Anna Henrietta may make me quit Gwent for good

[Tucoffin]

Anna is literal garbage, just like Arnaghad is and he had his own set of rage threads before he came out

I dealt with a 15-power Arnaghad earlier today with a 6-power Anséis with a shield that was already on the board, and the opponent conceded. Concerning Henrietta, I assembled a Pincer Maneuver NR deck specifically because it's mostly useless to the NG player, given he shouldn't have many NR units in his deck to choose from. I had quite a bit of success wtih that deck, despite giving little faith to that particular leader ability (I changed my mind). Ironically, never ran into anyone using Henrietta with the deck created to nullify her.

Thus, these are powerful cards, but they can be dealt with once you are willing to change your archetype to face them.

 

[Sensimilius]

Idk man, I see her very very rarely... but the last time I saw her she played for 4 points cuz the guy copied my Onslaught from SK and it was near the end so he could only use it once for 1 damage ping. xD
Obviously this is very situational and you can't judge a card by the worst possible situation it finds itself in...

 

[Guest 4375874]

I dealt with a 15-power Arnaghad earlier today with a 6-power Anséis with a shield that was already on the board, and the opponent conceded. Concerning Henrietta, I assembled a Pincer Maneuver NR deck specifically because it's mostly useless to the NG player, given he shouldn't have many NR units in his deck to choose from. I had quite a bit of success wtih that deck, despite giving little faith to that particular leader ability (I changed my mind). Ironically, never ran into anyone using Henrietta with the deck created to nullify her.

Thus, these are powerful cards, but they can be dealt with once you are willing to change your archetype to face them.

Changing your entire archetype to counter a single card is why it's imbalanced, especially when those other decks are not very good against other opponents. You creating a deck to counter Anna and then not encountering her is just more matching shenanigans that we've discussed at length in another topic but that aside, this isn't a practical solution.

 

[fil_faniki]

I dealt with a 15-power Arnaghad earlier today with a 6-power Anséis with a shield that was already on the board, and the opponent conceded. Concerning Henrietta, I assembled a Pincer Maneuver NR deck specifically because it's mostly useless to the NG player, given he shouldn't have many NR units in his deck to choose from. I had quite a bit of success wtih that deck, despite giving little faith to that particular leader ability (I changed my mind). Ironically, never ran into anyone using Henrietta with the deck created to nullify her.

Thus, these are powerful cards, but they can be dealt with once you are willing to change your archetype to face them.

Hol up, your argument for those cards being powerful is that you built entire decks against them? I don't see the logic

 

[Tucoffin]

Changing your entire archetype to counter a single card is why it's imbalanced, especially when those other decks are not very good against other opponents. You creating a deck to counter Anna and then not encountering her is just more matching shenanigans that we've discussed at length in another topic but that aside, this isn't a practical solution.

Hol up, your argument for those cards being powerful is that you built entire decks against them? I don't see the logic

Actually what I meant is that I chose to go a different route in case I met Henrietta, thus choosing another leader ability. I happened to like the Pincer Maneuver deck and I used it on numerous occasions, but the original idea was to counter her as I thought she'd be more popular. Moreover, this deck proved itself quite balanced against quite a few opponents in addition to counter Henrietta, so that's the point. The Arnaghad event has nothing to do with counter measures: I happened to be playing a Shieldwall deck and managed to deal with him, that's all.

 

[Guest 4375874]

Actually what I meant is that I chose to go a different route in case I met Henrietta, thus choosing another leader ability. I happened to like the Pincer Maneuver deck and I used it on numerous occasions, but the original idea was to counter her as I thought she'd be more popular. Moreover, this deck proved itself quite balanced against quite a few opponents in addition to counter Henrietta, so that's the point. The Arnaghad event has nothing to do with counter measures: I happened to be playing a Shieldwall deck and managed to deal with him, that's all.

cool, hopefully it works. Between Viper Witcher Mentor, a bronze card, preventing you from keeping any high provision cards in your deck and Anna now restricting what leaders you can use it may as well be called Gwent: The NG Game. It's becoming quite the bore

 

[fil_faniki]

I think if something is winning the match for an NG player it's going to be Ball and Joachim, not Anna but that's just me

 

[Guest 4375874]

I think if something is winning the match for an NG player it's going to be Ball and Joachim, not Anna but that's just me

Those are bad for sure but at the bare minimum there is a way to counter them (however difficult it may be). There's nothing you can do about Anna. When it's played, if you have a leader that protects their engines, all you can do is really forfeit. They're difficult enough to stop on their own but giving them added protection is a pointless match.

