Removal Is Too Strong, Like, Stupidly Strong

[CallMeHoot]

Seriously, I am getting sick to death of playing against removal. Why bother playing an engine deck when every single player is netdecking the latest removal fad?

Not a single card played that isn't involved someway in attacking or removing cards from the opponents board. I mean not a SINGLE card. Lovely. Fun games. Worst thing is, you get ONE Defender. ONE. With no neutral DEFENDER cards to combat a removal heavy meta. So, they just Heatwave, Invocation, Ping + Leader Ability, Purify + Ignore...

If DEFENDER status is removed via purify put it on a 1 round cooldown, meaning they have 1 turn to interact with the defended units, or the defender itself. This would at least mean an investment of removal in getting rid of it. Rather than a one and done, 4 provision Teller making your mighty 7 point defender useless. Those 3 extra points will sure carry a round.

DEFENDER cards are honestly worthless at this point.

And every deck, even decks that are supposed to run ZERO removal, are suddenly running 6 removal cards...because there is just no better alternative. They are TOO strong.

 

[quintivarium]

I agree that there is too much removal. But that is spurred by engines that are too strong with bodies that are too big. It’s something of a viscous circle. I think somewhere around a third of all Gwent cards need a significant nerf.

 

[CallMeHoot]

I agree that there is too much removal. But that is spurred by engines that are too strong with bodies that are too big. It’s something of a viscous circle. I think somewhere around a third of all Gwent cards need a significant nerf.

I am inclined to agree. Admitted, my OP was somewhat of a rage post (because in 20 games every opponent has been playing a form of removal, with every single card having some damage/removal effect), but still.

I guess I just miss the Gwent of old, where an 8, 12 or 15 point swing was massive, card advantage actually mattered (and was something you had to play for and around) and the ability to generate 50 points in a turn just didn't exist.

I mean sure, I could play a NG Lock deck or ST Traps...but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.

 

[saodhar]

As I always saw it, the devs were balancing engines/removals wrong. They made "important" (usually gold) cards taller and taller to protect them from basic removals, but then those cards became too strong, so they boosted removals. And now ordinary (usually bronze) engine cards require extreme maneuvering to survive long enough, while removal decks just throw cards at you, trying to wipe your half of the board clean. The only bright side - d-players using removal netdecks are sometimes so bad at understanding any cards (even their own), that they shoot themselves in the foot.

 

[Strateg1x]

Agree, there is too many neutral removals, Devotion decks should get more bonuses if not using neutral cards.

 

[saodhar]

Agree, there is too many neutral removals, Devotion decks should get more bonuses if not using neutral cards.

When devotion was introduced, I was hoping it will have a lot of impact on the game. But it's still so underused - too few cards even have it, and sometimes devotion effects are too weak to sacrifice powerful neutrals for them.
But then again - some neutral cards are just weaker (but unconditional) analogs of faction cards (purifiers, for example). I think neutral cards should be stronger on their own (and be more removal-focused), but faction cards should produce combos with their faction's abilities and archetypes, with devotion modifiers giving them additional tricks.

 

[Sensimilius]

I agree that there is too much removal. But that is spurred by engines that are too strong with bodies that are too big. It’s something of a viscous circle. I think somewhere around a third of all Gwent cards need a significant nerf.

I wouldn't say that a THIRD of the cards need a significant nerf, I'd rather say that over a third of cards are completely underpowered and unplayable compared to newer stuff.
It's like, the devs can either go the shorter route to nerf *10% of the overperforming cards or buff the 90% of the rest cards into their level.
Logical path is to nerf the 10% and is actually doable. BUT they insist to take the impossible (for them) route of trying to bring 90% of weaker cards into the level of 10%. BUT since they change like 4 cards per faction per patch AT MOST this will never be done (game has over 1300 cards in total btw), meanwhile they bring even more OP stuff to obsolete even more cards. Lack of knowledge or purposefully done? - Who knows and who cares? The results are the same (kind of like what Emhyr said... "Your motives do not interest me, only results").

