Pre-MW gwent + more meaningful rows + more witchery board + coinflip fix; would have been enough to make me happy.
- Status
Difference being that during Gold immunity's peak, l.e. promote, units were row locked. Line up all those promoted units and d bomb them. You'd need 5 locks each game to counter different artifacts and damage units now. Used to be that carrying a lock unit, waiting for that perfect lock was great. Now 3 locks in a round wouldn't be enough.
Another thing do note was that golds were limited to 4 cards. How many uninteractive card can you have now?
Also, why are locks not working on certain cards? Not immune ones.
You needed to have drawn that damage/control because, otherwise, on the next turn, Sabbath gets a Mandrake on top of that. And even if you did remove him, the opponent could just ress him again (in the final round), unless he was banished.
This has nothing to do with having point spam decks or not, but rather that a card and win condition should never be that binary.
Promote was part of the problem. Regardless, I have also mentioned Yennefer: Conjurer, which was an oppressive card. Much so, that players starting using D-shackles just to counter that card.
Indeed. I have also mentioned this in a separate thread. While the problem lies partly with the card design, the bigger issue is the core of Gwent and who goes first.
The original Witcher Gwent game could never have worked as a competitive CCG. That was my first thought when I heard about the announcement that Gwent would become a CCG. The game, at its core, is severely flawed. Throughout beta, Gwent moved away from being like the original game and, with Homecoming, the game was launched even further away, into unknown territory. And even now, those flaws still seep through the cracks.
Hence my suggestion.
Excluding Promote, you have a point with the 4 gold limit. The thing is, gold cards on their own, can win you the game. Artifacts do not put points on the board and always need to be combined. It's this synergy what makes artifacts dangerous, because otherwise, no one would care if a Spear pings you up to 8 damage (which is okay for 7 provisions). At the same time, no one is using the Spear just for the damage.
This whole thing makes artifacts too difficult to balance, as it stands now. The solution cannot be just increasing the provision costs. Artifacts as a whole need to change, hence my suggestion.
Well, it was quite possible to play around yen, you had 2 demote-cards, which could be used olterwise too (yen wasnt the only Gold worth demoting) and they had a debuff ability and later we got cards, which could damage gold, e.g. Iorweth. This alone extinct yen pretty moch, if i remeber correctly. That or the fact, that there were better decks/ card-combos.
Playing against both (Yen-Con and henselt-promote) was fun, even without playing a counterdeck.
I'm glad it stuck as well. Many original criticisms seemed to disappear or get posted into old threads
Yeah, i came back to try again with the Gwent, and jesus its even worse now, than i remember.
This game is just one hot mess. Can you REDs please bring back pre-homecoming gwent?
I really feel like if you run *BOTH* hc and old gwent, at the same time most people would just turn to old, even if you kept working only on HC with balance changes and patches.
DEAR god, every other deck is just nilf on witchers... its not about strategy anymore, its about finding and abusing OP combo, preferably one that leaves 0,00% chance, or any room for oponent to counterplay.
I swear to god, i feel like only viable decks now are full removal, cause you need (pardon my language) SHIT TON of removals, to get anywhere! Cause everybody just stacks one after another ROLLING unit that will snowball over you.
I lost 3 games in row, cause i didnt have *ENOUGH* removals - i repeat, i HAD removals, but NOT ENOUGH. So i get eskel growing to 15 strenght, letho turned into esked growing into 15. Wolf school trio, for 15 points, freakin IWO dealing total of 20 dmg during round, ciri allowing additional draw. I would need deck with 5x scorch a round to get anywhere.
Awful experience, would not recommend. And this game really had me hooked for hours not-so-long ago..
***EDIT***
And one more thing... cards like "Destroy unit stronger than 8" WHO IN THE GOOD LORDS NAME THOUGHT THAT IS GOING TO BE A GOOD IDEA!?
what was the freakin thought process behind that card! Geralt-Igni is pretty problematic, and sometimes makes just plain RETARDED power swings, if you got matching power on two units in a row, but that was situational... Scorch was supposed to be a card meant as a counter for heavy-buffing opponent, why the hell did you make direct *click and kill* card... SERIOUSLY, you straight up took a Hearthstone card, and push it into your game?
