A unbalance things: Dandelion vs Skjall

+
A unbalance things: Dandelion vs Skjall

Hello everyone,

It's a long time I didn't create new topic. I don't see anyone to say about this so today I create topic feedback it.

First, I just laugh crazy when compare two these card. I don't understand and disagree how dev do this with same quality but very difference in power. One useful and one useless.



Dandelion | Siver - Epic
Row: Melee - Strength: 5
Add 2 strength to each non-Gold unit played on your side. Does not affect spawned units.

















Skjall | Siver - Epic
Row: Any - Strength: 3 (5 in round 3)
Lose 2 strength at the start of your turn. When removed from the battlefield, spawn Craven Revived on the same row.


Craven Revived | Siver - Epic
Row: Any - Strength: 4
Add 2 to any non-Gold unit appearing on the row. Banish when move to the graveyard








Wait, what???

At the same situation, for example at round 1, Dandelion and Skjall play first and both player play 5 card after, we have:

Dandelion add 10 additional strength, total 15 strength - Skjall need 2 turn to transform Craven Revived then 3 card must on same row to receive 6 strength, total 9 strength.

What the hell? But not yet!

Dandelion can resurrection - Craven Revived banish (although this useless).

Never mind, I laugh to death again...

This thing show that Gwent is very unbalance, big hole of broken game. We must accept this exist in game. In some way, I believe there is more card broken not only this.

I enjoy Gwent so I must accept this to continute to play although I don't like.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that Dandelion got a few changes every patch and Skjall didn't, he is as he was after start of closed beta
 
Comparing cards across factions doesn't really work. For example, Caretaker vs Vicavaro medics. Or NR medics vs their SK counterparts.

Every faction has its own archetypes and synergies. Giving them all cards that are perfectly equal would completely ruin any semblance of diversity. In this case, Skellige already gets numerous buffs to -base- strength from several of its cards, and its faction passive, so it makes sense that its Dandelion equivalent is slightly less powerful.
 
NatoGreavesy You said that passive SK but, NR gain 2 strength for their Gold card. So that mean balance between two faction passive. Same as to compare with card. I don't know why you can't see that very clearly unbalance in power of this two card.

For more example:

Redanian Elite + Dandelion = 4 additional strength (in any round).

But for Skjall, required three turn and same row on round 3 to receive 4 additional strength.

Is that fair and balance?

P.S: Almost card of SK in lowest strength in round 1 more than NR.
 
Last edited:
Dandelion has had many changes over the past patches, if you didn't know he used to double the strength of whatever row he gets placed on.

Ska on the other hand is pretty much the same when they created him, he's actually got nerfed two patches ago. He used to deal 3 damage to the highest unit on the opposing side when could hit multiple units like Yennefer.
I'm 100% certain he'll get a complete rework in the future, he's currently the most underused card in the game even lower then Blizzard potion...
 
Skjall/Craven will obviously get a rework, but this is naturally not a high priority during Closed Beta - and it shouldn't be to us players either. Reworking cards are the easy parts, and although I agree Skjall is in major need of a rework as he is absolutely worthless in any context whatsoever, it is far more important to implement more crucial things to the game; Steam integration, faction balance, mechanics balance, client and game stability etc...

I can't get worked up over one or a few useless cards at this stage of the game. It's Closed Beta. There are more pressing issues by far.
 
Hello

@DEERCG: Nato Greavesy ist right.
You cannot compare 2 Cards from 2 different Factions and say "this is unbalanced". To make a conclusion about Balance you shoul take Decks as a whole.
There are a few Cards in Game wich are not as usual as they should and there are Cards wich are too Powerful.
Skjall isnt a very good Card, wich is true, but you cannot compare them.

Think about Cards like Kambi, wich Destroys EVRYTHING wich is on Board.
What Factions have this Card?
Skellige only, right?
Every Deck does have very unique and sometimes very Powerfull Cards and you know hat?
Dandelion is not. In 90% he gets Chained and/or Destroyed in the same moment he appears on the Battlefield, so i dont see anything to complain about him.
 
Sirgdrifa is better than Nenneke. She gains one strength whenever a unit is played from either graveyard which surely is better than 2 vs. 4 strength body. Why don't you complain about this?

In a Henselt deck Dandelion competes with Margarita. In a Foltest or Radovid deck Dandelion competes with Odrin.
In NR you have in many decks only one silver slot free since Priscilla,Nenneke,KoB,Roach and Stennis or Decoy take the other 5.
 
DEERCG;n8430470 said:
NatoGreavesy You said that passive SK but, NR gain 2 strength for their Gold card. So that mean balance between two faction passive. Same as to compare with card. I don't know why you can't see that very clearly unbalance in power of this two card.

For more example:

Redanian Elite + Dandelion = 4 additional strength (in any round).

But for Skjall, required three turn and same row on round 3 to receive 4 additional strength.

Is that fair and balance?