*the percentage I gave isn't like 100% mathematically calculated, but you get my point, the point is we have a small (compared to the overall number of cards) number of OP and a large number of UP (underpowered) cards.

 

[yeahalright]

I don't think removal is too strong, I think pointslam is generally too weak. There are too many trash cards that add a few points to your board and not do much else.

Removal should counter engines, engines should outgrow pointslam, and pointslam should out-value what removal offers. Instead, most pointslam is trash, except for Skellege (many types), Syndicate Jackpot, and Nilfgaard Tactical Decision. Those 3 types you see all the time in pro rank (out of the last 20 games all of them have been these three types, myself included) because they have high pointslam that out-values removal.

Monsters in theory should have the naturally high pointslam, instead they suck, and Northern Realms have no way to protect their engines. Most NR decks just go for engine spam and hope something sticks, it's terrible gameplay. ST have frail engines, zero pointslam, and used to have at least OP removal... now that Milva is nerfed they don't have anything.

The devs seem unaware of the balance:

Pointslam > Removal > Engines > Pointslam

Hyper control decks have been meta for over a year now. When will they buff all the TERRIBLE pointslam cards out there? The meta is so stale, I've been using the same 3 decks all year to climb to pro each season. Last patch things seemed to be better, ironically, with Milva, but now that Milva was killed it's just the same 3 decks over and over again. Worst deck diversity since Whoreson Junior and Viy first came out.

 

[Fargothwave]

I don't think removal is too strong, I think pointslam is generally too weak. There are too many trash cards that add a few points to your board and not do much else.

Removal should counter engines, engines should outgrow pointslam, and pointslam should out-value what removal offers. Instead, most pointslam is trash, except for Skellege (many types), Syndicate Jackpot, and Nilfgaard Tactical Decision. Those 3 types you see all the time in pro rank (out of the last 20 games all of them have been these three types, myself included) because they have high pointslam that out-values removal.

Monsters in theory should have the naturally high pointslam, instead they suck, and Northern Realms have no way to protect their engines. Most NR decks just go for engine spam and hope something sticks, it's terrible gameplay. ST have frail engines, zero pointslam, and used to have at least OP removal... now that Milva is nerfed they don't have anything.

The devs seem unaware of the balance:

Pointslam > Removal > Engines > Pointslam

Hyper control decks have been meta for over a year now. When will they buff all the TERRIBLE pointslam cards out there? The meta is so stale, I've been using the same 3 decks all year to climb to pro each season. Last patch things seemed to be better, ironically, with Milva, but now that Milva was killed it's just the same 3 decks over and over again. Worst deck diversity since Whoreson Junior and Viy first came out.

Aight, look, no type of deck should have an inherent decisive advantage over another type of deck. That would be a fundamentally wrong way to balance the game, devolving it into a bunch of pre-determined victories and defeats.

Engines should have better tools of protection against the control (only NR and SY have reasonable options right now), pointslam should potentially be good enough to force engine decks into short rounds, control should have better wide punish/high base power punish/distributed value punish in particular.

And, the thing is, all these equalizing tools already exist in the game in various forms (e.g. armor, slammy cards like Usurper, and the bloodthirst tag respectively), but has long been forgotten about and powercrept into complete irrelevance.

 

[saodhar]

In a well-balanced game pointslam (in its current state - generating 30+ points with one card) shouldn't exist at all. Reset "pointslams" like Yrden or Igni at least can be worked around by managing your side of the board, but a huge amount of points just appearing on the opponent's side in one click is an abomination. And engines and removals should have ways to outmaneuver one another. But this is Gwent forums, so abandon all hope.
Maybe in those months without new journeys devs will do something healthy for the balance for once. One can only hope.

 

[EduFerraz]

The problem is The huge amount os points some cards can do without control

Lets take an example. The triple gernichore, If you dont have control and your opponent get the cards He needs, its gg.

