the ball was always very powerfull even at times, when all those cards like Battle Stations, Admiral and so on did not exist. People just need to remember how to play with it in the old way.
Where it was powerful? Rank 15? The last time it was powerful was app. two and a half years ago.
In general, it's time to go. It's time to say goodbye.
Tried to play three games, three times vs Nekker Pirates. 
Buffs and nerfs are reversed between leaders and other cards.
So if a leader gets -1 provision its a nerf, if its a card, its a buff.
Imperial formation was rightfully nerfed, its absurd it had more provisions than any other NG ability.
Overall i agree with almost all the nerfs, and the reaver hunter thing feels wrong but i love it, a nice Halloween joke.
On the buffs however, there is a lot to be concerned about...
WHY THE F*** was Siege scenario buffed? There's 12 faction scenarios and they were all 14 provisions. Siege is easily in the top 5 scenarios and its the one that gets buffed? Clearly by some siege fanatics who want their beloved cards to be stronger regardless of balance.
Braathens, Vigo for NG and Roach and Magic Compass for SK Lippy decks might also devolve into degeneracy.
ah, ok, that makes more sense, but is a little confusing.
that's why i would suggest that only people with at least 1000h+ hours playtime should be allowed to vote.
why? the reason is, i guess that all those very-long-time-playing-people are (like me) completely emotionless to any deck. i dont favor any faction or playtype especially, i have played them all, i know them all - all i want is that they are all perfectly balanced. - and i guess this attitude only comes after playing the game very very long.
So the first community patchs brought some interesting changes, most of which were very predictable though (NG hard nerf, I’m surprised Yenvo wasn’t touched).
I wonder how far will the NG hate go, with all the broken decks this faction could potentially keep in check. The results are already in play: traps, nekker nonsense, elves, SK degeneracy etc.
Breaking reavers is funny at least
I wonder how far will the NG hate go, with all the broken decks this faction could potentially keep in check. The results are already in play: traps, nekker nonsense, elves, SK degeneracy etc.
Breaking reavers is funny at least
Well, this is exactly what I expected from this "democracy" when it was first announced. Lmao, . I'm glad I managed to finish all the Nilfgaard contracts before the nerfs and especially the NG imposter contract. Good news is I moved on to NR and SY so this change was good news for me. I thought the gwentfinity would be implemented in the new year but oh well.
The only thing this abomination council proves is that the gwent team, although not perfect, knew how to balance the game 100 times better than the playerbase. If the gwent team are reading this, they should implement a cap on all bronze cards which states that the provision nerf cannot exceed 6 provisions, based on the assumption that no bronze card is so OP that it needs to be 7 provisions and more.
I'm probably done with this game after the Christmas/Yule holliday. GG gwenters, nice reading your thoughts on this forum.
when it was first announced. Lmao, . I'm glad I managed to finish all the Nilfgaard contracts before the nerfs and especially the NG imposter contract. Good news is I moved on to NR and SY so this change was good news for me. I thought the gwentfinity would be implemented in the new year but oh well.The only thing this abomination council proves is that the gwent team, although not perfect, knew how to balance the game 100 times better than the playerbase. If the gwent team are reading this, they should implement a cap on all bronze cards which states that the provision nerf cannot exceed 6 provisions, based on the assumption that no bronze card is so OP that it needs to be 7 provisions and more.
I'm probably done with this game after the Christmas/Yule holliday. GG gwenters, nice reading your thoughts on this forum.
Last edited:
Its quite amusing seeing how quickly the discourse changed (especially on Gwent Reddit - these forums are less active but also less impulsive):
For the past two months, its been a cascade of positivity and excitement for Balance Council, appreciation posts for this amazing tool, and how it would keep the game alive, better than ever...
In 12 hours, it has turned into "Gwentpocalypse", how this is a disaster, devs are forgiven because they're balancing was so much better than the players, and so on.
First of all, for fairness sake, i do need to point out this is not necessarily hypocrisy - its very likely the people that praised the Balance Council for weeks are different from the ones speaking against it now. The first were vocal before, the latter were silently skeptical before and vocal now.
In my opinion, this Balance Council is far from perfect but not as bad as a lot of players are painting it:
It throws at us a lot of changes at an instance, something a lot of us have been asking for years, while the devs M.O. was to change things at a snail's pace, so there was less chance of a total disaster.
Regarding Reaver Hunters, and how "wrong" it is, now that they are functionally broken - this is the voice of the majority, that prefer to simply not have that crap archetype in the game, even if it makes the game feel mal-functional. If Gwent devs were great, they would have listened to the complaints and reworked the card while their development on the game was still active and we wouldnt have to come to this point.
Finally and more importantly, to defend the players who voted - each one didnt have access to the current number of votes, its a blind vote. Yes, there were entire decks, especially NG, that were heavily nerfed, possibly overnerfed. There were efforts to coordinate voting, but there's limits to the impact that can have.
You are blaming the collective, but each individual only voted for 6 nerfs, and maybe they'd agree that the total results went too far, but they had no way to know which ones would go through or not. Maybe the fault is in how the Balance Council works and not on the players who dont have access to the big picture until it hits them in the face...
For the past two months, its been a cascade of positivity and excitement for Balance Council, appreciation posts for this amazing tool, and how it would keep the game alive, better than ever...