Each Axeman can get 40+ strength with some stupid whale or weather.
All my Reaver Hunters together can reach 15 strength.

Is that fair and balance??

 
So wait, if Skjall has 3 base strength, you play him, the next turn you start he goes to 1, right? Well then two out of the three SK strats use power-weakening (either for their team or for the enemy team) and both run Clan Brokvar Archer, it seems as though with two cards you can bring this card online your next turn. Not to mention the archer can either hit the enemy with two more hits, providing your axes with two strength, or weaken two more on your team while you prep your warcry card and pray the enemy doesn't have scorch or D bomb...

I do agree in both decks the card sucks though, but I think its less about the power/time to come online, and just more that it doesn't really synergize with either. If you're self-weakening then you probably don't want to buff your team before the warcry, and if you're weakening the enemy this is a nice buff, but why not just use a potion or something more reliable and instantaneous? As far as Dandelion goes, he pretty much fits well into the NR synergy-constant slow buffs to your team, and sometimes constant but also slow debuffs of the enemy.

Also, no love for Old Speartip? That dude's a monster...
 
soph912;n8431420 said:
Each Axeman can get 40+ strength with some stupid whale or weather.
All my Reaver Hunters together can reach 15 strength.

Is that fair and balance??

That's kind of a bad comparison because Axemen are the core of wounding decks, while reaver hunters are deck-thinners.
 
KasumiGoto;n8431780 said:
That's kind of a bad comparison because Axemen are the core of wounding decks, while reaver hunters are deck-thinners.

I kind of think that was the point. OP is making a bad comparison by comparing 2 cards from different factions in a vacuum
 
soph912;n8431420 said:
Each Axeman can get 40+ strength with some stupid whale or weather. All my Reaver Hunters together can reach 15 strength.
Maybe you can compare Axeman and the towers for a closer approximation. And Reaver Hunters with the Shieldmaiden which for me looks more fair.
 
Last edited:
Skjall was better than most people gave him credit for when he dealt three damage to himself and the enemy, and didn't slowly die the round he was played. I had him in two of my three Skellige decks. The change that removed the damage portion and replaced it with the "slowly dies" mechanic is what made him almost unplayable. Dandelion, I think, has had a change every patch (or almost every patch), this version is the most playable version so far and is probably where he should be for usefulness. I run him in my "W2 - Roche's Path" deck with Ves, Roche and all the blue stripes.

Here's hoping they leave Dandelion alone and fix Skjall to be playable again.
 
Hey, I just compare two between card look like same function. Gwent make those card but can't make them have a same value (power) to use.

If now, Dandelion and Skjall are neutral then tell me which card that you want to use?

That's a problem I want to talking about. I don't think that you want accept it.











Faustus800 NatoGreavesy soph912 JohnathanHopkins
 
Last edited:
DEERCG;n8435890 said:
If now, Dandelion and Skjall are neutral then tell me which card that you want to use?

That's a problem I want to talking about. I don't think that you want accept it.

And if I knew what lottery numbers would win tomorrow, I would be a millionaire. Talking about hypothetical situations is moot in this case. More importantly, following your reasoning, why not mention Witchers vs Crones, for example? Crones are flat out better. However, both belong to different factions and different factions have different rules. Imagine Caretaker as a neutral card, dear mother of all that's holy.
 
Skjall's unplayability is mostly related to the fact that he is both a tempo loss the moment he is played, has a long ramp-up time before he becomes useful, and requires a well-developed board in order to make any impact. He is simply badly designed in his current iteration, and will of course see changes in due time - it is just not a high priority by any means compared to other, more structural issues relevant to the game's overarching succes. Furthermore, as 4RM3D says, comparing him to Dandelion is nonsensical due to being different factions. Skjall doesn't need to be compared to different factions' cards to be judged, he can easily be judged on his own (lack of) merits.
 
Skjall just doesn't fit in any Skellige archetype - when Axeman was only self-wounding it made a bit of sense, but it just doesn't interact with that side enough to make it worthwhile even then. Craven Revived doesn't have any use whatsoever, Skellige has never been about board buffs like Northern Realms is, its much more about base strength. Personally I think Craven Revived should be made 5 strength, and buff any card sent to the graveyard by 1 base strength (2 maybe, but that's a huge power creep over Draig bon Dhu). I don't have a clue what to do with Skjall, maybe just make it a timer so the effect isn't instant (although ressing him and getting a second Craven Revived, then playing King Bran's power and Ermion would be a pretty good combo).
 
I think most people can agree that Skjall is in a bad place, whereas Dandelion has been changed multiple times to be in a good place. I doubt the devs are happy with this situation at all, and considering it's one of the least played cards, Skjall will receive buffs when the devs think of a viable solution.

Does anyone in this thread think the above statement isn't true? If not, why are we even debating this point?

I mean, they completely changed Phillipa, who's to say they won't do the same for Skjall?
 
Top Bottom