Actual main problems with Gwent [in-depth view]

[EduFerraz]

Yes, they messes with The game.

I am tired to play against:
Golden nekker, ciri Nova, knickers, roach, ring, aerondight, mistery box.

This neutral cards are in every game. We can include snowball in some decks too.

Also we have The faction thinners (from 2 to 4 cards).

So every deck, half of it (no mather The faction) its The same.

 

[DolphPingus]

Yes, they messes with The game.

I am tired to play against:
Golden nekker, ciri Nova, knickers, roach, ring, aerondight, mistery box.

This neutral cards are in every game. We can include snowball in some decks too.

Also we have The faction thinners (from 2 to 4 cards).

So every deck, half of it (no mather The faction) its The same.

The past should teach: whenever you release a broken card that everyone can use, devotion disappears and ladder will be full of the same nonsense. All the factions that include nekker, aerondight and ring play in the same way, zero diversity.
Neutral card should be meant as a support if you need some specific answers ( like locks, purifies, tech cards against particular decks and so on ), not a core.
Card designers ignored this little detail, and here we are.

 

[igor565]

The past should teach: whenever you release a broken card that everyone can use, devotion disappears and ladder will be full of the same nonsense. All the factions that include nekker, aerondight and ring play in the same way, zero diversity.
Neutral card should be meant as a support if you need some specific answers ( like locks, purifies, tech cards against particular decks and so on ), not a core.
Card designers ignored this little detail, and here we are.

No-one cares about breaking devotion. It received almost no support from the day it was introduced plus neutrals are just too good, not including them limits deck’s points potential.

 

[NilesDavis]

Personally I think unstoppable recurring cards are a massive problem.
Sihil for example is broken af. A special that returns to your hand and gets stronger everytime. Sure you need to play a bronze card and destroy weak enemy units at first, but with spies or patricial fury that's not a problem at all.
Cards like these should be nerfed asap.

 

[Slizzl]

I'm starting to think a few cards should have a "Self-Reveal" tag or some sort of visual indicator your opponent is using them like Sunset Wanderers has. It should be clear when your opponent's deck has Sihil so that you can at least know you should fight for top points by all means necessary.

 

[igor565]

I'm starting to think a few cards should have a "Self-Reveal" tag or some sort of visual indicator your opponent is using them like Sunset Wanderers has. It should be clear when your opponent's deck has Sihil so that you can at least know you should fight for top points by all means necessary.

What’s the point? Opponent will start boosting Sihil as soon as possible, so it’s not that sneaky

 

[uber_croupier]

Imho, Aerondight is the least Gwent card out there. It should be reworked since it massively favours Blue coin, to the point that Blue plays it often for ~8 + ~14, while Red does ~3 to ~5 if at all. It really feels like your deck was stripped out of it's provisions. It's even more frustrating cause I'm Red most of the time since trying to abuse it Another aspect where it just feels bad knowing, you could have a Heatwave instead while on Red, without stressing for pointless Aero that just bricks your hand.

I tried two strong decks and I could easily say, that over 130 games this season already, I rarely loose when I'm Blue, but I can easily predict the outcome of the game while it's starting Red, which usually is a loose that I correctly guessed - which in the end feels like a punishment to go through, with hopes of winning, rather than an interesting game it felt before recent expansion.

Maybe GN would not be a problem, if Aerodight wouldn't be so abusive on Blue?

Imagine a scenario, where you both play the same, quite expensive card and yours plays for 15 points less only because you started second - very often costing you that game. I can account, that most of games I've lost were due to enemy being first, smashing me with 25 points of removal on their Aerondight. Current meta is tempo-ish, and it's almost impossible to catch up with a Blue player, even with 9-13 point plays every turn.

Ring is still an issue, but I think revealing it's boosting process to the enemy could help playing around it. It often plays for 13+ without any setup. It even happened whereas I'd spent couple of important golds to get the advantage and the round, just to be surprised by a 19 point slam, which makes me loose on even. So often, even if on Blue, I pass earlier without Spores in hand, which again, is not the real idea behind Gwent.

I apprecieate the ideas and creativeness behind some cards, but they just don't fit, at least those two I mentioned, I think.

 

[DolphPingus]

Imho, Aerondight is the least Gwent card out there. It should be reworked since it massively favours Blue coin, to the point that Blue plays it often for ~8 + ~14, while Red does ~3 to ~5 if at all. It really feels like your deck was stripped out of it's provisions. It's even more frustrating cause I'm Red most of the time since trying to abuse it Another aspect where it just feels bad knowing, you could have a Heatwave instead while on Red, without stressing for pointless Aero that just bricks your hand.

I tried two strong decks and I could easily say, that over 130 games this season already, I rarely loose when I'm Blue, but I can easily predict the outcome of the game while it's starting Red, which usually is a loose that I correctly guessed - which in the end feels like a punishment to go through, with hopes of winning, rather than an interesting game it felt before recent expansion.