This game is just one hot mess. Can you REDs please bring back pre-homecoming gwent?
I really feel like if you run *BOTH* hc and old gwent, at the same time most people would just turn to old, even if you kept working only on HC with balance changes and patches.
DEAR god, every other deck is just nilf on witchers... its not about strategy anymore, its about finding and abusing OP combo, preferably one that leaves 0,00% chance, or any room for oponent to counterplay.
I swear to god, i feel like only viable decks now are full removal, cause you need (pardon my language) SHIT TON of removals, to get anywhere! Cause everybody just stacks one after another ROLLING unit that will snowball over you.
I lost 3 games in row, cause i didnt have *ENOUGH* removals - i repeat, i HAD removals, but NOT ENOUGH. So i get eskel growing to 15 strenght, letho turned into esked growing into 15. Wolf school trio, for 15 points, freakin IWO dealing total of 20 dmg during round, ciri allowing additional draw. I would need deck with 5x scorch a round to get anywhere.
Awful experience, would not recommend. And this game really had me hooked for hours not-so-long ago..
***EDIT***
And one more thing... cards like "Destroy unit stronger than 8" WHO IN THE GOOD LORDS NAME THOUGHT THAT IS GOING TO BE A GOOD IDEA!?
what was the freakin thought process behind that card! Geralt-Igni is pretty problematic, and sometimes makes just plain RETARDED power swings, if you got matching power on two units in a row, but that was situational... Scorch was supposed to be a card meant as a counter for heavy-buffing opponent, why the hell did you make direct *click and kill* card... SERIOUSLY, you straight up took a Hearthstone card, and push it into your game?
Last edited:
I sent this to customer service.
Because they did not care much, I share it here.
___________
I have to be honest: I believe in CD Projekt RED.
I have bought each one of the games that have been released for consoles and, later, I have got them for PC. Thanks, in part, that playing Gwent in the BETA allowed me to enjoy the gifts you offered for The Witcher 1 and The Witcher 2.
Because I love the company, I have directly supported the development of GWENT. I have done it almost exclusively for the pleasure of supporting: this is serious.
When Gwent was in Beta, I supported his development by buying twice the most expensive barrels. I am a lover of the TCC and when I played The Witcher 3, I was very excited to see that they had included a minigame of cards within Sapkowski's universe.
I say that my main reason was to help the development of Gwent, because I could enjoy very little of the game due to my studies (you can see it, in the hours dedicated).
I believed in CD Projekt RED with Gwent. I supported your company. I trusted that Homecoming was really going to be a significant advance for Gwent. I felt hope when I read "we want to go back to the roots of the game".
Homecoming left. With my latent desire, I supported the company again by buying the "Welcome Package"; even if I already had all the cards I wanted to have. Pre-bought Thronebreaker; and there I began to fear the worst.
Gwent Homecoming was not Gwent. They took the beginning, they disfigured it and created a game that has nothing to do with what is in The Witcher 3. There was no "Homecoming". You lied.
I know that due to the policies of purchasing items in the GOG store, the money is not returned.
I know that it was my decision, autonomous and completely conscious, to finance a project that disappointed me.
But I want to tell you that now, as a client, I do not feel satisfied. I feel like I invested my money in something that resulted in nothing more than an unfulfilled promise: you used Gwent to lure the unwary like me. I invested money in a project, which was completely transformed, where only a glimpse of what it once was was rescued.
I write this now, and not before, because I had hoped to understand the game, learning to enjoy it with the community. But ... the community only helped to detract from my concept.
For me, CD PROJEKT RED used Gwent to squeeze out more of The Witcher universe. And I, like many others, believed in the smoke that you sold us.
I paid, a lot of money, for something I will not use or enjoy. I am very disappointed, coming from CD PROJEKT RED.
I just wanted to express myself.