 

[Damashiuchi]

Changing your entire archetype to counter a single card is why it's imbalanced, especially when those other decks are not very good against other opponents. You creating a deck to counter Anna and then not encountering her is just more matching shenanigans that we've discussed at length in another topic but that aside, this isn't a practical solution.

Well now wait a minute... Are you saying you should be able to build a deck that is 100% effective against all opponents all the time no matter what? Changing your deck or strategy to counter new cards or strategies while potentially making yourself more susceptible to others is really what CCGs are all about right? You're arguing that Ana is too strong, but your reasoning is that it is forcing you to be less "too strong" yourself. There is always risk/reward when dealing with new cards and I don't think "now I have to use cards that don't work as well against other opponents" is a good reason to nerf any card or faction or whatever...

 

[Qzman]

Do it.

 

[quintivarium]

Well now wait a minute... Are you saying you should be able to build a deck that is 100% effective against all opponents all the time no matter what? Changing your deck or strategy to counter new cards or strategies while potentially making yourself more susceptible to others is really what CCGs are all about right? You're arguing that Ana is too strong, but your reasoning is that it is forcing you to be less "too strong" yourself. There is always risk/reward when dealing with new cards and I don't think "now I have to use cards that don't work as well against other opponents" is a good reason to nerf any card or faction or whatever...

I don’t have a huge issue with Henrietta except for her being absurdly binary. But I find this argument absolutely ridiculous. No one is complaining about making adjustments to decks as a consequence of new cards; the complaint is about the extent and type of adjustments necessary.

Let me take this argument to its absurd extreme. Suppose I propose a new card. Make it cost 40 provisions and give it the power: the first player from this point forward to play a card worth over 7 provisions loses the match. Your argument would say this card is OK because it’s easily defeated if players just adjust their strategy.

 

[Guest 4375874]

Well now wait a minute... Are you saying you should be able to build a deck that is 100% effective against all opponents all the time no matter what? Changing your deck or strategy to counter new cards or strategies while potentially making yourself more susceptible to others is really what CCGs are all about right? You're arguing that Ana is too strong, but your reasoning is that it is forcing you to be less "too strong" yourself. There is always risk/reward when dealing with new cards and I don't think "now I have to use cards that don't work as well against other opponents" is a good reason to nerf any card or faction or whatever...

So by your definition Viy was fine as it was correct? There was no need for a nerf....players should have just changed their strategy right? That's what happens when a new card is added. Do you see the flaw in that argument? At least pretend to be objective.

I don't see how you interpret balancing a card to "Are you saying you should be able to build a deck that is 100% effective against all opponents"... My argument, is no one card should force players into playing a single leader ability. If everyone decides to play Arachas swarm for example because all the other leaders give Anna too much power how is that conducive to a healthy game? That's partly why you're see less Carapace and more Swarm now. And Carapace was previously nerfed, your argument that all the other leaders were too strong and that's the issue really doesn't hold up. Damien had the very same issue...the only difference between the two is Anna gives you the opponents ability but it's still a second go at a leader ability...there are countless examples why he needed to be nerfed and it's no different for Anna so I can only describe your response as very bizarre.

And of course the irony of this statement "Are you saying you should be able to build a deck that is 100% effective against all opponents" when we're talking about the only faction that has every tool at the cheapest cost to answer any deck in the entire game. Is that not what NG players were boasting about during the lockdown meta...which is why lockdown had to be nerfed. Oh yes, because they were able to answer any deck and forced players into playing only specific leaders

 

[fil_faniki]

I dunno mates. So far from what I've seen Anna has played (at best) as a 10ish for 9 and at worst as a 3 for 9, and it was always completely random and queue-dependant, nothing the guy running the Anna could do.