Maybe GN would not be a problem, if Aerodight wouldn't be so abusive on Blue?

Imagine a scenario, where you both play the same, quite expensive card and yours plays for 15 points less only because you started second - very often costing you that game. I can account, that most of games I've lost were due to enemy being first, smashing me with 25 points of removal on their Aerondight. Current meta is tempo-ish, and it's almost impossible to catch up with a Blue player, even with 9-13 point plays every turn.

Ring is still an issue, but I think revealing it's boosting process to the enemy could help playing around it. It often plays for 13+ without any setup. It even happened whereas I'd spent couple of important golds to get the advantage and the round, just to be surprised by a 19 point slam, which makes me loose on even. So often, even if on Blue, I pass earlier without Spores in hand, which again, is not the real idea behind Gwent.

I apprecieate the ideas and creativeness behind some cards, but they just don't fit, at least those two I mentioned, I think.

A great idea would be a list of banned cards that aren't allowed in pro rank, updated every month. Avoiding heavy rng and coin-flip resources will create an healthier meta for players who like strategy, while these cards can be used in normal mode by everyone.
In this way, they can design both random and fair cards to please all the spectrum of the audience.
Of course this will never happen. They print 5 usable cards every 4 months and scared to nerf obvious broken stuff, so i don't expect much if the level of incompetence is so high.

 

[quintivarium]

A great idea would be a list of banned cards that aren't allowed in pro rank, updated every month. Avoiding heavy rng and coin-flip resources will create an healthier meta for players who like strategy, while these cards can be used in normal mode by everyone.
In this way, they can design both random and fair cards to please all the spectrum of the audience.
Of course this will never happen. They print 5 usable cards every 4 months and scared to nerf obvious broken stuff, so i don't expect much if the level of incompetence is so high.

I appreciate this sentiment, but it has, too, has problems.

First, it is not only pro players who might appreciate a less RNG heavy game.

Second, agreeing upon which cards are RNG heavy may not be obvious, e.g. which card in a combination is at fault.

Third, most of the time when play quality is dominated by random factors, it is not cards that are at fault -- it is matchups that are too heavily Rock/Paper/Scissors in nature, or bad luck in draws (caused by too much variance between high-end cards and the deck dross). I think these issues can be addressed without offending either the population that want a strategy rich game and that which likes flashy random effects.

 

[DolphPingus]

First, it is not only pro players who might appreciate a less RNG heavy game.

Yes, of course. I said pro rank because it's the environment that contains the highest amount of people who like the skillbased aspect of the game. I don't mean only top 64, but all of them.

Second, agreeing upon which cards are RNG heavy may not be obvious, e.g. which card in a combination is at fault.

Golden nekker is an rng/crazy variance abomination, and it was obvious since day 1. Aerondight is an example of coin dependant card that ruined the skill expression. I dont' ask them to be diviners lol but, when a problem is so clear, they just need to do something about that ( not wasting 2/3 months to gather "datas" ).

Third, most of the time when play quality is dominated by random factors, it is not cards that are at fault -- it is matchups that are too heavily Rock/Paper/Scissors in nature, or bad luck in draws (caused by too much variance between high-end cards and the deck dross). I think these issues can be addressed without offending either the population that want a strategy rich game and that which likes flashy random effects.

Bad draws happens, it's a card game after all. But i completely agree on the huge variance you are pointing out. To solve the problem, nerfing is the key. With a reduced difference between high-end cards and low-end ones, bad luck is less relevant and resource managment incentivised.

 

[Slizzl]

How did the devs manage to turn Gwent into a coinflip simulator AGAIN?
The coinflip issue used to be a fundamental problem with the game which took a very long time before it was finally addressed. Now they seem to be creating cards whose intended purpose is to abuse the coinflip. Just mindboggling.

 

[quintivarium]

To be honest, Aerondight has its place to support point slam archetypes. Unfortunately, it has become an almost auto-include, coin-flip gamble. That suggests to me that it’s expected return is too high.

In my opinion, a one provision boost to Aerondight would address two issues: excessive use of a coin-flippy card (Aerondight) and too many potential payoff cards for the high RNG Nekker card.

 

[uber_croupier]

In my opinion, a one provision boost to Aerondight would address two issues: excessive use of a coin-flippy card (Aerondight) and too many potential payoff cards for the high RNG Nekker card.

A boost? Do you mean provision cost increase ? I hope you do Even if so, this would not fix the coin abuse problem, that this card creates.

How did the devs manage to turn Gwent into a coinflip simulator AGAIN?
The coinflip issue used to be a fundamental problem with the game which took a very long time before it was finally addressed. Now they seem to be creating cards whose intended purpose is to abuse the coinflip. Just mindboggling.

We could run on "organised" matchmaking, knowing we will play on Red for example, so we can choose appropriate decks for that, but, that would affect everything, and doing something like this, cause of a card nobody wants in the game in the first place, could be a grave mistake.