In 12 hours, it has turned into "Gwentpocalypse", how this is a disaster, devs are forgiven because they're balancing was so much better than the players, and so on.
First of all, for fairness sake, i do need to point out this is not necessarily hypocrisy - its very likely the people that praised the Balance Council for weeks are different from the ones speaking against it now. The first were vocal before, the latter were silently skeptical before and vocal now.
In my opinion, this Balance Council is far from perfect but not as bad as a lot of players are painting it:
It throws at us a lot of changes at an instance, something a lot of us have been asking for years, while the devs M.O. was to change things at a snail's pace, so there was less chance of a total disaster.
Regarding Reaver Hunters, and how "wrong" it is, now that they are functionally broken - this is the voice of the majority, that prefer to simply not have that crap archetype in the game, even if it makes the game feel mal-functional. If Gwent devs were great, they would have listened to the complaints and reworked the card while their development on the game was still active and we wouldnt have to come to this point.
Finally and more importantly, to defend the players who voted - each one didnt have access to the current number of votes, its a blind vote. Yes, there were entire decks, especially NG, that were heavily nerfed, possibly overnerfed. There were efforts to coordinate voting, but there's limits to the impact that can have.
You are blaming the collective, but each individual only voted for 6 nerfs, and maybe they'd agree that the total results went too far, but they had no way to know which ones would go through or not. Maybe the fault is in how the Balance Council works and not on the players who dont have access to the big picture until it hits them in the face...
Frankly, this is exactly what I expected would happen.
For years, many people in the community had been constantly complaining that the devs "don't listen to the community (enough)" , that the community would be able to "fix the game" better than the devs, and about changes made by the devs.
And now that the community was given control... these latest changes happened, and many are complaining about the changes made by the community.
Many people, doubtless, vote to nerf cards or decks they personally dislike, and to buff ones they personally like -- which absolutely is NOT how a game should be balanced. Therein lies the biggest problem with the new system: many votes are cast based on subjective rather than objective reasons.
My picks for next Balance Council Patch. I might change some cards later but for now these are my picks.
Though they didn't make sense "together," Slave Driver's provision nerf "alone" was perfectly justified. It's a on deploy spam card, and both, it and Scout should be 6p. Now, unfortunately for NG, on top of this totally fine nerf, the main two spam targets for this card have been ALSO nerfed 1 hp each, which may have been a bit too much. Does it seem like I'm mad about that, though? Because I'm not mad about that at all. Anyway, that doesn't affect Slave Driver per se, since it spawns 1point copies.
The difference is that Slave Driver plays a 1-power copy of the unit, while Reaver Scout plays a full-health copy of the unit. That's already a 2-3 power difference. Add to that the fact that NR can play a lot more Reaver Scouts than NG can play Slave Drivers and it's clearly visible, both shouldn't be at the same provision. And how ridiculous is nerfing Slave Driver while Reaver Scout get a buff.
Clearly visible depending on where you're looking I guess. And I guess we're just going to look past the fact that the Scout is an order card and Slave Driver is a deploy card, but if we somehow happen to notice that, then it becomes clearly visible that, yes, both should be 6p.
Yes, I actually forgot to mention that. And that is for two reasons:
1. 2-3 power difference (in case of Alba Armored Cavalry even 4 points, before AAC nerf) already is a bigger cost than order on Scout.
2. NR has numerous options to give zeal (even beside the leader).
The same way I also forgot to mention that Slave Driver damages the unit it copies, because the damage is most of the time circumvented by armor.
1. 2-3 power difference (in case of Alba Armored Cavalry even 4 points, before AAC nerf) already is a bigger cost than order on Scout.
2. NR has numerous options to give zeal (even beside the leader).
The same way I also forgot to mention that Slave Driver damages the unit it copies, because the damage is most of the time circumvented by armor.
1. Disagree (even before point 3 below). Edit to elaborate: Leader aside, giving zeal costs an extra card/turn, which is a bigger cost than 2-3 points of difference.
2. NR has numerous options to give zeal, just like NG has numerous ways to give armor.
3. Another thing we forgot is that Slave Driver is 3hp and Scout is 2.
Conclusion remains: they should both be 6p
2. NR has numerous options to give zeal, just like NG has numerous ways to give armor.
3. Another thing we forgot is that Slave Driver is 3hp and Scout is 2.
Conclusion remains: they should both be 6p
Last edited:
Any card that plays a copy of a bronze card in any form or shape should be 6P. Freyas Blessing is kind of fine as it doesn't allow copies of broken engines at the same time on the board.
Post automatically merged:
I assume this is for next season. Please create a new thread? I was planning to create a new thread, but haven't played a single game in this season yet. Magic Compass, Seige and AA getting provision buff left a very very bad taste in my mouth to even open the game. Why the hell Seige of all first generation Scenarios? It is the strongest of all first generation Scenarios. So bunch of people can make broken already strong powerful and regularly played card even stronger? That is just absurd. I toiled my way to get 25 wins to try to make weak cards stronger but then people can just snuck these kind of BS changes in?
Last edited:
I think it makes sense to continue in this thread, since there are technically 2 votes this season?
Or create a new one for November and use it for the two November votes?? Damn, I should start playing. If you have the voting privilege, why don't you please start a thread @Barracuda88 ?