Kolgrim, The same.

NR patience, If you let studants patience grows, its almost a gg.

And any other stupid things that generate too much points.

Thats why we need heavy control.

I really dont like those control decks, but I know how necesssary it is when exist some things like o said before.

So what i thing devs should do its limitade The huge amount points some cards can do and then, take off some of this heavy control.

If there is a combo wich is generaring too much points (a New card, as example) devs should do small hotfixes and dont need to wait untill The end of the seasonal tô do that.

 

[saodhar]

The problem is The huge amount os points some cards can do without control

Lets take an example. The triple gernichore, If you dont have control and your opponent get the cards He needs, its gg.

Kolgrim, The same.

NR patience, If you let studants patience grows, its almost a gg.

And any other stupid things that generate too much points.

Thats why we need heavy control.

So maybe devs should concentrate on those stupid cards and combos instead of building control crutches? Triple Gernis, as I understand it, rely on the degenerate Arachas Queen. Kolgrim, same as the whole Viper school, is a disgrace to all logic and lore, patient mages rely on resurrections from graveyards and resettable mage generating artifact (don't remember how it's called since I never used it) - yet they remain untouched, while devs make control ever heavier, making life harder for people who don't use these degeneracies in the first place

I really dont like those control decks, but I know how necesssary it is when exist some things like o said before.

So what i thing devs should do its limitade The huge amount points some cards can do and then, take off some of this heavy control.

If there is a combo wich is generaring too much points (a New card, as example) devs should do small hotfixes and dont need to wait untill The end of the seasonal tô do that.

And this is how we arrived at today's glorious situation. I think standing ovations are in order.

 

[yeahalright]

Sure, you can nerf Engines and then Removal so that Pointslam is relevant again, or you can buff Pointslam. Either way, makes no difference as long as there is balance. What matters is DECK DIVERSITY, which cannot happen with poor balance.

If the Devs would someday like to retire Gwent, they need to get the game in a state where around 10 decks are viable at any given time. Then you will see people play endlessly even if you don't update the game, because people's expectations are constantly challenged by the deckbuilding of other players. Then you get a deep, self-sustaining game.

Either get natural deck diversity, and complete Gwent, or go the Magic The Gathering route of endless patches and just keep shaking up balance to sell more new cards.

 

[Facefive]

When devotion was introduced, I was hoping it will have a lot of impact on the game. But it's still so underused - too few cards even have it, and sometimes devotion effects are too weak to sacrifice powerful neutrals for them.

The problem with devotion is the lack of thinning and searching your deck imho. The general idea is great. Even the upsides of devotion effects are great, however not drawing your engines, pointslams etc. most of the time is a big problem. SY works well with Vivaldi but is a joke compared to Oneiromancy or Royal Decree.

 

[Philido]

Lol, just had my first encounter with vampires. Removal is necessary, like, stupidly necessary.

 

[saodhar]

Lol, just had my first encounter with vampires. Removal is necessary, like, stupidly necessary.

Of course it is. Not fixing stupid Regis poinslams (with Oneiro being able to draw him anytime) or Fleder spamming, just throw in more and more removals, they'll fix everything.

 

[Philido]

Of course it is. Not fixing stupid Regis poinslams (with Oneiro being able to draw him anytime) or Fleder spamming, just throw in more and more removals, they'll fix everything.

If there weren't so many eye-wateringly overpowered engines, no one would run that much. But as of now it's either have it or lose the game miserably.

 

[Fargothwave]

If there weren't so many eye-wateringly overpowered engines, no one would run that much. But as of now it's either have it or lose the game miserably.

I mean, how much do we bloat our decks with tech before it becomes obvious it's never gonna be enough unless you outright play a super-mean control list?

