So, on the board in round 1 the player who goes first gets given a card with a 5 points to add to whatever unit the player decides to play - why? Also, why isn't this advantage available in round 2 or even 3?
Thanks.
Thanks.
It's a solution to the coinflip issue that was discussed a lot throughout beta. The player going first was considered to (almost) always be at a disadvantage with the old system and so, with Homecoming, the devs implemented the Tactical Advantage.
As to why it has to be used on round 1, I'd imagine it's because who starts rounds 2 and 3 depends on the players (i.e. who wins the previous round) rather than pure RNG (coinflip).
As to why it has to be used on round 1, I'd imagine it's because who starts rounds 2 and 3 depends on the players (i.e. who wins the previous round) rather than pure RNG (coinflip).
I would also like to point out that if you have played other CCG before, it may seem odd to award the player going first because in traditional CCG they usually have the advantage, unlike in Gwent.
In Gwent, it's not that simple. When going first, you change from a reactive style to a proactive style, which can be an advantage or a disadvantage based on your deck and the opponents. For example, heavy control decks are reactive and are usually at a disadvantage going first.
Ninja'd this from another thread because it's related to this.
Just like for some decks going first is an advantage, some decks thrive in a long round, while others do not and want a short round, instead. For example, engine-heavy decks tend to pass the second round (if they only have a few cards in hand) and go for a long third round. Most new players cannot take advantage of this and they do not know when to pass and when to push. This is one of the more tactical and challenging decisions of Gwent, which is difficult to master.
Why players want to win round 1 is because they want to dictate the narrative and decide whether they want to push for a 2-0 or go for a long round three. Mystic Echo (Francesca) Dwarfs or Harmony are notorious for pushing a 2-0. They win round 1 and then smack a quadruple Dwarf or Dryad engine on the board, which leads to an overwhelming head start and actually gives them the advantage when having to go first, in the second round. One last example is that you might want to bleed an engine deck in the second round, even when you have to go down a card in the final round because your finisher is stronger (like with tall Monsters).
In Gwent, it's not that simple. When going first, you change from a reactive style to a proactive style, which can be an advantage or a disadvantage based on your deck and the opponents. For example, heavy control decks are reactive and are usually at a disadvantage going first.
Ninja'd this from another thread because it's related to this.
Just like for some decks going first is an advantage, some decks thrive in a long round, while others do not and want a short round, instead. For example, engine-heavy decks tend to pass the second round (if they only have a few cards in hand) and go for a long third round. Most new players cannot take advantage of this and they do not know when to pass and when to push. This is one of the more tactical and challenging decisions of Gwent, which is difficult to master.
Why players want to win round 1 is because they want to dictate the narrative and decide whether they want to push for a 2-0 or go for a long round three. Mystic Echo (Francesca) Dwarfs or Harmony are notorious for pushing a 2-0. They win round 1 and then smack a quadruple Dwarf or Dryad engine on the board, which leads to an overwhelming head start and actually gives them the advantage when having to go first, in the second round. One last example is that you might want to bleed an engine deck in the second round, even when you have to go down a card in the final round because your finisher is stronger (like with tall Monsters).
Hmm, interesting stuff. Once you start looking at all this, it's amazing how more complex the game appears. Not normally things I'd given a second thought to.
Thanks for the responses.
Thanks for the responses.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention another important reason for winning the first round, you have last say in the final round, which can be the decisive factor in some matches. For example, imagine playing tall removal (Leo) against tall units (Ozzrel) in the final round. When Leo has last say, he can snipe Ozzrel. However, when Ozzrel has last say, Leo might not find a target.
I'd say the tactical advantage nowadays is obsolete if not just an OP tool for the META.
That would remove a lot of the tactical decisions of when to pass and when to push. So, better not.
Tactical advantage should begone, there's nothing usefull coming from it, it doesn't stop you from having to pass at 7 cards at hand nor does it protect units well enough, sometimes they indeed survive but since doing damage is so dominant it's likely that important units get killed eitherway with TA on it.
That's simply not true. You don't have to pass at 7 cards. There are plenty of decks that can and should push round 1. Furthermore, TA is good for luring out removal. You generally don't TA your best unit and you rarely open with that. Also, if you don't play any engines, you could save TA until the opponent passes.
TA should definitely remain, the only question is in what form or shape.
Sometimes its better to pass early if your hand is a mess. And if you're down on points and your hand is a mess, definately pass before you end up in card disadvantage. Decks can play todays 40 points in turn 3 of R1. Without TA. TA using a row-slot is also agitating me. It's not a real card compared to the others.