Said the one who no longer is playing. Amazing.
Atleast i'm having a blast playing the game, while you having a blast playing victim on these forums.
- Status
Atleast i'm having a blast playing the game, while you having a blast playing victim on these forums.
You signed up on November 2nd and claimed that you are a new player. I quote your words "For new players like me". Even before the nerf, you were defending Homecoming. you have given your opinion on every topic of this forum always supporting the part of the choices of the developers. You said that the choices to make gwent, a massive and non-niche game were right, but the numbers are wrong. I believe your opinion is far from reality. At least do not talk bad about beta, thanks.
I started playing in the early October. I wont deny that the numbers from the twitch channel are not in my favour. I wont deny that the early lauch of homecoming was a disaster. But I'm very honest when I say that I prefer the current gwent over beta, based on my last month of play compared to my 1 month of play during beta.
Wow, early october. I'm sorry, but you've never even seen peak gwent and obviously you won't be able to understand the frustration of some of us longtime players. Gwent had a great foundation, but CDPR hurt it by constantly removing mechanics from the game without compensation and dumbing down so many cards in their infamous midwinter update. Then they acknowlegded that they've messed things up and promised that Gwent would return to its roots. Instead of doing this they just gave us a completely new game with countless questionable design decisions and without so many things, which made Gwent great in the first place.
Post automatically merged:
Some stuff Tailbot has posted a few days ago:
"I think the biggest problem with gwent atm is power disparity between cards. Playing/drawing lowest provision cards just feels bad. Around 1/3 of your deck consists of cards that you don't want to see and just mulligan or dump them when you have a chance to. This is the opposite to pre-hc when bronze cards were the core of your deck and you felt good about your deck as a whole. I would like to see this power gap between cards become smaller by for example making lowest provision cards in the game cost 5 or maybe even 6 provisions. "
Interesting that he says it now although this issue was obvious from day one. I'd go even one step further and say that the provision system is just garbage.
Yeah, they are reverting one of their idiotic changes. HC is so awesome, if they continue to revert most of their changes they should have a decent game in 2020.
Last edited:
Pretty much this. Sure, it was legal, but being legal doesn't give a good image, doesn't make it a good move and doesn't make it fair for the players.
Post automatically merged:
This doesn't seem to me like a place where people want to force or demand a change. It seems to me like people need a place to vent, and this is it. They got something they liked screwed and probably, in the process, they felt like they lost the value of the money they invested in the game. It seems like something normal to me to see things that are a bit out of place if that's what you meant.
Anyhow, if you don't feel that need just head out.
Last edited:
Thanks. I'm doing so and reading other threads as well.
Understood. Some mechanics and interactions were removed. I've played Hearthstone since its beta (they're not the same, but similar games) and lots of mechanics have been added step by step with each expansion and the game have become more complex, with more synergies/interactions slowly. I mean that these erased "old" mechanics are likely to come back to the game, maybe reworked/balanced I guess (and I hope so, they look interesting).
On the other hand, I agree with you about the passing mechanic and the hand limit. In some games I could see that the way you pass the 1st, 2nd or both rounds doesn't matter at all since both player start with 10 cards and, many times, one has to "trash" a card in order to prevent milling another potential core card due to the hand limit or just losing draws. I think the round draws and/or hand limit are almost mandatory to be reworked/rethought to be fairer and more rewarding for the player who plays and passes better.
When I wrote about "hate" I didn't refer to anyone in particular. As you may understand I didn't read the whole forum. However, it's true than many people don't argument their points of view with good manners. They just puke and spit words as it happens in most online gaming communities.
When I complained about severe and stupid critiques I meant mostly those about bad performance, crashes or the "end turn button". About the 3rd row, card mechanics and gameplay in general I'm just trying to understand these complaints and trying to learn about the changes made along the different Gwent's versions.
Thank you mates for answering. Just to summarize, I guess that many things in the game have been erased/minimized in order to, as many say, attract more casual players to the game. Nowadays, with so many card games, I think it's not a good strategy to look for casual players and take a chance to lose your most loyal players who end up being your fanbase and I'm not sure this was the plan of CDPR. Maybe I'm wrong.
As for the 3rd row, some people think that this was a decision made in order to reduce the size of the board to make the game viable to be released in mobile phones and tablets in the future. I think the same and, if this is the real reason, I'm sorry mates but it's absolutely reasonable since this kind of games are widely played on mobile platforms. I think this is a "cheap cut" to the game if attracts more players and makes the game more economically viable and likely to receive support/contents,etc. Neverthless, maybe this "cut" should have been done more smartly.
Well, besides what has been already pointed out (card advantage, the bluffing game, row locks, abilities like muster and strengthen, tutors, etc), I think one of the unique things Gwent had, which they decided to diminish by a lot, was the Witcher's lore. Using the Witcher universe as a base for the game's design not only added to the "feel" of the gameplay and the game's personality, but it also added variety in abilities.
Characters' abilities tried to encapture the character they represented. There were cards like Kambi/Hemdall (that destroyed everything on the board and gave the opponent a 20 point card), Old Gaunter had a risky gamble (where you had to guess if a card was lower or higher than 5 and if you won you could choose a card from your deck, but if you lost you were penalized and the opponent got to draw a card), or something as simple as a small character from Witcher 3, Ronvid the Incessant. If you haven't played Witcher 3 or don't remember, in the game, he is a wimp who is always challenging you to a fight, yet no matter how many times you beat him he keeps coming back again and again to duel you. So before in Beta that was his ability, the only way to get rid of him was to lock and destroy him cause if not he kept reappearing as a 1 strength unit no matter how many times he was destroyed.
This brought a lot of personality to the game in my opinion and it made the Witcher aspect of Gwent shine. Now, this has been diminished and/or abandoned, so while a character like Johnny or Sarah (who are mischevious kids in the game) before had mischevious abilities, they both now attack. Common abilities have been placed to any card no matter what or who they represent.
Not only that, but using the Witcher universe as a template for design also provided a logical structure to specific classifications in the game. Most Mages and Sorceress in every faction were designed to have 3 abilities instead of 1, some Monster cards (like Foglets) had a synergy with Weather (Fog), same with Wild Hunt Units and Frost; Healers and medics (like Nenneke, Shani, Sigrdrifa or any priestess) brought units back to life, every faction had a Spy to gain an advantage, etc. There was a logic in the design that was inspired by the Witcher universe and it made the game feel unique.
I understand that maybe all of this was taken out to better balance the game, but it took away a lot of the personality from Gwent (and if you asked some of us who played the game, we believe it worked for what it was). They say "God is in the details," and in the case of Gwent I feel those details where the thing that made the game shine, yet those same details are the ones they either removed, diminished or enclosed within rules (like the 10 hand limit for card advantage).
Also while I agree that some of the heavy complaints like how 2 rows are better than 3 have been overexaggerated (although I agree that I would also prefer the latter and the reason for removing Siege was not in favor of the games main goal), the origin of the idea was that before rows had a meaning and in accordance, some units were row locked. Machines belong in Siege, archers in ranged and infantry in melee. This idea was scrapped long ago (after gold immunity was removed), but it was still logical and it gave the game a cohesive and well-structured idea of what Gwent was. It also provided a strategical aspect to gameplay since bronzes (or units with equal strengths) that went in the same row made you vulnerable to Igni.
There was a lot more, but if you are interested you should try out Witcher 3's Gwent if you haven't yet. It's not the same as Beta in any way, but it still feels like Gwenty Gwent.
PS
[Just to point this out] At least for me it is not hatred or rejection that I feel for Homecoming; its just that honestly, I don't find this game fun or special. It's a good game I guess, it's competent and it has a focus, but it's not for me (which is weird because the previous one seemed to be tailored made for my taste, hours and hours of sweet Gwent). It's just not the same idea and it doesn't have the uniqueness, fun, freedom, and speed as the one they had already given us.
Also, really I say RIP but it doesn't mean Homecoming. Beta Gwent is done, that game doesn't exist anymore, but Homecoming is still alive and it will keep going. If you look closely people don't refer to this new game as Gwent because even if it has the name it doesn't feel like it, so it is then referred to as Homecoming, that's just it.
Happy Trails
True, "Bringing back the Witcher" and "Turning Gwent into a battlefield" were two of the bullet points in their HC announcement letter, but in terms of gameplay closed beta gwent is still the iteration of gwent, which fullfills these goals the best and HC feels like the worst in this regard. It looks like most cards just got completely random abilities, there are no flavourful decks like old Wild Hunt or Queensgard and many other. It seems like they completely concentrated on the visual part, but I think it should have been the other way around. The game mechanics should reflect the battlefield character of the game, not the visuals. Instead of a MP version of the tavern game in The Witcher 3 we got the MP version of Thronebreaker.
I never played Gwent, not in Witcher and not in Beta so I cannot say anything about how Homecoming is better or not. I just find it weird that they spent 1.5 years and changed the game so much afterwards and basically did a new beta.
Mostra
Thank you so much for explaining and detailing your opinion in such respectful and objective manner. I think now I totally comprehend the reason of your complaints and frustration. I've played Witcher 3 and enjoyed it widely and, while reading your comments about some cards in Gwent based on characters of W3, I imagine how great it has to be playing with those characters' unique and original mechanics and I understand that today, the game feels too "plain" and not enough "Witcherish" or at least less than it used to.
Now I feel some pity for not to play the game before these changes took place. I think I'd have enjoyed it a lot. In any case, and being aware and realistic about the fact that it's unlikely to the "old" game to come back, I think it could be improved yet in many aspects. I hope CDPR keep working hard on the game and eventually they may end up bringing back to the game some of the virtues it used to have.
Thank you so much for explaining and detailing your opinion in such respectful and objective manner. I think now I totally comprehend the reason of your complaints and frustration. I've played Witcher 3 and enjoyed it widely and, while reading your comments about some cards in Gwent based on characters of W3, I imagine how great it has to be playing with those characters' unique and original mechanics and I understand that today, the game feels too "plain" and not enough "Witcherish" or at least less than it used to.
Now I feel some pity for not to play the game before these changes took place. I think I'd have enjoyed it a lot. In any case, and being aware and realistic about the fact that it's unlikely to the "old" game to come back, I think it could be improved yet in many aspects. I hope CDPR keep working hard on the game and eventually they may end up bringing back to the game some of the virtues it used to have.
Two statements here:
1. Not the EARLY launch was a disaster, the launch itself was. For my estimation, they would face the same critics even if they had delayed HC by another 6 months + critics for the delay. Why? Because mostly the people dindt complaine because its unfinished, but because its bad/not wanted design for most parts.
2. You compare the last month of a beta, which got stale after 6 months without any changes, to a fundamental new game were all people have to find themself again. Of course you see it this way then. Because you never experienced the good days of beta, which would be pre-Midwinter over 1 year back then.
I feel like there is not much of calculations now, you just put cards in pre-invented order and opponent's action do not change the sequence much...
I'm quite a new player, thought I've seen Beta plays, looked as if you had at least to count some numbers every round as there were 3 rows and bigger values...
I'm quite a new player, thought I've seen Beta plays, looked as if you had at least to count some numbers every round as there were 3 rows and bigger values...
I am a devoted Gwent player and I do not let other games, especially those that are a failure, to mess up my mind. That's why I stayed away from twitch yesterday. Anyway, I have a question whether there were any signs of restoring Old Good Gwent? If not, then we still have the case "is it 1358 yet?".
Not in the slightest. But we got our Mulligan per turn back, if you count that to it. (I am not)
I can't speak for everyone, but no, it's not apology that I am looking for. It is a CLOSURE. What adds fuel to the fire is that the extreme neglection from CDPR acting as if everything is normal.
A concise statement that addresses the changes, their direction with the game, or simple words like "We hear you guys but sorry. What you see in the game is Gwent now" (in a formal way) would be suffice. To many of us, we don't really care what updates they are working on or what they are trying to do to improve HC because the game ended for us with the end of Gwent beta.
I am looking for a closure here and only CDPR is able to fulfill the need. Perhaps it is their tactic to deliberately ignore us hoping the silence will eventually tire us out. If so, then the devs are deadly wrong. It can only get worse and may stem into other things that affect their future games. The conversation is no longer only that their games are being good or bad. The ethics and morals of the company are being in question.
Last edited:
Stop being so dramatic. Believe it or not, Gwent is a relatively small game with small player base. The game you played is gone, like it or not. It is honestly getting annoying seeing you beta players running around regurgitating the same thing every day. Also, this is golden:
it's not apology that I am looking for.
Simple words like "We hear you guys but sorry. What you see in the game is Gwent now" (in a formal way) would be suffice.
Do you think this might be a simple test and they will revert back to the beta?! The game is already convoluted. You search on google for one card, and then you get results for Gwent in Witcher, Beta and the current version. The last thing they need do any major changes one more time.
That word "sorry" there refers to something like "I feel for u guys but no." rather than about making an apology. People use "sorry" to sympathize pain, frustration, ect. and sometimes to politely reject. The word isn't only use to admit wrongdoing and express regret.
Other than that, I got nothing really that I want to say. It's just another one of those posts complain about ppl are complaining. Thrilling isn't it? I guess at least it is a good tactic to annoy others for getting annoyed(?) or trying to get a rise out of them
Last edited:
Why in this thread, mostly only two or three-month players or just registered in the forum defend hc game and are against Gwent veterans?
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status