I've been playing a very "paranoid" variation of a normal Gedi deck with Decoction, Mork, Heatwave, Squirrel, Gremist, Delirium. So I kill a buffed Leticia before it's too late, nuke a couple of mages normally, then one more with some stupid/desperate offensive Mardroeme off leader after a bit of rain, squirrel the most dangerous corpse just to make sure Shani doesn't do anything funny and Alumni don't fly, but in the end my opponent still has one or two more Aretuza Students that I can't do anything about anymore, pumps their duelants full of buffs and still annihilates my engines and ends up with like 90 points on their side of the board.

Control isn't even an answer in the end, that's the thing. The only thing it achieves currently is drastically limiting the variety of reasonable decks, while not helping all that much against the ridiculously hard-to-counter strats like triple Gerni or just regular Alumni or Kelli.

So...I'd say, still nerf control - there's never enough anyway, outside of annoyingly uninteractive decks - and thus give Dracoturtles, Igors and Belohuns a chance at competing with these newer monstrosities. They probably could match them, but it's hard to say.


Of course, to actually nerf all this stupid overtuned new crap to the Master Mirror levels of power would be the right thing to do, but CDPR seem to like the answer-or-die mechanics so much, they make them LESS vulnerable with time. Very well. If that's how it must be, pls let my Dracoturtle live too and nerf removal in general.


Upd: Kolgrim, and clog as a whole, on the other hand, should just be nerfed so hard, they never ever even come close to competitive state. The very mechanic of the deck breaks the fundamental rules of the game, no amount of tech crutches can even attempt to fix that.

 

[Messyr]

Fact is, the meta became significantly worse with the effective removal of Milva control/removal. As aggressive as that deck was, it actually kept in check totally uninspiring and greedy decks like NR Mages, and so on. This months meta is already way more stale and boring than the previous month.

 

[Philido]

I mean, how much do we bloat our decks with tech before it becomes obvious it's never gonna be enough unless you outright play a super-mean control list?

I've been playing a very "paranoid" variation of a normal Gedi deck with Decoction, Mork, Heatwave, Squirrel, Gremist, Delirium. So I kill a buffed Leticia before it's too late, nuke a couple of mages normally, then one more with some stupid/desperate offensive Mardroeme off leader after a bit of rain, squirrel the most dangerous corpse just to make sure Shani doesn't do anything funny and Alumni don't fly, but in the end my opponent still has one or two more Aretuza Students that I can't do anything about anymore, pumps their duelants full of buffs and still annihilates my engines and ends up with like 90 points on their side of the board.

Control isn't even an answer in the end, that's the thing. The only thing it achieves currently is drastically limiting the variety of reasonable decks, while not helping all that much against the ridiculously hard-to-counter strats like triple Gerni or just regular Alumni or Kelli.

So...I'd say, still nerf control - there's never enough anyway, outside of annoyingly uninteractive decks - and thus give Dracoturtles, Igors and Belohuns a chance at competing with these newer monstrosities. They probably could match them, but it's hard to say.


Of course, to actually nerf all this stupid overtuned new crap to the Master Mirror levels of power would be the right thing to do, but CDPR seem to like the answer-or-die mechanics so much, they make them LESS vulnerable with time. Very well. If that's how it must be, pls let my Dracoturtle live too and nerf removal in general.


Upd: Kolgrim, and clog as a whole, on the other hand, should just be nerfed so hard, they never ever even come close to competitive state. The very mechanic of the deck breaks the fundamental rules of the game, no amount of tech crutches can even attempt to fix that.

Nerfing removal too hard would result in a game where the only goal is to have more engines than the opponent, that's why CDPR won't do that. The game needs pointslam, engines and control to stay interesting, and they should keep each other in check. Too strong control (Double Ball, Milva), pointslam (SK Warriors back then, Viy) or engines (we don't need examples here) all lead to a binary and boring game, at least for me it would. Clog and Mill are just troll archetypes that should never be good against certain decks. Unfortunately Clog and, to a shorter extent, Mill can achieve that. I agree that these shouldn't be a thing.