 

[zacadoo]

Just rename the game to Nilfgaard. The faction is game breaking and unfair. Period.

 

[Damashiuchi]

I don’t have a huge issue with Henrietta except for her being absurdly binary. But I find this argument absolutely ridiculous. No one is complaining about making adjustments to decks as a consequence of new cards; the complaint is about the extent and type of adjustments necessary.

Let me take this argument to its absurd extreme. Suppose I propose a new card. Make it cost 40 p norovisions and give it the power: the first player from this point forward to play a card worth over 7 provisions loses the match. Your argument would say this card is OK because it’s easily defeated if players just adjust their strategy.

No. My argument says Anna is ok.

Post automatically merged: Apr 11, 2021

So by your definition Viy was fine as it was correct? There was no need for a nerf....players should have just changed their strategy right? That's what happens when a new card is added. Do you see the flaw in that argument? At least pretend to be objective.

I don't see how you interpret balancing a card to "Are you saying you should be able to build a deck that is 100% effective against all opponents"... My argument, is no one card should force players into playing a single leader ability. If everyone decides to play Arachas swarm for example because all the other leaders give Anna too much power how is that conducive to a healthy game? That's partly why you're see less Carapace and more Swarm now. And Carapace was previously nerfed, your argument that all the other leaders were too strong and that's the issue really doesn't hold up. Damien had the very same issue...the only difference between the two is Anna gives you the opponents ability but it's still a second go at a leader ability...there are countless examples why he needed to be nerfed and it's no different for Anna so I can only describe your response as very bizarre.

And of course the irony of this statement "Are you saying you should be able to build a deck that is 100% effective against all opponents" when we're talking about the only faction that has every tool at the cheapest cost to answer any deck in the entire game. Is that not what NG players were boasting about during the lockdown meta...which is why lockdown had to be nerfed. Oh yes, because they were able to answer any deck and forced players into playing only specific leaders

Tldr, BUT, the part about Viy was okay because yes Viy was a particularly offensive card with a particularly offensive power that was particularly annoying because it could not really be countered.. Meaning there was no way to stop it or interrupt it etc. Most if not all factions have abilities which specifically are only able to target their own faction's cards, which effectively bricks Anna.

I get you don't like the card, I really do, but to call it OP or anything near an automatic win condition is totally absurd. It's really only truly valuable against NG where the faction ability you are stealing is really useful.

 

[quintivarium]

No. My argument says Anna is ok.

Post automatically merged: Apr 11, 2021

I know. My point was that even though I agree with you, I find your argument totally invalid.

 

[Guest 4375874]

Tldr, BUT, the part about Viy was okay because yes Viy was a particularly offensive card with a particularly offensive power that was particularly annoying because it could not really be countered.. Meaning there was no way to stop it or interrupt it etc. Most if not all factions have abilities which specifically are only able to target their own faction's cards, which effectively bricks Anna.

Much like Viy there is no way to stop or interrupt Anna so I'm failing to see the validity to that argument. And the few leader abilities that give her little value only need 5 pts at most to break even considering how cheap she is, what's more if there isn't a target for those leaders Braathens who is an auto include in every NG deck can easily provide one. Whatever the case, for most leaders she provides a huge point swing and protection/flexibility with no risk whatsoever. Despite playing MO I'm all for nerfing Viy, in fact I think it deserves another nerf. I don't allow my love for the faction to blind me to any obvious problems it presents to the overall state of the game. It all comes down to risk vs reward...for the point potential what is the risk.....? It's as simple as that

 

[Adanedhil]

meaning there was no way to stop it or interrupt it etc

NG can stop it by mass Kingslayers+Traheaern tactic. There is a good chance to banish Viy from the opponent's deck.

 

[fil_faniki]

Man I can't believe this thread's still going. She's literally Cosimo tier, come on fellas