Hi,
I don't read these forums often but this is the first time (and maybe last) I contribute my 2 digital bit-cents here.
I have not uninstalled the game but in last few weeks I've barely touched it anymore and most likely will uninstall. Homecoming is just terrible (for my taste) compared to what game was..
What did HOMECOMING get WRONG and why it utterly failed (for me):
1. Pace. Game was FAST, you could set a quick game as a fun quicky or have a session of fun pacey games. In homecoming matches drag out too long... As a filthy casual (300+ hours over a year on beta) I am here to have fun not to waste time... Now it makes me sleepy.
2. Meta. The tempo and card advantage meta (with maybe few exceptions like consume) was simple, fun and player engaging... I cannot event figure out what the meta is now
3. (Premium) Card art. Absolutely loved it over all other card games (which was important reason that kept me hooked in Gwent). Mostly it is still there but already mobile/console is spreading its ugly head - card names stupified (shortened), strange change of card quality (no silver!?!)
4. 3D art overhauled look of battlefield. I don't know if overhaul was done only to get a bigger splice of money pie (and extend the game to new projects like Thronebreaker), but the new cardboards and leader looks are only cool for so long... I played this game for the playability/game experience, less so because some Leader looked cool.
This seems to be classic game product management mistake when proven and working titles got moved from 2D to 3D and game designers forgot that most important thing about game is the feel of the game to end user not the eyecandies... 3D alone means nothing except maybe the first few hours trading cool first impression against longevity and loosing player engangement. Take chess for example, they are still using 2D boards to describe match results as it is simple and visible for eye.
I suppose CDR wanted to keep to pace with other card game creators who all (except Heartstone) seem to be coming up with some wacky 3D wannabe stuff. And eventhough I might try the Valve's Artefact, I already know it get's old fast.
I am sure there are also positives in Homecoming but above reasons are taking the fun out of the game and alienate me from it. Sorry if my reasons were listed in erratic way.
Please consider releasing/rolleback beta (classic/vanilla) version of the game instead of this abomination of mediocrity, from a card game point of view anyway.
Keep Homecoming version in specific side project(s) (Thronebreaker,...), if you have to.
+++ RIP Gwent as we knew it +++
I don't read these forums often but this is the first time (and maybe last) I contribute my 2 digital bit-cents here.
I have not uninstalled the game but in last few weeks I've barely touched it anymore and most likely will uninstall. Homecoming is just terrible (for my taste) compared to what game was..
What did HOMECOMING get WRONG and why it utterly failed (for me):
1. Pace. Game was FAST, you could set a quick game as a fun quicky or have a session of fun pacey games. In homecoming matches drag out too long... As a filthy casual (300+ hours over a year on beta) I am here to have fun not to waste time... Now it makes me sleepy.
2. Meta. The tempo and card advantage meta (with maybe few exceptions like consume) was simple, fun and player engaging... I cannot event figure out what the meta is now
3. (Premium) Card art. Absolutely loved it over all other card games (which was important reason that kept me hooked in Gwent). Mostly it is still there but already mobile/console is spreading its ugly head - card names stupified (shortened), strange change of card quality (no silver!?!)
4. 3D art overhauled look of battlefield. I don't know if overhaul was done only to get a bigger splice of money pie (and extend the game to new projects like Thronebreaker), but the new cardboards and leader looks are only cool for so long... I played this game for the playability/game experience, less so because some Leader looked cool.
This seems to be classic game product management mistake when proven and working titles got moved from 2D to 3D and game designers forgot that most important thing about game is the feel of the game to end user not the eyecandies... 3D alone means nothing except maybe the first few hours trading cool first impression against longevity and loosing player engangement. Take chess for example, they are still using 2D boards to describe match results as it is simple and visible for eye.
I suppose CDR wanted to keep to pace with other card game creators who all (except Heartstone) seem to be coming up with some wacky 3D wannabe stuff. And eventhough I might try the Valve's Artefact, I already know it get's old fast.
I am sure there are also positives in Homecoming but above reasons are taking the fun out of the game and alienate me from it. Sorry if my reasons were listed in erratic way.
Please consider releasing/rolleback beta (classic/vanilla) version of the game instead of this abomination of mediocrity, from a card game point of view anyway.
Keep Homecoming version in specific side project(s) (Thronebreaker,...), if you have to.
+++ RIP Gwent as we knew it +++
It makes me really sad that there exists a forum on this game but nobody listens to us. there are no game modes ( for example 5 wins 2 lose tournaments) with ore/scrap or kegs as rewards to give us a motivation or even something other than just queue up and play . Many people including me have posted many times about potential new bundles in the shop but all we get is premium kegs and a pointless tournament in which we cannot even participate and for me personally is totally indifferent . The artifact Nerf was a good thing but i think it was the only good thing that happened after the game launched. I like this game but i will stop playing for a while simply because there are not many things to do to keep me interested ( i even got a friend to play the game and more or less he has the same opinions as me) . take magic arena for example with 5+ different game modes to chose from. Sorry game designers or w/e but you need to listen a bit to your community. if i am so wrong by all means let me know in the comments..
i think you got that wrong mate. the homecoming was initiated because CDPR listened to the community too much...
Have you played Thronebreaker? Because I have the feeling that Thronebreaker was the main reason for changing Gwent into its Homecoming version. Why I have this feeling? Because for a RPG, it would be more attractive for casuals or fans of the Witcher universe who haven't tried beta Gwent or any other card game before, to have a more realistic and presentable board than the tabletop / tavern looking one we had in old Gwent.
I also believe that the vast majority of the community didn't ask for a whole row to be removed, to have fewer bronzes, to lessen the card advantage mechanic (except for the CA spies), to not be able (in most cases) to tactically drypass a round, to change the mulligan system, to change how leaders work and many more. No, all the above were done because of how the new board's layout works. Presentation stuff above gameplay stuff.
I've read a twitter post from a well known streamer / caster that many people don't like change. No, for me it's way simpler than that. I can compare the two products (Beta VS Homecoming) and decide which one is the better version of the game.
PS Nothing personal, just found an opportunity from your post to disagree with the opinion that Homecoming is what the fans wanted.
Last edited:
I've never seen anything like it honestly. I'm sure many are sick of me complaining but we have a dedicated, patient, welcoming and friendly community who only wants what's best for the game we love. However all feedback seems disregarded. I been gaming on the daily since I was 4 back with the atari, I'm 40 now and have yet to see a communities feedback disregarded like gwent. I worked tech support for a big game publisher as well so I understand the financial aspect of a company doing what they feel will monetize longterm. However ceos/lead developers need to realize that when they have an actual community and something unique to not scrap it for a clone of a more popular game. This way everyone loses in the end
Post automatically merged:
Yes the community wanted changes but they changed everything we liked too. We gave more than enough feedback. We love the idea of homecoming just don't remove a row.. Oh your removing a row? Just don't remove a bronze.. Oh your removing a bronze now? Just get rid of rng then.. Oh you've increased rng throughout? OK just give us a new faction and architypes.. Oh you've removed all original architypes as well as card tags? We didn't ask for anything homecoming turned out to be.
Last edited:
I'm sorry if I'm mistaken, but wasn't that your account before you wanted it to be deleted? You change your opinion quite often my friend.
Spent days raging about HC; then made a thread saying that you were wrong and you want to apologize and other people, who don't like HC, should do the same. A few days later you wrote a 1 star review on gog (quote: "i don't know what to say other then I'm through with it. just kill it... it's probably the worst flops i have ever seen.").
Homecoming was the right decision, midwinter (and other mistakes, but really mostly midwinter) hurt the game a lot and a significant number of people quit, but the result of Homecoming is the opposite of what the word 'Homecoming' would suggest, so please stop saying they listened to the community. Nobody asked for this, they decided to make it that way and apparently a lot of people don't think the result is an interesting or enjoyable game. Maybe they should have concentrated on fixing the things the community actually critized instead of creating a new game.....
Last edited:
Show me specifically whom and how listed out the detailed list of things that was supposed to stay in gwent. come on dude back your words. people complained tirelessly about EVERYTHING. if CDPR wouldn't have listened to all the moans and cries we would have a succesful product. i give my left prosthetic eye we would.
Post automatically merged:
yes, I do. I'm in doubt. anything wrong with that?
Last edited:
Yes, if you're in doubt, stop bashing CDPR and the community alternately.
Hey Gwent Team
Previously I mentioned that I thought you were heading in the wrong direction regarding some of the visuals of the game. The general appearance of many things improved since that first preview, but it still seems like visuals during gameplay are only attractive/engaging if you consider each area separately:
(a) I really like the background graphics but the only things that seem to "work" with it are the UI elements which technically should work with almost anything since they overlay xyz.
(b) One would think that 3D leaders would go well with the current battlefield background but even the way they've been implemented now makes them seem out of place. I think the worst thing is to have a 3D character standing and spending most of their time in a sort of idle animation. Why are they standing, and why are they staring at the enemy leader? We all know they aren't going anywhere or doing anything interesting. What's the point?
Most of the 3D leaders make sense if we ignore them (or try to ignore some clipping issues on Eredin etc.), or stare at them as they slow down the passing of a turn, and what does that say?
This brings me to my favourite 3D leader in terms of behaviour - Jan Calveit, who thankfully sits down. Even though at times you made him stand up for no reason, he is still my favourite.
It makes sense for the leaders to be seated since they aren't attending an incredibly eventful event. I've heard the idea was to create the feel of a battlefield but, I'm sorry, the incoherence of the visuals and pace of the game doesn't bring about the engaging and threatening feel of a battle for me.
It works fine for a battle of strategy which is why I wish you would make all the leaders be seated - they don't all have to sit on the same things or sit in similar ways. Keep their absolute positions the same but orient them as if they were gazing diagonally across the area of play so we can get a better look at our leader, and they can get a better view of the cards. Create sets of animations for them so that players can get a sense of who they are through body language, posture, interaction with props that appear/disappear, dialogue, reactions to various events during play, and so on. Even when seated there is enough room for creativity to bring them to life.
(c) So, so far, we have the 3D leaders that don't quite make sense with the background, and to this we add cards that don't quite make sense with the leaders, and don't quite make sense with the background. Don't get me wrong, I love the artwork on the cards but when you put a card in play it feels like it goes nowhere. It just sort of hovers there and you don't know if the leader can see it either because there's nothing happening in the leader's "space" or on the field.
(d) I think many players hold CDPR to high standards because they've seen what the designers, developers, and other creatives there are capable of. The visuals still feel like they need to make more sense in terms of tying everything together. I know it's a turn-based card game but somebody over there said they want to bring it to life, and it just hasn't been brought to life, yet.
In terms of game mechanics I have to repeat what other players have already mentioned. Most of the time, everything feels too similar. The faction identities seem to be missing or diluted, and a lot of the fun to be had is also missing. At the moment I can still enjoy arena mode because some random deck against some other random deck isn't bad, mostly. Before Homecoming, I had more fun creating, testing and tweaking decks from different factions because you ended up with something that felt like a carefully made character having their own identity, strengths and weaknesses.
There probably isn't much else for me to add right now since others have given loads of suggestions already, and I don't know what the processes are like for the team to turn suggestions into changes - it really does seem like there's a manager, or two (or whatever), that isn't paying attention to grassroots aspects or is just out of touch with the potential final form of Gwent, and how successful it can be, because it's not meant to be like other card games. It's meant to be a certain kind of "better" ... more or less.
I'll say the same thing I've said before. I'm still interested in the game and hope you guys can make it work!
Previously I mentioned that I thought you were heading in the wrong direction regarding some of the visuals of the game. The general appearance of many things improved since that first preview, but it still seems like visuals during gameplay are only attractive/engaging if you consider each area separately:
(a) I really like the background graphics but the only things that seem to "work" with it are the UI elements which technically should work with almost anything since they overlay xyz.
(b) One would think that 3D leaders would go well with the current battlefield background but even the way they've been implemented now makes them seem out of place. I think the worst thing is to have a 3D character standing and spending most of their time in a sort of idle animation. Why are they standing, and why are they staring at the enemy leader? We all know they aren't going anywhere or doing anything interesting. What's the point?
Most of the 3D leaders make sense if we ignore them (or try to ignore some clipping issues on Eredin etc.), or stare at them as they slow down the passing of a turn, and what does that say?
This brings me to my favourite 3D leader in terms of behaviour - Jan Calveit, who thankfully sits down. Even though at times you made him stand up for no reason, he is still my favourite.
It makes sense for the leaders to be seated since they aren't attending an incredibly eventful event. I've heard the idea was to create the feel of a battlefield but, I'm sorry, the incoherence of the visuals and pace of the game doesn't bring about the engaging and threatening feel of a battle for me.
It works fine for a battle of strategy which is why I wish you would make all the leaders be seated - they don't all have to sit on the same things or sit in similar ways. Keep their absolute positions the same but orient them as if they were gazing diagonally across the area of play so we can get a better look at our leader, and they can get a better view of the cards. Create sets of animations for them so that players can get a sense of who they are through body language, posture, interaction with props that appear/disappear, dialogue, reactions to various events during play, and so on. Even when seated there is enough room for creativity to bring them to life.
(c) So, so far, we have the 3D leaders that don't quite make sense with the background, and to this we add cards that don't quite make sense with the leaders, and don't quite make sense with the background. Don't get me wrong, I love the artwork on the cards but when you put a card in play it feels like it goes nowhere. It just sort of hovers there and you don't know if the leader can see it either because there's nothing happening in the leader's "space" or on the field.
(d) I think many players hold CDPR to high standards because they've seen what the designers, developers, and other creatives there are capable of. The visuals still feel like they need to make more sense in terms of tying everything together. I know it's a turn-based card game but somebody over there said they want to bring it to life, and it just hasn't been brought to life, yet.
In terms of game mechanics I have to repeat what other players have already mentioned. Most of the time, everything feels too similar. The faction identities seem to be missing or diluted, and a lot of the fun to be had is also missing. At the moment I can still enjoy arena mode because some random deck against some other random deck isn't bad, mostly. Before Homecoming, I had more fun creating, testing and tweaking decks from different factions because you ended up with something that felt like a carefully made character having their own identity, strengths and weaknesses.
There probably isn't much else for me to add right now since others have given loads of suggestions already, and I don't know what the processes are like for the team to turn suggestions into changes - it really does seem like there's a manager, or two (or whatever), that isn't paying attention to grassroots aspects or is just out of touch with the potential final form of Gwent, and how successful it can be, because it's not meant to be like other card games. It's meant to be a certain kind of "better" ... more or less.
I'll say the same thing I've said before. I'm still interested in the game and hope you guys can make it work!
For tea
For real? I think that homecoming letter spelled it out clearly. An apology for fking up and that rng would be toned down, how skill needs to matter and that gwent was going back to its roots. Anyone who has played before could and would have never imagined homecomings results would be what we have today. Had they said we are scrapping gwent and creating a new Witcher themed card game called "boost" I think we would not be as upset. We gave feedback about what needed fixed the end were ignored
no no no. thats not what I meant. show me a list community provided of things that has to remain in game and I will show a post where the all saint "community" says exactly the opposite. lets do this for the arguments sake at least. if it fails it fails.
I will add to that. The RNG was PEANUTS pre midwinter. people complaint still. CDPR had to do something to stop damage to the brand. After that every consequential change they made, people complaint more and more. Gwent team lost their nerve and who wouldn't, I dont blame them. Especially due to constant change of non-backwards compatible management within the team.
Honestly, I would go full troll on this one. And in terms of bashing CDPR. I only had one issue with them. I wanted them to grow a pair. A pair of big bad brass 5 pounders, cause thats what you need to stand up to the "community".
Last edited:
- Status