates and playrates of leaders and factions, and cards playrates. Therefore to compare where it is possible specific cards or leaders to equivalents is much more accurate (like mentioned NR puryfier vs puryfier in SK, or SK Onslaught before recent rework vs NR Royal inspiration - Its mirror)
Bwt there is also an old joke about statistics - if You will put one Your feet into boiling hot water and the second one in frozen ice statistically You should be perfectly fine. Its worth to keep that in mind while worshiping stats as indicator of everything
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom