Anna Henrietta may make me quit Gwent for good

[livegeekdie]

It seems to me that the purpose of a leader ability is to have something to build your deck around, so that you can use your skill to make synergies between your deck and its leader. Enter Lockdown where the opponent can do that because they know they're running Lockdown but yours is negated leading to a disadvantage before you even play a card. Effectively the only way to counter it is to run NG decks that either have Lockdown or have Damien de La Tour (plus some way to protect him so he can use his order).
Enter Anna Henrietta. Not a leader ability but a unit that lets you effectively have 2 different leader abilities. Can also be combined with Lockdown as she steals the other person's ability allowing for preventing the other person from using their leader ability and then stealing it and using it (twice if combined with Damien de La Tour).
This means that if you want to have any hope of winning playing against someone with Anna Henrietta in their deck you basically have to play Lockdown or figure out how to build a deck that's not vulnerable to your own leader ability.

Edit: I forgot to add how stupid it is that it's a Deploy ability and there's no way to counter it. I don't even want to know what happens when you combine it with Syanna.

 

[littlie]

i think it's good.

 

[InkognitoXI]

Calm down for a moment.
Lockdown is no longer permanent, so Anna does not have any more synergy with that than any other leader ability.

[...]
Edit: I forgot to add how stupid it is that it's a Deploy ability and there's no way to counter it. I don't even want to know what happens when you combine it with Syanna.

That's easy, you cannot hold 2 leader abilities at the same time, so Anna overwrites your leader ability with the opponent's and then overwrites that with another copy again, leaving you with the same as after only Anna, which is worse synergy than playing Syanna for Wolf Pack.

 

[Messyr]

I don't even want to know what happens when you combine it with Syanna.

I've heard that combo automatically uninstalls the game from your computer...

 

[TheBlackRose101]

I don't think Anna would be an issue if it weren't for one thing. The fact you can use her ability after you have used your leader's ability makes her way too good not to play. I start to feel bad now playing it as it creates an unfair advantage. No matter how you look at it, using her to copy your opponent's leader ability after you have used yours with no penalty is an issue.

Personally, if the card got an errata, that Anna's ability cannot be used if you have already used your leader's ability would fix it. That correction would balance the huge advantage she creates. You would either have to choose to keep your own or copy the opponents would avoid this issue.

 

[InkognitoXI]

I don't think Anna would be an issue if it weren't for one thing. The fact you can use her ability after you have used your leader's ability makes her way too good not to play. I start to feel bad now playing it as it creates an unfair advantage. No matter how you look at it, using her to copy your opponent's leader ability after you have used yours with no penalty is an issue.

Personally, if the card got an errata, that Anna's ability cannot be used if you have already used your leader's ability would fix it. That correction would balance the huge advantage she creates. You would either have to choose to keep your own or copy the opponents would avoid this issue.

That would make Anna completely unplayable, playing a 3 for 9 (which is about half the expected value for the bottom end in one's deck) to switch your ability for what is almost always worse than what you already had.
With that suggestions Anna would unironically be worse than Wolf Pack (ignoring provisions at this point) AND cost 9p, rather than 4p.

 

[TheBlackRose101]

That would make Anna completely unplayable, playing a 3 for 9 (which is about half the expected value for the bottom end in one's deck) to switch your ability for what is almost always worse than what you already had.
With that suggestions Anna would unironically be worse than Wolf Pack (ignoring provisions at this point) AND cost 9p, rather than 4p.

That is fair to say, and you would be right. Though I am more focused on the fact you can use the ability after the leader's ability has been used. That just creates such an advantage and with little to no drawbacks. Like you either get a second chance if you were careless or really rewards yourself if you playing consciously.

 

[Lord-Misplay]

I like this card. I think its quite ok. I mean it can be hit and miss vs some abilities. You can probably get 12 for 9 from it from the leaders worth copying. If it doesnt work you can always mulligan it.
I think half of the leader abilities you can copy can be actually useful so you can turn a game. Not sure how it works with the cooldown NR ones. Havent tried it.
Also to prove a long time point. Invigorate. Not worth a thing even if you can get it for free.

 

[ya1]

If Eist gets hotfixed and SK goes back to Ursine (but even if it stays on Blaze), and SY gets a reliable playrate, in a week or two, no-one will be playing Anna on the ladder anymore. It's a novelty card. Like Alzur was. People play it because it's new and because they don't know what to play until top players tell them what to play.

But in these very interesting periods between new content releases and esport meta reports, people are fast to form and pass judgements based on "omg so stronk..." But think, how "stronk" exactly? What's the value variation spreadsheet in different matchups? Do it and see that Anna's average value hardly pays for its provision.

Now look at Eist that enables a play that's worth 3-4x its provisions always in every matchup. I don't see how Anna is even a topic.

 

[AngryDeadGuy]

I agree. I'm not generally the type to whine or complain, but it seems like Nilf just has way too many advantages, especially if you're not using some sort of horde strategy. And that's probably why most of the matches I see anymore are against Nilf decks - easily over 50% and that's out of what, 6 different factions? That alone should say something.

You just can't play any powerful units against it. Either Imposter happens, or Cadaverine (usually both), or just straight-up ganked by Yen's Invocation or Vattier, or smashed by Vilgefortz or Leo or any of the neutral cards, then the one asshole who re-enables the leader ability, and now Anna?

I mean, I have no problem admitting that I suck and I actually do enjoy trying to think of new strategies and constantly tweaking my deck, but damn, at some point you gotta wonder who at CDPR has such a hard-on for Nilfgaard. It feels like the only faction I regularly struggle against.

 

[quintivarium]

I agree. I'm not generally the type to whine or complain, but it seems like Nilf just has way too many advantages, especially if you're not using some sort of horde strategy. And that's probably why most of the matches I see anymore are against Nilf decks - easily over 50% and that's out of what, 6 different factions? That alone should say something.

.... at some point you gotta wonder who at CDPR has such a hard-on for Nilfgaard. It feels like the only faction I regularly struggle against.

Maybe NG is the only faction you really struggle against because it’s the only one you ever get to play against

 

[Philido]

I wish NG was really that strong as people say right now, so far I haven't succeeded at making it work for me...

 

[ya1]

Lol ok let's see the Anna:

SK Ursine: 4-9 for 9 (armor saves value)
SK Blaze: 3 for 9 (unless Invo)
SK Arnjolf: 11 for 9 (plus assimilate value)
NR Zeal: 6 for 9
NR Shieldwall: 9 for 9
NR Uprising: 12+ for 9 (plus assimilate)
ST Elves: 12 for 9
ST Gift: 9 for 9
ST PS: 10 for 9 (plus assimilate)
MO Carapace: 12 for 9
MO Vamps: 9 for 9
most SY: 3 for 9
mirror Cross: sick value
other mirrors: shit value

So in general it's mediocre most of the time, decent sometimes, sometimes it would be considered a brick even if it was 4p and rarely is it excellent (more often in assimilate). Keep in mind that matchups where it's 12 for 9 are typically bad matchups for NG. Carapace now should be a terrible matchup for no Lockdown NG with locks and poisons nullified. Might be better average value for assimilate, though, but I don't see assimilate ever creating as much commotion as it is portrayed in NG rants. IIRC Assimilate was never a winning leader in pro (I mean 50+% winrate).

 

[Gwentsan]

It seems to me that the purpose of a leader ability is to have something to build your deck around, so that you can use your skill to make synergies between your deck and its leader. Enter Lockdown where the opponent can do that because they know they're running Lockdown but yours is negated leading to a disadvantage before you even play a card. Effectively the only way to counter it is to run NG decks that either have Lockdown or have Damien de La Tour (plus some way to protect him so he can use his order).
Enter Anna Henrietta. Not a leader ability but a unit that lets you effectively have 2 different leader abilities. Can also be combined with Lockdown as she steals the other person's ability allowing for preventing the other person from using their leader ability and then stealing it and using it (twice if combined with Damien de La Tour).
This means that if you want to have any hope of winning playing against someone with Anna Henrietta in their deck you basically have to play Lockdown or figure out how to build a deck that's not vulnerable to your own leader ability.

Edit: I forgot to add how stupid it is that it's a Deploy ability and there's no way to counter it. I don't even want to know what happens when you combine it with Syanna.

The problem is the currently the Devs have NO IDEA how to actually balance a game.
Rather than "Balance"
They just introduce MORE imbalanced cards..
I don't think they understand what "balance means."
Really, this is a serious hypothesis.. I think they think Balance = NEW META...
Noo..... It's easy to create a new meta. Just introduce some new super powerful card. For example, I can do that right now.
Card: Spongebob
Provision cost: 4
Ability: Deploy - win the game.

Everyone will use that card, and therefore there will be a new meta.
THAT is not balancing..

Balancing is when you have a card that NO one uses, because it is TOOO underpowered.
Example: Elder bear.
Has ANYONE seen elder bear in play? ANYONE? ... if you have seen it being used, please take a snapshot and post it because you sir, have just spotted a rare, a VERY RARE pokemon..

Someone need to tell them that Balancing means you look at card that are too over powered, make them "balanced" by nerfing them, and make underpowered cards "balanced" by buffing them...

 

[Guest 4375874]

I don't understand what those in defense can't comprehend. It's a card that gives you a leader ability once your charges are used up. That is a broken mechanic, it has nothing to do with whether its NG or not it shouldn't be a part of any faction. They removed DS and several other leaders not long ago because they said double play was not healthy for the game in any form....but THIS is? Lippy decks are playing cards like heatwave and all their gold twice and then this cards gives you a second leader ability.

And please don't argue that the points aren't significant because it doesn't matter. There's no risk, If I know that I can just get free charges in R2 then I will freely use my current leader charges without concern. I've seen it several times already where previously players would have tried to reserve their charges...not now. All the players with Anna so far just fire off all their charges because they can just swap mine next round. I on the other hand cannot do that.

And finally there's the obvious problem. Every faction has bad match ups but Anna now allows them to swap to the ability that serves them best in that match. If the original leader ability puts them at a disadvantage they can just switch to the opponents. That kind of freedom has to come at a steep price or not exist at all.

 

[rrc]

If Anna would make you quit the game and not Eist, then I don't know what your logic/preference is. From a pure pointslamming potential, Anna is no where near Eist. Against SY she is almost dead and useless (yes I know the opponent can play enemy cards by various means, but still it would suck) and most leader abilities are useless for Anna/NG.

Do you hate her because she puts a lot of points on board? I don't think so. So, you hate her by principle? That is not a valid argument too.

You are facing Lockdown? Then please play around it. Single round leader? Try to do 2-0. Don't go to R3 with your full leader.

I don't like NG and recent Lockdown Clog nightmare still haunts me. But this version of Lockdown is weak and Anna is no where near how broken SK cards are.

Which leader/deck you play and which NG leader you face with Anna and lose due to Anna? I am genuinely curious.

 

[AngryDeadGuy]

Which leader/deck you play and which NG leader you face with Anna and lose due to Anna? I am genuinely curious.

I didn't understand half the lingo there - I'm still relatively new, but I think I get the gist of what you're saying (though I'm not sure what Einst is - I haven't memorized all the names yet). But the point is that Anna just gives another considerable advantage to NG, which already seems to have the most advantages, and not just by a little. I've lost 4, maybe 5 matches today specifically due to Anna. Opponent will do the lock/copy ability on my strongest unit, throw down Anna, then get 9 points of carapace boosts, or Woodland Spirit, or whatever, and just end up beating me by a couple of points. It's already difficult enough to keep things close without Anna, and this just tips the scales even further.

 

[ya1]

It's a card that gives you a leader ability

So? It's not a game about how many leaders you play. It's about how many points you play.

throw down Anna, then get 9 points of carapace boosts

So they played a 12 for 9. Not bad but nothing to write home about. And then they cued into Passi or crimes and played the Anna for less than the Peasant Militia. Textbook memeness.

PS. I just found out both Birna discards come back, consuming only one Eist counter... You guys still wanna talk about the Anna?

 

[Guest 4375874]

So? It's not a game about how many leaders you play. It's about how many points you play.

It's the same answer to why they row locked Damien. You can't have it both ways, either leaders are a factor or they aren't. Decks are built around leader abilities, NG has more flexibility across their leaders so perhaps because you favor the faction you don't see the dependency but that is the case for most factions. And if you truly believe the leader doesn't matter then new Lockdown shouldn't allow copying the opponents leader if it doesn't matter.

Someone has already suggested above that it should be one or the other. You either choose to lock or copy the leader not both.

 

[TheBlackRose101]

If Anna would make you quit the game and not Eist, then I don't know what your logic/preference is. From a pure pointslamming potential, Anna is no where near Eist. Against SY she is almost dead and useless (yes I know the opponent can play enemy cards by various means, but still it would suck) and most leader abilities are useless for Anna/NG.

Do you hate her because she puts a lot of points on board? I don't think so. So, you hate her by principle? That is not a valid argument too.

You are facing Lockdown? Then please play around it. Single round leader? Try to do 2-0. Don't go to R3 with your full leader.

I don't like NG and recent Lockdown Clog nightmare still haunts me. But this version of Lockdown is weak and Anna is no where near how broken SK cards are.

Which leader/deck you play and which NG leader you face with Anna and lose due to Anna? I am genuinely curious.

For myself where I find the most loops are using imposter combined with Anna. The deck that I playtested with mainly focuses on copying cards from my opponent (i.e., coup de grace, duchess's informant, Braathens, experimental reality into duchess or card of interest, etc.). I essentially would copy/ play main engines from my opponent's field onto my side. Then through using imposter copy a key card of my opponent, lock and damage it, copy the opponent's leader ability with Anna and switch to mock a mirror match.

Where this combo or playstyle may not be the most "broken" or feasible it has improved my odds of winning dramatically. It bothers me that I am using an external resource outside of the mainboard and the deck that gives me an advantage. It would be one thing to change play styles or tech in certain cards to counter them. When it taps into a resource that I should not have access to or with no penalty it just doesn't seem like a healthy playstyle.